Jan
03

Estate Freeze Update

Volume XX, Number 1 • January 2011
©2011 Donlevy-Rosen & Rosen, P.A.

Estate Freeze Update

New Law – New Opportunity

INTRODUCTION.  More than 10 years ago we wrote an issue of the APN on estate freeze planning (Vol. IX, No. 1). The essence of estate freeze planning is just what it sounds like: the value of an asset (or assets) is “frozen” at today’s value for future estate tax purposes. A brief example will illustrate the effect of this strategy: The value of your asset worth $1million today is “frozen” using this technique. You pass away, say, 15 years from now at a time when that asset is worth $10million. The effect of the estate freeze is that $9million in appreciation will pass to your heirs free of estate tax. A new estate freeze planning opportunity has arisen as a result of the enactment  in late December of the “Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization and Job Creation Act of 2010″. The new law provides a $5million gift tax “exemption” for taxpayers. This means that a married couple can freeze up to $10million in assets without paying any gift tax. In addition, the currently depressed values of many assets (e.g., real estate, bank stocks) enhance the potential benefit of this strategy (because they are likely to appreciate).
COMMON METHODS.  Examples of common estate freeze techniques are:
Outright Gift: An outright gift is the simplest and least desirable method of implementing of an estate freeze: the transferor loses all property interests in the transferred asset. If properly structured, any post-transfer appreciation will be excluded from federal estate taxation.
Gifts In Trust: In general, these produce the same result as an outright gift where the transferor is not also a beneficiary of the trust (but see “Solution”, below).
Sale Of Appreciating Assets: The sale (usually to a family member or to a trust) of assets which are likely to appreciate in exchange for a promissory note (issued at the date of sale for fair market value) will also effect an estate freeze, because the value of the promissory note held by the transferor (seller) will usually be subject to federal estate tax at a value equal to its unpaid balance (although “self-cancelling” notes “disappear” at death). However, the transferor will again lose all property interests in and any potential benefits from the asset(s) sold (but see “Solution”, below).
Impediments: A major impediment to the implementation of a typical estate freeze used to be that it might have constituted a taxable gift, although, with the new $5million exemption this is less likely.  The even more important impediment is that the typical estate freeze will result in a loss by the transferor of all interests in the property given away. People want to “have their cake and eat it too”; that is, they want to retain some type of interest in the transferred property and obtain the estate tax benefit. In the usual case, if they retain any type of interest in the transferred property, the transfer will not be complete for federal transfer tax purposes, thereby not effecting an estate freeze (see below).
TECHNICAL NECESSITIES. A little technical background is necessary here. In order to effect an estate freeze, we need a “completed transfer” for federal estate & gift tax purposes. Under the trust law in most jurisdictions, property transferred to a trust in which the transferor is also a beneficiary (remember “have your cake and eat it too”?) can be reached by the transferor’s creditors to the extent the transferor could possibly receive benefits from the trust. The IRS says, because of that, the transfer is incomplete for estate & gift tax purposes. Thus, in the usual case, a trust of which the transferor is a beneficiary will be included in the transferor’s estate for federal estate tax purposes (no freeze).
SOLUTION. Ok, we want to have an interest in the transferred property AND obtain an estate tax benefit. How can we accomplish that? The IRS, in several well-reasoned public and private rulings, has held that if a transferor establishes his/her trust in a jurisdiction whose laws will not permit the transferor’s creditors to reach trust assets (as they would be able to in most places as a result of the transferor being a discretionary beneficiary of the trust), that the transfer will be complete, and will be excluded from the transferor’s estate for estate tax purposes.
WHY OFFSHORE? Although the laws of a few states allegedly restrict a creditor’s access to trusts under the circumstances described above, there are numerous uncertainties in that regard (See, APN, Vol. VII, No. 1). However, we know that certain offshore jurisdictions will be effective to that end. To summarize: You can set up a trust in certain jurisdictions and be a discretionary beneficiary of your trust, and it will be excluded from estate taxation in your estate. Do your assets have to be offshore? The answer is: NO. Can they stay at your favorite broker? YES.
Note that we have not mentioned anything about U.S. income tax. That’s because, even though the trust described above will not be subject to U.S. estate tax in the transferor’s estate, it will still be a “grantor trust” for U.S. income tax purposes, requiring the transferor to report all trust income personally (See, APN, Vol. VI, No. 4 for a discussion of these tax laws).
Variations of the technique discussed in this issue can be effectively implemented for nonresident aliens owning U.S. real estate or for those wishing to immigrate into the United States. Properly implemented, such planning can result in the elimination of our estate tax for such persons.
CONCLUSION & CAVEAT: The structure discussed in this issue will only be effective if certain rules are strictly followed in the planning and operation of the trust (beyond the scope of this issue).

Dec
21

Howard D. Rosen Interviewed on Asset Protection

Attorney Howard D. Rosen (Donlevy-Rosen & Rosen, P.A.; Publisher of The Asset Protection News) was recently interviewed by fellow attorney, Douglass Lodmell, on the informative financial planning online show The Mind of Money.

The complete interview is available to view at www.protectyou.com.

Howard and Douglass had a frank conversation about some key issues associated with asset protection planning and offshore trusts, including:

  • What is asset protection? What is an asset protection trust?
  • How have the recent events associated with Swiss banks affected offshore trusts?
  • Who should engage in asset protection planning?  When, if ever, is an offshore asset protection trust implemented too late?
  • How can real estate and other immovable assets be protected? How can businesses be protected?
  • What is a fraudulent conveyance / transfer? Will a client go to jail for engaging in asset protection?

Watch a preview of the show:

Howard and Douglass shared their experiences as asset protection attorneys, and brought up some interesting points relevant to attorneys and potential clients alike.

For more information on asset protection planning or offshore trusts, contact the law firm of Donlevy-Rosen & Rosen, P.A. at (888) 412-8844 or at their website, www.protectyou.com.

Apr
01

The Jamie Solow Case

Volume XIX, Number 1 • April/May 2010
©2010 Donlevy-Rosen & Rosen, P.A.

THE JAMIE SOLOW CASE -

WHAT REALLY HAPPENED:

A Return To Debtors’ Prisons?

INTRODUCTION. The Jamie Solow contempt incarceration case has caused a lot of people to write a lot of articles and offer a lot of opinions – most of which are completely inaccurate. The author, Howard D. Rosen, is one of Mrs. Solow’s attorneys, attended court hearings, testified, and can state with accuracy what actually transpired in this case. You’ve all heard the expression that “bad facts make bad law”, but the Solow case represents an example of the court and the SEC ignoring the facts and ignoring the law. Read the rest of this entry »

Aug
01

US Tax Compliance for Foreign Accounts

Volume XVII, Number 1 • August/September 2009
©2009 Donlevy-Rosen & Rosen, P.A.

U.S. TAX COMPLIANCE

FOR

FOREIGN ACCOUNTS:

How Does The UBS Disclosure Agreement Affect Offshore Trusts?

INTRODUCTION. On August 19th the U.S. Internal Revenue Service announced that the Swiss bank, UBS AG, the United States, and Switzerland had reached an agreement under which the U.S. would file a request under the U.S. – Swiss tax treaty to obtain certain data regarding U.S. taxpayers (about 4,450 accounts). The Swiss government would then direct UBS to supply the account data to the Internal Revenue Service. This matter relates to U.S. citizens or residents who have unreported foreign accounts – regardless of whether those accounts are held within a foreign trust or in the individual’s personal name. We have received many inquiries asking how this affects our firm’s asset protection and offshore trust planning strategies. The good news is that our clients who are following our written compliance instructions should not be affected in any way. Read the rest of this entry »

Oct
01

The Morris Case

Volume XVII, Number 3 • October 2008
©2008 Donlevy-Rosen & Rosen, P.A.

THE MORRIS CASE:

No Opinions, No Conjecture, No Assumptions,

Just The Facts…

INTRODUCTION. A lengthy legal ordeal has finally ended for Merry Morris. Much has been written about her case, most of it inaccurate, according to Merry, whom we interviewed on September 25, 2008. We want to present the truth about her case, and what better source for the truth than Merry? Read the rest of this entry »

Older posts «