IRS: Lifetime Estate and Gift Tax Exemptions

By Staff Reporters

SPONSOR: http://www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.org

***

***

Remember, in 2023, do not trigger the US estate and gift tax. Last year’s inflation, the highest in decades, means married couples can now hand their heirs almost $26 million tax-free, $1.7 million more than in 2022 and $2.4 million more than in 2021.

The hike in the lifetime estate-and-gift tax exemption — adjusted for price growth annually by the Internal Revenue Service — is the largest since 2018, when the amount was doubled by Republican-passed legislation signed by former President Donald Trump the prior year. As a result, the individual exemption, which is easily shared between spouses, has rocketed to $12.9 million from $5 million in 2011.

But, richer Americans may be running out of time to pass on this much wealth. The exemption is slated to be cut in half in three years, when provisions of Trump’s tax law are set to expire. While even $26 million is a drop in the bucket for the ultra-rich, the exemption’s size shows why generational wealth transfers — estimated by research firm Cerulli to total almost $73 trillion in the US through 2045 — go largely untouched by the government.

Plus, financial advisors may use loopholes and leverage to multiply the amount of tax-free money available to heirs. 

***

ORDER: https://www.routledge.com/Comprehensive-Financial-Planning-Strategies-for-Doctors-and-Advisors-Best/Marcinko-Hetico/p/book/9781482240283

***
COMMENTS APPRECIATED

Thank You

***

AICPA Gift and Estate Requests

Join Our Mailing List

The American Institute of Certified Public Accounts Recommend

[By Children’s Home Society of Florida Foundation]

At a September 13th hearing of the House Committee on Small Business, Subcommittee on Economic Growth, Tax and Capital Access, Jeffrey A. Porter of the American Institute of Certified Public Accounts (AICPA) discussed recommended tax provisions to be considered in November.

A section of his testimony covered proposed gift and estate tax provisions:

1.  Generation Skipping Tax – AICPA requests that the technical GST  modifications passed in 2010 be made permanent.

2.  Estate and Gift Exemption – The $5 million exemption with indexing should be made permanent.  If a lower exemption is passed, there should be no recovery of gift taxes for transfers made in 2011 and 2012 with the larger exemption.

3.  Uniform Exemption Amount – The gift, estate and generation skipping tax exemptions should remain uniform to avoid undue complexity.

4.  Marital Portability – The option to permit use of the exemption of a prior deceased spouse should be made permanent.  Marital portability should also extend to generation skipping tax.

5.  State Tax Credits – Congress should reinstate a state tax credit.  Under the current system, many states have “decoupled” and the different federal and state systems have created undue complexity.

6.  Tax Liquidity – Revise the installment payment of taxes under Sec. 6166 and extend it to all types of business interest.

7.  Gift and Estate Brackets – Do not create gift and estate “cliff” brackets.  For example, a 15% and a 30% bracket could create great differences for taxpayers with moderately different-sized estates.

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com

OUR OTHER PRINT BOOKS AND RELATED INFORMATION SOURCES:

Product Details

A Review of LP / LLC Transfer Hazards for Physicians

Join Our Mailing List

Can standard boilerplate and default corporate law provisions inadvertently disinherit your family from controlling the business or cost millions in additional estate/gift tax?

By Ed Morrow, JD, LL.M. (tax), MBA, CFP®

[Manager, Wealth Strategies Communications, Key Private Bank]

Many physicians use limited liability companies, limited liability partnerships or limited partnerships (“LLCs”, “LLPs” and “LPs”) to operate a trade or business, to hold real estate, or even to hold investment assets.  When only immediate family are owners, these are often referred to as family limited partnerships or limited liability companies (“FLPs” and “FLLCs”).  There are numerous business, asset protection and estate planning reasons for using these entities (hereinafter lumped together for simplicity as “LLCs”).  In many cases, these are preferable to old-fashioned corporations (see separate companion article on LP/LLC Advantages).

As a doctor – you must be very careful, however, when transferring LLC shares during lifetime or at death, to your spouse, children, trusts or others.  Especially when there are co-owners outside the immediate family.  This is due to a stark difference between LLC/partnership law and corporate law and the concept known as “assignee interests”.  Understanding this is even more crucial in 2012 because of the overwhelming demand and interest in transferring LLC interests to irrevocable trusts to exploit the $5.12million gift tax exclusion, which is slated to reduce to only $1 million in 2013.

An LLC owner (called a “member”, not a “stockholder”) has two bundles of rights:

  1. Economic rights – which are the rights to receive property from the LLC both during existence and upon liquidation, along with tax attributes and profit/losses; and
  2. Management rights – the right to vote, participate in management and receive reports and accountings.

It is the latter category that can cause problems when transferring LLC interests by gift or at death.

Members of an LLC usually establish an Operating Agreement to set the rules for transfer of interests.  State statutes (such as the Uniform Limited Liability Company Act) usually provide default rules where the document is silent.

The problem occurs when an LLC member transfers a portion of his or her ownership interest in the LLC to another person, either during lifetime or at death.  At that point, the transferee may become a “mere assignee” of the LLC interest, and not a full “substitute member.”  Under the laws of most states, unless the Operating Agreement provides or parties otherwise agree, an assignee only receives the transferor’s economic rights in the LLC, but not the management rights.

In fact, some court cases require member consent even if the operating agreement seems to otherwise permit such transfers (Ott v. Monroe, 719 S.E.2d 309, 282 Va. 403 (2011).  These state laws were enacted to protect business owners from unwillingly becoming partners with someone they never intended or contracted to be partners with.

This treatment is completely different from transferring C or S corporation stock – when you buy P&G stock, you get the same rights as the previous owner.  S Corporation stock is not even allowed to have differing classes of ownership interests (although voting/non-voting is permitted).  Usually, this quirk in the law has numerous asset protection benefits to LLC owners (discussed in the companion article), but it can cause havoc to one’s business planning in unforeseen circumstances.

Examples of Inadvertent Loss of Control

#1- Doctors Able and Baker, unrelated parties, form and operate an LLC.  Able owns 49% and Baker owns 51%.  Baker has a controlling interest in the LLC.  Baker dies and his 51% interest in the LLC is transferred to his revocable living trust.  Now, the trust is a “mere assignee” and while the trust receives 100% of Baker’s economic rights in the LLC (51% of the total LLC economic rights), it has none of the management rights.  After Baker’s death, Able will have 100% of the LLC’s management rights.  The trustee may have serious difficulty even getting books and records of the LLC, much less have any say on reviewing Able’s business decisions (including new hire and new salary expectations).

#2 – Same ownership structure as above, but Baker leaves assets via Transfer on Death designation or via Will to his spouse, children or others directly.  Same result.

#3 – Same ownership scenario as above, but Baker gifts his membership interests during life to his spouse, children, UTMA account or an irrevocable grantor trust.  Same result.

#3a – Same scenario as above, but Baker simply transfers his shares to his revocable living trust (called “funding”) via Schedule A attached to trust or other assignment.  Same result.

#4 – Same scenario, but Dr. Baker got express permission of Able to transfer his LLC interest to his revocable living trust and have it remain a full substitute member.  No issue – until Baker dies and the LLC interests pass to a new subtrust, such as a bypass, marital, QTIP, or other irrevocable trust, or to beneficiaries outright.  Able must have agreed to this subsequent transfer as well, otherwise the transfer to the new subtrust will be a mere assignee interest and the Baker family loses control.

Creditor Issues

Again, Able and Baker own 49%/51%.  Baker has some creditor issues from a tort claim and co-signed loans unrelated to the LLC.  He files bankruptcy to reorganize or get a clean start (or perhaps the creditor forces a bankruptcy).  This is probably another trigger that causes Baker to lose all of his management rights in the LLC.

Incapacity Issues

Again, Able and Baker own 49% and 51% economic and management rights respectively.  This time, Baker has a stroke or an accident and his wife or one of his family takes over as guardian or conservator.  Similar result.  Able now has 100% controlling management rights, even though Baker still keeps the same economic rights.  He can fire Baker and raise his own salary.

Estate/Gift Tax Issues 

Able and Baker’s company is worth $10Million.  Baker’s 51% interest gets marketability discount, but a controlling premium, so valuation experts and the IRS agree it is worth $4Million.  Able’s 49% interest gets a marketability and lack of control discount, so his interest is only worth $3 million.  Yet when Baker dies, he leaves this 51% interest to his spouse (or marital trust) as a mere assignee, and because the interest has no voting control or management rights, it may be worth only about $3 million in the hands of the spouse/trust (because there is no “control” or management rights, the 51% is worth considerably less).  Thus, Baker’s 51% interest is taxed at $4 million, but only gets a $3 million marital deduction (this same discrepancy is true for charitable gifts, which is why physicians should also be careful gifting LLC interests to charities or charitable trusts).  Did $1 million in value inadvertently pass to Able?  At best, this wastes Baker’s estate tax exemption.  At worst, it may lead to an additional 55% tax (and probably penalties, since it would unlikely be reported and caught on audit) on $1million, or $550,000 additional tax that could easily be avoided.

This same issue arises in gifting shares to a spouse or to a trust for a spouse that is intended to qualify for the marital deduction (or to charities or charitable trusts).

In addition, gifting a mere “assignee” interest risks disqualifying any LLC/LP gifts for the “present interest” annual exclusion under IRC 2503(e) ($13,000 per donor per donee) pursuant to the recent IRS wins in the Hackl, Fisher and Price cases.

Furthermore, it adds grist to a favorite line of attack that the IRS uses to add to taxpayers’ estate tax bill.  If a taxpayer has a “retained interest” in a gift, the IRS has been successful in pulling such gifts back into a taxpayer’s estate (therefore causing additional 35-55% estate tax).

What Can Physicians Who Own LP/LLCs Do?

If you want to transfer both economic rights and management rights in your LLCs, similar to shares of stock of a corporation, then the LLC’s written Operating Agreement should be reviewed and/or revised to admit certain transferees or assignees (like a guardian/conservator, spouse, children, trust, subtrusts, etc) as full “substitute members”, while other transferees (like creditors, ex-spouses) can remain “mere assignees”, with no management rights.

LLC owners may decide on other variations on the above solution if desired.  For instance, some owners might prefer to exclude a surviving spouse or children from management rights, but be perfectly comfortable with having an independent or agreed upon trustee of a marital trust accede to those rights.  The key to good planning is to know the consequences of gifts/bequests beforehand to adequately plan.

Make sure your entire wealth management team is on the same page when orchestrating your wealth planning.  Ask whether they use a checklist of any sorts in their planning, or even if they do, whether they communicate the checklist with other advisors on your team – many do not.

Assessment

As noted in Atul Gawande’s The Checklist Manifesto, simple checklists can often prevent mistakes and miscommunications among even the most educated of professionals – this is certainly true for asset protection and tax planning for LLC interests, and at no time more than in 2012 with all of the anticipated tax changes and proposals threatening to snare any missteps in planning.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

© 2012 Edwin P. Morrow III and KeyBank, NA.  The author holds the following designations:  J.D., LL.M. (masters in tax law), MBA, CFP® and RFC®.  He is a Board Certified Specialist in Estate Planning, Probate and Trust Law through the Ohio State Bar Association.  He is an approved arbitrator for the Financial Industry Regulatory Association (FINRA).  He currently provides educational and consultative services nationwide for the financial advisors and clients of Key Private Bank.  Contact:  (937) 285-5343 or:  Edwin_P_Morrow@KeyBank.com Ed is also a friend of the ME-P and designated “thought-leader”. 

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Link: http://feeds.feedburner.com/HealthcareFinancialsthePostForcxos

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com

OUR OTHER PRINT BOOKS AND RELATED INFORMATION SOURCES:

DICTIONARIES: http://www.springerpub.com/Search/marcinko
PHYSICIANS: www.MedicalBusinessAdvisors.com
PRACTICES: www.BusinessofMedicalPractice.com
HOSPITALS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466558731
CLINICS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781439879900
BLOG: www.MedicalExecutivePost.com
FINANCE: Financial Planning for Physicians and Advisors
INSURANCE: Risk Management and Insurance Strategies for Physicians and Advisors

Product Details  Product Details

Why a Physician’s Charitable Contribution was Denied

Setty Gundanna Viralam et ux. v. Commissioner [A Case Model]

By Children’s Home Society of Florida Foundation

Join Our Mailing List 

In Setty Gundanna Viralam et ux. v. Commissioner; 136 T.C. No. 8; No. 21355-03 (13 Feb 2011), the Tax Court denied a deduction for a charitable gift to an organization maintaining donor advised funds for doctors. In addition to not receiving the charitable deduction, the doctor was subject to capital gains tax on sale of the stock and an accuracy-related penalty.

Physician Example

Dr. Viralam is a medical practitioner. In 1998, Dr. Viralam sold his 50% interest in a medical practice for $2,262,500, producing a taxable gain of $2,261,750. Dr. Viralam had joined a membership organization of doctors named Xelan. He paid a $975 membership fee for the “Xelan tax reduction plan.”

Xelan Foundation

Based upon promotional materials that promised “a tax reduction” program, Dr. Viralam transferred appreciated stock to the Xelan Foundation (“Foundation”) in 1998. The Foundation indicated that Dr. Viralam could create an account described variously as a “donor advised fund” or “family public charity.” The fund was available for “charitable giving, income tax reduction planning, estate tax reduction, educational funding and future retirement planning.”

The Xelan Foundation had been recognized by the IRS as a public charity and was included in IRS Publication 78. In addition, the Foundation had obtained an opinion letter from the Conner & Winters law firm on deductibility of gifts. In their opinion letter, Conner & Winters suggested that gifts to the Foundation were more likely than not to be deductible. However, the opinion letter declined to issue an opinion on the specific grants or educational programs of the Foundation donor advised funds.

The Gifting Mechanism

Following Dr. Viralam’s gift of stock with fair market value of $262,433 and cost basis of $131,360, the Foundation sold the gifted stock and provided him with a receipt. The receipt included the Sec. 170(f)(8) statement that “no goods or services” were transferred in exchange for the gift.

At the recommendation of Dr. Viralam, the Foundation accountant distributed $15,500 to religious organizations for the next two years. However, his Foundation account also made distributions to the University of Pennsylvania of $70,299. Dr. Viralam’s son Vinay was at that time a student at that university. The IRS audited Dr. Viralam and issued a notice of deficiency for 1998. The IRS denied the charitable deduction, assessed a tax on the sale of the appreciated stock by Xelan Corporation and also accessed an accuracy-related penalty under Sec. 6662.

The Court and IRS Opines

The court noted that under Sec. 170(c)(2), a charitable contribution is permitted if it is given to “a foundation organized and operated exclusively for charitable or educational purposes.”

The IRS claimed that the supposed “student loan” to Vinay showed that Dr. Viralam had “never surrendered dominion and control” over the fund. When Dr. Viralam created the fund in 1998, he anticipated that his three children would receive most of the fund for their college expenses. The initial distributions for the benefit of Vinay were made and “the Foundation’s approval of petitioner’s son as a student loan beneficiary was perfunctory.”
While it was true that the Foundation had been granted exempt status and was listed in Publication 78, the issue of the operation exclusively for the benefit of charitable purposes remained. Even though the purported donor advised fund was supposedly for charitable purposes, the facts indicated that Dr. Viralam had retained dominion and control.

The Sec. 170(f)(8)(A) receipt issued by Xelan Foundation indicated that there were no “goods or services” provided in consideration of the gift. However, the “student loans” were clearly within the regulatory definition of “cash, property, services, benefits and privileges.” Because the student loans were contemplated as part of the fund benefits, the gift failed the “no goods or services” test. Under Sec. 170(f)(8), there is “no deduction” if that test is failed.

Assessment

Because there was no charitable deduction, Dr. Viralam is also taxable on the long-term capital gain produced by sale of the stock in 1998. In addition, the penalty under Sec. 6662 applied. Dr. Viralam pointed to the legal opinion by the law firm Connor & Winters. However, that legal opinion explicitly excepted a potential student loan program. In the view of the court, the arrangement fails the “too good to be true” test. In the view of a reasonable person, a taxpayer should realize that this gift to provide university-level educations for children would not be deductible.

Conclusion

And so, your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com 

Our Other Print Books and Related Information Sources:

Health Dictionary Series: http://www.springerpub.com/Search/marcinko

Practice Management: http://www.springerpub.com/product/9780826105752

Physician Financial Planning: http://www.jbpub.com/catalog/0763745790

Medical Risk Management: http://www.jbpub.com/catalog/9780763733421

Healthcare Organizations: www.HealthcareFinancials.com

Physician Advisors: www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.com

Subscribe Now: Did you like this Medical Executive-Post, or find it helpful, interesting and informative? Want to get the latest ME-Ps delivered to your email box each morning? Just subscribe using the link below. You can unsubscribe at any time. Security is assured.

Link: http://feeds.feedburner.com/HealthcareFinancialsthePostForcxos

Sponsors Welcomed: And, credible sponsors and like-minded advertisers are always welcomed.

Link: https://healthcarefinancials.wordpress.com/2007/11/11/advertise

Product DetailsProduct DetailsProduct Details       

Product Details  Product Details

On the Estate and Gift Law Tax Changes

Update on the New Tax Laws

[By Chris Miller JD and Nicole McNair]

Robinson & Miller, PC

Dear ME-P Readers and Subscribers,

On behalf of attorney J. Christopher Miller of our firm, please find attached a letter summarizing the changes in the estate and gift tax law enacted last month by the Obama Administration. We trust you find it interesting and informative.

Link: 2010 Estate Tax Reform Letter

Assessment

Please call with questions.

  • Robinson & Miller, PC
  • 3460 Preston Ridge Road, Suite 100
  • Alpharetta, GA 30005
  • http://www.robinsonmiller.com
  • Tel: 770-817-4999
  • Fax: 770-817-4994

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Link: http://feeds.feedburner.com/HealthcareFinancialsthePostForcxos

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com

OUR OTHER PRINT BOOKS AND RELATED INFORMATION SOURCES:

DICTIONARIES: http://www.springerpub.com/Search/marcinko
PHYSICIANS: www.MedicalBusinessAdvisors.com
PRACTICES: www.BusinessofMedicalPractice.com
HOSPITALS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466558731
CLINICS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781439879900
BLOG: www.MedicalExecutivePost.com
FINANCE: Financial Planning for Physicians and Advisors
INSURANCE: Risk Management and Insurance Strategies for Physicians and Advisors

Product Details  Product Details

%d bloggers like this: