Tag Archives: Community Property

Gift Taxes in a Nutshell

Posted on January 15, 2016 by | Leave a comment

Title Deed with keys

When does my generosity, or my desire to give gifts during my life, trigger the application of federal tax laws regarding gift taxes? Consider the following scenarios:

  • Declan wants his daughter Fiona to receive his residence at his death. He and his late wife purchased the property for $30,000 in the early 1950s. He signs and records a deed in 2015 that conveys the property to himself and Fiona as joint tenants. As of the date of the conveyance, the property is worth $300,000. He continues to reside there and to pay all property taxes, insurance and maintenance.
  • Teresa opens a bank account in 2014 and transfers $500,000 to the account. She names herself and her son Juan as joint tenants with right of survivorship at the time she opens the account. Under the account terms, both Teresa and Juan have the right to withdraw the entire amount of the bank account at any time. Juan does not withdraw any funds from the account the first year. He withdraws $40,000 in 2015 to pay his college tuition.

Has Declan or Teresa made a taxable gift? If so, when was the gift made and for how much? Could either of them have achieved the same result but avoided the gift tax rules?

The gift tax is a tax imposed on certain gifts made during life. Not every gift is taxable. The IRS allows a generous annual exemption, currently $14,000, per donee. This means you may give up to $14,000 each year to an unlimited number of recipients without having to file a gift tax return. (The amount was established at $10,000 and is increased periodically for inflation; it has been $14,000 since 2013). Also, you may give unlimited gifts to your spouse (if a U.S. citizen) or to §501(c)(3) charities without incurring a tax. You may also pay tuition for education and medical bills on another’s behalf without tax consequence if you pay such amounts directly to the educational institution or health care provider.

Even if you make gifts that are taxable, Congress has provided for a unified credit that allows you to make otherwise taxable gifts throughout life and at death up to a sum total of $5,450,000 (for those who die in 2016) without paying a gift or estate tax. The credit is “unified” in the sense that it is applied both to gifts made during your life time and to gifts made at death from your trust or estate, up to the maximum credit. Each year the unified credit is adjusted upward for inflation. Gifts made above that amount are taxed at a whopping 40%.

Returning to our examples, the fact is that both Declan and Teresa have made taxable gifts that require a gift tax return to be prepared and filed with the IRS; and both could have avoided this result with some good legal advice and planning.

Declan has made a taxable gift of one half the value of the real property, or $150,000, to Fiona. He can count the first $14,000 toward the annual exclusion, but he still must file a gift tax return for the remaining $136,000. Even worse, since the transfer was made during his life time, if and when Fiona sells the house after his death she will have to pay a capital gains tax on the increase in value from the $30,000 purchase price. Had Declan conveyed the property to her at his death, she would have received a step up in basis, meaning the base price for considering a capital gains tax would have been the value at his date of death, rather than the value of the original purchase in the 1950s. This would have been a huge tax savings to Fiona. It would also have eliminated the requirement of the gift tax return.

Teresa makes a gift of $40,000 to Juan in 2015 when he withdraws that amount from the account. She must file a gift tax return for the gift, after offsetting the amount of the annual exclusion. The joint bank account is treated differently than a joint tenancy in real property; until and unless Juan withdraws money from the account over and above any contribution he may have made to the account, there is no gift because Teresa can still withdraw the whole amount. Here, Teresa could have paid Juan’s school directly for the tuition without any gift tax consequence.

Note that for both Declan and Teresa, assuming no previous gifts have been made, no actual tax is due because the unified credit will cover these relatively modest amounts; but the hassle and cost of preparing the gift tax return could have been avoided. Moreover, if either has an estate that will exceed the unified credit at the time of death, these gifts will have negative consequences for their estates.

If you are thinking of making a large gift, it is well worth consulting with your accountant or estate planning lawyer to ensure you take advantage of the gift and estate tax rules to minimize or eliminate your tax liability.

Leave a comment

Posted in Community Property, Estate Planning, Estate Tax, Gift, Tax

Tagged , , , ,

Who Gets Your Property if You Die Without a Will?

Posted on August 26, 2014 by | 2 comments

natasha_fatalle___boris_badenov[1]

In my last installment (Who Is Qualified to Serve as Administrator of an Estate?), I wrote about Boris and Natasha and the Big Fight occasioned by Boris dying without a will. As you may recall, Boris had two adult children from a prior marriage when he married Natasha. He and Natasha had two children before Boris died without a will. His property was substantial and all of it was acquired prior to his marriage. What happened to the property on his death?

The good news is that no one was disinherited, and the property did not escheat to the state. Nevada law provides for property to go to your closest relatives if you die without any estate planning in place. In a community property state such as Nevada, a married person’s property may be either community or separate, or some combination of the two. Separate property is property acquired before marriage, as well as property acquired by gift or inheritance during marriage. All property earned during marriage, or purchased with earnings during marriage, is community property. These characterizations can be changed by a written agreement if the couple wishes.

For Boris and Natasha, all of Boris’s property was separate property and he left no will. Nevada law provides that in such case, the surviving spouse is entitled to one third of the separate property, and—because he had more than one surviving child—the children were entitled to equal shares of the remaining two-thirds. Boris did not put any of his assets into joint tenancy with Natasha, but if he had, Natasha would have succeeded to such assets. Once the estate administration finished, Natasha received one-third of Boris’s assets; the couple’s minor children received one-third subject to a guardianship or trust until they became adults; and Boris’s two adult children received the remaining one-third in equal shares.

2 Comments

Posted in Probate, Wills

Tagged , , , ,

Who Is Qualified to Serve as Administrator of an Estate?

Posted on February 19, 2014 by | 3 comments

Treasure Chest

Some years ago a wealthy older man I’ll call “Boris” got married to a foreign national half his age. Boris was a Nevada resident. He brought “Natasha” to the U.S. after their marriage. She was intelligent but did not speak English well and was unfamiliar with American culture and basic business practices. Boris had two adult children from a prior marriage who both lived out of state. Three years after his marriage to Natasha, Boris died without any estate planning in place. At his death, who was qualified to be the administrator of his estate?

If Boris had made a will, he could have nominated whomever he wanted to act as executor of his estate. (As a note on vocabulary, the term “executor” refers to someone nominated in a will, whereas the term “administrator” refers to someone appointed by the court in a situation where there is no will.) If a Nevada resident dies without a will, that person’s estate may be administered by a qualified person. The Nevada probate code sets forth the priority in which the court will consider candidates; a surviving spouse has first priority, and a child (18 or older) has second priority.

Need I say that Boris’s adult children did not get along with Natasha all that well? They did not trust her at all, and they believed she did not speak English well enough nor understand basic survival skills nor basic obligations (e.g. that Boris’s death did not mean his bills didn’t have to be paid) to be the administrator of their father’s estate.

What qualifies someone to act as the administrator of an estate where there is no will? An administrator must be at least age 18 and not convicted of a felony, unless the court determines that such a conviction should not disqualify the person. Someone will be disqualified if upon proof, he or she is adjudged by the court to be disqualified by reason of conflict of interest, drunkenness, improvidence, or lack of integrity or understanding. Finally, the person must either be a Nevada resident or must associate as a co-administrator with someone who is a Nevada resident.

Boris’s children had two impediments to petitioning for appointment of themselves as administrator: they were not Nevada residents and they did not have priority over Natasha because she was Boris’s surviving spouse. In order to prevent Natasha from serving as administrator of the estate, it was necessary for them to prove in court that Natasha was disqualified by reason of improvidence or lack of integrity or understanding. In the end, however, neither Natasha nor the children were appointed administrator. Instead, Natasha invoked a statute that allowed her, as the person with first priority, to nominate someone else to act as administrator—and she nominated a local accountant who was perfectly qualified and did a great job.

Lesson learned? Do some estate planning—preferably while you are still well enough to think clearly and act independently. Choose a personal representative who is both competent and trustworthy. Boris could have avoided a fight among his relatives by executing a will naming someone to act as executor of his estate, and he could have better provided for disposition of his assets—which were significant.

You may be wondering what happened to Boris’s estate—who was entitled to receive his property? Stay tuned for the next installment of As the Probate World Turns.

3 Comments

Posted in Estate Planning, Probate

Tagged , , , , , ,

Separate Assets, Joint Problems

Posted on December 19, 2013 by | 2 comments

Image

Some married couples enjoy living together while keeping their financial assets separate. Separate ownership of assets can be advantageous in some instances, but oftentimes loving couples misunderstand the results of holding separate assets.  The Wall Street Journal recently highlighted four potential pitfalls for couples maintaining separate accounts:

  1. The assets are not necessarily separate under Nevada law.

Simply having your name on an account does not mean the account is yours alone.  Under Nevada law, pursuant to community property principles, all of your earnings and wages after marriage are the property of both parties.   This is true even if you have your paycheck deposited into a separate account.

Nevada inheritance laws can surprise couples. If you die without a will and leave a surviving spouse, no children and surviving parents, your parents are entitled to a portion of your estate.  Many spouses intend for their entire estate to go to a surviving spouse.  However, unless that desire is set forth in a will or trust, the state may direct otherwise.

  1. Separate accounts most often mean lack of communication.

Communication between spouses is critical.  Many spouses have separate retirement accounts and manage those accounts in isolation.  This isolated planning can undermine the couple’s financial objectives and their combined risk tolerance.  Regularly, I meet with clients where both spouses are unaware of accounts or policies that one spouse possesses.  These omissions could cause the account proceeds to go missing or remain unclaimed for long periods of time.

In addition, holding similar investments in two separate accounts can be more costly.  Combining the separate holdings may result in lower advisory fees.

  1. Separately-owned property may be at greater risk in bankruptcy or a lawsuit.

Nevada has very liberal exemptions for bankruptcy purposes.  These protections can be utilized best by conferring with an attorney who focuses on asset protection planning.

Joint ownership can make your assets less appealing to creditors.  Creditors loathe joint assets in which they will hold only a one-half interest.  Separately-owned property is less-protected from creditors.  The home is the primary asset to hold jointly or through a trust.

  1. Separate accounts are more difficult to administer.

The death of a loved one causes plenty of heartache.  Maintaining separate account causes needless headaches too.  The time delay in accessing separately-owned accounts can lead to draining financial stress.  Many financial institutions demand formal court orders before allowing access to financial accounts, even when such orders are not necessary.  At a minimum, couples should maintain a joint checking or savings account to make sure the day-to-day expenses can be satisfied.

2 Comments

Posted in Asset Protection, Community Property, Probate

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

Careful with Deathbed Planning

Posted on December 10, 2013 by | Leave a comment

As death looms, people become much more focused on arranging their affairs.  Even those with few assets will develop a laser-like focus on leaving a suitable legacy.  There are pitfalls to death-bed estate plans or revisions to existing plans.  In a perfect world, an estate plan is constructed carefully after much thought and revisions are made regularly.  However, lawyers and financial advisors are often solicited to make changes when a client fears an imminent demise.

Image

Recently, I helped clients update their revocable living trust after the wife was diagnosed with terminal cancer.  They created their trust 20 years ago and had not made any updates since that time.  In the intervening years, one of their five children had passed away and numerous grandchildren had been born.  The prior version of their trust provided that if one of their children predeceased them, the surviving children would receive the estate equally.  The clients instead wanted the trust share that would have passed to the deceased child to be held in trust for the deceased child’s children or the clients’ grandchildren.  If nothing had been done, the clients would have disinherited their grandchildren.

When making near-death amendments or creating new estate plans, advisors and clients must consider the income tax ramifications. A common mistake is to transfer a home or real property to children or grandchildren prior to death.  Such a transfer results in loss of the step-up in basis of the property to the date-of-death fair market value.  The child or grandchild receiving the property steps into the shoes of the transferring parent or grandparent and takes the transferor’s basis in the property.  Usually, the basis is much lower than the present day fair market value.  When the child or grandchild sells the property, he or she will incur a much higher capital gains tax than necessary.

Finally, to avoid a contest, a medical or mental competency examination can assure that the client is competent to make the change.  These exams can be administered by the client’s regular physician.  By using their normal physician, the client will feel more at ease and the physician will already have a history with the client and be able to differentiate whether the client lacks capacity.

Death-bed planning can be done effectively but there are numerous considerations and precautions to follow.

Leave a comment

Posted in Community Property, Estate Planning, Probate, Tax, Trusts, Wills

Tagged , , , , , , , ,