About Me

My photo
Hackensack, NJ, United States
Attorney at Law (NJ, NY, VA) Specializing in Trusts and Estates - Business Succession Planning. I currently focus on taxation law, with a particular emphasis on business advice, succession and estate planning. I draft complex commercial documents, trusts, wills and business succession plans in order to maximize the wealth of current principals and preserve closely-held and family businesses for the next generation of ownership. I serve as an advisor to corporate clients on such matters as partnership and shareholder agreements, protection of trademarks and copyrights, corporate/commercial transactions, including the formation, purchase, sale and restructuring of businesses and professional practices, and general corporate agreements.

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    Monday, September 28, 2009

    Charitable Trusts

    Friday, July 18, 2008 by James R. Modrall

    Charitable Lead Annuity Trust. A Charitable Lead Annuity Trust
    ("CLAT") is a charitable trust designed to pass significant wealth to
    the next generation without transfer tax. The CLAT was publicized
    after the death of Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis who had reportedly
    established a CLAT in her will or revocable trust for the benefit of
    her children.

    Basically, the idea of a CLAT is to provide for sufficient annual
    payments from the trust to a charity over a period of years so that
    the remainder gift to children, at the end of the term, has a tax
    value of zero or close to it.

    How Does This Work? I was alerted to the impact that the rapidly
    changing interest rates will have on a zero gift CLAT. Each month the
    IRS publishes the applicable interest rate for the next month based on
    Federal mid-term interest rates. For example, the applicable rate for
    May was 3.2%. For June and July, 2008 the rate is 3.8%, and for
    August, 2008 the rate is 4.2%. In calculating the value of the
    remainder gift to family, the IRS assumes that the earnings of the
    trust will be equal to the applicable interest rate ("AFR").

    Example. Suppose $1 million is transferred to a twenty year CLAT with
    annual payments to a family foundation (or a public charity) at the
    May AFR of 3.2%. The annual payment to the charity from the $1 million
    trust would be $68,464.54 for a 20 year trust. Using the May AFR of
    3.2%, the taxable gift would be zero. If the trust earns more than
    3.2% there will be a tax free remainder at the end of the twenty year
    term. For example, if the trust earns 6.85%, the earnings will exceed
    the payments to charity and there will be $1 million remaining after
    20 years. If the trust earns more than 6.85%, the remainder value will
    be greater than $1 million .

    Similarly, if the trust earns less than 3.2% there will be no
    remaining assets for family. (How many financial advisors tell their
    clients that they can expect to earn less than 3.2% on their portfolio
    over a twenty year period?)Why The Urgency?

    Why The Urgency? The IRS regulations permit the grantor of the trust
    to use the AFR for the month of the transfer or either of the two
    previous months. Thus, a CLAT done before the end of July, 2008 will
    qualify for the 3.2% rate.

    Why is this important? If the grantor delays until August when the
    lowest AFR is 3.8%, the annual payment to charity would have to be
    $72,284.63 for the 20 year term in order to have a zero gift. That is
    a difference of $3,820.09 per year to accomplish the same result, a
    taxable gift valued at zero.

    Using a compound growth rate of 5% for 20 years, that saving would
    amount to $126,312 (assuming an annuity in arrears). As they say,
    "this ain't chicken feed!"What Is The Benefit?

    What Is The Benefit? Why would a client want to do a CLAT in the first
    place? First, this interests clients who are pretty sure to have an
    estate tax at death. That is, clients that have total assets more than
    $3.5 million (the exemption in effect for 2009 and likely to be in
    effect in the future).

    Second, clients may have a charity or private foundation that they
    want to benefit. We have done CLATs benefitting both family
    foundations and public charities where there is a strong charitable
    interest.

    Third, we have had clients who want to delay distributions of wealth
    to family members for various reasons. Among them are maturity of
    grandchildren, retirement funds for children, or delays for reasons of
    divorce credit or claims, etc. (Delays can also be useful in the case
    of incarcerated relatives but we assume that no readers of this
    newsletter would fall into that category.)

    More On CLATS.

    We have talked about why people would use a CLAT. CLATs come in two
    flavors. In the most commonly used CLAT in our experience, the donor
    does not claim an income tax deduction, but the trust gets an income
    tax deduction for all the payments to the charity. The alternate form
    provides a charitable deduction for the discounted value of the
    charitable payments, but the trust is taxed on the income. In either
    case the objective is the same: payments to a charity and a tax free
    gift to children at the end of the term.

    In some cases clients may elect to use several CLATs of different
    terms if part of the objective is to use up the taxable gift exemption
    of $1 million, for example, by reducing the annual payments to
    charity, the length of the trust term, or some combination of both.

    Conclusion. There is not a lot of time left to set up a CLAT before
    the end of July, 2008. However, with another jump in interest rates
    imminent, there is still a substantial advantage to a trust
    established in August, 2008, using the June rate of 3.8%. A CLAT can
    be an important estate planning tool for wealthy clients with a
    charitable intent. (There is an especially strong reason to use a CLAT
    if a client has a Private Foundation where the client's family will
    retain an element of control over the activities of the Foundation.)
    You don't have to be a Ford or a Rockefeller to establish a Private
    Foundation!

    ©BRANDT, FISHER, ALWARD & ROY, P.C.

    It's Time to Pass the Torch or At Least a Portion of the Flame: Business Succession Planning in Distressed Times

    http://www.gibbonslaw.com/news_publications/articles.php?action=display_publication&publication_id=2756

    Corporate & Finance Alert
    (Rita M. Danylchuk, Cathleen T. Butler)
    May 5, 2009


    Believe it or not, there is a silver lining in today's economy when it
    comes to estate planning and particularly passing the family business
    to the next generation. Statistics show that many family businesses do
    not survive the transition of management from the original founder to
    subsequent generations. The current economy notwithstanding, two
    primary reasons for business succession failure are lack of proper
    estate planning and that many business owners wait until death to
    transfer ownership of the family business to the younger generation at
    significant estate tax cost. The current economic climate is favorable
    for transferring business interests to younger generations. As
    discussed below, the current environment of low interest rates,
    depressed asset values and valuation discounts make it an opportune
    time for senior owners of closely-held businesses to pass the torch to
    the younger generation at minimal transfer tax cost.

    What Can You Do?

    Interest rates are at historical lows. This offers the owner of a
    closely-held business an opportunity to make loans to a child or
    grandchild purchasing the business under terms the descendant may be
    able to afford. Typically, to structure a loan to a family member that
    meets IRS guidelines, the loan must bear interest at a rate which at
    least equals the monthly rate issued by the Internal Revenue Service,
    referred to as the Applicable Federal Rate or "AFR." The AFR for May
    2009 for a note with a term of 3 years or less is a whopping 0.76%! If
    the loan is for a term of 3-9 years, the AFR increases to 2.05% and
    for a loan of 9 years or more, the AFR is 3.58% Given these low AFR
    rates, family loans or sale of business interests pursuant to
    installment sales are ideal ways to transfer wealth and assets to the
    younger generation.

    In the current distressed economic climate, it is possible to transfer
    assets, such as closely-held stock and real estate, to your children
    and grandchildren at the currently depressed values of the business
    assets . By transferring a business interest now to a child or
    grandchild at a depressed value, the future appreciation on the
    business interest can inure to the benefit of the younger generation
    with minimal or no gift or estate tax consequences.

    Under current law, valuation discounts can be applied to the transfer
    of certain business interests. Generally, two types of discounts apply
    - a marketability discount because the business interest is not a
    publicly-traded asset; and a discount for minority interest or lack of
    control if the interest being gifted represents the non-voting or
    non-controlling interest in a company. Let's take an example: assume
    Dad and Mom own a printing business appraised at $3 million (including
    real estate and other business assets). Mom owns a 49% non-voting
    interest in the business and Dad owns a 1% voting interest and a 49%
    non-voting interest. Mom can gift her 49% non-voting interest to her
    children at a discounted value because the interest is a minority
    interest in a closely-held company that is not readily marketable when
    compared to assets that are publicly-traded. Discounts vary but
    generally range from 20% to 40% of the gross value of the asset. In
    the above example, if Mom gifts a 49% non-voting interest to her
    children, the value of the gift without any discounting will be
    approximately $1,470,000 ($3,000,000 x 49%). Now assume a 35% discount
    applies because the interest being gifted represents a non-controlling
    interest in a closely-held business. The value of the gift for gift
    tax purposes will be reduced to approximately $955,000 ($3,000,000 x
    49% x 65%), a difference of approximately $515,000. With the current
    Federal estate tax rate at 45% on estates exceeding $3,500,000, the
    use of a valuation discount can result in substantial estate tax
    savings.

    While valuation discounts are currently utilized in the estate
    planning arena, their existence may be fleeting. On January 9, 2009,
    the "Certain Estate Tax Relief Act of 2009" (HR 436) was introduced in
    the House of Representatives. This proposed legislation seeks to
    eliminate the use of valuation discounts in a closely-held company
    which holds non-business assets (assets not used in active trade or
    business). For example, any transfer of non-business assets (stocks,
    bonds, real estate, etc.) would be valued without any valuation
    discounts. The proposed legislation also seeks to eliminate minority
    discounts that currently apply for transfers by a donor whose family
    members have control over the business even if the donor does not.

    How Can You Do It?

    1. Gifting
    In 2009, the annual amount that each individual can gift to a donee,
    without incurring a gift tax, increased from $12,000 to $13,000. A
    husband and wife can make a joint gift of $26,000 without incurring a
    gift tax. For gifts exceeding the annual exclusion amount, an
    individual can gift up to $1,000,000 during life without paying any
    Federal gift tax (herein, the "Lifetime Gift Exemption"). The use of
    annual exclusion gifts and the Lifetime Gift Exemption, combined with
    valuation discounts, may allow an individual to transfer a substantial
    portion of his business interest to family members at minimal gift tax
    cost. Gifts of business interests can be made to children directly or
    to trusts established for the benefit of children and/or
    grandchildren.

    In the example described above, Mom's gift of her 49% interest would
    not be subject to any out of pocket gift tax. If Mom gifted her 49%
    interest, valued at $955,000 for gift tax purposes, to her three
    children and split the gift with her husband, $78,000 of the gift
    would be covered by the annual gift exclusion and the remainder of the
    gift would be covered by a portion of Mom's $1 million Lifetime Gift
    Exemption. Mom would not be required to pay out-of-pocket gift tax to
    the IRS. Further, through gifting, Mom will remove approximately $1
    million from her taxable estate, resulting in estate tax savings of
    approximately $450,000. Dad can also do similar gifting with his
    interests in the business.

    If parents are concerned about outright gifts to children, a trust can
    be established to own the business interest. From a creditor
    perspective, any assets in the trust also will be protected from
    creditor claims of trust beneficiaries (i.e., the children) to the
    extent the assets in the trust are not distributed out to the
    beneficiaries. Further, if properly created, a trust can exist for
    multiple generations.

    2. Sales to Family Members
    As an alternative to a gift of the business interest, the business
    owner may consider the sale of the business interest to the junior
    generation with a promissory note. Unlike a commercial loan, the terms
    of an intra-family promissory note can be structured to meet the
    specific needs and circumstances of a child or grandchild. For
    instance, the promissory note can provide for interest-only payments
    for the term of the note with a balloon principal payment paid at
    maturity. The sale of a parent's business interest to a child will
    provide a stream of income for the parent and enable the child to
    obtain an interest in the family business at a lower cost due to the
    current depressed value of assets and low interest rates. While the
    parent may realize capital gain on the sale of the business interest,
    the capital gains rate of 15% minimizes the tax hit when weighed
    against the value of the business interest that is removed from the
    donor's estate.

    3. Sales to Intentionally Defective Grantor Trusts
    In the current economic climate, selling a business interest to an
    intentionally defective grantor trust ("IDGT") is another attractive
    transfer technique. An IDGT is a trust under which the grantor is
    treated as the owner of trust assets for income tax purposes, but not
    for gift or estate tax purposes. Any transactions such as sales
    between a grantor and an IDGT are ignored for income tax purposes.
    Accordingly, the grantor parent will not recognize a capital gain on
    the sale of a business interest to an IDGT and any interest income
    paid on a promissory note will not produce taxable income to the
    grantor. The beneficiaries of an IDGT can be the grantor's children
    and grandchildren or even individuals who are not the grantor's lineal
    descendants but to whom the grantor wishes to leave the business. The
    business interest sold to the IDGT, together with all future
    appreciation in the value of the business, will be removed from the
    grantor's taxable estate and inure to the benefit of the IDGT
    beneficiaries.

    Going back to the prior example, let's assume that Dad sells his 49%
    non-voting interest in the family printing business, valued at $3
    million, to an IDGT in exchange for a promissory note with a face
    value of $955,000, bearing interest at the appropriate AFR. The face
    value of the promissory note is based upon the appraised value of the
    49% non-voting interest utilizing a minority interest and lack of
    marketability discount of approximately 35% ($3,000,000 x 49% x 65%).
    Assuming this discount is accepted by the IRS, Dad will have
    transferred $1,470,000 worth of property (undiscounted) to his IDGT
    without utilizing any of his Lifetime Gift Exemption. Since the IDGT
    is treated as a grantor trust for income tax purposes, no gain or loss
    will be recognized on the sale of Dad's 49% non-voting interest in
    exchange for the promissory note. Further, no interest will be treated
    as paid on the promissory note during the term of the note and all
    items of income and deductions will flow through and be taxed to Dad
    as grantor, rather than the IDGT, for income tax purposes. With a sale
    to an IDGT, it is recommended that the IDGT should have sufficient
    assets of its own to make a down payment on the purchase of Dad's
    non-voting interest. If the IDGT does not have sufficient assets, then
    prior to the sale, Dad should make a gift to the IDGT of assets that
    can be used to make the subsequent purchase of assets. Typically, a
    gift equal to at least 10% of the value of the assets transferred to
    the IDGT should be sufficient.

    To conclude, the current availability of valuation discounts,
    historically low interest rates and depressed asset values all are
    clear indicators that now is the time for business owners to seriously
    consider passing the torch to the next generation - do it now before
    the flame goes out.

    Should you have any questions regarding your own situation, please
    contact Rita M. Danylchuk or Cathleen T. Butler of our Trusts and
    Estates Group.

    Woman Who Owns Bulk of Marilyn Monroe's Estate Barely Knew Her

     
     

    Sent to you by Options44 via Google Reader:

     
     

    via Wills, Trusts & Estates Prof Blog by Trusts EstatesProf on 9/28/09

    When Marilyn Monroe died, she was single and childless, but she did have a will. Monroe signed a will one year before her death. She left $100,000 in trust to care for her mother, who was institutionalized for mental illness...

     
     

    Things you can do from here:

     
     

    Sunday, September 27, 2009

    Trusts: Legally Protecting Assets from the Settlor's Creditors

     
     

    Sent to you by Options44 via Google Reader:

     
     

    via New York Trusts & Estates Litigation Blog by jdagostino@farrellfritz.com (Jaclene D'Agostino ) on 8/27/09

    New York law allows individuals to limit their liability to creditors by arranging their affairs in a manner that legally protects their assets. One of the ways this is accomplished is by "making irrevocable transfers of their assets, outright or in trust, as long as such transfers are not in fraud of existing creditors . . ." (Matter of the Joseph Heller Inter Vivos Trust, 613 Misc 2d 369 [Sur Ct, 1994]). The circumstances under which a trust's assets will be validly protected are limited to the existence of specific parameters in the trust instrument.

    According to EPTL §7-3.1, "[a] disposition in trust for the use of the creator is void as against the existing or subsequent creditors of the creator." In other words, an individual cannot transfer his or her assets to a trust and continue to retain control or enjoy the benefits of that trust, while simultaneously enjoying protection from creditors. Instead, transfers to irrevocable trusts will only be deemed valid for purposes of sheltering the assets from creditors where the grantor does not reserve a power to revoke the trusts or to dispose of the property during his lifetime, and where the transfers to the trust did not make the grantor insolvent (see Matter of Granwell, 20 NY2d 91 [1967]; Debtor Creditor Law §273). 

     

    A transfer resulting in the grantor's insolvency or one that is made while the grantor is already insolvent may be deemed a fraudulent conveyance (see Debtor Creditor Law §273). In such cases, the creditors may set aside conveyances and reach the assets. But if trust assets remain available for the grantor's benefit, creditors need not establish fraud to invalidate the transfer (see Vanderbilt Credit Corp. v Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A., 100 AD2d 544 [2d Dept 1984]; Colgate v Guaranty Trust Co. of New York, 159 Misc 664, 666 [Sup Ct, New York County 1936]).   For example, in Vanderbilt Credit Corp. v Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A., 100 AD2d 544 (2d Dept 1984), the Appellate Division held that trust assets are not protected from creditors if the trustee has discretion to make payments to the grantor (see Vanderbilt Credit Corp. v Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A., 100 AD2d 544 [2d Dept 1984]). 

     

    Not surprisingly, this concept extends beyond the life of the trust settlor and remains applicable to his or her estate. Indeed, courts recognize that where an individual reserves the power to dispose of trust property during his or her  lifetime, "he or she must be regarded as the absolute owner of the funds until death and those funds would be therefore available to pay estate debts" (Estate of Hughes, 3/20/2003 NYLJ 23 [col 2] [Sur Ct, Kings County], citing Matter of Granwell, 20 NY2d 91 [1967]; Matter of Batiste, 5/4/99 NYLJ 30 [col 6]).  Also notable is the fact that, "any property covered by a general power of appointment which is presently exercisable, or a postponed power which has become exercisable, is subject to creditors' claims" (Estate of Chappell, 7/24/09 NYLJ 26 [col 1] [Sur Ct, New York County], citing EPTL §10-7.2). 

     

    In light of the foregoing, it is clear that individuals may legally protect their assets from the claims of creditors, provided they are willing to forego the control and benefits of the funds and of course, do not transfer their assets fraudulently.


     
     

    Things you can do from here:

     
     

    Tuesday, September 22, 2009

    Contesting a Will in New Jersey

    no picture
     
    It is an eventuality that virtually all of us will face sometime during our lives, the loss of a loved one.  Whether this loved one is one of your parents, a sibling, a relative, or a friend, litigation may arise concerning the Probate of their Will in order to administer their Estate.  Estate litigation is often emotional, costly and is similar in the emotions it evokes to that of a divorce proceeding.  Often times, the Executor of the Estate may use the Estate's assets to defend the Will.  On the other hand, a contestant of the Will must often pay their own counsel fees with only a possibility of being reimbursed by the Estate.  As such, a person challenging a Will should first evaluate the value of the Estate and their potential gain as compared to the expenses they may incur in seeking that relief .  In addition, a party should consider the emotional trauma which is very prevalent in Estate litigation.  An Executor of the Estate or beneficiary whose bequest is being challenged has no other alternative than to defend against the challenge being brought against their interest or a challenge against the Will itself. 
     

    In the State of New Jersey, there are essentially two ways in which an individual may challenge a Will.  The first way is to allege that the decedent lacked the requisite capacity the date the Will was executed.  This is a fairly low standard to meet, as the decedent need only be aware that he/she possesses assets, and in addition, that he/she wishes to transfer these assets to certain other individuals.  In levying a challenge in this regard, the Court may review medical records and other information concerning the decedent's physical and mental health in order to determine if this individual possessed the requisite mental capacity on the day the Will was executed.  The medical records are relevant as they may demonstrate physical or mental conditions which could suggest that the decedent may have lacked the capacity to execute a Will on the date the Will was executed.  This often involves the need for expert witnesses to review medical records, and thereafter, to render their opinion as to the capacity of the decedent on the date the Will was executed. 
     

    The other way in which an individual may challenge a Will concerns an allegation of undue influence.  Simply put, undue influence means that the Will does not reflect the true intentions of the decedent, but instead, reflects the wishes of an individual who asserted their influence over the Testator, thereby rendering the Will inconsistent with the Testator's true wishes.  In order to prove a claim of undue influence, the contestant must first establish that there existed a confidential relationship between the decedent and the party which is alleged to have unduly influenced the Testator.  A confidential relationship exists when the Testator and another individual shared a relationship where trust or confidence is naturally reposed by the decedent with this individual.  Another instance under which a confidential relationship arises is in an attorney/client relationship where there is a fiduciary relationship between the parties. 
     

    Once the contestant of the Will has established the existence of  a confidential relationship, he/she must establish suspicious circumstances with regard to the creation and execution of the Will.  Once this has been achieved, the Court can shift the burden of proof upon the proponent of the Will to demonstrate the validity of this document. 
     

    After a lawsuit has been commenced, the Court will often recommend that the parties consider mediation in an attempt to resolve the matter without the need for additional litigation.  Often, the parties are able to resolve the litigation through Mediation without the parties incurring additional expenses.  If a case cannot be resolved through mediation, the case will move forward through discovery, and thereafter, to Trial.  Once an Estate litigation matter is scheduled for Trial, the parties should be aware that the Trial will not be heard before a jury, but rather is decided by a Chancery Judge that hears probate matters.  Once the Judge renders his/her decision, either side may make an application for fees to the Estate. 
     

    If the party prevails in contesting the Will, the Will could revert to a previous Will, if said document still exists, or the individual could be deemed as having died without a Will.  Thereafter, the Court may appoint an independent Executor if the named Executor is disqualified.  If the Will is not invalidated by the Court, then it will be probated in the manner which had been sought to be probated by the Executor originally.  Thereafter, the Estate litigation will conclude.

    After Disney-Marvel Deal, Cartoonist’s Heirs Seek to Reclaim Rights

    By Michael Cieply and Brooks Barnes

    The Walt Disney Company's proposed $4 billion acquisition of Marvel Entertainment may come with a headache: a brand-new superhero copyright dispute.

    Heirs to the comic-book artist Jack Kirby, who has been credited as the co-creator of characters and stories behind Marvel mainstays like the "X-Men" and "Fantastic Four," among many others, last week sent 45 notices of copyright termination to Marvel, Disney, Sony Pictures, Universal Pictures, 20th Century Fox, Paramount Pictures and others who have been making films and other forms of entertainment based on the characters.

    The legal notices expressed an intent to regain copyrights to some creations as early as 2014, according to a statement from Toberoff & Associates, a Los Angeles firm that helped win a court ruling last year returning a share of the copyright in Superman to heirs of the character's co-creator, Jerome Siegel.

    Reached by telephone on Sunday, Mr. Toberoff declined to elaborate on the statement. A spokeswoman for Marvel had no immediate comment. Disney said in a statement, "The notices involved are an attempt to terminate rights seven to 10 years from now, and involve claims that were fully considered in the acquisition." Fox, Sony, Paramount and Universal had no comment.

    Marvel shareholders must still approve the sale of the company to Disney, which is already battling criticism from some Wall Street analysts that Marvel comes with too messy an array of rights agreements. The worry is that Disney will have a hard time immediately executing a coordinated exploitation of Marvel's various brands.

    Sony has the film rights to Spider-Man in perpetuity, for instance, while Fox has the X-Men and the Fantastic Four. Paramount has a distribution agreement for Marvel's next few self-produced movies, including a second "Iron Man" film. Meanwhile, Hasbro has certain toy rights and Universal holds the Florida theme park rights to Spider-Man and the Incredible Hulk, among other characters.

    Mr. Kirby, who died in 1994, worked with the writer-editor Stan Lee to create many of the characters that in the last decade have become some of the most valuable in a Hollywood that hungers for super-heroes. Mr. Kirby was involved with "The Incredible Hulk," "The Mighty Thor," "Iron Man," "Spider-Man," and "The Avengers," and others.

    The window for serving notice of termination on the oldest of the properties opened several years ago, and will remain open for some time under the law. But Disney's announced purchase gives a new reason for anyone with claims on Marvel to stake out a position.

    Under copyright law, the author or his heirs can begin a process to regain copyrights a certain period of years after the original grant. If Mr. Kirby's four children were to gain the copyright to a co-created character, they might become entitled to a share of profits from films or other properties using it. They might also find themselves able to sell rights to certain characters independently of Marvel, Disney, or the various studios that have licensed the Marvel properties for their hit films.

    In July, a federal judge in Los Angeles ruled that Warner Brothers and its DC Comics unit had not violated rights of the Siegel heirs in handling internal transactions related to Superman, but an earlier ruling had already granted the heirs a return of their share in the copyright. In the late 1990s, Mr. Toberoff represented a television writer, Gilbert Ralston, who sued Warner over the rights to the film "Wild, Wild West." The suit was ultimately settled.

    Copyright issues have become increasingly difficult for Hollywood, as it continues to trade on characters and stories that were created decades ago, but are now subject to deadlines and expiration dates under federal copyright law.

    Saturday, September 19, 2009

    CNNMoney Mobile: Lend to family the right way

    Lend to family the right way
    A loan to a relative can actually be a sweet deal for both sides, if
    it's served up correctly.
    By Linda Stern, Money Magazine
    September 14, 2009: 01:10 PM
    (Money Magazine) -- When Brian Hetherington complained to his father
    two years ago about the weighty 9% rate he and his wife were paying on
    their home-equity line of credit, Jim, the senior Hetherington, had an
    idea. He could lend the couple the $100,000 to pay off the loan and
    charge them only 6%. It's been win-win ever since. "We haven't missed
    a payment," says Brian, 43. And his folks are still earning a return
    on their money.


    With banks stingier in the credit they're offering to borrowers,
    families are finding that it pays to cut traditional financial
    institutions out of the equation. While the bulk of interpersonal
    lending is informal and hard to track, there's clearly a lot of money
    moving around. At Virgin Money, an online company that facilitates
    such loans, volume has more than doubled in two years, to $425 million.


    Perhaps you're considering helping an adult child buy a first home,
    aiding a sibling who is struggling with debt, or supporting a relative
    who's lost a job. Those are laudable objectives, but beware before
    putting up serious money.


    "Lending to family can be dangerous," says Dennis Stearns, a
    Greensboro, N.C., financial planner who has seen deadbeat relatives
    and bad communication doom deals and damage relationships.


    In fact, according to a recent Money survey, 43% of readers who lent
    to family or friends weren't paid back in full; 27% hadn't received a
    dime. To avoid joining this unfortunate club, follow these steps
    before offering an advance.


    Check your reserves. The arrangement can go wrong on either end. On
    your side, you want to be sure of two things. First, that if the loan
    falls through, it won't destroy a cherished relationship. And that you
    can truly afford to give up the money being requested.


    The emotional part is for you alone to judge; we'll stick to the
    practical side of the equation. To start, verify that the loan won't
    jeopardize your retirement. Use T. Rowe Price's retirement income
    calculator to see if you'd be able to manage comfortably if the money
    isn't repaid. You also shouldn't play banker if it means taking on
    debt or selling assets you're not prepared to sell -- especially if
    the latter would trigger capital gains taxes.


    Even if you can swing the loan, be sure your immediate family is
    onboard. Troubles can arise if you want to make the deal and your
    spouse doesn't. If you're lending to your child, bring his or her
    siblings into the loop; a big loan to one could reduce funds available
    to the others or be seen as favoritism.


    Vet the borrower. On the other side, you must consider the likelihood
    that the borrower will pay you back. You probably already have a sense
    of whether he or she is a good risk, based on past behavior. But go a
    step further. Request that the person produce a credit score and
    report so you can see how she has managed other loans (look for late
    payments and delinquencies).


    "And ask for a debt-repayment plan," says Burt Hutchinson, a Lewes,
    Del., financial planner. This will help you see if the borrower is
    willing to take this arrangement seriously. Also, if it's a loan for a
    business, make sure you get a copy of the business plan.


    Definitely don't lend out of guilt. If the person appears to be a bad
    risk, "just say, my financial adviser is telling me I can't afford to
    do this," says Hutchinson. Lessen the sting with an offer of
    nonfinancial help -- such as babysitting -- so the would-be borrower
    can work longer hours.


    Set your terms. Families often low-ball the interest rate on personal
    loans, but if you go too low, you can run afoul of Internal Revenue
    Service rules -- of which there are many. For starters, you're
    supposed to declare and pay tax on the interest earned. If the loan is
    over $10,000, you owe tax on at least a minimum rate, even if you
    don't collect. The IRS posts what it calls the applicable federal
    rates on its website.


    In September the rates were 0.84% for a loan of less than three years;
    2.87% for three to nine years; and 4.38% for any loan over nine years.
    If you don't declare the interest on your taxes, the loan could be
    considered a ploy to avoid gift or estate taxes, and that's a whole
    other headache, says Michael Yuen, a Rockville, Md., CPA and financial
    planner.


    Set the repayment schedule with the borrower, and finally, make it
    clear what rights you have as lender. If you're bailing out a debt-
    ridden child, for example, you may want to stipulate how she spends
    her money until you're paid back.


    Write it up. It pays to have a paper trail, for both IRS purposes and
    your own. Putting the agreement in writing emphasizes that this is a
    business arrangement.


    You can opt to have a third party administer the loan for you. Or
    download a fill-in-the-blanks promissory note. Include the amount
    borrowed, the interest rate, and the repayment schedule. Sign it in
    front of witnesses. And seal with a kiss if you'd like.


    --------

    Sent from my iPhone.

    Small-Business Owners Hit By IRS Fines - The Wall Street Journal.

    Thursday, September 17, 2009


    Sent from my iPhone.

    Sunday, September 13, 2009

    Jeh@hodge-law.com has shared: Ask the Experts: Avoid battles over a living trust - Sacramento Business, Housing Market News | Sacramento Bee

    Ask the Experts: Avoid battles over a living trust - Sacramento Business, Housing Market News | Sacramento Bee
    Source: sacbee.com

     
    Jeh@hodge-law.com sent this using ShareThis.

    Forbes.com: Your Go-To Guide to Estate Planning

    Your Go-To Guide to Estate Planning
    It's not just for the wealthy, and it's more than a will. There's your
    medical care, insurance and kids to consider.
    By Heidi Brown

    http://www.forbes.com/2009/09/02/estate-financial-planning-forbes-woman-net-worth-guide.html?partner=email


    Sent from my iPhone.

    Prince Harry's 25th Birthday Means Access to Inheritance

    Prince Harry's 25th Birthday Means Access to Inheritance

    Prince Harry will turn 25 this month and when he does, he will be entitled to a portion of his inheritance from his mother. Princess Diana's estate was split equally between Prince Harry and Prince William, with the same restrictions...

    Protecting Your Money and Your Family

    Protecting Your Money and Your Family

    CBS Money Watch has provided readers with a set of articles designed to help readers ensure that their money goes where it's supposed to after death. Entitled Keep the Money in the Family, the following useful resources are available: Will...

    Video icon8 Steps to Protect Your Family

    But look at it this way: If the worst should happen and you don't have your financial affairs in order, you'll leave your loved ones a big headache, and possibly a financial burden. No one will be worried about home maintenance, but they will be forced to make crucial decisions about your estate at an emotionally charged time, with no idea if they're doing what you had in mind.

    "That's usually when the fights begin," says Diane Park, a financial planner in Minneapolis. "If you have the right documents completed beforehand, it can save time, it saves energy, and then you're the one making your own decisions."

    Most importantly, taking care of the basics in advance will also help ensure that your money stays in the family and not in the hands of your least-favorite uncle: Sam. (Or even an old girlfriend. See tip No. 6 below.) Here are eight fairly simple steps you should take now to protect your family and your assets later.

    1. Draft a will

    More than half of American adults don't have one. Big mistake. Even if you don't have a Gates-sized estate, someone will need to handle your financial affairs after you die, and it'll be easier if there's a document spelling things out. This is especially important if you have children; the will should name a guardian for anyone under 18. You'll also want to name a trusted person as executor of your estate. If you have young children, ask an attorney about creating a minor's trust — assets you leave them will be held in the trust until they reach your state's "age of majority" (18 in most states).

    A simple will might cost $300 to $500 (the $43.99 downloadable Quicken WillMaker Plus 2010 is a good do-it-yourself version), but you probably have assets that will require paying an estate lawyer $1,000 to $3,000 for the job. To find a specialist, check with your state bar association or look for a local estate planning council. Review your will every two to three years, or whenever there's a life event, such as a birth, death, marriage or divorce.

    2. Ask an attorney about trusts

    If you establish a living trust, your estate can bypass probate and its associated costs and hassles, but you probably need one only if your estate is worth more than about $2 million, you own real estate in more than one state or you want to keep the terms of your estate private. Otherwise, you might want to create a trust within your will to manage your assets after your death. This is a good idea if you fall into one or more of these categories: 1) You have minor children and don't want to leave property directly to them. 2) You have adult children and aren't confident they can responsibly manage their inheritance. 3) You want to protect your assets from ending up with a creditor or a child's ex-spouse. Setting up a trust in a will should be included in a lawyer's will-creation fee, but if you're having it done separately, expect to pay $1,000 to $3,000.

    3. Assign a power of attorney

    This authorizes someone to handle matters if you're unable to act on your own behalf. There are two types: financial power of attorney, which lets someone take care of things such as writing checks; and medical power of attorney, which allows someone to make decisions about your health care. Without this form, your loved ones might have to go to court to handle simple estate matters if you were incapacitated. "This is a really important and very inexpensive document," says Stewart Welch, a financial planner in Birmingham, Ala. and co-author of J.K. Lasser's New Rules for Estate and Tax Planning. "Most attorneys will charge $100 or less, or if they're doing a will, they'll throw it in."

    Decide whether you want a standard durable power of attorney, or a "springing" power of attorney that requires a doctor declare you incompetent or incapable before it's active. Update this document about every five years even if it's correct, since officials sometimes are hesitant about accepting an older form.

    4. Set up an advance directive

    Basically, this document lays out your end-of-life preferences, such as whether you'd want a feeding tube or to be placed on a respirator, if necessary. It can incorporate related requests such as a living will (explaining when you'd want to be allowed to die), medical power of attorney and Do Not Resuscitate orders. Creating one doesn't require an attorney; find the advance directive permitted in your state at caringinfo.org. Some states require you to have this document witnessed, so make sure you follow the rules to make it official.

    5. Be sure you have enough life insurance

    If you have children dependent on you financially, you need life insurance to cover lost income after you die. Generally, term life is your best bet;Accuquote.com can give you premium quotes. (A good rule of thumb: have enough life insurance to equal 10 times your annual salary.) If you're interested in permanent life insurance (such as variable or universal) with a built-in savings component, speak with your financial planner to find the right coverage.

    6. Update your beneficiaries

    You may not realize it, but beneficiaries on your 401(k), insurance policies, retirement accounts and investments trump your will. So even though you've left everything to your children in your will, if your ex-wife is still listed as your IRA beneficiary, the stash goes to her. "We see a lot of mistakes here," Welch says. "People get divorced or they have additional children, and you can run into some big problems with the wrong beneficiary." Review your designations about every two years or upon life events, such as the birth of a child. And make sure to choose a contingent beneficiary. Otherwise, if your primary beneficiary dies before you do, your funds will go to your estate, which can create tax and legal issues. It's not unheard of for people to leave seriously outdated beneficiaries — when you enrolled in your first 401(k) at age 24, did you casually name your boyfriend as next in line? You might want to change that.

    7. Organize your paperwork

    Do you know where your tax returns, insurance policies, brokerage and 401(k) statements, and mortgage paperwork are? If you're not sure, you can bet your loved ones won't be able to find them when they need to, plunging them into estate-settling hell. Put everything together in one place and then tell your spouse or closest family member where that is. Aside from the documents mentioned above, also include: your Social Security and health insurance/Medicare cards, plus contact information for your doctors, lawyers and accountants.

    8. Keep it in the right place

    Never keep your original will in your safe-deposit box. Some states seal the box when someone dies until the estate has been settled. (And of course, settling the estate is easier with the original will in hand.) You can keep a copy of your will in the safe-deposit box, but the original belongs with your lawyer or in a fireproof box at home or in your office. You may even want to scan all your important financial paperwork and keep a virtual copy with a Web site like vitalesafe.com (it's free for up to 100MB of space). Just be sure to share access with your closest family member, so he or she will be able to get in. "We have a client who lived in New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina," Welch says. "All of her documents were destroyed, but we had a virtual copy of everything and that was a huge help."


    Sent from my iPhone.

    Thursday, September 3, 2009

    Labor day? Why not a day to celebrate small businesses?


    Sent to you via Google Reader

    Labor day? Why not a day to celebrate small businesses?


    Some say Matthew Maguire is the father of Labor Day – others say it was Peter McGuire. Both cared greatly for an important segment of the marketplace, its workers.



    Regardless of paternity, such a day was first celebrated on Tuesday, September 5, 1882, in New York City, when members of the CLU took an unpaid day off to demonstrate solidarity and, of course, have picnics. In 1884, President Grover Cleveland designated the first Monday in September as Labor Day and an official federal holiday.



    In 1898, Samuel Gompers, then head of the American Federation of Labor, called Labor Day, "the day when toilers' rights and wrongs would be discussed … that the workers of our day may not only lay down their tools of labor for a holiday, but upon which they may touch shoulders in marching phalanx and feel the stronger for it."



    Alas, entrepreneurs aren't organized like our union brethren, probably because we're too busy making payroll. There is no single Small Business Day officially decreed by the U.S. Government. No Entrepreneur's Day set aside to honor the few who do so much for so many; a day to picnic and party down in honor of the real heroes of the marketplace, small business owners.



    There actually is a small business week when the U.S. Small Business Administration recognizes the "creme de la creme" of entrepreneurs in America. But it's not a federal holiday, and it's not always the same week each year.



    Small businesses represent over 98% of all U.S. businesses and produce over half of the U.S. $13 trillion GDP. Plus, we sign the FRONT of the paychecks of over half (70 million) of all U.S. workers.



    Let's see: big deal on Labor Day; no Small Business Day. What's wrong with this picture?





    Sent from my iPhone.

    Forbes.com: Easy Organizing: Plan Your Estate

    Easy Organizing: Plan Your Estate
    Prepare--and your heirs will reap the benefits.
    By Heidi Brown

    http://www.forbes.com/2009/09/02/estate-financial-planning-forbes-woman-net-worth-organize_slide.html?partner=email


    Related Links:

    http://www.forbes.com/2009/09/02/estate-financial-planning-forbes-woman-net-worth-guide.html?partner=email

    Your Go-To Guide to Estate Planning


    Sent to you via Google Reader

    Your Go-To Guide to Estate Planning

    It's not just for the wealthy, and it's more than a will. There's your medical care, insurance and kids to consider.


    Sent from my iPhone.

    Tuesday, September 1, 2009

    CNNMoney Mobile: Assessing the net value of children

    This article was sent from CNNMoney's mobile app. To download the FREE
    CNNMoney iPhone or Blackberry application, click here: http://mobileapp.cnnmoney.com

    Assessing the net value of children
    The U.S. birth rate is falling. One explanation: a diminishing return
    on investment.
    By Ben Stein, contributor
    September 1, 2009: 01:47 PM
    (Fortune Magazine) -- What is the value of a child in modern Western
    industrial society? More specifically, what is the value of a middle-
    class or upper-middle-class or upper-class child in America? And does
    this have anything to do with the fact that the birth rate among
    American women has been falling for decades and that the age of first
    childbirth among educated women is far higher than among less-well-
    educated women?


    Start with economics. People in a free society will choose to have
    more of something if its return exceeds its cost. On the other hand,
    people in a free society will choose to have less of a good or service
    if its value is less than its cost.


    Now, what is a modern child? Obviously, not a good or service, but
    something more and also something less. Long ago, as we all know,
    humans had children because they liked having sex and because children
    had some value as assistant hunters and gatherers and keepers of the
    hearth.


    Then, as society became more organized, families chose to have
    children because the parents (we assume) still liked having sex and
    the resulting children were helpful on the farm or the ranch or in the
    village smithy. The kids did not require much -- just food and shelter
    and occasional loving and cuffing about to keep them in line.


    Now we can have sex without having children. That is a major factor in
    life, but by itself it does not explain why people do not necessarily
    want to have kids.


    Maybe the reason is largely because raising modern children is such a
    major pain in the neck. For one thing, thanks to a variety of factors,
    often parents have to struggle like galley slaves to get their
    offspring into private schools and pay for them.


    The private school parent also has to pony up for every kind of lesson
    -- ballet, horse, and music lessons, math tutoring, and chess club.
    The parent also has to drive the little ones to all of these events as
    well as to the "play dates" that lurk like unanesthetized
    colonoscopies in modern life. Then there is the most horrible event a
    healthy upper-middle-class American can have: social engagements with
    the parents of Junior's classmates.


    In other words, we are talking about child rearing as part unpaid
    chauffeur, part torture.


    Then there is college and a real course in horrors getting the darling
    in somewhere that won't embarrass you in front of your pals at the
    club. That's before paying for the school, which is a stunning slap in
    the face. Total college costs at a "prestige" school can easily touch
    $70,000 a year, real money for most people.


    And after graduation day, what do you get for having the system
    holding you by your ankles and shaking all the money out of your
    pockets? You might have a son with a law degree who cannot get a job,
    a daughter with a film-school degree who works as a masseuse, or a
    musician who keeps you up all night with his drums.


    You are very likely to have one who cannot spell "gratitude" and has a
    sense of entitlement that would make Marie Antoinette blush. How many
    of each kind have you observed with your own eyes? I might add that by
    pure luck, my wife and I do have a dutiful, helpful son and daughter-
    in-law. How this happened I am not quite sure.


    But my son is an aberration, as far as I can tell. Look around you.
    The costs and benefits of having children in affluent America are
    wildly off kilter. Too much cost, too little reward. Often the cost-
    benefit analysis of children prints out "Get a German shorthaired
    pointer instead."


    Many people are doing that, and the birth rate is collapsing. But if
    we stop having enough children, because their value is so low relative
    to their cost, the society grinds down. It's happening right now. The
    native-born upper middle class barely replace themselves in America,
    if they do at all. In a way we are committing suicide as a class,
    possibly in part because of the burdens of child rearing in modern life.


    What is the net present value of a child in modern America? Often,
    it's difficult to find much, and thereby hangs a question mark over
    our future as a nation, at least as we have known it.


    Ben Stein is an actor, lawyer, writer, and economist who also appears
    in commercials as a spokesman for various companies.


    --------

    Sent from my iPhone.