Posts Tagged ‘Elderlaw/Law For Life’

Cohabiting Seniors: Protect Your Rights

Tuesday, June 28th, 2011 by Moore McLaughlin

More and more seniors are living together without getting married. According to U.S. Census data, the number of cohabiting seniors nearly doubled between 1989 and 2000. For some seniors, marriage isn’t financially worth it‚ they don’t want to lose their former spouses’ military, pension, or Social Security benefits. Other seniors don’t want to have to pay their partners’ medical expenses or deal with the objections of children worried about their inheritance.

There are risks to cohabiting without marriage, however. You have no rights with regard to your partner’s health care decisions. In addition, you may be considered “common law” married by a court after you die, possibly causing a dispute between your partner and your children. If you and your partner plan to live together without getting married, you can take a number of steps to ensure that you are protected and your wishes are followed.

  • Sign a cohabitation agreement. If you live in a state that recognizes common law marriage or even if you don’t (some courts have recognized the rights of unmarried partners who lived together in non-common law states), you may want to enter into a cohabitation agreement with your partner. The agreement can state your intentions not to marry or to make any claims against each other. It can also specify the division of household expenses and what will happen to your house in the case of death or breakup. You should consult a lawyer for assistance in drawing up an agreement.
  • Provide access to health care decision making. If you are not married, you have no right to participate in your partner’s health care decisions or even, in some circumstances, to visit your partner at the hospital. To avoid this situation, you need several documents. You can sign a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) medical release to allow each other access to the other’s medical information. In addition, you should have a health care proxy and/or a durable power of attorney for health care, naming your partner as your agent to make health care decisions. For more information on medical directives, contact attorney Jill E. Sugarman at 401-421-5115 or by e-mail at JSugarman@McLaughlinQuinn.com.
  • Sign a durable power of attorney. A power of attorney allows your partner, or whomever you appoint, to make financial decisions for you if you become incapacitated. Without a power of attorney, the court will have to appoint a conservator or guardian to make those decisions and the judge may not choose the person you would prefer.
  • Update your will. Your will should be clear about what happens to your possessions when you die, including your house and its contents. It is particularly important to specify what will happen to your house if it is owned by only one partner.
  • Think about the tax consequences of gifts. Married couples can leave each other as much as they want without paying estate taxes; unmarried couples cannot. If you want to leave money to your partner, consult an estate planning attorney or tax expert to find ways to limit estate taxes. For more on estate planning, contact attorney Jill E. Sugarman at 401-421-5115 or by e-mail at JSugarman@McLaughlinQuinn.com.
  • Look into registering as domestic partners. Some cities and states have domestic partnership laws, which may allow unmarried couples to take advantage of their partners’ health insurance or to participate in health care decisions.

Adult Children Losing $3 Trillion in Caring for Aging Parents

Tuesday, June 28th, 2011 by Moore McLaughlin

Americans who take time off work to care for their aging parents are losing an estimated $3 trillion dollars in wages, pension and Social Security benefits, according to a new MetLife study. Meanwhile, the percentage of adult children providing basic care for their parents has skyrocketed in recent years.

Nearly 10 million adults age 50 and over care for an aging parent, MetLife says. For the individual female caregiver, the cost impact of caregiving on in terms of lost wages, pension and Social Security benefits averages $324,044. For male caregivers, the figure is $283,716.

The study also identified a dramatic rise in the share of men and women providing basic parental care over the past decade and a half. In 1994, only 9 percent of women and 3 percent of men and were providing care. By 2008, the percentage of women caregivers had more than tripled to 28 percent, while the figure for men had quintupled to 17 percent. “Basic care” is defined as help with personal activities like dressing, feeding, and bathing. Daughters are more likely to provide basic care and sons are more likely to provide financial assistance, the study found.

“Undoubtedly, the impact of the aging population has resulted in increased need within families for family caregiving support,” the study notes.

At the same time, MetLife found that adult children age 50 and over who work and provide care to a parent are more likely to have fair or poor health than those who do not provide care to their parents.

The study was based on an analysis of data from the 2008 National Health and Retirement Study (HRS).

The findings have implications for individuals, employers and policymakers, MetLife concludes. Individuals, it says, should consider their own health when caregiving and should prepare financially for their own retirement. Employers can provide retirement planning and stress management information and assist employees with accommodations like flex-time and family leave.

On the policy side, although only a few states mandate paid family and medical leave, “clearly this policy would benefit working caregivers who need to take leave to care for an aging parent,” the study notes. MetLife also notes that the CLASS Act, a voluntary long-term care insurance program that is part of the new federal health reform law, will provide some coverage for long-term care needs as well as raise public awareness of the issue.

For more on the study, “The MetLife Study of Caregiving Costs to Working Caregivers: Double Jeopardy for Baby Boomers Caring for Their Parents,” click here.

For more information on estate planning and long-term care options, please contact Jill E. Sugarman, Esq. at 401-421-5115 or by e-mail at JSugarman@McLaughlinQuinn.com.

Who Gets Copies of the Will After a Person Dies?

Monday, June 20th, 2011 by Moore McLaughlin

Many movies and television shows have a scene where a family gathers around a big table after a relative has died to listen to the reading of the will. While this is a great dramatic scene, it doesn’t usually happen like that in the real world. There is no requirement that a will be read out loud to anyone. So what does happen with the will?

Once the will is located, it should be given to the estate’s attorney. Instead of reading the will out loud, the estate’s attorney sends copies of the will to anyone who may have an interest in it. Obviously the person who is named as executor or personal representative is entitled to a copy of the will. He or she is in charge of applying for probate, managing the decedent’s property, and making sure the instructions in the will get carried out.

The estate attorney will also send a copy of the will to anyone who is named as a beneficiary. If any minor children or incapacitated individuals are named as beneficiaries, then their guardians should receive a copy of the will. In addition, if there is the possibility of a legal challenge to the will, the attorney may want to send a copy to any legal heirs, close family relatives, or previous beneficiaries who aren’t included in the will, so that they have notice. This will limit the time frame for them to file a will contest.

Another person who may be entitled to a copy of the will is the estate’s accountant, and if the estate is taxable, then the IRS may get a copy of the will as well. If the will funds a revocable trust, then the successor trustee of the trust is entitled to a copy of the will. Note that once a will is probated, it is available to the public and anyone can read it.

For more information on estate administration, contact Attorney Jill E. Sugarman at 401-421-5115 or by e-mail at JSugarman@McLaughlinQuinn.com.

Be Sure To Update Your Estate Plan When Your Finances Change

Monday, June 20th, 2011 by Moore McLaughlin

In the recent economic downturn, many homes have lost considerable value and stock portfolios have plummeted. If this is the case for you, do you need to change your will? What if your income and assets have increased significantly? If your finances have changed markedly since you wrote your will, you should check your estate plan to see if you need to make any changes.

If your will or estate plan divides your estate into percentages for beneficiaries, then changes in value won’t affect how your estate is distributed. However, if you include specific bequests in your will, a fall or rise in your estate could have consequences. For example, if your estate plan gives $50,000 to your favorite charity and the rest of your estate to your children, a reduction in the value of your estate could mean your children won’t get as much as you intended.

A change in value of assets could also affect your estate plan if you intended to treat your children equally by giving them assets of equal value. For example, suppose your will gives your house worth $500,000 to your daughter and your stock worth $500,000 to your son. If the value of either the house or the stock portfolio increases or decreases significantly in value, your children will no longer receive equal gifts. It is also important to update your estate plan if the overall nature of your assets has changed. For example, if you sold the stock and bought real estate instead, this will affect the distributions to your children.

In addition, if your estate has significantly increased in value, it is important to reassess whether your estate will be subject to estate taxes. In 2008, estates worth more than $2 million are subject to federal estate taxes. In 2009, estates subject to federal taxes must be worth more than $3.5 million. After that, it isn’t clear what the estate tax will be, so it is important to be prepared for any eventuality.

Contact Attorney Jill E. Sugarman at 401-421-5115 or by e-mail at JSugarman@McLaughlinQuinn.com for more information.

Resolving Conflicts Between Co-Agents on a Power of Attorney

Wednesday, April 20th, 2011 by Moore McLaughlin

Having power of attorney over a family member is a big responsibility and sometimes it makes sense to share that responsibility with someone else. But when two people are named co-agents under a power of attorney, conflicts can arise. Unfortunately, if the conflict can’t be resolved, it may be necessary to get a court involved.

A power of attorney allows a person to appoint someone called an “agent or “attorney-in-fact” — to act in his or her place for financial purposes when and if the person ever becomes incapacitated. A power of attorney can name one agent or it can require two or more agents to act together.

If you are acting as a co-agent under a power of attorney, but you and your fellow agent disagree on a course of action or one party has stopped participating in decision making, what can you do? The first thing is to check the wording of the power of attorney document to see if it sets up a procedure for resolving disputes. If the power of attorney itself doesn’t help, you should contact an elder law attorney. The attorney can tell you if your state’s power of attorney laws offer any guidance. There may be a state statute that deals with disputes.

If the dispute still cannot be resolved, the final step may be to file a petition in probate court to let the court decide it. Or if the court finds that one of the agents is not acting according to the incapacitated person’s best interests, it can revoke the agent’s authority. Unfortunately, taking the matter to court takes time and money.

If you are creating a power of attorney and want more than one agent to share responsibility, but want to minimize conflict, you can name two agents and let the agents act separately. Naming more than two agents can get cumbersome and make communication difficult. An alternative to naming co-agents is for the power of attorney document to name agents in sequence. The first-named agent acts alone, but if she cannot serve for some reason, the next person on the list will serve.

Dealing with the Credit Card Debt of Seniors

Wednesday, April 20th, 2011 by Moore McLaughlin

The number of seniors facing credit card debt has been growing. The average credit-card debt for consumers over 65 more than doubled from 1992 to 2004, to $4,907. Credit card debt can be especially problematic for seniors, who typically have a fixed income. If you or someone you love is having trouble making credit card payments, there are several options:

  • Try negotiating. A credit counseling agency or attorney may be able to negotiate with the credit card company for lower fees or interest rates. If the debtor is relying solely on Social Security for income, it may even be possible to have the debt forgiven. Note, however, that if the debt is forgiven it can count as income, which may create tax consequences or affect Social Security payments.
  • Reverse mortgage. If the debtor owns a house and is over 62 years old, a reverse mortgage may provide enough money to pay off debt. With a reverse mortgage, instead of paying the bank money to build up equity, homeowners use the equity in their homes to take out loans. The loan does not have to be paid back until the house is sold or the homeowner dies. While reverse mortgages may look like no-lose propositions on the surface, they also have some significant downsides.
  • Tap into life insurance. Permanent life insurance policies build a cash value, which can be used as collateral for a loan or withdrawn from the account. This money can be used for any purpose, including paying down credit card debt. Keep in mind, however, that loans or withdrawals will reduce the death benefit.
  • Bankruptcy. Filing for bankruptcy is not an easy solution. In 2005, a tough bankruptcy law went in to effect, making it much more difficult to get bankruptcy protection. For example, bankruptcy is available only to individuals whose income is below a certain level, and the homestead exemption, which allows you to protect all or some of the equity in your home, is stricter. Before filing for bankruptcy be sure to discuss your options with an attorney.
  • Do nothing. It may sound crazy, but one option is to do nothing and let the credit card companies sue the debtor. If the debtor owns a house, the court may put a lien on it. If not, the debt may be written off or reduced. An attorney can tell you if this is the right step for you take.

Regardless of what steps the debtor takes, debtors have the right not to be harassed by credit card companies. The Fair Debt Collection Act prohibits certain conduct by credit agencies attempting to collect debts. For example, creditors may contact debtors only between the hours of 8am and 9pm, may not use abusive or profane language, and must stop contacting debtors if the debtors request it in writing.

Responsibility for a Deceased Relative’s Debts

Friday, April 1st, 2011 by Moore McLaughlin

The loss of a loved one is tough to begin with, but if the loved one left debts behind, it can be even tougher. Family members generally should not have to pay for a decedent’s debts, but it is important to know your rights because collection agencies may target the decedent’s relatives.

Usually the loved one’s estate is responsible for paying any debts. If the estate does not have enough money, the debts will go unpaid. The debt collectors may not collect payment from relatives (unless they were co-signers or guarantors). However, if you are the spouse of the decedent, you may have responsibility for any debts that were jointly held. Depending on state law, some assets — such as a house or car — may be exempt from debt collection. You should talk to an attorney to determine your responsibility, if any.

If a debt collector contacts you, give the collector the contact information for the personal representative (also called the “executor”) who is handling the estate. It is the personal representative’s responsibility to make sure all bills are paid. Whatever you do, do not give any personal information to debt collectors. Scam artists sometimes pose as debt collectors to prey on relatives.

If a debt collector won’t stop contacting you, send a certified letter to the collector saying you do not want to be contacted again. Once the collector receives the letter, the collector can contact you only to tell you that there will be no further contact or to inform you of a lawsuit. Report any problems with debt collectors to your state’s attorney general or to the Federal Trade Commission.

Statutory glitch reduces portable estate tax exclusion for some surviving spouses

Thursday, March 31st, 2011 by Moore McLaughlin

Effective for estates of decedents dying after 2010 and before 2013, the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010 (2010 Tax Relief Act) allows a deceased spouse’s unused estate tax exclusion to be shifted to the surviving spouse. The Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) has released an errata sheet pointing out an error in the statutory language defining “deceased spousal unused exclusion amount.” As explained below, the current statutory language may result in a lower-than-intended exclusion for the surviving spouse of an individual who was previously married and received a portable estate tax exclusion from his or her former spouse. The JCT says a technical correction may be needed to fix the defect.

Background. A credit (the “unified credit”) is allowed against the estate tax imposed on U.S. citizens and residents. The credit is equal to the tentative tax on the “applicable exclusion amount,” determined under the estate tax rate schedule.

Pre-2010 Tax Relief Act law did not allow for any unused portion of a decedent’s applicable exclusion amount to be used by the estate of the decedent’s surviving spouse.

Portable exclusion. Under the 2010 Tax Relief Act, for estates of decedents dying after 2010 and before 2013, the applicable exclusion amount is the sum of (1) the “basic exclusion amount” and (2) in the case of a surviving spouse, the “deceased spousal unused exclusion amount.”

The basic exclusion amount is $5 million with an adjustment for inflation after 2011.

The “deceased spousal unused exclusion amount” is the lesser of:

(1) the basic exclusion amount, or

(2) the excess of the basic exclusion amount of the last deceased spouse dying after December 31, 2010, of the surviving spouse, over the amount on which the tentative tax on the estate of the deceased spouse is determined.

A deceased spousal unused exclusion amount may not be taken into account by a surviving spouse unless the executor of the estate of the deceased spouse files an estate tax return on which the amount is computed, and makes an election on the return that the amount may be taken into account by the surviving spouse. The election, once made, is irrevocable. No election may be made if the estate tax return of the deceased spouse is filed after the due date (including extensions) for filing the return.

A surviving spouse may use the deceased spousal unused exclusion amount in addition to his or her own $5 million exclusion for taxable transfers made during life or at death.

Illustration 1: Husband 1 dies in 2011, having made taxable transfers of $3 million and having no taxable estate. An election is made on his estate tax return to permit Wife to use his deceased spousal unused exclusion amount. As of his death, Wife has made no taxable gifts. Thereafter, Wife’s applicable exclusion amount is $7 million (her $5 million basic exclusion amount plus $2 million deceased spousal unused exclusion amount from Husband 1), which she may use for lifetime gifts or for transfers at death. (Committee Report)

If a surviving spouse is predeceased by more than one spouse, the amount of unused exclusion that is available for use by the surviving spouse is limited to the lesser of $5 million or the unused exclusion of the last deceased spouse.  This so-called “last deceased spouse” limitation applies whether or not the last deceased spouse has any unused exclusion, and whether or the estate of the last deceased spouse makes a timely election to allow the surviving spouse to use the deceased spousal unused exclusion amount.

Illustration 2: Assume the same facts as in illustration (1), except that Wife subsequently marries Husband 2. He predeceases Wife, having made $4 million in taxable transfers and having no taxable estate. An election is made on his estate tax return to permit Wife to use his deceased spousal unused exclusion amount. Although the combined amount of unused exclusion of Husband 1 and Husband 2 is $3 million ($2 million for Husband 1 and $1 million for Husband 2), only Husband 2′s $1 million unused exclusion is available for use by Wife because the deceased spousal unused exclusion amount is limited to the lesser of the basic exclusion amount ($5 million) or the unused exclusion of the last deceased spouse of the surviving spouse. Thereafter, Wife’s applicable exclusion amount is $6 million (her $5 million basic exclusion amount plus $1 million deceased spousal unused exclusion amount from Husband 2), which she may use for lifetime gifts or for transfers at death. (Committee Report)

Remarried surviving spouses who predecease new spouse. The following illustration, based on an example in the Committee Report, says that if a surviving spouse remarries, and then dies survived by a new spouse, the deceased spousal unused exclusion amount included for the surviving spouse’s estate is determined by taking into account the deceased spouse’s applicable exclusion amount and not just the basic exclusion amount.

Illustration 3: Assume the same facts as in Illustrations 1 and 2, except that Wife predeceases Husband 2. Following Husband 1′s death, Wife’s applicable exclusion amount is $7 million (her $5 million basic exclusion amount plus $2 million deceased spousal unused exclusion amount from Husband 1). Wife made no taxable transfers and has a taxable estate of $3 million. An election is made on Wife’s estate tax return to permit Husband 2 to use Wife’s deceased spousal unused exclusion amount, which is $4 million (Wife’s $7 million applicable exclusion amount less her $3 million taxable estate). Under the provision, Husband 2′s applicable exclusion amount is increased by $4 million, i.e., the amount of Wife’s deceased spousal unused exclusion amount. (Committee Report)

This view does not seem to reflect Code Sec. 2010(c)(4), which states that the deceased spousal unused exclusion amount equals the lesser of the basic exclusion amount (i.e., $5 million), or the excess of the basic exclusion amount of the last deceased spouse of such surviving spouse over the amount on which the tentative estate tax is determined under Code Sec. 2001(b)(1) on the estate of such deceased spouse. Rather, under the current statutory language, Husband 2′s applicable exclusion amount would seem to be increased by only $2 million.

The JCT Errata sheet confirms that the current statutory language does not support the conclusion in Illustration 3. It does so by adding a footnote to the example in the Committee Report on the 2010 Tax Relief Act. The footnote states that a technical correction may be necessary to replace the reference to the basic exclusion amount of the last deceased spouse of the surviving spouse with a reference to the applicable exclusion amount of such last deceased spouse, so that the statute reflects Congressional intent.

Under the technical correction, Husband 2′s applicable exclusion amount would be increased by $4 million.

Under the technical correction, it would be possible for the new spouse’s applicable exclusion amount to exceed $10 million, the combined amount of the basic exclusion amount of the surviving spouse and the new spouse. For example, if, in Illustration 3, the Wife’s taxable estate were only $1 million, then Husband 2′s applicable exclusion amount would be increased by $6 million (Wife’s applicable exclusion amount of $7 million less $1 million of taxable transfers). Thus, Husband 2′s applicable exclusion amount would be $11 million (Wife’s spousal unused exclusion amount of $6 million, plus Husband 2′s basic exclusion amount of $5 million).

Allowing a surviving spouse to wind up with a more than $10 million applicable exclusion amount is somewhat inconsistent with the last spouse limitation. That’s because the last spouse limitation prevents a spouse who survived two or more deceased spouses from getting an applicable exclusion amount that exceeds the combined basic exclusion amounts of a husband and wife. This combined figure presently is $10 million, but could exceed $10 million with inflation adjustments after 2011.

There is no word on when this or any other technical corrections may be forthcoming. Hopefully, IRS will address the matter when it provides guidance on the new portable exclusion.