PLANNING ON WHAT TO DO WITH AN INHERITANCE IS IMPORTANT

Within the next twenty years, Canada's baby boomers are in line to inherit a substantial fortune, which will represent the largest transfer of wealth from one generation to the next.

In an article written by Jennifer Power Scott and published in Canadian Living, Ms. Scott discusses the  bittersweet bonanza that many heirs face and cautions the impulsive spender: "There are a lot of people in this world who might go out and blow the whole thing in a week, and that's not appropriate. Unless you're well-heeled to begin with, flushing the funds into trips to Las Vegas, sexy cars and plush home theatres probably isn't the smart way to go."

In her article, Ms. Scott stresses the importance of carefully planning what to do with your inheritance, so that your inheritance can turn into a gift that lasts. Ms. Scott urges those who have received a windfall inheritance to:

  1. Take a breath. Put your inheritance somewhere safe that earns a good guaranteed rate of interest for a few months while you think things through
  2. Once you are ready to make a decision, speak to a certified financial planner
  3. Consider your option, such as satisfying outstanding debts, investing into an RESP for your children, or an RRSP or RRIF for yourself

Essentially Ms. Scott's article forces her readers to consider their long-term goals as opposed to their short-term goals. "It pays to step back a little bit. Some people will immediately say, I've got this money, I don't deserve it all, and maybe I should start helping out my kids right away. But they need to make sure that their financial future is properly secured before they do that."

Thank you for reading, and have a great day,

Rick Bickhram - Click here for more information on Rick Bickhram.

Encouraging Your Parents to Discuss Their Financial Matters

Having an open conversation with your parents about their financial matters and the importance of estate planning is never an easy task. Medical studies have indicated that people who have lived through the Great Depression prefer to keep their financial affairs to themselves. This presents a challenging task for loved ones trying to discuss with their parents financial matters and particularly who is best equipped to handle their finances if they are unable or how they expect to pay for long-term care should the need arise.

The New York Times recently published an article entitled, “Talking with Depression-Era Parents About Money”. In this article, Tara Siegel Bernard, the author, suggests the different ways that adult children could broach the topic with their parents such as:

Show and Tell: “Adult children could talk about their own estate plans - a show and tell”. This forces the parent to give thought to their children’s estate plan and opens the door for the child to ask how the parents have handled their own affairs.

Parental Duty: “Appeal to their duties as parents.” 

Bring in a Pro: “Some parents may also feel more comfortable discussing their financial situation in front of a disinterested party, like a long time accountant, lawyer, or financial planner.” It appears that Ms. Bernard suggests having a disinterested party present could help the parent feel more secure, which likely would have the effect of the parent opening up about their financial matters. This sounds like a good idea; however, a word of caution, this suggestion also could lead to estate litigation, as arguments of undue influence could be advanced in the circumstances.

Timing: “Make sure you choose a good time and place to bring up the topic”. Obviously, having this sort of discussion at the family holiday party is not a good idea.  

Thank you for reading and have a good day.

Rick Bickhram - Click here for more information on Rick Bickhram.

 

The Importance of Having a Will

For my final blog for the week, I want to discuss an article recently featured in Forbes.com, which considers the importance of having a Will. 

If an individual dies without a Will, he is said to have died intestate. When a person dies intestate, their assets are distributed pursuant to the intestate provisions contained in the Succession Law Reform Act.

If a person dies with a Will, he is said to have died testate. In such circumstances, the deceased’s assets are distributed in accordance with his last wishes as set out under his Last Will and Testament.

Under Glenn Curtis’s article, “Why You Should Draft a Will” he sets out the benefits of having a Will, such as:

1.                  Limiting family disputes;

2.                  Wills can outline personal preferences; and

3.                  Wills make quantifying and distributing assets easier.

By comparison, Curtis argues that not having a Will could place significant burdens on loved ones, such as it could take a very long time to compile an accurate list of an individual's assets; it could also take a prolonged period of time to identify and locate potential beneficiaries. “Unfortunately, until this process is complete, money may not be distributed, even to legitimate and known beneficiaries.”

Curtis concludes his article with some wise words: “Individuals seeking to prevent family infighting, and who want to ensure that their spouses, children and other relatives are properly taken care of after they die would be wise to consider drafting a will.”

Thank you for reading, and I hope you have a great weekend,

Rick Bickhram -  Click here for more information on Rick Bickhram.

 

The Need to Plan our Estates

I recently read an article named “The Lessons of Famously Bad Estate Planning”, authored by Steven Morelli. This article looks at disasters that have followed celebrities because of the absence of a properly planned Will.

Jimi Hendrix died without a Will which started a family war that would end up in court for more than 30 years.

Sonny Bono, an American record producer, singer, actor, and politician, died without a Will. It is mind blowing that someone so successful would not have a carefully planned Will. Of course, numerous people lined up to advance claims against his estate, which included Cher, and the inevitable love child. Sonny could have saved his widow and everyone else involved a lot of grief and aggravation if he had taken the time to do some simple estate planning.

For those of us who have taken the time to prepare our Wills, Mr. Morelli reminds us of the importance of updating our Will. For instance, Anna Nicole Smith died with a Will; however, her Will contained a provision which specifically excluded “future children” from benefiting from her estate. This clause had the effect of leaving her entire estate to her now deceased son, and disinheriting her five month old daughter. A judge eventually fixed this estate mess, but it came at an unnecessary expense.

Mr. Morelli puts it perfectly: “The essence of estate planning: control. Whether it involves celebrities maintaining their image for all posterity, or wealthy land-owners keeping their families’ holdings intact, estate planning protects clients’ control. Quite often people don’t want to discuss estate planning because it involves their death. But clients should understand that it is essential to maintaining their family’s stability and dignity.”

Thank you for reading,

Rick Bickhram - Click here for more information on Rick Bickhram.
 

Digital Assets and Estate Planning

Estate planners now have yet another issue to address: how to deal with a testator's digital assets. 

The term "digital assets" (wikipedia entry) generally refers to email, social media, and other online accounts, protected by a password and right to use a specific account.  People are now commonly storing huge amounts of unique data such as photographs, emails and any form of document.  The Michigan case where a court ordered Yahoo to allow executors to access a deceased's email account notwithstanding that Yahoo's terms of use and privacy policy did not allow for a transfer of access, is already five years old.

This may already be a professional liability issue.  The information stored in relation to the "digital assets" is arguably no less important than their predecessor "physical assets".  I say "predecessor" because for many people, physical forms of these assets are already quaint.  Other digital assets could have objective financial value; for instance, a PayPal account with a substantial balance, as Michael Panchieri points out.

Without addressing the swamp of legal issues associated with digital assets (even scratching the surface in a meaningful way would require many blogs), I recommend you peruse the following list of sources from Ontario and other jurisdictions to get a sense of how digital assets might fit into an estates plan:

-> mybangalore article expanding on how digital assets fit into estates

-> Dennis Kennedy's article in the American Bar Association's online e-zine Law Practice Today (attribution

-> Florida lawyer David Goldman has a must-read blog on what may be a fundamental planning challenge inherent to the nature of the digital asset (hint: it is a license that expires on death...)  

-> a general FT.com (UK) article on companies that offer services to store and pass on passwords and login credentials, link to this example of one such service provider, Entruset.

Thanks for reading,

Christopher M.B. Graham - Click here for more information on Chris Graham.

 

 

 

Succession Planning Crisis Looming Over Canadian Businesses

Sara Crosbie, a writer with the Globe and Mail, recently published an article on the succession planning crisis looming over Canadian family businesses. In her article, Ms. Crosbie refers to a study completed by Deloitte and Touche, which indicates that two-thirds of Canadian families have no written contingency plans to guide them through a disability or death.

To understand the importance of family businesses to the Canadian economy consider the following study which was completed by Deloitte and Touche and found that “family businesses have 4.7 million full-time employees, 1.3 million part-time workers and sales of around $1.3 trillion.”

Ms. Crosbie states that the lack of succession planning could be attributed to the idea that most parents think, “there's nothing here to pass on”, but the children think, “actually, I'm quite interested in taking it on.” 

Dr. Pramodita Sharma attributes the lack of succession planning to the fact that “money and mortality conversations don’t usually take place until the head of a business is gravely ill. By then, it’s too late to start talking.”

Regardless of the cause, the consensus on resolving this looming crisis is rather simple, communication. Dr. Sharma says “Succession planning is either passing to the next generation of your family, passing to employees … selling it, to be merged or acquired by someone or it could be closing the business down.  That needs preparation, too. You want to get the maximum value out of the business so it has to be a pro-active succession plan. You don't want death to be the succession plan.”

Thank you for reading and have a great day.

Rick Bickhram

Rick Bickhram - Click here for more information on Rick Bickhram.

The U.S. Death Tax is Dead! Will it be Resurrected?

The United State’s federal estate tax, more commonly known as the “Death Tax” is a tax applied to the transfer of a person’s assets at death. It is defined by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service as “a tax on your right to transfer property at your death.”

The Death Tax is paid by the recipients of an inheritance and is due within 9 months of the decedent’s death.   If there is not sufficient cash in the estate, personal property and business assets must be sold to pay the tax. 

As noted in one of our prior blogs, due to changes made by Congress during the George Bush administration back in 2001, the Death Tax was due to fall from 45% to 0% on January 1, 2010.  Many thought this loophole would be addressed before the start of the year. However, due to a Congressional tax standoff, no action was taken in time and the Death Tax has been repealed. However, the repeal is not permanent and the Death Tax is scheduled to be resurrected on January 1, 2010, at a rate of 55% on all assets above $1 million (the current exemption amount). 

It remains to be seen which way the political winds will blow, as Congress will likely address the issue this year. In the interim, estate planners in the U.S. are in uncharted territory, as no one can predict whether/when the Death Tax will be resurrected and if so, whether Congress will make it retroactive to the beginning of the year. This may ultimately be a matter for the courts to decide. Stay tuned!

Bianca La Neve

Bianca V. la Neve - Click here for more information on Bianca La Neve.

The 8 Life Stages of Estate Planning

As we are in the beginning of a new year, a quote from one of my favourite poets, T.S. Eliot, comes to mind:  “For last year's words belong to last year's language and next year's words await another voice.”  

I recently came across an article entitled "The 8 Life Stages of Estate Planning", authored by G.M. Filisko.  In his article, Mr. Filisko points out the obvious - during our life we will go through different phases and our estate plans should reflect these changes. Mr. Filisko lists the following stages to consider regardless of the phase one may be currently in:

1.      Young, single and carefree
2.      Single, but committed
3.      We’re Engaged
4.      Just Married
5.      The Joys of Parenting
6.      Divorce (if unfortunately applicable)
7.      The Middle Ages
8.      The Golden Years

Regardless of where one may fall in this spectrum, it is never to late to get started.

Since making New Year’s resolutions seems to be the theme around this time of the year, let’s make a resolution to be more organized this year and spend some time considering our estate plans.

Thank you for reading.

Rick Bickhram

Rick Bickhram - Click here for more information on Rick Bickhram.

Future Changes to U.S. Estate Tax?

Yesterday I wrote about Edward Kennedy – I began to wonder about the tax implications on his estate.

Assuming he held $75 million in assets, his estate would have been taxed at a rate of 45% and the bill owing would be $33,750,000. But this is unlikely because much of his wealth was held by trusts which, in Ontario, are separate taxable entities. 

My colleague, Sarah Fitzpatrick wrote in July 2008 about the upcoming changes to the U.S. tax law.  That time is four months away. Congress must act soon; if it does not, taxes on nearly everyone will soar under a plan enacted in 2001 called the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act (EGTRRA) which provides that in 2011 the tax law that had been in effect in 2000 will reappear.

The estate tax is set to vanish for a year if nothing happens before the end of 2009 as the EGTRRA sunsets in 2010. In 2011, an effective rate of 55% on estates would come into effect.

Only a small number of individuals pay the estate tax each year. In 2007, there were 36,458 estate tax filers – out of 235 million total tax filers that same year in the United States.  . Smaller estates (under $3.5 million) make up the bulk of filers – over 60 percent in years 2002-2007. Large estates (over $10 million), however contributed between 18 and 30 percent of the total revenue in the same time frame.

During the 2008 campaign, President Barack Obama supported permanent extension of the 2009 law – effectively a permanent 45 percent top rate with $3.5 million exemption per individual ($7 million for couples).

Either side of the political spectrum will present different numbers, but what seems certain is that if there is no legislative action in the U.S. in the next few months, 2010 will be a good year for estates. My bet is that the large loophole will be filled quickly, especially as the U.S. operates with a large deficit.

Thank you for reading. Please remember that Hull & Hull is hosting another breakfast seminar tomorrow morning.

Enjoy your Wednesday.

Jonathan Morse - Click here for more information on Jonathan Morse.

Nurturing Legacies: Edward M. Kennedy

The death of Edward M. Kennedy on August 25, 2009 marked the end of era. The Lion of the Senate received much praise for his 47-year contribution to American politics. 

In his memoir – True Compass –  “Teddy” provides a posthumous review of his life and of his famous family.  It is a reminder that people leave a range of legacies when they die. Several of his siblings left their own mark, including his sister Eunice.  Edward Kennedy’s political accomplishments are a great part of his legacy. (I have read about JFK and Bobby and will enjoy this read.)

There is the financial side of Edward Kennedy’s life (and of each Kennedy) which presumably continues to back many of the endeavours of the current generation. Edward Kennedy, apparently, reported a net worth  in 2008 between $15 million and $72.6 million, but a year earlier the range was between $46.9 and $157 million. As a U.S. senator, Kennedy earned a base salary of $165,200 a year.

The main source of Kennedy's wealth was his father and family patriarch Joseph P. Kennedy, a former U.S. Ambassador to Great Britain, whose fortune stemmed from banking, real estate, liquor, films and Wall Street holdings that eventually grew to an estimated $500 million by the 1980s.

A big portion of that wealth came from Kennedy Sr.’s purchase of Chicago's Merchandise Mart  in 1945 for $12.5 million. Spanning two city blocks and rising 25 stories, the sprawling limestone and terra-cotta mart had its own zip code. It was the world's largest building until the Pentagon was built in the 1940s. The Kennedy family sold its interest in the Merchandise Mart in 1998 for $450 million in cash and a $100 million interest in the purchasing trust. The holdings of Edward Kennedy included a string of publicly and non-publicly traded trusts and assets. 

The Kennedy family contributed a great deal to public service. Liberal projects and public service work by the family is supported in part, I expect, by the resources available to them through family investments.

While we did not know the patriarch of the Kennedy family, we can glimpse the satisfaction he likely felt that his investments – in his family and businesses – contributed to the greater good.

The scale may be far different, but within our own families, each of us can support the work and the dreams of the next generation with careful planning and wise investments of our time, energy and financial resources.

Thank you for reading.

Jonathan Morse

Jonathan Morse - Click here for more information on Jonathan Morse.

On the Big Screen: Challenging Dr. Barnes' Wishes

The Toronto International Film Festival brought stars to town and brought an estate issue into focus. The Art of the Steal  received accolades as a “thrilling whodunit” about the world-renowned Barnes art collection, valued in the “billions and billions.” Dr. Albert Barnes assembled art in the twenties and housed it in the suburb of Merion, Pennsylvania.

On his death in 1951, Dr. Barnes’ will gave control of the collection to the trustees of Lincoln University, the first black university in the United States. However, according to the film’s producer, in the nineties, a scheme was hatched to permanently remove the collection from Merion that some would later call the heist of the century.

The trustees’ decision to move the exhibit to downtown Philadelphia was met with legal challenges that did not succeed.  On a site called The Barnes Letters  it seems interest groups used the courts to deviate from Dr. Barnes’ express wishes to focus on “an educational organization designed to promulgate a unique way of teaching art appreciation.”

At an opening ceremony for the new site, protestors marked the occasion with signs advocating that Barnes’ “…Will Should Be Honoured.”

Art disputes relating to trusts and foundations are not uncommon. Here in Canada, one example involves a long-standing legal dispute between the U.K. Beaverbrook Foundation which claims that it only loaned art to a New Brunswick gallery – art that originally belonged to New Brunswick newspaper baron Max Aitken.  (See Paul Trudelle's September 14, 2009 blog).

These examples point to the idea that a testator’s expressed wishes for certain assets may not always be respected. Dr. Barnes wanted his art to stay put, while it was alleged that Lord Beaverbrook’s art was gifted to the people of New Brunswick.

Have a good Monday.

Jonathan Morse

Jonathan Morse - Click here for more information on Jonathan Morse.

The Top 10 Issues To Consider When Planning Your Estate

Planning your estate feels a lot like preparing for your taxes. It takes time and it’s something the average person hates to turn their mind to. Nevertheless, a solid estate plan is, without a doubt, the best defence against the potential threats to hard earned wealth posed by disgruntled family members or tax authorities.

Recently, I read an article written by Hyman Darling, an Attorney in the State of Massachusetts, in regards to the top 10 issues regarding wills. Mr. Darling states that the top 10 issues that are frequently being considered by the average person are:

1.                  Should I have a Will?

2.                  What kind of Will should I have?

3.                  How does a Will work when I die?

4.                  What if I have a Will but am not satisfied with it?

5.                  Do both spouses need Wills?

6.                  Is it possible to set up a Trust under my Will?

7.                  How can I include a charity in my Will?

8.                  How can a charitable bequest benefit me?

9.                  How much does a Will cost?

10.              How do I go about getting an attorney?


Mr. Darling does an exceptional job at considering each issue and I certainly recommend that everyone considering an estate plan review his article.

Thank you for reading,


Rick Bickhram

Rick Bickhram - Click here for more information on Rick Bickhram.

The Death of a Legend: Michael Jackson leaves loose ends

Many people, including myself, paused on learning of Michael Jackson’s death.   While I have not searched out his music for several years, his death marks the end of an era. 

Michael Jackson’s music is part of my memory of growing up. I attended his concert in October 1984 at the Canadian National Exhibition in Toronto.

Of course, in my role as an estate litigator, other thoughts also come to mind. Namely, what issues will arise in untangling Michael Jackson’s estate?

Some of these issues are addressed in a New York Times article. One executive describes the singer's estate as a "mess".  There are clearly valuable assets, including a 50 percent share of Sony/ATV Music Publishing which owns the rights to more than 200 Beatles songs; this asset alone may be worth more than $500 million.  Apparently these shares were not owned directly by the pop star, but rather by a trust controlled by his mother.  The shares therefore may not fall to Michael Jackson's  estate but they would be part of his legacy.

The estate has debts too: Neverland cost many millions of dollars to operate annually and in recent years there was a $24.5 million debt against the property. Some commentators estimate Michael Jackson’s overall debt to be $400 million. 

All of these issues – from copyright and real estate assets to Michael Jackson's personal and business loans – will take many months, if not years, to sort out.   

There were recent plans for a 50-concert comeback in London, England. Apparently fans had paid $90 million which will have to reimbursed and the concert preparations included payments for renovations to the venue as well as advance payments to Michael Jackson. 

As the administration of Michael Jackson’s estate unfolds, I suspect there may be more related topics to be covered in our blog.

Of course, for us regular folks, estate issues that we encounter in our own lives will be simple in comparison to the challenges faced by the Jackson family.  But there are some lessons: careful management of one’s affairs and good planning will lessen the load on named executors and estate trustees. 

Enjoy your Monday. 

Jonathan

A New Twist to Death Planning

Death planning now includes options like buying your coffin at your favourite retailer, purchasing jewellery keepsakes that hold a loved one's ashes, and even treating mourners at your funeral to ice cream.

For my final blog of the week, I thought that it would be appropriate to discuss Death Planning. In my limited experience, I recognize an ingredient of success is the ability to adapt to change.   Changing ideas about traditional funeral and burial practices are bringing change to this industry. A recent article in the New York Times by Gabrielle Glasser discusses personalizing your funeral service. 

Despite being in financially weary times, Glasser notes that your funeral is your last chance to be a big spender. Peter Moloney and his six brothers own six funeral homes on Long Island and have catered to customers who wish to have a customized send-off. For instance: “Bike lovers pay an extra $200 or so to take their last ride in a special hearse towed by a Harley-Davidson motorcycle. Gardeners select wildflower seed packets to include with their funeral programs. One gentleman wanted to be remembered for comforting his grandchildren with ice cream, so, after the funeral, mourners were greeted by a man in a Good Humor truck, handing out frozen treats.”

I have yet to hear of a funeral home that caters to customized send-offs north of the border, but I presume that we may be a little bit more reluctant to abandon our traditional religious funerals in favour of secular ceremonies.

Before I sign-off, I would like to point out that tonight is the final game of the Stanley Cup Playoffs. Two of the greats will be playing tonight for Pittsburgh, Sid the Kid and Evgeni Malkin. If you tune in tonight, I am sure that you will get the opportunity to see them outskate the older, and slower Detroit Red Wings. Looking on with anticipation…

Go Pittsburgh!


Rick Bickhram

 

Succession Planning for Lawyers

The Ontario Lawyers Gazette recently published a helpful article titled “Succession Planning Protects You and Your Clients”, which reminds licensees of the importance of planning for the future.

According to a 2006 survey, 80% of sole practitioners do not have a plan detailing who would service their clients in the event of their death or incapacity. This is an alarming number of sole practitioners who are putting themselves at unnecessary risk.

Under the provisions of the Law Society Act, the Trustee Services department of the Law Society may intervene in a practitioner’s practice and obtain a variety of orders which would have the effect of winding up the practitioner’s practice in the event that the practitioner became incapacitated or deceased. Margaret Cowtan, manager of Trustee Services states that “it can be a very intrusive and often expensive undertaking if Trustee Services is required to resort to an order to enable a practice to be wound up.” 

One alternative that we can consider in planning for our future is to “name a licensed lawyer as a limited trustee in their wills for the sole purpose of winding up the practice. By appointing another lawyer as a trustee for the purposes of the practice, on death, that lawyer can not only take professional responsibility for the trust account and make appropriate distributions to clients he or she can review client files, continue matters should clients elect to engage them, or return files to clients as appropriate.” We can also give signing authority on the trust account to another lawyer in the event of an emergency. Only licensed lawyers or paralegals are permitted to deal with trust accounts.

If you are interested in learning more about planning for your future, please click the following link which will take you to the Law Society’s Succession Planning Toolkit.

Thank you for reading,


Rick Bickhram

Cottage Plans: An upside to the Economy?

It's Friday in late April. The May long weekend and all that cottage fuss is just around the corner.  (I like the cottage, but understandably a lot of people choose the backyard.)

In Ontario, we do not have inheritance tax like they do elsewhere, including the United Kingdom. In some cases, the several-generation home has to be sold to cover a £14,000 tax bill or, in one instance, a painting donated in lieu of inheritance tax of £700,000.

To be certain, we have taxes here. At death, often there is a deemed disposition of property unless steps have been taken in advance. An article from last year provides some thoughts on how one might plan to avoid the situation where the capital gains tax cripples an estate or the next generation.

Apparently, and maybe not surprisingly, the cottage market may be down by about 20% this season. Good news for buyers. Maybe it is also good news for those who are looking at estate planning this year. 

If the goal is to keep a cottage in the family, relative to the previous few years it might be an opportunity to trigger a disposition by transferring the property this season and, presumably, incurring a lower capital gain. Each situation requires specific tax advice. 

The economy is lousy but it might be a chance to avoid financial strain and family tension for the next generation.

Have a safe weekend, wherever you spend it.

Jonathan

Delegation in Investment Accounts - Hull on Estate and Succession Planning Podcast #119

Listen to Delegation in Investment Accounts

 

This week on Hull on Estate and Succession Planning, Ian and Suzana discuss delegation issues that arise when dealing with Investment Accounts and address a listeners question about the family cottage.

 

Comments? Send us an email at hullandhull@gmail.com, call us on the comment line at 206-457-1985, or leave us a comment on the Hull on Estate and Succession Planning blog.

Delegation in Investment Accounts - Hull on Estate and Succession Planning Podcast #119

Posted on July 1, 2008 by Hull & Hull LLP

Suzana Popovic-Montag: Hi, and welcome to Hull on Estate and Succession Planning. You’re listening to Episode #119 of our podcast on Tuesday, July 1st, 2008.

Welcome to Hull on Estate and Succession Planning, a series of podcasts hosted by Ian Hull and Suzana Popovic-Montag, that will provide information and insights into estate planning in Canada. From the offices of Hull Estate Mediation in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, here are Ian and Suzana.

Suzana Popovic-Montag:   Hi there, Ian.

Ian Hull: Hi Suzana.

Suzana Popovic-Montag: How are you today?

Ian Hull: I am great.

Suzana Popovic-Montag: That’s good.

Ian Hull: I think this podcast will actually be lodged into the internet through the mysteries of digital technology on Canada Day.

Suzana Popovic-Montag: Happy Canada Day everyone.

Ian Hull: Yes, big day here in Canada, and a big day for us as we continue our march towards our 200th podcast. That’s our next benchmark, I guess, in some ways. We’re now at 119.

Suzana Popovic-Montag: Just a quick reminder to anyone who’d like to call in and give us feedback, comments on the show, please feel free to call us at 206-457-1985.

Ian Hull: And feel free, of course, to e-mail us at hullandhull@gmail.com, or jump on our webpage at hullandhull.com and surf around, find our blog, find all of the backup information that we tend to be using for a lot of these podcasts.  And we’re hoping to put more on where this summer’s project is looking toward trying to get some more video on there and certainly keeping the white papers on the website as well. 

So, before we begin our further analysis of the ever-pressing issue of investment accounts, when you’re putting together Court format accounts, I just wanted to talk about an e-mail that we received last week on our discussion about the prudent investor rule. And we got a great e-mail, again this is tied into some specific advice they were seeking so I’m just sort of summarizing what was being asked of us.  And the focus of the question was, just how much of a balanced portfolio do you have to maintain or how important is diversity when you have the main asset of the estate being the family cottage? And remember, we talked about the unique quality of a family cottage as an illustration of the escape clause that the Act and the Courts have allowed trustees to maintain an asset that, on the face of it, looks like it isn’t prudently being invested in the sense that it may be a wasting asset or it may be costing more than it’s making. And this person e-mailed us asking us what happens if it’s a fairly modest estate and you have essentially the bulk of the estate is indeed the family cottage? 

So it’s a tough question and one that, as all lawyers have to say because we are right when we say it, it depends on the facts and it depends on the circumstances. We didn’t get into any more detail on what this specific question was, but I’m going to add one layer onto that and that is, is that let’s say it is a trust for a surviving widow.  So in this case, a happily married couple, they have Wills that say all to the other in trust, and on the death of the final last person standing, everything to the child or the children, in this case there’d be two kids. So in that kind of scenario we have a surviving spouse, she’s 84 years old, the trust is only, and when I say only it’s made up of $900,000, $800,000 of it is the family cottage and $100,000 of it is cash. Well, in that kind of scenario, if the surviving spouse needs the money, then in that kind of situation it may be that the Court would say, you know what, you do have an obligation to diversify. Notwithstanding the fact that the two children are probably chirping away saying don’t sell the cottage, mom, it may be that that situation where, as a fiduciary, you have to assess it as being a unique asset certainly, but when you need cash, you need cash. So, again, it would depend on the personal circumstances of the surviving spouse and if she had her own wealth she may say, don’t worry, keep it. So that scenario works well, I think, as an illustration, because if the surviving spouse has their own wealth, and chooses to say to the fiduciary, don’t sell, then you’ve got some comfort to hang onto, it’s completely undiversified portfolio. But, if the surviving spouse says, I need the dough, then you’re faced with a difficult decision. And the third question would be, what about the children of the children, i.e., the grandchildren?  And what would the representative, the legal representative of the grandchildren, say about that diversification question?

Suzana Popovic-Montag: And that also raises, of course, the issue of the even hand rule and how a trustee has to maintain an even hand between the income and the capital beneficiaries of the estate. And I know we’ve talked, Ian, on previous podcasts a little bit about that rule as well as how a trustee would go about exercising discretion in light of the fact that the surviving widow either does or does not have her own assets in her own estate.

Ian Hull: And there’s that other layer, of course, that we’ve talked about, is that we’re not actually as a fiduciary allowed to ask the surviving spouse typically what they have or don’t have. So you’re hoping there’s some co-operation and some discussion that is frank and maybe outside the boundaries of what we’re allowed to ask. But I have seen cases where you’ve got the even hand rule tugging away at you and then, and that being basically, look, we’ve got to balance these three generations.  That this is the trust, the trust says look after the income beneficiary, the surviving widow, look after the children and keep in mind the grandchildren. So, I’ve seen cases where government agencies that monitor the grandchildren’s interest have insisted that that is not a diversified portfolio and that you have to seriously consider, notwithstanding the provisions of the Act, seriously consider selling the cottage. So really, from our perspective, I think what’s important to keep in mind is, if you keep, if you really want to keep a special cottage issue, or a chalet, or some recreational property, unique characteristic property, in a trust after you die, you’d better think through what all of the competing interests are going to be, and think through what the Court’s going to say to you. Because you may end up forcing the sale of this cottage property inadvertently, because of these competing interests.

Suzana Popovic-Montag: It really does underscore the importance of planning with proper professionals before these kinds of situations can unfold, so that you can sort of not predict but certainly try to anticipate the issues that can arise and perhaps creatively plan around that so that at the end of the day, you do have someone upholding what you ultimately intended to be your intentions.

Ian Hull: So I think that, anyway, I really appreciated the input from our e-mail participant on that one.  But it’s a good dovetail into the next concept I think that’s worth flushing out, because at the end of the last podcast, Suzana, you talked about this mutual funds and delegation and the kind of twists and turns that come up in the investment account environment. Let’s talk for a few minutes, if we could, about this concept of delegation first of all, and then dovetail it into this investment account problems that get created.

Suzana Popovic-Montag: And generally speaking, what we start with is the fact that as fiduciaries, we are somewhat restricted in terms of the level and the extent of delegation that we can make in doing our fiduciary responsibilities.  And one of the things that, in particular as I was saying previously years ago was a big issue with mutual funds, to what extent trustees could hire mutual fund advisors to actually help them administer these pools of funds and these assets.

Ian Hull: So when we say delegation, I guess we’re saying that we can’t hand off even the littlest jobs of any responsibility as a fiduciary. For example, signing a cheque. There is some authority that says that as a fiduciary we can ask someone else to give a Power of Attorney and ask someone else to sign the cheques. So in this situation, where we’re talking about delegation, we would say, hey we’ve got, the fiduciary is actually out of town most of the time but we’re running a bank account here. That fiduciary can delegate the job of signing the cheques probably.  but what he can’t do is delegate the decision-making to sign the cheque. So every time, say there was an income payment that had to be made and the fiduciary was out of town and their lawyer, for example, was in charge of sort of making sure the cheques went out once a month. Every time a cheque is written and signed, it has to be on the express instructions of the fiduciary. Now the fact that the lawyer, under a Power of Attorney, may sign the cheque is probably okay, but that’s a good illustration of what we say delegating. As long as you don’t give up the mental and the judicious decision to have the cheque signed, although you’re passing on the actual mechanics of it, you probably haven’t breached the delegation rule. Again, twists and turns, depends on the facts, but that’s an illustration of this delegation. And your example is the perfect one, because with a mutual fund, that was sort of like the ultimate delegation from a fiduciary standpoint, where you were a fiduciary, you handed $100 to an investment advisor and that investment advisor turned that money over, bought into different funds.  In the old days, they’d buy a bit of IBM, a bit of Bell Canada and you’d give them direct instructions. Well, with a mutual fund, of course, you’re handing it over to a further person, that is the fund manager of the mutual fund. So you give it to your investment advisor, who then hands it off to a fund manager.  And until the Act was changed in Ontario, there was some concern that that was essentially over-delegating. You had pushed out the decision-making too far. And it’s a really important point when you come to the expectations of the investment account which we’ll talk about more in our next podcast, but an important step. 

So in summary, we’ve got the old fashioned broker-client relationship untouched, but then we twisted it, we pushed it one step further and now we have some statutory protection to allow this sub-delegation, so to speak.

Suzana Popovic-Montag: And just to close the loop on that as well, we always underscore the importance of actually reading the documents and here the trust instrument or the Will, because that can be something that’s specifically planned for and language can be put into these documents that can authorize things over and above what the statute or what the common law itself provides for. So just another thing that we try to keep in mind in these situations.

Ian Hull: Well that’s great, Suzana. Hopefully we’ve had a good discussion on the question of delegation and certainly answered the question that came in from the listener. So thanks very much Suzana.

Suzana Popovic-Montag: Thanks to you, Ian and thanks to everyone who has joined us.   Again, just a quick reminder of our call-in number for any questions or any comments that you might have on the show, 206-457-1985.

Ian Hull: And any direct feedback, go to our blog at estatelaw.hullandhull.com or our e-mail at hullandhull@gmail.com. Thanks so much.

Suzana Popovic-Montag: Thank you.

You’ve been listening to Hull on Estate and Succession Planning with Ian Hull and Suzana Popovic-Montag. The podcast you have been listening to has been provided as an information service. It is a summary of current legal issues in estates and estate planning. It is not legal advice and you are reminded to always talk with a legal professional regarding your specific circumstances.

To listen to other Hull On podcasts, or to leave a question or comment, please visit our website at www.hullestatemediation.com.

Our theme music is UpTempo14 by Gary and is courtesy of the Podsafe Music Network.

/mem

Planning Early Can Get You a Discount - At Least if You Live in Montana (and Own a Farm)

I came across an interesting article in The Prairie Star, a Montana-based newspaper, about an incentive being offered to farm and ranch couples, both young and old, who plan their estates early. 

Montana State University is offering a promotion whereby the first 40 couples who work through an estate planning process will receive $100.00 off any follow-up legal fees.    

A reason for the program is to encourage families in the agricultural business to start thinking about how they are going to plan their estates early on.  This is especially important where there is an operational farm which will make up the bulk of the estate.  Complications can arise when, for example, there is no clear plan in place and one beneficiary wants to keep and run the business, while another wants to take his or her inheritance in cash.

The presence of a family farm can affect the estate planning of more than one generation.  For example, members of an older generation may control the farm, while members of a younger generation may be structuring their estates in anticipation of inheriting it.  Or, members of multiple generations might have ownership interests in the farm that will affect the way it can be dealt with in the estate of any one of them. 

Of course, many of the issues that families owning a farm in Montana my face are the same as those faced by families owning any kind of business anywhere.  However, the program does underscore the importance of planning early and planning well. 

You can read more about the program in Montana here.

Thanks for reading,

Megan F. Connolly

You Make The Call

Consider the following interpretation issue, which was recently considered by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice:

The deceased left a will kit-type will directing that all “just debts, funeral and testamentary expenses, all succession duties, inheritance and death taxes, and all expenses necessarily incidental thereto, to be paid and satisfied by” my executor as soon as convenient after her death. 

The will went on to provide that the following distributions were to be made:

To son A, Property A "with all loans, leins [sic], mortgages attached”.

To son B, Property B, “free and clear of all debt". 

The residue was to be divided between A and B. For the purposes of the trial, the only assets of significance were the real estate: Properties A and B.

At the time of her death, the deceased had no debt other than certain mortgages registered on title against Property A.

The issue in dispute was what assets were to be chargeable for paying the deceased's taxes, including estate administration tax and income taxes, and funeral and testamentary expenses.

A took the position that these expenses were paid out of the residue, and in the absence of any residue, were to be chargeable equally as against Property A and B. (Properties A and B were of equal value.)

B took the position that Property B was conveyed to him "free and clear of all debt", and thus, those expenses were payable out of Property A only.

What did the court do? Tune in tomorrow.

Until then, thank you for reading.

Paul Trudelle

Golden Years, or Tin?

In Thursday’s Globe and Mail, Margaret Wente wrote about “Geezers in Paradise”, and observed that tomorrow’s seniors will be able to enjoy “the most delightful old age of any generation the world has ever known”. Seniors are the fastest growing group in Canada, and by 2017, seniors will outnumber those under 15.

Ms. Wente sees a future where “mature lifestyle residences” replace schools, nannies are imported to care for your mom rather than for your kids, and the most popular diapers will be size XXL. Industries will sprout up to service this aging population, medicines will improve, and the political clout of this older group will ensure their comfort and entitlements.

This optimistic future is contrasted by reports earlier last week that one in three Canadians worry about outliving their savings (Toronto Star, July 16, 2007). The report found that many older Canadians did not foresee such a rosy retirement. 33% of respondents over 60 worked either part-time or full-time, and 19% indicated that their financial situation was worse or much worse than 5 years ago.

The vision of the baby boomer generation, on the cusp of becoming senior citizens, being the most affluent group ever is not universal. “There’s going to be a group of baby boomers for whom all of this image of affluence and consumption isn’t reality,” said professor Doug Owram of the University of British Columbia.

Rich or poor, the articles both highlight the importance of planning for our later years.

Thank you.

Paul Trudelle

Hull on Estate and Succession Planning Episode #39 - Participation at the Family Conference

LISTEN HERE

READ THE TRANSCRIBED PODCAST

During Hull on Estate and Succession Planning Episode 39, we continued our discussion on the Family Conference, focusing on the actions to be taken in regards to non-participating family members. We also discussed the importance of documentation and defined will challenges.

 

Reality Check

Amidst the hustle and bustle of preparations for the holiday season, I'm always amazed by the kinds of matters that can bring a sudden reality check to our situations and to life in general.

Recently, after having attended the funeral of a friend of the family, I had my own reality check. Pat, a remarkable 37-year old woman, passed away after a courageous 2 and a half year battle with breast cancer. Pat was survived by her husband and two beautiful children, a daughter and a son. Learning about the amazing legacy that Pat left behind, I started to consider the legacy which I was creating and what it was that I hoped one day would be said at my funeral.

So often, we get wrapped in all the little things that, in the grand scheme of things, really do not matter. Struggling to maintain the professional and home life balance is challenging at best, but, in the end, nothing can be more fulfilling.

Everyday, we deal with clients who are either trying to create an estate plan for themselves or deal with the one that has been left to them. The whole area of estates and trusts is premised on the desire to deal with our material possessions for the benefit of others when we are gone. Sometimes, however, the emotional legacy that we leave behind is much more important than the financial one. 

All the very best,

Suzana. 

 

Webster v. Webster Estate - Limitation Periods and Equalization Payments: When is it too Late?

Limitation provisions generally aim to strike the appropriate balance between an aggrieved party’s right to seek redress and a potential defendant’s right not to remain under the cloud of litigation indefinitely or to answer for a wrong where it has become difficult, if not impossible, to marshal the evidence.

The case of Webster v. Webster Estate , a recent decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, attracted notoriety in the media, as the Webster family is well known in Montreal and the world of philanthropy. The case is interesting to read given the amount of money at stake and the family dynamics. The case also deals with limitation periods in the estate context. Today, I will discuss the facts. Tomorrow, I will discuss the law and the court’s decision.

By way of background, Mr. & Mrs Webster were married for 29 years. It was a second marriage for both parties. Mrs. Webster was a devoted wife. Mr. & Mrs. Webster gave generously to their community. They lived happily ever after until Mr. Webster’s death on October 11, 2003. Mr. Webster was 87 years old when he died. Mrs. Webster was then 81 years old.

Mr. Webster’s estate was valued at around $24 million. Mrs. Webster was provided for under the terms of the Will, but the bulk of the Estate was left to the Eric T. Webster Foundation. Unfortunately, since the death of her husband, Mrs. Webster developed Alzheimer’s disease, which had progressed to the point where she was unable to testify as a witness in the proceeding.

The Will appointed four Estate Trustees of the Estate including Mrs. Webster and her son by her first marriage, who was also Mrs. Webster’s legal representative and the step-son of Mr. Webster.
In Ontario, when a spouse dies with a Will, the surviving spouse may elect to take the benefits bestowed under the Will, or seek the equalization of net family property from the estate as calculated under the provisions of the Family Law Act.

An application for an equalization payment must be brought within six months of the first spouse’s death, otherwise the surviving spouse is deemed to have chosen to take under the Will.

Mrs. Webster did not file an election within the prescribed six months. This meant that she could no longer elect to equalize their net family property. However, Mrs. Webster and her son both alleged that they were unaware of any right to elect to receive an equalization payment under the Family Law Act in the six months following Mr. Webster’s death. Mrs. Webster therefore sought an order extending the time within which she could file an election to make an equalization claim from the Estate of her deceased husband.

Unfortunately for Mrs. Webster, and her son who ultimately spearheaded the proceeding, they did not receive a sympathetic hearing from the court. Tomorrow I will consider the law and the court’s decision. Stay tuned.

Have a great day.

Justin de Vries

Hull on Estate and Succession Planning Podcast #35 - The Family Conference - Special Needs Beneficiaries

LISTEN HERE

READ THE TRANSCRIBED PODCAST HERE

During Hull on Estate and Succession Planning Podcast #35, we discussed:

  • Special needs beneficiaries;
  • What the definition of a special needs beneficiary is;
  • The use of trusts for special needs beneficiaries; and
  • The proper planning for special needs beneficiaries and what happens to the assets and the trust when the special needs beneficiary dies.

MAKING AND REVOKING OF BENEFICIARY DESIGNATIONS - PART V

We have made note this week of the fact that a beneficiary designation is subject to considerably less legal formality than a Will. The fact that many Canadians do not have Wills often means that the designation of a beneficiary is the primary means by which an individual engages in estate planning. This is particularly true of those in their thirties or forties whose largest assets will often be RRSPs or life insurance policies. We have noted that such estate planning has the benefit of clearly directing assets to the intended beneficiary without the need for obtaining probate of a Will.

Certainly, non-legal professionals such as financial advisors will frequently highlight the benefits to their clients of structuring their affairs in such a way as to minimize estate administration tax. Lawyers, as well, will recommend such benefits, mindful of the pitfalls associated when a beneficiary does not act as intended. For instance, where an individual designates a beneficiary of an asset, not for that person's personal benefit but rather, to distribute in accordance with a Will or some other written or verbal instructions (ie. a secret trust), the issue of trust becomes paramount.

What if the beneficiary does not distribute the asset as the deceased intended but keeps it for herself? For the litigation lawyer, it may be a serious challenge to prove a breach of trust on behalf of disappointed beneficiaries. The designated beneficiary can simply take the position that she has received all right, title and interest in the asset. If the designated beneficiary is herself named executor of the deceased's estate, there may well be some legitimate questions as to whether she was expected to distribute the asset in accordance with the Will. The designation, if contained in the Will, may ideally clarify whether the asset is to be subject to the terms of the Will.

Have a great weekend and we'll be back on Tuesday, David. --------