Planning to Meet the Client's Goals and Limit Estate Tax Liability

Last week we profiled a client and the strategies used in his estate plan to protect his loved ones after doctors diagnosed him with a likely fatal disease. While we did a great deal of planning in his final months, as with many endeavors, planning prior to discovering problems leads to greater success. When we began working with this client, we immediately recognized that he faced significant potential issues related to estate planning, tax planning, and family dynamics.

After analyzing his situation, we found three areas of potential concern. First, due to the scope of business and invested assets, as well as his real estate holdings there was likely to be a substantial estate tax liability at both the client’s death and the death of his wife. Second, because he wanted to provide that some of his assets went to his daughters from his first marriage if he predeceased his current wife, we were unable to set up the traditional marital/residuary strategy to eliminate taxes on the first death. Finally, we knew that the value of his real estate holdings continued to increase and increased the potential estate tax liability.

We first discussed the potential estate tax liability and the effect it would have on his business if he died suddenly and a significant tax liability arose. He recognized that while his assets generated significant annual income, most of his assets were illiquid and would not provide cash for taxes without adversely affecting the business itself. Without planning, we would have to "kill the golden goose" to provide sufficient assets to satisfy tax liability. To address this issue we recommended a number of Irrevocable Trusts to own life insurance on the client’s life and on both the client and his wife’s lives jointly.

One Irrevocable Trust held a policy on his life alone, which matured at his death and provided the funds to pay the estate tax liability at that time. Since we could not know at that time if the client or his wife would die first, the second Irrevocable Trust held a second to die policy, which would mature in any event on the second death and provide funds to pay any additional tax liability at that time. After years of continued success and an increasing estate, we also later set up an Irrevocable Trust to own a policy on his wife's life, to provide additional protection against tax liability whenever she passed away. In addition to providing liquidity to the estate to offset potential tax liability, these Trusts freed up estate assets for other family planning. As an added benefit to the client, premiums paid were a fraction of the policy face value, so the client was able to pay estate taxes at his death with cheaper dollars.

When it came time to address the matter of the client’s evermore-valuable real estate holdings, the client indicated that he did not need the asset value or the income from these properties and was willing to gift the property to his five daughters, as long as he could maintain control of them. Using limited liability companies to own the property, we gave our client a 1% voting interest in the entities and gifted the 99% nonvoting interest to the daughters. While he was alive, the client maintained control of the properties with the voting interest and the LLCs held the rental income received for the benefit of the daughters. Eventually we entered into an agreement where the LLCs loaned money to the Irrevocable Trusts to pay life insurance premiums, which freed up a significant amount of cash flow for the client. In order to protect the children, we annually distributed a sufficient amount of money to pay taxes on the "phantom income" they received from the LLCs.

As you can see, while it is possible to complete some planning when emergencies arise, the best planning is done beforehand by anticipating issues and using strategies that protect the client and loved ones. It is important that we as planners anticipate our clients’ needs because they are often too busy to do so themselves.

Alan Ferrara

Unwinding Irrevocable Life Insurance Trusts

     On Tuesday, we addressed the technique of funding insurance policies to an Irrevocable Trust and using the annual gift exclusion to make premium payments. For those clients with potential estate tax liability this technique allows them to help fund the estate tax liability at a fraction of the actual cost because policy proceeds at death that will not be includable in the client's estate will more than offset the premiums paid during lifetime. When collected by the Irrevocable Trust, the proceeds can be used to purchase assets from the Living Trust or loan funds to the Living Trust to pay estate taxes until illiquid assets are sold.

     However, what happens if circumstances change and the purpose for which the Irrevocable Trust was created no longer exist, or if the client has a change of heart about owning the policies? Since the trust is irrevocable, the client cannot unwind the trust through revocation. The client can however discontinue annual gifts to the trust (and its lifetime trust beneficiaries), leaving the Trustee of the Irrevocable Trust without any assets to pay the life insurance premiums. Eventually the insurance coverage will lapse leaving the trust without any assets, at which point the trust ceases to exist as a matter of law.

     Alternatively, as part of the initial planning for the Irrevocable Trust, specially added provisions may allow the Grantor to unwind the trust despite its irrevocable nature. One strategy is to structure the Irrevocable Trust as a "Grantor Trust”. If properly drafted, the Trust can be treated as property of the Grantor for the purposes of income tax liability, excludable from the Grantor's estate for estate tax purposes. If the trust holds only life insurance there should be no income, presuming the Trustee uses all of the gifts made to the trust by the client to pay the premiums on the life insurance owned by the trust, and  there should be no impact on the client’s income tax liability.

     The Internal Revenue Code Sections 671-678 detail the circumstances under which the grantor trust rules apply. One of those provisions gives  the Grantor the right to substitute assets of equivalent value for the assets held by the trust. This allows the Grantor to substitute or exchange other assets equaling the value of the insurance policies contained in the trust for the life insurance policies themselves. Those assets are still subject to the distribution terms of the trust.

     As with any advanced estate planning technique, including the creation or termination of irrevocable trusts, advice and counsel of experienced attorneys is important in order to avoid unintended consequences. 

Matt Ferrara

Transferring Insurance Policies to ILITS

Because of the larger estate tax exclusion of $5,000,000 per person (already $5,125,000 because of the cost of living increase), many clients no longer need an Irrevocable Trust to own their life insurance in order to avoid tax on the proceeds at death. However, an Irrevocable Trust is still an important planning tool for those whose estates already exceed the estate tax exclusion or for those whose estates increase in value faster than anticipated. 

            We previously discussed the basic concepts of an Irrevocable Life Insurance Trust (ILIT), but today we want to focus on how policies are transferred to the ILIT.  There is an estate tax rule that requires the inclusion in a decedent’s estate of life insurance transferred within three years of death.  Because of this rule, the ideal planning technique is for Grantor to execute the ILIT and then for the Trustee to apply for new insurance on the life of the ILIT’s Grantor.  If the Trust is the initial owner and beneficiary of the life insurance policy, and the Grantor never had any incidents of ownership in the policy, the three-year inclusion rule does not apply.  

            If there is existing insurance, a client will often set up an ILIT, have the trustee apply for a new policy, and then terminate the old policy when the new policy is issued with the Trust as the owner.  This protects the Grantor if the new insurance application is declined.  There is usually no need to have twice the insurance coverage, but you want to maintain the existing coverage until the new policy is issued and effective.

            Sometimes there is a need for an ILIT, but the Grantor is unable to secure new insurance coverage or the coverage is too expensive because of age or health issues.  At these times you utilize the next best strategy and transfer an existing policy to an ILIT, knowing the three year inclusion rule applies.  You need to remember that the value of the policy at the time of the transfer is a gift.  In addition, any amounts gifted to the ILIT and later used for payment of premiums are gifts.  If the policy transferred is a term policy, there is probably little value other than the unused premiums for the policy year in question.  However, if the policy is an existing permanent policy, there may be significant cash value requiring consideration for gift tax purposes.  The Crummey rules require notice be given to Crummey beneficiaries so that the gift can be considered a present gift and allow use of the annual gift exclusion.  However, if the total of premiums and cash value of transferred policies exceeds the total of Crummey beneficiaries times $14,000, a portion of the gift will not qualify for the annual exclusion.  Any gift in excess of the available annual exclusions is considered a future gift and will use a portion of the Grantor’s lifetime exclusion.

            Planning for policy transfers can be tricky and confusing and should be done with the guidance of professionals qualified in both insurance and tax issues.

Alan Ferrara