Celebrity Estate Planning Mistakes that Keep on Giving–to the Wrong Person

My dad was a life insurance salesman. I remember rummaging around in his sales materials and finding a service he subscribed to that reported on the estate tax problems of the rich and famous and even the not-so-famous. He used the  reports to make the point that his prospective clients needed to do some estate and insurance planning, so their families wouldn’t face similar fates.

I was reminded of this when I stumbled upon this 2013 article from Forbes, “Monumental Estate Planning Blunders of 5 Celebrities.” The piece details the woes of rocker Jim Morrison, Rat Pack icon Sammy Davis Junior, hotelier Leona Helmsley,  QB Steve McNair, and, my favorite sad story, actress Marilyn Monroe:

Some celebrities have erred by not going far enough with their estate planning. For instance, famous actress and model Marilyn Monroe left most of her estate to her acting coach, Lee Strasberg.

“She left him three-fourths of her estate, and when he died, his interest in Marilyn’s estate went to his third wife, who did not even know Marilyn. Marilyn’s mistake was not putting her assets in trusts,” says Nass.

Strasberg’s third wife, Anna, eventually hired a company to license Monroe’s products, which involved hundreds of companies including Mercedes-Benz and Coca-Cola. In 1999, many of Monroe’s belongings were auctioned off, including the gown she wore to President John F. Kennedy’s birthday party, for more than $1 million. Strasberg ended up selling the remainder of the Monroe estate to another branding company for an estimated $20 million to $30 million, according to a remembrance of the star by NPR in 2012.

It’s unlikely Monroe would have wanted someone she didn’t know to profit so handsomely from her belongings. A trust would have provided for Strasberg while he was alive and then after his death could have directed the remainder of her estate to someone of her choosing.

Yes, I imagine was very unlikely that she wantedStrasberg’s 3rd wife to laugh all the way to and from the bank. But poor planning allowed that to happen.

Just Leave It Alone?

As many will recall, then candidate Trump promised to eliminate the estate tax. That was then. This is now–he’s the President. What will he actually do? Will he also eliminate the estate tax’s two siblings: the gift tax and the generation skipping tax? No one knows, though many people care, especially those who preach tax fairness.

Given that married couples currently have to be worth almost $11 million dollars before  the estate tax kicks in–it’s more complicated than that, but still–eliminating the estate tax is going to help only the very, very wealthy. And maybe that’s a bad (or a good) thing.

I’m here to argue for the advisor. Estate planning attorneys, life insurance and investment advisors, CPAs and financial planners. I’m betting that each and every one of them agree with the following:

Because the estate tax generates a meager 0.005 percent of annual tax collections, according to I.R.S. figures, it generates far more political debate than federal revenue. And among many tax planners, the calls aren’t so much for reform as for stability, or at least a period of benign neglect.

“Just leave it alone so we can plan,” Mr. Jenney said. “But every administration seems to want to put their own twist on the estate tax.”

Crime Pays (for awhile) So Be Careful Who You Choose to Work with

Mr. Crook is more like it. 

Folks, you can’t be too careful. Lots of good attorneys and financial advisors out there. Pick one of them. Stay away from the too-good-to-be-true guys and gals.

Business Start-Ups: Which Entity is Best

DetroitSkylineI’ve been reading Steven B. Gorin’s massive “book” (he calls the 1053 page PDF a “mere compilation of preliminary ideas”) titled Structuring Ownership of Privately Owned Businesses: Taxation and Estate Planning Implications. I’ve yet to do a deep dive–again, it’s 1053 pages of very dense, complicated reading–but I will. And I will because it’s chock full of crystal clear nuggets like this:

“I freely admit to a bias in favor of partnerships . . . Generally, a business with an uncertain future (as is the case of most start-ups) should start as an LLC taxed as a sole proprietorship or partnership . . . Start-up businesses often lose money initially, and an LLC taxed as a sole proprietorship or partnership facilitate loss deductions better than other entities.” (pp. 76, 78)

Okay, sounds good to me, but what if my plan is to take that start-up public down the road? Gorin might respond (he actually did say this, but not in response to that exact question):

“Suppose that one concludes that a C corporation would be ideal. Starting with an LLC taxed as a partnership and then converting to a C corporation the earlier of five years before a sale is anticipated or shortly before its gross assets reach $50 million might be the most tax-efficient approach.” (p. 78)

So there you have it, the advice of one of the top estate and business planning attorneys in the U.S. on where to begin with your start-up. Of course, every case is different, so don’t take his advice to the bank just yet. Consider all your options, talk with your attorney and a good CPA, but I’m thinking Gorin is probably right.

 

 

When Dave Ramsey’s Wrong, He’s Really Wrong

Zander_2016-04-15_1200I’ve listened to Dave Ramsey. My wife owns a couple of his books. I get what he does, and I think he probably does a some good–in the debt area, at least. But he’s not always right. For example, I don’t care for some of his opinions about life insurance and much of his investment advice is off the mark as well. Further, his one-size-fits-all approach and his dismissive attitude towards insurance agents and other financial advisors are a real turn off for me. Seems that everybody’s out to get you but Dave and those he recommends. (I have more to say on this point, but I won’t.)

In short, I’m basically not a fan.

So you will not be surprised that I’m posting this link to a blog post by attorney Richard Chamberlain in response to a wildly uniformed excerpt about living/revocable trusts from one of Dave’s books. Make sure to read the entire post and the links in the post.

I must add my two cents on living/revocable trusts: Though they are just one part of a well-executed estate plan, they are an important part. Among many good reasons to establish a living/revocable trust, there’s this: setting one up and funding it will help you and yours get your minds around what you own, how you own it, and how you want it distributed or handled upon your death or incapacity. Mind you, I could add more than two cents to this conversation, but I’ll stop here.

Quote for the Day

Shot:

“For clients who are planning to stay in their homes, a reverse mortgage can be a good source of needed cash flow. This allows them to tap their home equity and supplement their retirement income.

“Additionally, most reverse mortgages are Home Equity Conversion Mortgages (HECM), which are non-recourse loans insured by the FHA. If the balance outstanding exceeds the value of the property, the government covers the difference and the homeowner will not be evicted from his or her home.”

Chaser:

“Fees and costs associated with many reverse mortgages are common and in some cases can be pretty steep. There can also be servicing fees during the life of the loan. They will be included in the amount owed when the mortgage comes due.

“Many reverse mortgages have variable interest rates. The amount you owe could increase significantly if inflation returns and interest rates rise drastically from current low levels. Note that an adjustable rate can work in the borrower’s favor as well in terms of allowing them to borrow funds both at closing and at a later date in some cases.

“The interest on a reverse mortgage is deductible, but only to the extent that it is actually paid. Most reverse mortgages are never repaid, so there is no interest deduction unless the borrower actually writes a check for payment, of which some will be interest and principle. The limit to which an interest deduction can be taken is up to the repayment of $100,000 in principle. If the loan is paid off after the death of the borrower, than whoever pays off the loan—generally either the heirs or the estate—can deduct actual interest paid.

Both quotes are from Reverse Mortgages: When They Make Senseby Roger Wohlner

Social Security: Myths Debunked?

That’s the claim in this piece by the Motley Fool.

  • Myth 1: Social Security benefits will disappear in the future.
  • Myth 2: You should always take Social Security benefits as soon as you qualify.
  • Myth 3: What you do with your Social Security has no effect on your family.

I won’t take time here to review the answers. The article linked to is short enough to read in a few minutes. But there’s little doubt that Social Security is on the minds of more and more people–aka Baby Boomers–and rightly so.

By the way, the piece ends with a paragraph bearing this heading: The $15,978 Social Security bonus most retirees completely overlook. I clicked on the link and, well, I found the sales pitch pretty compelling. Unfortunately (fortunately?) the link to the thing being sold was down, so I can’t say more. I will when I have a chance to read more.

 

Stretch IRAs Under Seige?

What’s a stretch IRA, you say? Well, it’s not a new type of IRA, rather it’s a strategy to preserve the value of an inherited IRA, to defer the tax on as much of the IRA as possible for as long as possible. As the law now stands, the owner of an IRA has to begin taking required minimum distributions (RMDs) for his or her IRA at 70 1/2. Those RMDs are based on the person’s life expectancy at that time.

Should the IRA owner die, the beneficiary of the IRA must then take RMDs based on the beneficiary’s life expectancy–regardless of how old the beneficiary is at the time. Typically, beneficiaries are spouses, people of roughly the same age as the owner, so their RMDs will be more or less the same as the IRA owner’s.

To “stretch” the tax deferral benefits of an IRA, some advisors suggest their clients change the beneficiary designation on their IRA from their spouse to their children, that is, if their spouse has other income and will have no need for the income from the IRA. Though the children beneficiaries will have to take RMDs as well, those RMDs will be “stretched” out over a longer life expectancy and therefore will be much smaller and therefore more dollars will remain in the IRA for a longer period, safe from the tax man–for now.

Got that?

Well apparently stretch IRAs are under attack, according to a piece at Wealthmanagement.com. Here’s the first paragraph, with a teaser at the end. Yes Virginia, there are some possible solutions to the problem.

The stretch IRA is under siege.

If it’s eliminated, a non-spouse beneficiary of an IRA will be required to pay income taxes on the entire inherited IRA within five years of the IRA owner’s death. Here are two promising solutions using tax-free income that your clients can act on before the law changes. Let’s discuss Roth IRA conversions and life insurance.

There’s much to talk about with regard to IRAs, so check back later.

Looking for a Financial Advisor? Here’s Some Good Advice

As a freelance financial writer, I worked with the people in Northern Trust’s wealth management arm. They are bright and very good at what they do. So when they talk, consider listening. For example, in the audio at this link, you’ll find a good discussion of what to look for when you’re searching for a financial advisor. Enjoy.

Be Careful Out There

Hey, I know I have a bit of a bias, but be careful when you hire an attorney. Not all is at it seems, as this story illustrates. The woman in the story is probably not the first to do this–to such a degree, and the problem is not limited to the legal profession. Lots of charlatans out there. Be careful.

The Wyoming State Bar does not certify any lawyer as a specialist or expert. Anyone considering a lawyer should independently investigate the lawyer’s credentials and ability, and not rely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. This website is an advertisement.