IRA Planning in Light of Robertson v. Deeb

In December of 2009, the Florida Court of Appeals concluded in Robertson v. Deeb, 16 So. 3d 936 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009), that the beneficial interest that a person owns in an inherited IRA may be subject to garnishment. In other words, an IRA that you inherit may be taken by your creditors. This is different from an IRA that you establish yourself, or a retirement plan like a 401(k) or 403(b), which are all protected against creditors.

The result itself did not surprise me much until I read and article by Kristen M. Lynch and Linda Suzzanne Griffin in the April 2010 Florida Bar Journal. Intuitively, it made sense that a creditor can go after an asset that you inherit. Usually, the rule of thumb is that unless an asset is specifically exempted, a creditor can sue to get it.

What made this case unusual, and what I was not aware of, is the fact that there was a specific statute on point, F.S. Section 222.21, which seems to indicate that money payable to the "beneficiary" of an IRA is exempt from all claims of creditors. The Court, however, stated that a beneficiary who inherits an inherited IRA is not entitled to the same protection as a beneficiary who contributes to his or her own IRA.

I do not wish to argue the merits of the Court's decision, but I will point out that as a result of this case, anyone who has a substantial IRA should seriously consider establishing a trust for their loved ones which has "stretch" and asset protection provisions.

For many people, their IRAs are their biggest asset. It is clear, now more than ever, that if you wish to protect your IRA from creditors, you cannot simple name your loved ones as the beneficiaries without risking it being taken. Moreover, you cannot simple name a traditional trust as the beneficiary without incurring large income taxes. You need to do comprehensive IRA planning.

Business Succession Planning

Some of you may have seen these scary statistics:

According to the U.S. Small Business Administration, 90 percent of the 21 million small businesses in the U.S. are family-owned, but less than one-third of family-run companies succeed into the second generation, while only half of that make it to the third. Most often, the lack of a proper succession planning is to blame.

Proper business succession planning is particularly vital in the Northeast where taxes are so high.

Let's assume that an unmarried NJ decedent (Jane) has a company worth $5,000,000 at the time of her death. Without looking at Jane's other assets, I can tell you that her heirs have a potential federal estate tax liability of close to $1,350,000 plus a NJ Estate Tax liability of almost $400,000 for a total tax liability of close to $1,750,000. If she had no issue or parents living, this would also be subject to a $750,000 New Jersey inheritance tax. These taxes could decimate a small company at a time when the key person involved is not around.

The benefits of proper planning are countless.At a minimum, proper strategy will help you minimize taxes, maximize control and provide a clear path for continuity of the business. Planning an exit strategy is important as soon as you go into a business. This includes planning for death, divorce or a sale upon retirement.

Some popular planning techniques include:

1. Setting up an entity structure (LLC, C Corporation, S Corporation, Partnerships, etc.);
2. Purchasing Life Insurance (combined with Buy-Sell Agreements);
3. Creating agreements limiting control of potential takers to the business;
4. The use of promissory notes;
5. Selling or gifting ownership in the business to family members; and
6. Selling or gifting ownership in the business to other entities or trusts that will benefit family members.

Valuation Discounts

One of the most important aspects of proper planning is gaining the ability to maximize the amount that you can pass down to your heirs through the use of Valuation Discounts.

When a person has a small business, it is often difficult to sell. The IRS recognizes this lack of marketability. Additionally, as many small business owners get on in years, they are not as involved in running the business. The IRS also recognizes this lack of control.

It is not uncommon to have restrictive agreements in place that will allow an owner to pass on his or her interest with a one-third discount for lack of marketability PLUS another one-third discount for lack of control. Discounts are very specific to each business and a proper appraisal is a MUST.

So how does it work?

Let's go back to our example above. Let's assume that Jane has one child, Dave, who is 35 years old and has shown some interest in the business. Ten years ago, Jane sets up an entity, let's say an LLC, with a restrictive operating agreement. As a result, the appraisal comes back and states that there is a 1/3 discount for lack of marketability. Jane can transfer Dave $1,012,000 of this company without any out of pocket gift tax consequences. Without the appraisal, this would result in a transfer of 20% of the company. With the appraisal, Jane could transfer as much as $1,518,000 of the LLC (a little over 30%) without gift taxes. Additionally, Dave could buy another 20% of the company with a promissory note at the lowest rate available for tax purposes. Let's say a ten year note of $666,666 at 6% interest. Finally, Jane is in good health, so for the next 10 years she uses her annual exclusion amount to gift Dave another $12,000 worth of the company annually. (Since annual appraisals would be expensive, let's assume we don't discount this.)

The result is that upon Jane's death 10 years later, her 100% interest in the company, which started at $5,000,000 company, has been reduced as follows:
1) Through the lifetime gift to Dave, her interest is reduced to a 70% interest, worth $3,500,000;
2) Through the promissory note, her interest is reduced just under 50%, with a value of just under $2,500,000.
3) Through the annual gifting, her interest in the business is reduced to $2,380,000.

Upon Jane's death her $2,380,000 interest will receive a 1/3 discount for lack of marketability and another 1/3 discount for lack of control. This will result in a tax valuation of approximately $1,060,000. After we add back in the $666,666 that she received for the 20 interest plus another $220,000 for interest payments, she will pass with a taxable estate of about $1,950,000.

Accordingly, upon Jane's death, her estate will not be subject to any federal estate tax liability. Additionally, the NJ Estate tax liability will be reduced to $96,000. This is a tax savings of over $1,600,000 - which far outweighs the costs involved in such preparation.

Obviously, there are many different ways to structure this type of transaction, but they are usually based upon the same methodology. The numbers and techniques involved will depend upon the individual needs of the client. For example, if Dave were not responsible or had no interest in running the business, Jane could give him his shares in trust. If Jane had a business partner, this structure could be done for each partner and combined with a buy-sell agreement funded by life insurance.

Nuts and Bolts of Life Insurance Trusts

Life Insurance Trusts – The most common form of inter vivos irrevocable trust is the Life Insurance Trust (ILIT). Since the grantor of the trust has no desire to use the proceeds of this trust during his life, and because the value of the insurance at the time of the grantor’s death can be quite high, it is a very popular mechanism for reducing or avoiding a grantor’s estate tax liability.

a. When creating a life insurance trust, it is important to know whether the client will be buying the insurance through the insurance trust or if they will be transferring in an existing insurance policy.

1) If at all possible, the client should always have the trust buy the insurance because:

i It avoids I.R.C. §2035 which states that a person’s gross estate for estate tax purposes includes certain assets that have been transferred out of the person’s estate within three years of death. Accordingly, if a person transfers an insurance policy to an insurance trust and dies within three years of when the gift to the trust was made, the full amount of the proceeds will be subject to both the Federal and New Jersey Estate Taxes.

ii It avoids having to determine the value of the existing policy at the time of the transfer. This value is known as the interpolated terminal reserve.

iii We are sure the insurance actually gets into the trust. All too often a planner creates the insurance trust and then it never gets funded, exposing the practitioner to unnecessary liability.

2) If the client will be contributing existing insurance to a trust:

i The value of the insurance at the time of the transfer is a gift to the Crummey beneficiaries of the trust.

ii Care must be taken when selecting the beneficiaries of the trust to ensure that there are enough beneficiaries to shelter the value of the gift.

iii The trust must be funded with enough liquid assets in the event someone does wish to exercise their withdrawal rights.

b. The trust should be established as a Crummey Trust.

1) A Crummey Trust is named after Clifford Crummey, the first taxpayer to use this type of trust successfully.

2) A Crummey trust is designed to provided a limited withdrawal right to certain beneficiaries in an irrevocable trust so that transfers to the trust are eligible for the annual gift tax exclusion.

3) The more Crummey beneficiaries there are, the greater the gift that may be made to the trust without having to pay a gift tax. Crummey beneficiaries may not just be named at random, because they do have a real right to withdraw the money that is put into the trust.

4) Generally, a 30 day withdrawal right is considered adequate, but there is no clear minimum.

5) Particular care must be taken when drafting the Crummey power to ensure that the power lapses only the extent of the greater of $5000 or 5%. Any greater lapse will be considered a gift by that withdrawal beneficiary to the other beneficiaries of the trust.

6) The trustee should have broad powers to satisfy any withdrawal rights. All Crummey withdrawal rights should be satisfied either against the contribution or the property of the trust, including any insurance policy or fractional interests in the insurance policy. This will provide substance to a Crummey withdrawal right.

c. Tax aspects

1) The trust should generally be created as an Intentionally Defective Grantor trust, I.R.C. §677, so that although the assets of the trust are out of the grantor’s estate, during the life of the Grantor any income received by the trust is taxed to the Grantor rather than being taxed to the trust. This avoids having to file a Form 1041 income tax return for the trust and it provides an additional gift to the beneficiaries in an amount equal to the income taxes actually paid. Frequently this is done with a power to substitute trust assets, other than the insurance, with assets of an equivalent value to the trust in a non fiduciary manner I.R.C. § 675(4).

2) Upon the death of the grantor, the trust will either be taxed as a simple or complex trust depending upon the terms of the trust.

3) The practitioner must consider whether the Grantor’s Generation Skipping Tax Exemption should be allocated to the ILIT. The Code was revised under EGTRRA to provide an automatic allocation of the Grantor’s GST exemption in many cases and this is not always the most desirable result. A grantor may opt in or opt out of having the automatic allocation on a timely filed gift tax return.

d. Planning Considerations

1) The Grantor should NEVER be trustee of his or her own ILIT.

2) It may sound obvious, but it is important to counsel clients that once money goes into an irrevocable trust, the money no longer belongs to them and they will have difficulty getting the money back.

3) If the Trustee is the Grantor’s spouse, care must be taken when making contributions to the trust to ensure that the Trustee spouse is not making any contributions. (i.e. Never contribute joint or community property to the trust or write a check to the trust from a joint account or a business account).

4) ILITs are somewhat expense to establish and maintain for many clients, particularly those who have large estates due strictly to the amount of insurance they buy. Consideration should be given to naming a child as the owner and beneficiary of the policy as a means to save money for the client while receiving many of the same tax benefits.

5) The client should make sure that the insurance premiums are paid on an annual basis to minimize the maintenance fees. If multiple insurance policies are in one trust, try to convince the insurance carriers to have the same due date for the premiums.

6) The life insurance trusts is a particularly useful planning tool for same sex couples and unmarried couples because it provides a means to give the decedent’s significant other a large sum of money tax free, yet control the money’s ultimate destination.

e. Types of Life Insurance - Regardless of whether a client owns a term, whole life, or variable life insurance policy, if the value of the policy and the client’s other assets are in excess of the New Jersey Estate Tax threshold, it is advisable to discuss the benefits of the ILIT.

1) Term Life Insurance – These policies by their nature are designed to last for short period of time to cover a particular type of risk. The premiums on these policies are typically low, and a contribution of an existing policy to an insurance trust is relatively easy because of the low value of the policy.

2) Whole Life Insurance – These policies are designed to build up a cash value to produce a guaranteed return that will ultimately pay for the insurance premium. The premiums can be quite substantial, which is important to know when calculating the number of Crummey beneficiaries that must be named. A contribution of a large whole life policy to an ILIT may result in a gift tax no matter how comprehensive the planning because of the size of the insurance.

3) Variable Life Insurance – This type of policy is similar to the whole life insurance except that instead of having a guaranteed return, the rate is variable. Since most people are not good investors, be wary of advising this product.

4) Second to Die Insurance - A Second to Die Insurance Trust is different from a typical ILIT in one substantial and obvious way - the insurance benefits are not paid until the second to die.

i Practitioners should ensure that neither spouse is ever eligible to serve as trustee nor made a Crummey beneficiary.

ii Since this trust is not for the benefit of the surviving spouse, the clients should be sure that the surviving spouse has enough funds to live on absent the trust funds.

iii These trusts are particularly beneficial for clients interested in dynasty trusts as more insurance can purchased for a lower premium amount.

f. Insurance Trusts Established Pursuant to Divorce or Separation– Frequently Divorce attorneys draft provisions in a separation agreement or a divorce decree that call for an insurance trust to be created for the benefit of the children of the marriage. Terms of the trust are rarely spelled out with any specificity.

1) In the event that the person who is required to be insured passes prior to the creation of an ILIT, the courts can impose a constructive trust for the benefit of the children. (A constructive trust is an implied trust established by operation of law.) The terms of the trust are in the judge’s discretion, rather than in either the form that the decedent, or surviving parent, would want.

2) Planning Considerations

i Frequently a divorce or separation agreement will say what amount of insurance a person should have without any consideration for who should be trustee, the tax consequences or the ages at which the children should have access to the money. Occasionally, inappropriate provisions are included. Thought must be given how to address these concerns, particularly in light of the fact that these two individuals may not be on good terms.

ii Payment for the trust. I have yet to see a divorce decree or separation agreement that contemplates who will actually pay for the insurance trust. This is often a sticking point for many clients.

iii Compliance. Working with an unfriendly trustee or grantor can severely complicate compliance with both the tax laws and properly funding the trust.

g. Management of Insurance Trusts

1) The management of an insurance trust from an investment standpoint is quite simple. Most insurance trusts do not have assets other than the insurance itself.

2) The complexity comes when trying to explain the maintenance and funding requirements of the trust to clients. Further complicating matters, often clients will try to manage the trust completely on their own to save on costs. The practitioner must take extreme care when allowing this to happen because the practitioner will still be potentially liable.

3) Funding the Trust

i Checking accounts must be created in the name of the trust (and if the Grantor does not have an individual checking account, the Grantor may also have to create a checking account to fund the trust). Many practitioners like to get a separate tax identification number for the ILIT. If the trust is an Intentionally Defective Grantor Trust (IDGT), it is not necessary, but it is still a good idea in the event a creditor does an asset search using the Grantor’s Social Security Number.

ii Insurance must either be purchased by the trust or transferred into the trust. This requires completing insurance forms that designate the trust as the owner and beneficiary of the policy.

4) Sending the annual Crummey letter. As soon as practical after the trust is funded, a letter must be sent to the designated Crummey beneficiaries to advise them of their withdrawal rights. These letters should be acknowledged by the beneficiaries (or their guardians) and maintained by the attorney (or trustee).

i After 30 days (or whatever the relevant Crummey time period is) the Trustee may use the gift from the Grantor to pay the insurance proceeds.

5) To avoid problems with I.R.C. §2035 and §2036 (which would bring the insurance back into the gross estate of the Grantor), it is important that the Grantor contains no impermissible control over the trust and should never be the trustee. The Grantor may be given limited ability to hire and fire Trustees.

Asset Protect Trusts vs. Family Limited Liability Companies

Occasionally, people who are interested in asset protection ask me what is more appropriate, a trust or some sort of FLC or FLP. Here is my response:

An asset protection trust is more secure than an FLC, but it is also more costly to maintain (high annual fees for an independent trustee) and you give up more control. The more money you have and the more at risk you are for a lawsuit, the more you want to set up a trust. For asset protection trusts to work properly, you must give up almost all decision making power over the assets (to a trusted advisor), and you will become, at best, a discretionary beneficiary of such trust.

A single person FLC does not offer much protection, but certainly some. A two person FLC without an operating agreement offers decent protection from any lawsuit arising out of assets in the FLC, but little protection for misdeeds done outside the FLC. With an operating agreement limiting distributions, you get much more protection and that is why there is more of a setup cost. This structure is good for people who really don’t want to part with their assets and/or think they will need it in the future. These receive more protection over time as the Grantor transfers shares of this down to issue (usually at a discount) because of the lack of marketability and lack of control.

There are many types of Asset Protection Trusts. Inter vivos ones (trusts set up during the Grantor’s life) are invariably more costly than one’s set up on death. Something as simple as a traditional ILIT can make a great Asset Protection Trust, especially if funded with Whole Life Insurance. Self Settled Asset Protection Trusts (where the Grantor is also a beneficiary) are available in a few jurisdictions such as Delaware, Alaska, Nevada and New Hampshire. These are high end domestic asset protection trusts. For even greater protection, we can go offshore.

So, basically, it comes back to what you, the client, is trying to accomplish.

SEP IRA is a protected asset in NJ

I was asked earlier today whether a SEP IRA is protected against creditor lawsuits. Without doing a lot of in depth research, I have found that the answer is generally yes. The answer is not the same in all states as it is dependent upon state statute.

New Jersey exempts the claims of creditors from qualifying trusts. See N.J.
STAT. ANN. § 25:2-1. Qualifying trusts include trusts created or qualifying under the Internal Revenue Code §§ 401, 408. (i.e. IRAs, SEP IRAs and 401(k) plans)

Additionally, there is a New Jersey bankruptcy case on point. See In re Lamb, where the court held that 25:2-1 exempts IRAs. See In re Lamb, 179 B.R. 419, 427 (Bankr. N.J. 1994).

Since SEPs are a type of IRA, all of the IRA requirements and benefits, other than the contribution limits, apply to SEP-IRA accounts as well.

The protection is limited by The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005, which does not protect IRAs in excess of $1,000,000.

I also found this interesting site which appears to have a lot of information on the topic: http://www.aicpa.org/pubs/jofa/jan2006/altieri.htm

As always - if a transfer of assets is made prior to a lawsuit, it's good planning. If you do it afterwards, its FRAUD.