Avoiding Fiduciary Conflicts of Interest

/in , , , , , ,

by Carol Warnick

It is very difficult for a trustee to have conflicts of interest without breaching the duty of loyalty.  We typically think of trustee conflicts as they relate to self-dealing by the trustee, which is almost always a problem and for which the beneficiaries can obtain redress.  But I have seen more conflicts lately in my practice where a trustee is trustee of different trusts that have conflicting interests, or the trustee is serving as trustee of a trust and also as personal representative of an estate whose interests are in direct conflict with each other.

When faced with a conflict situation, a trustee needs to take action before he or she breaches the duty of loyalty, which is a bedrock duty owed by all fiduciaries.  Restatement of Trusts § 78 (1) states that a “trustee has a duty to administer the trust solely in the interest of the beneficiaries . . . .”  That is not possible when the two trusts (or the trust and the estate) have conflicting interests and what the fiduciary does as trustee of one trust would be detrimental to the other.  One example would be engaging in a specific transaction that is beneficial to the beneficiaries of one trust but harmful to the beneficiaries of the other trust or of the estate.  Read more

No Contest Clauses – Not Just for Wills

/in , , , , , , , ,

by Matthew Skotak

Fiduciary litigation continues to grow and often times outpaces the development of case law regarding the myriad of issues that arise in estate and trust disputes.  Historically fiduciary litigation involved disputing family members or changes in family circumstances.  However, another frequent source of litigation is the estate planning documents themselves.  For this reason, estate planners often include a no contest clause, or in terrorem clause, in a will or trust as a means of deterring feuding beneficiaries from challenging the validity of the instrument; yet, enforcement of these no contest clauses carries its own burden.

A no contest clause is more frequently contained in a will, although it can also be prudent to include these provisions in trusts – especially when the underlying concern is to discourage litigation over the decedent’s estate plan by disinheriting a person who unsuccessfully contests the will and/or trust.  The enforceability of these provisions varies from state to state; however, Colorado has determined that a no contest clause is valid when the contesting party lacks probable cause to bring their challenge.  See Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 15-11-517, 15-12-905.  Read more

2018 Cost of Living Adjustment of Certain Dollar Amounts Under Colorado Probate Code

/in , ,

by Suzanne Coffman

The 2018 cost of living adjustment list of certain dollar amounts under the Colorado Probate Code has been published by the Colorado Department of Revenue.  It is important for probate practitioners to be aware of these numbers as they relate to the intestate share of a decedent’s surviving spouse, supplemental elective share, exempt property, lump sum exempt family allowance, installment amount exempt family allowance and collection of personal property affidavit. Read more

When Beneficiaries are Not Heirs

/in , , , , ,

by Jody H. Hall, Paralegal

The terms Beneficiary and Heir both refer to someone who receives an inheritance after someone passes away.  However, while the terms are often used interchangeably, they do not always refer to the same individual or set of individuals.  Heirs can be beneficiaries but beneficiaries are not always heirs.

In our practice, we often see issues arising when these 2 sets are not identical or are different than the expectations of the parties. Read more

Planning Opportunities Under the New Tax Cuts and Jobs Act

/in , , , ,

By Chelsea May

In December, President Trump signed into law what is commonly referred to as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.  This legislation, which is mostly effective as of January 1, 2018, is the first major reform to the federal tax code since 1986 and affects almost every individual and business taxpayers in some way or another. For individuals, the top tax rate has temporarily dropped from 39.6% to 37% and the standard deduction has nearly doubled.  Personal exemptions are repealed and the mortgage interest deduction is limited to interest on a mortgage of $750,000 or less per married couple. The AGI limitation for deductions of cash donations to public charities increased from 50% to 60% and the deduction for alimony payments was repealed (for divorces or separations executed after December 31, 2018).  Corporate tax rates have dropped from a 35% top rate to a permanent 21% flat rate, a 20% deduction is now available for certain pass through entity income and the corporate AMT has been repealed.

The new tax act also increased the federal estate and gift tax exemption amount. Specifically, for lifetime gifts and the estates of any decedents passing between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2025, the estate tax and GST tax exemption amounts were increased to $10 million per person, adjusted for inflation occurring after 2011 (expected to be about $11.2 million for 2018). The marginal transfer tax rate remains at 40%. Read more

Fifty Ways to Leave Your Lover (or Fifty Ways to Plan, Administer and Litigate Estates)

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by Carol Warnick

As the old song by Paul Simon contemplates, there are fifty ways to leave your lover, and there are also fifty ways to plan, administer and litigate estates and trusts.  I have recently become aware of various situations in which attorneys assume that because things are done a certain way in the state in which they practice, they are done the same way in other states.

I am licensed in three states, Colorado, Utah and Wyoming, and deal regularly with the significant differences between them.  For example, Colorado tends to use “by representation” in dealing with passing assets down the generations, but Utah and Wyoming both use “per stirpes.”  Read more

Good News for Surviving Spouses Seeking to Elect Portability

/in , , , ,

by Chelsea May

IRS Revenue Procedure 2017-34, effective as of June 9, 2017, increases the amount of time that a surviving spouse has to file an estate tax return (Form 706) for the purpose of electing portability of the Deceased Spousal Unused Exclusion amount (otherwise known as “DSUE”).  The portability election, which  was first introduced in 2010 and made permanent under the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, offers a great way for a surviving spouse to preserve the unused estate tax exemption of their deceased spouse.  The DSUE amount can then be added to the surviving spouse’s own exemption amount and be used to shelter the surviving spouse’s lifetime gifts and transfers at death from estate taxes.

Prior to June 9, 2017, a portability election was required to be made on a timely filed estate tax return, due to the IRS nine months from the decedent’s date of death, with the availability of an automatic six month extension.  The IRS has once before provided some relief from this deadline in Revenue Procedure 2014-18, but that ruling was temporary and provided no relief for the estates of decedents dying after January 1, 2014.  The IRS claims to have been flooded with numerous requests for an extension of time to file for the portability election and has issued this new Revenue Procedure to provide a simplified method to obtain the extension to elect portability for a decedent’s estate who has no estate tax filing requirement to the later of (i) January 2, 2018 or (ii) the second anniversary of the decedent’s date of death.  Note that the regulation provides that this longer deadline is not available to the estate of a decedent if an estate tax return was timely filed.  In such case, the executor either will have elected portability by timely filing the return or will have affirmatively opted out of portability by not making the election.      Read more

Beneficiary Designations: They Aren’t Always What They Seem

/in , , ,

by Jody H. Hall, Paralegal

As long as I have been a probate paralegal, and even prior when I worked in financial services, I have spoken about assets with beneficiary designations, including life insurance, retirement accounts and annuities passing outside of probate as if they were a foregone conclusion.  Period.  End of Story.  However, some recent situations have reminded me that the plot of the story may indeed have a surprise ending.

First of all, it bears reminding to our clients, that documents with beneficiary designations do not pass in accordance with the general instructions in the Decedent’s Will.  I recently worked with a client that became concerned when we learned that an estranged family member received a portion of an IRA account due to the beneficiary designation.  It was very confusing and upsetting to her that this family member received assets in addition to those provided for in the Will.

Secondly, there are situations where the beneficiary designation needs to be reviewed and confirmed, both at the time the designation is made and at the time of the claim. Read more

Fiduciary Duty to Elect Portability

/in , , , , ,

by Matthew Skotak

The Oklahoma Supreme Court recently upheld a ruling that has required the Personal Representative of an Estate to take the necessary steps to transfer the deceased spousal unused election (DSUE) to the surviving spouse. The case stems from the rights created by the federal gift and estate tax laws regarding portability.  More specifically, beginning in 2010 one spouse was allowed to transfer, at death, his or her unused gift and estate tax exemption to the surviving spouse. Prior to 2010, each spouse had his or her own gift and estate tax exemption, but any portion of that exemption which remained unused by the spouse at death could not be transferred to the surviving spouse.

In In re Estate of Vose, 390 P.3d 238 (Okla. 2017), the Personal Representative of the Estate, one of the children of the decedent by a prior marriage, had refused to make the required election for transfer even though the surviving spouse agreed to pay the cost required to prepare the necessary Federal Estate tax return to do so. Read more

Identity Theft Isn’t Just for the Living

/in ,

by Kimberly K. Rutherford

With income tax season upon us, we are inundated with warnings from the IRS to take extra caution when filing our individual income tax returns with identity theft on the rise.  But identity theft also happens to Decedents.

We recently had an estate that filed a final individual income tax return for a Decedent and the estate was expecting a sizeable refund.  When the refund check did not arrive, we attempted to track it down with the IRS.  All calls to the IRS hit dead-end after dead-end.  No agent at the Service would talk with us even though we had the Personal Representative on the phone line with us and all necessary information to validate our identity. Read more