My aunt named me “POD” beneficiary of a bank account before she died, but the bank refuses to give me the money!

Decedent had a bank account in her own name worth $50K. She named her nephew as a “Payable On Death” or POD beneficiary of this account, unbeknownst to her spouse and children. He was her favorite nephew, who’d cared for her a lot during her lifetime, and she had hoped he could quietly liquidate the funds upon her death and use the funds to pay back some of his college fees.

Little did she know, this little act of love would cause so many adverse ramifications, and the series of events that unfolded next were nothing short of a nightmare for the poor nephew.

The nephew was dealt a nightmare because New Jersey imposes an inheritance tax for assets more than $500 passing to all non-Class A beneficiaries. The nephew in this case would be a Class D beneficiary, who would be required to pay a 15% tax on the amount passing to him, minus the $500 exemption.

Worse, the bank would put a freeze on the account until he was able to produce a waiver from the State of NJ Tax Branch, and the only way to secure this waiver would be if the Executor of the Estate (or Administrator, if there was no Will) files a NJ Inheritance Tax Return (ITR) with the Tax Branch reporting the distributions from the estate. All of this must be accomplished within eight months of the date of death. NOTE: There is a blanket waiver that allows the nephew to receive 50% of the assets in the account (i.e. $25K) immediately, but he would have to wait for the balance after the estate administration was completed and final waivers issued.

Had the aunt consulted with an estate planning attorney before her death, she would have learned that gifting during her lifetime would have no gift tax ramifications in New Jersey (NJ does not have a gift tax), and apart for a minor reporting requirement on a Form 709 to report gifts over $15K per year, she could have effectively transferred the funds over to her nephew achieving the very objective she was trying to accomplish. Better even, if she had paid the college directly with the amount, it would not have been deemed a gift at all.

It is critical to consult with an attorney before making significant decisions to ensure that these choices do not morph out of control and cause unintended consequences that could have easily been avoided.

Revocable Trusts – Common Misconceptions

A few days ago, I was explaining the concept of “funding” to clients who were new to the world of estate planning, and I was struck by the fact that what I’d always thought were commonly understood concepts were actually the cause of significant gaps in the clients’ understanding of what trusts do and how they operate. The two main areas of confusion appear to be in: 1) figuring out exactly how trusts differ from wills; and 2) the mechanics of how accounts are transferred into trusts, which make the trust the “new owner” of those accounts. This article hopes to shed light on these two seemingly simple (or so I thought!) concepts: trusts and trust funding.

We’ve heard people use the word trusts in different settings and under different circumstances. Many mistakenly believe that all trusts offer asset protection. However, not all trusts are made equal – trusts can either be living (i.e. inter-vivos trusts set up during the lifetime of the Settlor or Grantor) or testamentary (i.e. those that become effective upon the death of an individual). All testamentary trusts are irrevocable, but living trusts can be revocable or irrevocable.

Living trusts are typically stand-alone entities that become effective immediately upon the signing of the trust agreement. Those that are revocable are called Revocable Living Trusts, RLTs, or Will substitutes. These RLTs allow a Grantor (also called a Settlor or Trustor) to set up the trust and retain full control of the trust assets as a Trustee, while enjoying the full benefits of the trust assets as a beneficiary. There are several benefits for setting up an RLT, but more notably, RLTs are meant to avoid probate upon death and the associated hassle-ridden probate process in some states.

In contrast, Irrevocable Living Trusts cannot be changed once established. The Grantor transfers assets into trust by assignment, sale, gift, or loan, and then completely gives up control over the assets. The two main benefits of irrevocable trusts are: 1) assets are removed from the Grantor’s estate upon his or her death, thereby avoiding estate taxes; and 2) assets are protected from both the Grantor’s creditors as well as the creditors and predators of the beneficiaries. Properly designed trusts may even escape Medicaid recovery and preserve assets for the Grantor’s ultimate beneficiaries should the Grantor be receiving public benefits. Regardless of which irrevocable trust is used, these trusts are typically sophisticated planning techniques established as part of an individual or married couple’s advanced planning. They should always accompany a robust foundational plan complete with a Will and/or an RLT, a General Durable Power of Attorney, and Advanced Healthcare Directive. For more information on the benefits of an RLT, check out our earlier posts on this subject.[1]

When it comes to “funding” trusts though, it is important to note that this term of art refers the act of transferring accounts into the trust or retitling assets into the name of the trusts and has nothing to do with refinancing or getting loans to trusts. The following comparison may help provide a better understanding of how RLTs[2] actually “receive” assets.

If you think of your trust as a cookie jar, then our firm would work with you to take your cookie jar from concept to design to setup. Once you sign the trust agreement, your cookie jar is now ready to be filled with assets or “cookies.” And because your trust is like your alter-ego, it can do almost anything you can do. This means that if you have five bank accounts, each at a different bank, and you want to continue to bank at these five banks, then you can open five trust accounts at these banks. Our office would then provide you with the necessary documentation you need to present to your bank representative, who will then open a new trust account and give you a new account number. Depending on the type of trust you are setting up (revocable or irrevocable), the account will either be associated with your social security number or have its own separate tax identification number (or EIN#) for income tax reporting moving forward. This process of funding may involve several back-and-forth communications with institutions and can sometimes be challenging, especially if the bank representative is unfamiliar with trusts. This is when your choice of law firm becomes critical, so the firm can coordinate with you and the institutions to see this process through to the end. Our hope is that as trusts become more and more mainstream, funding becomes less daunting on Grantors, who can then leave their organized estates to their loved ones in a smooth manner, completely free of the probate process.

This article would not be considered complete if we did not address funding in connection with real property, businesses, and accounts with beneficiary designations. Here is a quick synopsis of how these assets are funded:

  • REAL PROPERTY: Real property must undergo a title change (i.e. the deed needs to reflect the new owner as the trust) in order for this to properly avoid probate. This deed must be recorded at the county clerk’s office just like any other deed. So long as the property is being transferred into an RLT, and the Grantor continues to reside in the property, a lender holding mortgage to the property cannot trigger the due on sale clause as the Grantor is protected by statute.
  • BUSINESSES: Depending on how a business is structured (LLC, S Corp., C Corp.), a Grantor-owner’s interest could be assigned to the RLT.
  • ACCOUNTS: Accounts passing by beneficiary designations, typically retirement accounts, life insurance policies. and/or brokerage and investment accounts with beneficiaries, must be amended to ensure the RLT (or its subtrusts for the various beneficiaries) is the primary beneficiary of these accounts.

While funding is relatively straightforward and may be handled by the Grantor on his or her own, it is always best to do so under the guidance and counsel of the drafting attorney (or even let the drafting attorney’s office handle the funding process for an extra fee) to ensure the transition is completely correctly and efficiently.

 

[1] Benefits of Revocable Living Trusts: https://estateelderplanning.com/2020/09/01/why-revocable-living-trusts-should-not-be-getting-such-a-bad-rap-in-new-jersey/ and Revocable Living Trusts Misunderstood: https://estateelderplanning.com/2018/02/26/legal-tip-of-the-week-22518/

[2] Our focus in this article is to address funding challenges with Revocable Living Trusts and only briefly discusses Irrevocable Living Trusts in passing.

Primer on Spousal Access Trusts – What you need to know about this important estate planning technique!

Very often we meet clients looking for a more nuanced estate planning with specific assets – they may want to (1) protect assets from creditors; or (2) they would like to minimize the estate tax liability upon death. For these clients, Irrevocable Trusts are a critical piece of advanced estate planning that can accomplish these goals. It is important to remember here that these trusts are set up in addition to (and not in lieu of) their foundational planning, which typically consists of Wills or Revocable Living Trusts, as well as the Financial or Healthcare Powers of Attorney.

Irrevocable Trusts come in many flavors – insurance trusts or ILITs, gifting trusts for children, residence trusts or QPRTs, and a whole lot more in between. These trusts can either be established locally (i.e. situs of the trust is New Jersey), or a NJ resident can situs his or her trust in other U.S. states with favorable Domestic Asset Protection Trust laws (also called DAPT states).

This post discusses the popular Spousal Access Trusts or SLATs, where the spouse of the Grantor or Settlor of the trust is a named beneficiary, while the trust continues to accomplish its primary objectives regarding creditor protection and estate tax savings. It is key to remember here that if the 2-SLAT approach is being utilized (one trust each for the husband and the wife), then utmost care must be taken by the drafter of these trusts to ensure the trusts are not identical to one another, which would run afoul of the reciprocal trust doctrine.

Consider the following when establishing these trusts in New Jersey:

  • Pros:
    • There is no need to get an outside Independent Trustee who is a resident – a trusted friend would be able to serve in this role.
    • There is no need for outside counsel review.
    • You can accomplish the current asset protection goals even with the spouse as a beneficiary, but the Grantor[1] of the trust cannot become a beneficiary of the trust if the two primary objectives of creditor protection and estate tax savings are desired.
  • Cons:
    • The Grantor cannot be (or be added back later) as a named beneficiary.
    • Death of a spouse-beneficiary can make things problematic for the Grantor, who will now no longer have access to the funds in the trust.
    • If the 2-SLAT approach is being used, then there is higher probability of IRS scrutiny if both trusts are sitused in NJ.

However, if we go outside the state of NJ to one of the DAPT states[2], these trusts become more sophisticated and robust, but are also expensive – not only for set up but also in annual costs. The following are some considerations:

  • Pros:
    • The Grantor can be added back as a beneficiary after the trust is set up.
    • There are greater asset protection laws in these DAPT states, so creditor challenges are much harder.
    • With the 2-SLAT approach, situsing these trusts in two different DAPT states ensures even greater asset protection.
    • Resident Trustees can be Directed Trustees where they are only acting upon the direction of another – this keeps costs down each year.
    • This approach has potential to avoid IRS/Creditor scrutiny, especially where an independent, objective third party is serving as a trustee.
  • Cons:
    • This route is more expensive, because these are sophisticated trusts part of advanced planning.
    • Co-counsel needs to be retained to get the trusts reviewed by attorneys in that state.
    • Resident Trustees are a requirement.
    • Although trustees may be “Directed Trustees,” depending on the DAPT state, annual fees may vary between states and could become quite costly.

To minimize costs, some alternate solutions include:

  1. Staying within NJ and set up both trusts within the state, but be willing to give up some of the added benefits of DAPTs.
  2. Creating one trust in a DAPT jurisdiction and another trust in NJ, so you can take advantage of the “pros” for at least one trust, where the Grantor can be named back as the beneficiary.

 

 

 

[1] Grantor refers to the individual setting up the trust and is often used interchangeably with the terms Trustor or Settlor.

[2] As of 2020, there are at least 19 states that are now considered to be DAPT states and which have amended their statues to offer strong creditor protection and favorable treatment towards Grantors’ irrevocable trusts. http://www.actec.org/assets/1/6/Shaftel-Comparison-of-the-Domestic-Asset-Protection-Trust-Statutes.pdf