Guardianship Alternatives

Guardianship is often unnecessary or limited thanks to guardianship alternatives which include appropriate estate planning.

Guardianship is the court process by which a Judge appoints a person to make decisions on behalf of someone who cannot make them for themselves.  Guardianship is a very involved process which removes or reduces the legal autonomy of the individual and appoints a decision maker for that person.  Guardianship can be invasive, time-consuming and costly.  Although guardianship is sometimes necessary and beneficiary to the individual, many clients seek to avoid guardianship and, in fact, Texas (and virtually every state’s) law directs you to use less restricting guardianship alternatives where available.  The best options require preplanning however, so if you want to avoid the need for guardianship, you should consider some of the following guardianship alternatives.  See the article entitled “Guardianships Should Be a Last Resort–Consider These Less Draconian Options First” from Kiplinger for more. 

Durable Financial Powers of Attorney

Guardianship often is necessary when an elderly individual loses legal capacity due to dementia, Alzheimer’s or other conditions leading to cognitive decline.   In that case, the person cannot make their own financial decisions anymore, so a guardian would need to be appointed to manage their assets.

However, if an individual has a durable financial power of attorney (POA) in place, then this may not be necessary.  The POA names an individual to take financial action for you if you can’t yourself.  It is usually much better than guardianship as you are the person choosing who will act and you can set the rules as you want.  It is also substantially cheaper than guardianship litigation.  It is also one of the most important estate planning documents for this reason.

You can see here for a bit more on POAs:  https://galligan-law.com/which-powers-should-a-power-of-attorney-include/

Trusts

Trusts are more than just will substitutes.  In this context, the trustee of the trust can control the assets owned by the trust.  So, if the person who created the trust becomes incapacitated, the successor trustee (again a person you choose) can take over and start controlling the assets.  This is often a major reason for clients who create revocable trusts later in life or who have concerns about long-term care or management of their assets.

Medical Powers of Attorney

This echoes the issues of the financial POA, namely that you can appoint a person to make medical decisions for you.  Now, the law does provide default decision makers for medical decisions makers, so this isn’t typically the reason for a guardian.  However, it too is a critical document for several reasons.  Among them, you may not want the default to be your decision-maker, it provides clarity of responsibility and lets the decision-maker know in advance what’s expected of them, and finally, avoids delay in a medical crisis when the documents have to figure out your family history to determine who a default decision-maker is.

Naming Fiduciaries for Minors

Another common guardianship scenario is leaving property to minors.  Although there are multiple state-based alternatives which might be helpful, such as creating UTMA/UGMA accounts (Uniform Trusts for Minors Act/Uniform Gifts to Minors Act), paying to a court registry or possibly to a parent of that child depending on the circumstance.  However, if these alternatives don’t work, you may need a guardian for the minor.

In any case where leaving property is intentional, such as in a will or trust, an easy solution is to establish a trust for the minor within your own documents.  This accomplishes several goals, but here, allows for an adult to hold the property for the child.  They can then spend the assets on their behalf, such as on education, daily living and so on,

Now, the above are mostly proactive steps, so these are what you can do now to avoid guardianship later.  However, if you or a loved one find yourself without sufficiently covering these concerns and contemplating guardianship, there are still some alternatives that might help or help reduce the scope of the guardianship.

Limited Guardianship

This a blog unto itself so this will be brief, but guardianship can be limited in nature.  Essentially, the powers of the guardian are limited so that the least autonomy is taking from the individual as possible.  This could mean that only assets are under the control of the guardian, or perhaps only to control some personal decisions such as medical decisions.

Joint Ownership

Some families take the step of making a family member a joint owner on a bank or other assets.  Now, I didn’t include this as a proactive measure because joint ownership has a litany of difficulties.  It includes the risk of creditor issues, potential concerns over gift making, disruption of the estate, plan, tax implications and lends to family disputes.  However, should you find yourself with the need for guardianship, this can be a less restrictive guardianship alternative.

Social Security Representative Payees

Social Security pays to an account with a designated rep payee for beneficiaries who can’t act for themselves.  So, on this particular account, the rep payee, which is typically a close family member, but could be someone else, is already authorized to control that particular asset.  So, this doesn’t typically completely avoid the need for a guardianship, but does mean that one account receiving income can be accessed and utilized for an individual without the intervention of a guardian.

Community Property Administration by a Spouse

This is distinctly a Texas solution, but we have community and separate property.  Community property is owned by the marriage, as opposed to the individual.  So, depending on the assets of the individual, her marital status and suitability of the spouse to do this, community administration might be a helpful guardianship alternative.

Guardianship Appointment

Although this isn’t a guardianship alternative, I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention it.  You have the power to name the person who you would want to be a guardian for you if guardianship is necessary.  We routinely prepare these for clients so that should guardianship be necessary, you’ve told the court who should do it.  They are very seldom necessary due to the estate planning we put in place, but it serves a belt and suspenders approach to ensure you have as much control over a guardianship process as possible.

Other Alternatives

There are other guardianship alternatives beyond what I included here, but key factor is that preplanning is the best guardianship alternative.  Talk with an experienced estate planning attorney to protect yourself or loved ones from having to pursue guardianship.

Reference: Kiplinger (July 7, 2022) “Guardianships Should Be a Last Resort–Consider These Less Draconian Options First”

Continue ReadingGuardianship Alternatives

Portability Elections: Update

A month ago I wrote a blog on portability, which is an estate tax concept in which a surviving spouse keeps the estate tax exemption of the deceased spouse.  That blog focused on what it is and its potential tax advantages for families.  See here for that article:  https://galligan-law.com/why-you-should-elect-portability/  

Incredibly, the IRS published a revenue procedure last Friday extending filing deadlines for estates which only need to elect portability to 5 years after death.  The time limit had been 2 years.

Previously, the IRS would consider an extension beyond the 2 year limit in private letter rulings.  Essentially, you could write to the IRS explaining why you would need more time or were unable to complete the return in 2 years, and the IRS would consider an extension.  Portability is sometimes so critical that many, many individuals made private letter requests for extensions past the 2 years.  The IRS indicated they received so many letter request that it placed a “significant burden” on IRS resources, so much in fact that the IRS extended the deadline to avoid the need for those letter requests.

You can find the full revenue procedure here:  https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rp-22-32.pdf

Now, it is important to recognize this only changed the deadline for returns that are only filed for portability purposes.  If the decedent had sufficient assets so that a return was required (i.e. their assets met or exceeding their exemption), then it remains due within 9 months of death and not filing timely or paying timely could have serious consequences.  Accordingly, in all cases going forward you should assume the deadline in 9 months, but may have the option of up to 5 years.

The immediate advantage of this rule is it gives us more hindsight.  If you or someone you know lost a spouse in the last 5 years and they did not file an estate tax return, it might be worth considering.  Many people didn’t do this a few years ago because the exemptions were high.  They assumed that if the survivor’s exemption was going to be, say $10 million, then portability wouldn’t be necessary and they didn’t take steps to elect it.

However, currently Congress has not changed the estate tax law.  The exemption is still set to cut in half in 2026.  Further, COVID has disrupted the economy in a way that has negatively affected the market, but also lead to substantial growth in some industries and for some individuals.  So, whereas portability might not have seemed prudent 6 months after the death of a loved one, it might seem so 3.5 years after the death of a loved one.  Thanks to this new procedure, filing for portability is still possible.

Similarly, if you were in charge of an estate, either as an executor, administrator or trustee, it might be worth considering doing this as a prudent discharge of your duties. It would potentially assist a surviving spouse and ultimately lead to less tax for the family, and will avoid questions from beneficiaries about why you didn’t do it in the first place.

You can find the full revenue procedure here:  https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rp-22-32.pdf

 

Continue ReadingPortability Elections: Update

Does a Supplemental Needs Trust have an Impact on Government Benefits?

I wanted to touch on a topic that has come up quite a lot recently, namely, how to leave property to individuals with disabilities.  The key to this, in most cases, is to create a Supplemental Needs Trust (SNT) which will allow individuals with disabilities to retain inheritances or gifts without eliminating or reducing government benefits, like Medicaid or Supplemental Security Income (SSI).  Using the SNT allows them to receive additional funds to pay for things not covered by their benefits.

Having an experienced estate planning attorney properly create the SNT is critical to preserving the individual’s benefits, according to a recent article titled “Protecting Government Benefits using Supplemental Needs Trusts” from Mondaq.

Individuals who receive SSI must be careful, since the rules about assets from SSI are far more restrictive then if the person only received Medicaid or Social Security Disability and Medicaid.

The trustee of an SNT makes distributions to third parties like personal care items, transportation (including buying a car), entertainment, technology purchases, payment of rent and medical or therapeutic equipment. Payment of rent or even ownership of a home may be paid for by the trustee.

The SNT may not make cash distributions to the beneficiary. Payment for any items or services must be made directly to the service provider, retailers, or other entity, for benefit of the individual. Not following this rule could lead to the loss of benefits as giving the money to the beneficiary counts against their benefit’s asset limit.

Now, some families who already have a loved one utilize government benefits might be familiar with SNTs generally.  If that’s the case, there is a second aspect of SNTs to be familiar with which is whether the SNT is funded with the individuals’ assets or other people’s assets.

If the SNT is funded using the person’s own funds, it is called a “First-Party SNT” This is a useful tool if the disabled person inherits money, receives a court settlement or owned assets before becoming disabled.

If someone other than the person with disabilities funds the SNT, it’s known as a “Third-Party SNT.” These are most commonly created as part of an estate plan to protect a family member and ensure they have supplementary funds as needed and to preserve assets for other family members when the disabled individual dies.

The most important distinction between a First-Party SNT and a Third-Party SNT is a First-Party SNT must contain a provision to direct the trust to pay back the state’s Medicaid agency for any assistance provided. This is known as a “Payback Provision.”

The Third-Party SNT is not required to contain this provision and any assets remaining in the trust at the time of the beneficiary’s death may be passed on to residual beneficiaries.

Many estate planning attorneys (ourselves included) us a “standby” SNT as part of their planning, so their loved ones may be protected, in case an unexpected event occurs and a family member requires benefits.

References: Mondaq (May 27, 2022) “Protecting Government Benefits using Supplemental Needs Trusts”

 

 

Continue ReadingDoes a Supplemental Needs Trust have an Impact on Government Benefits?