New Wyoming Single Member Limited Liability Company

I remember back in 1977 when the State of Wyoming passed the first Limited Liability Company Act. Many thought that a hybrid company that could be treated as a partnership or proprietorship for tax purposes and yet have limited liability like a corporation would never work. Fast forward to today and all fifty states now have Limited Liability Company statutes and the Limited Liability Company ("LLC") has become the entity of choice for all of new business organizations.

Well, the state of Wyoming is at it again. Beginning July 1, 2010 , an individual can set up a single person LLC in Wyoming and have creditor protection in a way that is not available in Missouri or in very few states. The new provision of the Wyoming statute regarding creditor's rights (W.S 17-15-503) now creates an "exclusive remedy" for creditors of an LLC. A creditor is limited to what is known as a "charging order". The charging order "is the exclusive remedy by which a person seeking to enforce a judgment against a judgment debtor, including any judgment debtor who may be the sole member, disassociated member or transferee, may, in the capacity of the judgment creditor, satisfy the judgment from the judgment debtor's transferable interest or from the assets of the limited liability." This means the individual member of the LLC (think "owner") cannot be sued for the liabilities of the LLC. The Wyoming statute even goes on to say that there are "no other rights, legal or equitable, other than the charging order". Thus, there is no judicial foreclosure available to a creditor of a member's LLC ownership interest.

Anyone who is interested in creating an extra layer of security in a business enterprise might consider setting up a single member Wyoming LLC and then registering the Wyoming LLC as a foreign business in the state in which the member resides or does business. We can partner with attorneys who are licensed in Wyoming to assist clients with this new tool of asset protection planning.

2010 Estate Planning

As of June 8, 2010 Congress has still failed to act to advise us as to what the exact tax implications will actually be for people who die in 2010. With the repeal of the Estate Tax and Generation Skipping Transfer ("GST") tax in 2010, anyone who contemplates that they could meet their demise in 2010 would be well advised to seek legal counsel immediately to update one's estate planning documents. In particular, anyone who utilizes a "formula clause" in one's will or trust to create sub-trusts after the first spouse's death for the benefit of a surviving spouse and/or family members (i.e. a "Marital Trust" and a "Family Trust") would be well advised to update his or her documents.

For larger estates the gift tax rate this year is at an all time low of 35%. Next year, the rates revert to 55%. Should one consider making taxable gifts this year to pick up a 20% savings for the benefit of one's heirs? Anyone who has to write a check to the "U.S. Treasury" next year for 55% rates would have thought that this would have been a wonderful idea!

Clients who face end of life issues may wish to update their Health Care Powers of Attorney and Living Wills in light of the year end tax issues for 2010. The time to make these decisions is well in advance of the events that cause the need for them.

Our best guess at this time is that we are not going to see any tax legislation before the November elections. Given the current circumstances of gridlock in Washington D.C. at this time, the thought of comprehensive tax legislation getting done before year end is looking more and more unlikely. We very well may be facing a situation starting on January 1, 2011 where every unmarried citizen who dies in 2011 will be paying 55% estate taxes on one's estate in excess of $1M dollars.

The Increased Need for Special Needs Trust Planning

There is no doubt that the need for special needs planning is increasing. Just look at these statistics:

• In 1992, there were 15,580 children ages 6-22 who were diagnosed as having what is now called an Autism spectrum disorder. In 2006, the number was 224,594.
• In 2006, there were an estimated 24.9 million adults in the United States with serious psychological distress.
• Approximately 4.4 % of U.S. adults may have some form of bipolar disorder during some point in their lifetime.
• In 2006, an estimated 22.6 million people in the U.S. (9.2% of the population age 12 or older) were substance dependent or abusive in the previous year.

Almost every family has at least one member (child, grandchild, nephew, niece, parent, grandparent) who will always need help managing personal care and/or finances. And since most of these conditions do not decrease life expectancy, many families are seeking answers on how to provide the best quality of life for their loved ones for the rest of their lives . . . which could, for a young child, be 70 years or longer.

Fewer Programs Are Available
At the same time that the need for support services is increasing, government and non-government programs are being reduced and even eliminated due to the strain on state budgets, competition among entitlement programs, and pressures to reduce deficit spending. Once a program is cut, it may be difficult if not impossible to restore it in the future.

Families Are Motivated
Even families who are using them now do not trust that the programs that are benefitting their special loved one will be there to provide the needed benefits in the future. They are wisely (and fearfully) looking at alternatives to provide those services. Common concerns are:

• Who will care for my loved one when I am gone?
• Who will be my loved one's advocate?
• Where will my loved one live?
• How much independence can be maintained?
• Will the money last for my loved one's lifetime?

Preserving Government Benefit Entitlement
Are government benefits for a special needs person worth preserving? For families of lesser means, the answer is almost always, "Yes, absolutely!" For more affluent families, however, maybe not.

It may be better to privatize the special needs person's care instead of spending thousands of dollars to protect a few hundreds in benefits that may not be available in the future. In the past, many practitioners focused exclusively on preserving public benefits at all costs. Today, special needs planning is not necessarily "poverty planning." The proper focus today is, on a case-by-case basis, how to provide the best quality of life throughout the life of the loved one.

Estate Planning Update - No News

It is now May and so far it looks like the Senate is to busy to deal with Estate Tax Reform before November. It is looking more and more like 2010 will be the year when one can die without the imposition of any Estate taxes regardless of the size of one's estate. However, starting January 1, 2011 taxpayers will be limited to an exemption of only $1M dollars. Everything else above that number will be taxed at 55%.

I never dreamed that we would see the actual repeal of the Estate Tax. Nor did I imagine we would ever go back to exemptions and rates that were in effect in 2002. The Federal Estate Tax is like a sponge. It soaks up everything that one owns: cash, bank accounts, CD's, stocks, bonds, investment accounts, retirement plans, real estate and life insurance owned by the person who dies. When one totals up everything on this kind of basis, there are many more "millionaires" today than there were in 10 years ago. Your next door neigbbor might be a millionaire?

Married people get a special break called the "Unlimited Marital Deduction". Any property that passes at death to one's spouse, whether outright, as a designated beneficairy or as the beneficiary of a Marital trust, will qualify for deduction. Often this means there will be no tax at the first spouse's death! But, the IRS is not being that generous. They will just wait until the second spouse dies, subtract the $1M exemption, and then tax the excess at 55%. We often refer to the Federal Estate Tax as the "Tax on the 2nd spouse's life".

It is imperative that when the first spouse dies, that he or she use whatever exemptions are available to the deceased spouse in the year of death. Jointly held property will not get one there. The first spouse needs to set up a Family Trust(sometimes referred to also as a "By-Pass" trust, or a "Residuary Trust" or a "B-Trust"....lawyers just love to call the same thing by different names to confuse people!) at the death of the first spouse. That trust can be for the surviving spouse's benefit during his or her life. But, when the surviving spouse dies, this Family Trust can pass tax free to the heirs as it is not deemed to be "owned" by the 2nd spouse during his or her lifetime. This savings is huge! It could be as much as 55% of $1M dollars =$550,000 starting next year. Jointly held property in this set of circumstances actually increases one's taxes and becomes a trap. Planning before one becomes disabled or dies is essential.

It is entirely possible that we will get a new Tax bill after November's elections. A lot will depend on who is elected. Stay tuned. This is going to be a wild ride for millions of Americans.

Congress to Increase Taxes on Individuals

With the passage of the new Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, starting in 2013 the new law provides for 3.8% tax on “Net Investment Income” to help pay for nearly $1 Trillion in spending under the health care legislation. This has now been labeled the“Medicare Tax”.

For individuals, this 3.8% additional tax is imposed on the lesser of:
(i) Net Investment Income; or,
(ii) Modified adjusted gross income exceeding $250,000 for married couples filing jointly or $200,000 for single tax payers.

This 3.8% tax increase also implies to Net Investment Income of trusts.

Net Investment Income encompasses interest, dividends, capital gains (other than income from an active trader business not primarily engaged in investment trading activity), rent and royalties as reduced for applicable specific deductions.

It appears that tax exempt interest from municipal bonds and similar investments will not be subject to this tax. Also exempt are distributions from IRAs and qualified retirements plans such as 401(k) and profit sharing plans.

With the ending of the Bush tax cuts which are scheduled to expire at the end of 2010 long term capital gains rates will increase next year from 15% to 20% and dividend rates will again be taxed as ordinary income starting next year. With the corresponding expiration of the cuts in ordinary income tax rates, the top rate on dividends will be 39.6% (federal). This will be a resumption of the Clinton-era top income tax rate.

In addition, starting in 2013 the new law increases the 1.45% Medicare portion of FICA taxes by .9% on wages exceeding $250,000 for married couples jointly or $200,000 for single taxpayers. Also, starting in 2013 (and in 2017 for individuals and their spouses age 65 or older) the floor for deducting medical expenses will increase from 7.5% to 10% of adjusted gross income.

However, twenty (20) states have now filed suit to overturn the new law on constitutional grounds. Where this will end up is anyone’s guess at this point? Very few such constitutional challenges are successful. What is apparent is that the trend of current tax law will create significant increases in many individual’s personal income taxes at almost all levels. The need for efficient tax planning is now even more necessary for the preservation of one’s wealth.

Community Spouse Owned Annuities are no longer available resources for Medicaid Purposes

In a decision on April 20, 2010 out of the Western District of the Missouri Court of Appeals, the appellate court reversed the trial court and barred the Missouri State Family Support Division from counting a community spouse's ownership of a commercial annuity as an "available resource" to disqualify an institutionalized spouse from Medicaid assistance. The court found that treating a community spouse's income stream from a commercial annuity as an available resource which denied coverage for the institutionalized spouse for Medicaid assistance was a violation of federal Medicaid law.

Creditor Protection Benefit of the Stand Alone IRA Beneficiary Trust

In a recent bankruptcy court decision out of the Eastern District of Texas (In re: Chilton) the court found that an inherited IRA is not the equivalent to an IRA for purposes of determining whether the account contains “retirement funds” that may be exempted from the bankruptcy estate under U.S.C. §522(d)(12).

Courts have listed several reasons for distinguishing an inherited IRA from an IRA which allows the creditors to reach the inherited IRA assets:

• The state exemption was for retirement benefits to be available to the retired person, not a child who was still earning a living;
  
• The beneficiary of an inherited IRA has an unrestricted right to withdrawal of the IRA at any time without any penalties;
  
• And, the IRA is significantly different than an inherited IRA under the Internal Revenue Code.

The Chilton case highlights the dangers of relying on the bankruptcy code to provide protection for an inherited retirement accounts. To obtain solid asset protection we recommend that retirement plans be payable to a Stand Alone IRA Beneficiary Trust that is drafted to qualify as a designated beneficiary under Internal Revenue Code Section 401(a)(9) and that contains spendthrift language. The incremental cost of creating a Stand Alone IRA beneficiary trust is more than offset by the benefit of protecting the inherited IRA assets during the lifetime of the beneficiary from creditors, predators and spouses.