(6172,1,'2011-11-18 13:29:53','2011-11-18 13:29:53','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Nathan Moccia, shareholder of Rack & Moccia, to conduct a national teleconference for National Business Institute on Friday December 30, 2011, titled “Estate Planning Basics.”</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/2011.11.18-nbi-announcement.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/2011.11.18-nbi-announcement.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The program aims to provide a basic knowledge of the essential estate planning instruments and their use in a well-structured and funded plan.  The course will also cover their use during the incapacity and abuse and protection from controversy.  The core groups of registrants are attorneys; however, the course will also benefit professional partners to include trust officers, estate and financial planners, insurance professionals, bankers and paralegals.  For further information, or to register for this program <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><a href=\"http://www.nbi-sems.com/SemTeleDetails.aspx/R-58430ER%7C?ctname=SPKEM\">click here</a></span></p> <p><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>Program Description</strong></span></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Build a Solid Foundation in Estate Planning Basics.   Do you have the skills to ensure your clients are well taken care of in case of incapacity? Can you minimize their tax liability through carefully planned asset transfers? Gain the knowledge you need to help your clients through their estate planning needs with this fundamental program. Be prepared to effectively represent your clients. </p> <ul> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Gain a fundamental understanding of basic principles in drafting wills and trusts to effectively document your client\'s wishes.</li> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Learn what impact gift and estate taxes will have on beneficiaries and how your plan can address how these taxes are handled.</li> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Help your client plan for incapacity by understanding how to proactively address common legal and financial issues that can arise when health deteriorates.</li> </ul>','Rack & Moccia Attorney to conduct NBI Teleconference','','publish','open','open','','rack-a-olansen-attorney-to-conduct-nbi-teleconference','','','2016-03-02 22:00:47','2016-03-02 22:00:47','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6172',4,'post','',0),(6174,1,'2011-12-22 00:00:00','2011-12-22 00:00:00','','2011.12.21-six-tax-tips','','inherit','open','closed','','2011-12-21-six-tax-tips','','','2016-02-22 18:06:49','2016-02-22 18:06:49','',6175,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/2011.12.21-six-tax-tips.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6175,1,'2011-12-22 13:29:53','2011-12-22 13:29:53','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>The Internal Revenue Service wants to remind all taxpayers that with the New Year fast approaching, there is still time for you to take steps that can lower your 2011 income taxes.  Here are six tax-saving tips the IRS suggests you consider before the calendar turns to 2012.</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/2011.12.21-six-tax-tips.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/2011.12.21-six-tax-tips.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"></a> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>1. Make Charitable Contributions.</strong></span>  If you itemize deductions, your donations must be made to qualified charities no later than December 31st to be deductible for 2011.  You must have a canceled check, a bank statement, credit card statement or a written statement from the charity, showing the name of the charity and the date and amount of the contribution for all cash donations.  Donations charged to a credit card by December 31st are deductible for 2011, even if the bill is not paid until 2012.  If you donate clothing or household items, they must be in good used condition or better to be deductible.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">2. Install Energy-Efficient Home Improvements.</span></strong>  You still have time this year to make energy-saving and green-energy home improvements, and qualify for either of two home energy credits.  Installing energy efficient improvements such as insulation, new windows and water heaters to your main home can provide up to $500 in tax savings.  Homeowners going green should also check out the Residential Energy Efficient Property Credit, designed to spur investment in alternative energy equipment.  The credit equals 30 percent of the cost of qualifying solar, wind, geothermal, or heat pump property.  For details see Special Edition Tax Tip 2011-08, Home Energy Credits Still Available for 2011 on the <a href=\"http://www.irs.gov/\">www.IRS.gov</a> website.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">3. Consider an Investment Portfolio Adjustment.</span></strong>  Check your investments for gains and losses and consider sales by December 31st.  You may normally deduct capital losses up to the amount of capital gains, plus $3,000 from other income.  If your net capital losses are more than $3,000, the excess can be carried forward and deducted in future years.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>4. Contribute the Maximum to Retirement Accounts.</strong></span>  Elective deferrals you make to employer-sponsored 401(k) plans or similar workplace retirement programs for 2011 must be made by December 31st.  However, you have until April 17, 2012, to set up a new IRA or add money to an existing IRA and still have it count for 2011.  You normally can contribute up to $5,000 to a traditional or Roth IRA, and up to $6,000 if you are age 50 or over.  The Saver’s Credit, also known as the Retirement Savings Contribution Credit, is also available to low- and moderate-income workers who voluntarily contribute to an IRA or workplace retirement plan.  The maximum Saver’s Credit is $1,000 for individuals and $2,000 for married couples, but the amount allowed could be reduced or eliminated for some taxpayers in part because of the impact of other deductions and credits.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>5. Make a Qualified Charitable Distribution.</strong></span>  If you are age 70½ or over, the qualified charitable distribution (QCD) allows you to make a distribution paid directly from your individual retirement account to a qualified charity, and exclude the amount of the distribution from your gross income.  The maximum annual exclusion for QCDs is $100,000.  The excluded amount can be used to satisfy any required minimum distributions that the individual must otherwise receive from their IRAs in 2011.  This benefit is available even if you do not itemize deductions.  Importantly, the exclusion for QCDs expires at the end of this year!</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>6. Do Not Overlook the Small Business Health Care Tax Credit.</strong></span>  If you are a small employer who pays at least half of your employee health insurance premiums, you may qualify for a tax credit of up to 35 percent of the premiums paid.  An employer with fewer than 25 full-time employees who pays an average wage of less than $50,000 a year may qualify.  For more information see the Small Business Health Care Tax Credit page on <a href=\"http://www.irs.gov/\">www.IRS.gov</a>.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">One final tip to remember: you should always save receipts and records related to your taxes.  Good recordkeeping is a must because you need records to prepare your tax return, and it will help you to file quickly and accurately next year.  In the unfortunate event your return is selected by the taxing authorities for examination, clear and accurate records will be the best defense to an unexpected tax bill.</p> </div>','Six Year-End Tips to Reduce 2011 Taxes','','publish','open','open','','six-year-end-tips-to-reduce-2011-taxes','','','2016-03-02 22:01:11','2016-03-02 22:01:11','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6175',13,'post','',0),(6176,1,'2011-12-27 00:00:00','2011-12-27 00:00:00','','2011.12.27-temporary-extension-payroll','','inherit','open','closed','','2011-12-27-temporary-extension-payroll','','','2016-02-22 18:06:49','2016-02-22 18:06:49','',6177,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/2011.12.27-temporary-extension-payroll.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6177,1,'2011-12-27 13:29:53','2011-12-27 13:29:53','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Late on December 22nd, House and Senate leaders agreed to end their stalemate over extending the payroll tax break, and have agreed to continue the 2% reduction in workers’ Social Security tax rate through the end of February 2012.</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/2011.12.27-temporary-extension-payroll.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/2011.12.27-temporary-extension-payroll.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The payroll extension agreement (bill number H.R. 3765, entitled, the “Temporary Payroll Tax Cut Continuation Act of 2011”) calls for new language to be inserted into the tax relief bill to prevent a potential payroll tax problem for employers.  According to information provided by the House Ways & Means Committee, the revision would allow employers to withhold employee payroll taxes at 4.2% (instead of 6.2%) on all wages paid during the two-month extension period, subject only to the full 2012 wage base ($110,100) and without regard to the $18,350 cap (two-twelfths of the wage base of $110,100) on wages earned through the end of February 2012.   If an employee’s wages during the first two months of 2012 exceed $18,350, and the payroll tax reduction is not extended for the remainder of 2012, an amount equal to 2% of those excess wages would ultimately be recaptured on the worker’s individual 2012 income tax return.  Under the agreement, both Republicans and Democrats in the Senate and House will immediately appoint negotiators to a conference to forge a full-year extension of the payroll tax reduction.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Both the Senate and House approved the bill on the morning of December 23, 2011, and it was signed into law by President Obama shortly thereafter.</p>','House and Senate Approve Bill Temporarily Extending the Payroll Tax Cut','','publish','open','open','','house-and-senate-approve-bill-temporarily-extending-the-payroll-tax-cut','','','2016-03-02 22:01:28','2016-03-02 22:01:28','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6177',12,'post','',0),(6178,1,'2012-01-06 13:29:53','2012-01-06 13:29:53','<p>Rev. Rul. 2012-2, 2012-3 IRB</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/2011.5.27-applicable-federal-rates.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/2011.5.27-applicable-federal-rates.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"> </span></strong></span></p> <table style=\"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;\" height=\"497\" border=\"3\" cellpadding=\"3\" width=\"483\" align=\"center\"> <caption> <p><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong>Table 1 (Section 1274(d) Rate) Period for Compounding<br /></strong></span></p> </caption>  <tbody> <tr bgcolor=\"7093DB\"> <th><br /></th><th style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Annual</span></th><th style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Semiannual</span></th><th style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Quarterly</span></th><th style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Month</span></th> </tr> <tr> <td colspan=\"5\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Short-Term</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"7093DB\"> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.19%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.19%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.19%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.19%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">110% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.21%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.21%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.21%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.21%</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"7093DB\"> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">120% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.23%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.23%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.23%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.23%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">130% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.25%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.25%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.25%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.25%</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"7093DB\"> <td colspan=\"5\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Mid-Term</span></td> </tr> <tr cellpading=\"10\"> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.17%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.17%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.17%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.17%</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"7093DB\"> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">110% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.29%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.29%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.29%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.29%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">120% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.40%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.40%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.40%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.40%</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"7093DB\"> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">130% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.53%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.52%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.52%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.52%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">150% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.77%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.76%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.76%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.75%</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"7093DB\"> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">175% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.06%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.05%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.04%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.04%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan=\"5\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Long-Term</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"7093DB\"> <td><strong>AFR</strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.63%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.61%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.60%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.60%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">110% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.89%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.87%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.86%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.85%</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"7093DB\"> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">120% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.15%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.13%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.12%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.11%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">130% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.42%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.39%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.38%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.37%</span></td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <table style=\"width: 475px; height: 246px; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;\" height=\"197\" border=\"3\" cellpadding=\"3\" width=\"466\"> <caption> <p style=\"text-align: center;\"> </p> <p> </p> <p><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong>Table 2 (Section 1288(b) Rate) Period for Compounding</strong></span></p> </caption>  <tbody> <tr cellpading=\"5\" bgcolor=\"7093DB\"> <th><br /></th><th><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Annual</span></th><th><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Semiannual</span></th><th><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Quarterly</span></th><th><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Month</span></th> </tr> <tr> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">Short-term </span></strong><br /><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">adjusted AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.38%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.38%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.38%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.38%</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"7093DB\"> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">Mid-term </span></strong><br /><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">adjusted AFR</span></strong><br /></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.50%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.49%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.49%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.49%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">Long-term</span></strong><br /><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">adjusted AFR</span></strong></p> </td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.47%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.44%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.43%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.42%</span></td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <table style=\"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;\" height=\"107\" border=\"3\" width=\"425\"> <caption> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong>Table 5 (Section 7520 Rate)</strong></span></p> </caption>  <tbody> <tr> <td> <p style=\"text-align: left;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">Applicable federal rate for determining the <br />present value of an annuity, an interest <br />for life or term of years, or a remainder or <br />reversionary interest</span></p> </td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.4%</span></td> </tr> </tbody> </table>','Applicable Federal Rates for January 2012','','publish','open','open','','applicable-federal-rates-for-january-2012','','','2016-03-02 22:08:37','2016-03-02 22:08:37','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6178',8,'post','',0),(6179,1,'2012-01-06 00:00:00','2012-01-06 00:00:00','','2012.1.6-expired-tax-breaks','','inherit','open','closed','','2012-1-6-expired-tax-breaks','','','2016-02-22 18:06:50','2016-02-22 18:06:50','',6180,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2012.1.6-expired-tax-breaks.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6180,1,'2012-01-06 13:29:53','2012-01-06 13:29:53','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>December 31st marked the expiration of 53 tax break commonly referred to as the “extenders.”</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2012.1.6-expired-tax-breaks.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2012.1.6-expired-tax-breaks.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\"></div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\">December 31st marked the expiration of 53 tax breaks commonly referred to as the “extenders” because Congress usually votes to extend them for one more year.  The expired provisions include several popular tax breaks, such as:</div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\"> <ul> <li>the AMT patch (which protects 30 million middle-class taxpayers from the Alternative Minimum Tax; </li> <li>the employee mass transit subsidy;</li> <li>research and development tax credits;</li> <li>bonus depreciation; </li> <li>and 100% expensing.</li> </ul> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Congressional Budget Office assumes the expiration of these provisions, therefore masking the true size of the deficit if they are extended.   Also, many of the 53 tax breaks are questionable at best, but are typically extended as part of the budget package (for which members of Congress troll for campaign contributions from affected individuals and businesses).  For a complete list of the 53 expired tax breaks, see Joint Committee on Taxation, <a href=\"http://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=startdown&id=3722\" target=\"_blank\">List of Expiring Federal Tax Provisions 2010-2020</a> (JCX-2-11).</p> </div>','53 Tax Breaks Expired on December 31, 2011','','publish','open','open','','53-tax-breaks-expired-on-december-31-2011','','','2016-03-02 22:08:06','2016-03-02 22:08:06','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6180',7,'post','',0),(6181,1,'2012-01-09 00:00:00','2012-01-09 00:00:00','','2012.1.6-divorce-special-needs','','inherit','open','closed','','2012-1-6-divorce-special-needs','','','2016-02-22 18:06:50','2016-02-22 18:06:50','',6182,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2012.1.6-divorce-special-needs.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6182,1,'2012-01-09 13:29:52','2012-01-09 13:29:52','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">While the process of obtaining a divorce decree is rarely simple, the ordeal can become much more complicated when an involved family member, such as a spouse or child, has special needs.  Further, many attorneys who specialize in family law may not be aware of the estate planning strategies and protective measures that may be available to the family – a situation which can produce devastating results.</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2012.1.6-divorce-special-needs.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2012.1.6-divorce-special-needs.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">As with many areas of law, each special needs planning situation varies based on the facts and circumstances of the case.  However, when any special needs individual is involved, divorce negotiations and proceedings should always include planning for the well-being of such person.  The following is a list of examples of situations that can arise from such a case:</p> <ul> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\">When a divorce involves a minor special needs child, spousal support payments made to the primary custodial parent and child support payments made to a child can be included in the total income computation of the household, which can result in ineligibility for government benefits (such as Social Security Income) which may have otherwise been available to the child.  Further, if benefits are received and the income is later disclosed, the family may be required to reimburse the government for past benefits received – most of which may have already been spent for support needs.</li> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\">An award of spousal support directly payable to a spouse with special needs could result in increasing the recipient spouse’s income in excess of the limitations required for certain government benefits (such as Medicaid), thereby disqualifying the special needs spouse from continued eligibility.</li> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\">A parent may still be required to provide support for an adult special needs child, which can reduce certain benefits on a dollar-for-dollar basis.  This can be avoided if the payments are made to approved recipients on behalf of the special needs adult child or to a special needs trust.</li> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\">If a family with a special needs member properly plans during a divorce, the non-special needs person can agree to make support payments directly to certain creditors so that the direct receipt of the funds by the special needs person does not become ineligible for government benefits.  For example, in lieu of a cash payment, payments can be made directly to a caregiver.  (However, the paying spouse would not be able to deduct such payments, as he or she would when making direct spousal support payments – an issue which may reduce the agreed upon support payment amount.)</li> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\">In cases where the divorcing parties are not amicable, one party can request that the court direct payments to be made in a manner that does not create ineligibility for benefits on the part of the special needs individual (such as establishing a third-party special needs trust).<span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\" new=\"New\" lang=\"EN\"></span></li> </ul> <p>A divorce settlement involving a special needs person should not be executed without consulting an attorney specializing in such areas.  When properly planned, potentially upsetting results can be avoided in favor of a well-crafted plan that benefits the family, and provides for the special needs person, for years to come.</p>','The Effect of Divorce on Special Needs Planning','','publish','open','open','','the-effect-of-divorce-on-special-needs-planning','','','2016-03-02 22:08:55','2016-03-02 22:08:55','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6182',5,'post','',0),(6183,1,'2012-01-11 13:29:52','2012-01-11 13:29:52','<p>Kelly Green, The Wall Street Journal,<em> Who Gets the Vacation Home?</em>:</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Is there a way to hand off a vacation home to the next generation so that everyone still wants to spend time together there?  Tensions often mount when a family figures out what to do with a property that could be a lightning rod for sibling rivalries—not to mention a sizable chunk of an estate.   Creating a new generation of family vacationers is the exception, not the rule, and it requires thoughtful planning.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204331304577140773728878042.html?mod=WSJ_FamilyFinance_MoreHeadlines\">Click here for the full article</a></p> <p><a href=\"http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204331304577140773728878042.html?mod=WSJ_FamilyFinance_MoreHeadlines\" target=\"_blank\"></a></p> <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p>','Keeping the Vacation Home in the Family Using LLCs, QPRTs and Dynasty Trusts','','publish','open','open','','keeping-the-vacation-home-in-the-family-using-llcs-qprts-and-dynasty-trusts','','','2016-03-02 22:09:31','2016-03-02 22:09:31','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6183',4,'post','',0),(6184,1,'2012-01-11 00:00:00','2012-01-11 00:00:00','','2012.1.11-report-ira-conversion','','inherit','open','closed','','2012-1-11-report-ira-conversion','','','2016-02-22 18:06:50','2016-02-22 18:06:50','',6185,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2012.1.11-report-ira-conversion.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6185,1,'2012-01-11 13:29:52','2012-01-11 13:29:52','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>IRS issues guidance for reporting the income tax consequences of 2010 conversions to Roth IRAs for taxpayers that did not elect to include the entire value of the conversion as income on their 2010 income tax return.</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2012.1.11-report-ira-conversion.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2012.1.11-report-ira-conversion.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\"></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Background.</strong>  Beginning in 2010, the rule that barred taxpayers with more than $100,000 of modified adjusted gross income from converting traditional IRAs to Roth IRAs was eliminated.  For conversions made in 2010, any amounts that would be included in income as a result of the conversion must be included in income in equal amounts in 2011 and 2012, unless the taxpayer elected to include the entire amount in income in 2010. (<a href=\"https://checkpoint.riag.com/app/main/docLinkNew?usid=137686dcaf6&DocID=iae497a0a19d711dcb1a9c7f8ee2eaa77&SrcDocId=T0NEWSLTR%3A604996.1dr6&feature=tnews&lastCpReqId=3025933&pinpnt=TCODE%3A40002.1&d=d#TCODE:40002.1\" target=\"_blank\"><b>Code Sec. 408A(d)(3)</b></a>).</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Income Tax Reporting.</strong>  Half of the taxable amount of the 2010 conversion must be reported on the 2011 income tax return unless the taxpayer (1) elected to include the taxable amount in income for 2010 by filing a 2010 Form 8606 (“Nondeductible IRAs”), and completed Part II or Part III or both, as applicable, and checked the box on line 19, the box on line 24, or both; (2) re-characterized the 2010 rollover or conversion to a Roth IRA; or (3) received a distribution in 2010 or 2011 of any of the taxable amount (in which case, an amount other than half may need to be reported on the 2011 tax return).</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">If no part of the 2010 conversion to a Roth IRA was distributed in 2010 or 2011, the amount from line 20a of the 2010 Form 8606 must be reported on:</p> <ul> <li>line 15b of the 2011 Form 1040;</li> <li>line 11b of the 2011 Form 1040A; or</li> <li>line 16b of the 2011 Form 1040NR.</li> </ul> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">If, as required, distributions of a 2010 conversion to a Roth IRA were reported on the taxpayer’s 2010 tax return, the taxpayer must, on the 2011 return, report:</p> <ul> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\">on Form 1040, line 15b (Form 1040A, line 11b; or Form 1040NR, line 16b) the smaller of (a) the amount from the 2010 Form 8606, line 20a, or (b) the remaining taxable amount of the 2010 conversions to a Roth IRA; and</li> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\">on Form 1040, line 16b (Form 1040A, line 12b; or Form 1040NR, line 17b) the smaller of (a) the amount from the 2010 Form 8606, line 25a, or (b) the remaining taxable amount of the 2010 rollovers to a Roth IRA and IPRRs.</li> </ul> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Example.</strong>  A taxpayer converted $30,000 from a traditional IRA to a new Roth IRA on February 1, 2010.  On June 1, 2010, the taxpayer received a $20,000 distribution of the converted amount from the Roth IRA.  Part II of the 2010 Form 8606 was completed to report the $30,000 as the taxable amount of the conversion, and the taxpayer elected to include $15,000 of the taxable amount in income for 2011 and $15,000 for 2012.  The $30,000 was the only amount put into the new Roth IRA in 2010, so the entire $20,000 distribution was from the taxable amount of the conversion.  The $20,000 was included in the taxpayer’s 2010 income by reporting it on line 15b of the 2010 Form 1040.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Example.</strong>  A taxpayer converted $30,000 from a traditional IRA to a new Roth IRA on February 1, 2010.  On June 1, 2010, the taxpayer received a $20,000 distribution of the converted amount from the Roth IRA.  Part II of the 2010 Form 8606 was completed to report the $30,000 as the taxable amount of the conversion, and the taxpayer elected to include $15,000 of the taxable amount in income for 2011 and $15,000 for 2012.  The $30,000 was the only amount put into the new Roth IRA in 2010, so the entire $20,000 distribution was from the taxable amount of the conversion.  The $20,000 was included in the taxpayer’s 2010 income by reporting it on line 15b of the 2010 Form 1040.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Only $10,000 of the 2010 conversion remains to be taxed, and because this is smaller than the $15,000 listed on line 20a of the 2010 Form 8606 (half of the total 2010 conversion to a Roth IRA), $10,000 must be included on line 15b of the 2011 Form 1040. None of the 2010 conversion to a Roth IRA will have to be reported in 2012 income.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Additionally, a taxpayer may have to include in 2011 income all or some of the taxable amount of 2010 rollovers and conversion to a Roth IRA and IPRRs that would have otherwise been included in 2012 income. To determine the amount to report in 2011, the 2011 Form 8606 must be completed, using Part III for distributions from a Roth IRA and Part IV for distributions from a designated Roth account.</p> <p><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.irs.gov/retirement/article/0,,id=251832,00.html\">Click here</a></span> to view the original IRS article.</p> <p>For additional information see:</p> <p>IRS <a href=\"http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p590.pdf\"><b>Publication 590</b></a>, Individual Retirement Arrangements (IRAs)</p> <p>Retirement Plans FAQs: <a href=\"http://www.irs.gov/retirement/article/0,,id=111413,00.html\"><b>IRAs</b></a></p> <p><a href=\"http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc413.html\"><b>Topic 413</b></a> - Rollovers from Retirement Plans</p> <p><a href=\"http://www.irs.gov/irb/2009-39_IRB/ar15.html\"><b>Notice 2009-75</b></a>, Rollovers from Employer Plans to Roth IRAs</p> <p><a href=\"http://www.irs.gov/irb/2010-51_IRB/ar11.html\"><b>Notice 2010-84</b></a>, Guidance on In-Plan Roth Rollovers</p> <ul> <li></li> </ul>','How to report 2010 Roth IRA rollovers and conversions','','publish','open','open','','how-to-report-2010-roth-ira-rollovers-and-conversions','','','2016-03-02 22:09:15','2016-03-02 22:09:15','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6185',4,'post','',0),(6186,1,'2012-01-27 00:00:00','2012-01-27 00:00:00','','2012.1.27-beneficiary-designation-planning','','inherit','open','closed','','2012-1-27-beneficiary-designation-planning','','','2016-02-22 18:06:50','2016-02-22 18:06:50','',6187,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2012.1.27-beneficiary-designation-planning.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6187,1,'2012-01-27 13:29:52','2012-01-27 13:29:52','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>Most people spend a lifetime accumulating retirement assets in qualified plans, IRAs and other tax deferred retirement accounts.  Often times, these accounts constitute a significant portion of a person’s wealth.  While most of the time the account owner will diligently plan for the withdrawal of assets during retirement, very little time is spent on planning for the distribution or transfer of the account after the owner has passed.</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2012.1.27-beneficiary-designation-planning.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2012.1.27-beneficiary-designation-planning.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\"></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Without careful consideration of the many complex factors involved in beneficiary designation planning, the value of a retirement account can be drastically reduced or even destroyed upon the death of the account owner.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">For example, if the owner of an IRA or SEP fails to designate a beneficiary, the estate of the account owner automatically becomes the beneficiary.  Regardless of the size of the account, the owner’s estate will be forced to draw down the entire value of the account over no less than five years, and then distribute the net proceeds of the account to the heirs of the owner’s estate.  Estate’s are not able to “stretch-out” the receipt of retirement account distributions.  Since all distributions from IRAs and SEPs are taxable as ordinary income, and estates generally pay a 35% federal income tax, the net value of the account is likely to be only 60% of its original value the day the owner passed.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Even if the retirement account owner does designate an individual beneficiary, that beneficiary may not be capable of handling the assets.  Since the beneficiary is free to withdraw the assets of the retirement account as he or she chooses, negative personal circumstances such as creditor issues, poor spending habits, substance abuse issues, or dysfunctional personal relationships may cause the individual beneficiary to expedite the withdrawal of inherited retirement account assets.  Not only would we expect the beneficiary to pay more income tax than necessary, he or she would lose the benefit of continued tax-deferred growth, and may even squander the entire account on frivolous purchases or in attempting to solve personal problems.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">These are just a few simple examples of the inherent problems associated with beneficiary designation planning for retirement accounts.  Since there are so many factors to consider, there is no one size fits all solution.  Each account owner has different goals and priorities, and external forces such as income taxes, creditors, and spendthrift beneficiaries influence the planning process.  Considering the multitude of distribution possibilities and potential negative consequences for failing to properly plan, do not neglect this important area of your estate plan.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"> </p> <p> </p> <div class=\"a2a_kit a2a_default_style\"> <p> </p> </div>','The Importance of Beneficiary Designation Planning','','publish','open','open','','the-importance-of-beneficiary-designation-planning','','','2016-03-02 22:09:47','2016-03-02 22:09:47','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6187',4,'post','',0),(6188,1,'2012-02-01 00:00:00','2012-02-01 00:00:00','','2012.2.1-fund-for-disabled','','inherit','open','closed','','2012-2-1-fund-for-disabled','','','2016-02-22 18:06:50','2016-02-22 18:06:50','',6189,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2012.2.1-fund-for-disabled.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6189,1,'2012-02-01 13:29:53','2012-02-01 13:29:53','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>An appeals court in New Jersey ruled that a bank account held by a Medicaid recipient would not be considered a countable resource because the funds were being held on behalf of the applicant’s disabled grandson and not for the recipient’s personal use.</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2012.2.1-fund-for-disabled.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2012.2.1-fund-for-disabled.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\"></div> <p><strong><em>I.M. v. Division of Medical Assistance and Health Services</em> (N.J. Super. Ct., App. Div., No. A126509T3, June 3, 2011) (unpublished).</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts. </strong> A 79 year old Medicaid recipient (“Ms. M”) was named the sole caregiver of her 21-year-old mentally disabled grandson, (“J.M.”).  J.M. received a special needs grant of $2,000 from the New Jersey Division of Developmental Disabilities (“DDD”) in December of 2007.  Ms. M spent some of the funds for various needs of J.M., as intended, and established a bank account to hold the remaining grant funds ($1,480) for J.M.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Upon a review of Ms. M’s Medicaid status, The Division of Medical Assistance and Health Services (“DMAHS”) deemed the $1,480 to be a countable resource of Ms. M, thereby increasing her resource total in excess of the Medicaid limit of $2,000.  As a result, DMAHS terminated her Medicaid benefits.  In response to having her benefits terminated, Ms. M transferred the remaining grant funds to a new account in her grandson’s name, and added herself as a permitted user on the account.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">At the primary hearing, the Administrative Law Judge concluded that the termination of the Medicaid benefits had been improper, but that the bank account was still considered an available resource to Ms. M, so she appealed.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Ruling.</strong>  The Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, reversed the decision of the Administrative Law Judge, agreeing that the \"availability\" of countable assets under Medicaid regulations intends a legal, rather than physical, type of possession.  Although Ms. M has physical access to her grandson’s grant funds, she simply held them on his behalf “as his fiduciary, restricted in their use by the very terms of the DDD grant, as well as of the bank account in which they are held.\"  Ms. M’s Medicaid benefits were reinstated.</p>','Account Held on Behalf of Disabled Family Member Not a Countable Asset for Medicaid','','publish','open','open','','account-held-on-behalf-of-disabled-family-member-not-a-countable-asset-for-medicaid','','','2016-03-02 22:10:06','2016-03-02 22:10:06','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6189',4,'post','',0),(6190,1,'2012-02-02 00:00:00','2012-02-02 00:00:00','','jlm-wealth-counsel','','inherit','open','closed','','jlm-wealth-counsel','','','2016-02-22 18:06:50','2016-02-22 18:06:50','',6191,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/jlm-wealth-counsel.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6191,1,'2012-02-02 13:29:52','2012-02-02 13:29:52','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In early 2011, a landmark federal bankruptcy case shed doubt on the asset protection powers of the previously lauded domestic asset protection trust (DAPT), alarming many attorneys and distressing certain of those trust-wielding clients.  In a decision filed by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Alaska on May 26, 2011, Judge MacDonald set aside Thomas Mortensen’s transfer of real property to an Alaska asset protection trust as a fraudulent conveyance.</p>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/jlm-wealth-counsel.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/jlm-wealth-counsel.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><i><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\" new=\"New\" lang=\"EN-GB\">Battley v. Mortensen</span></i><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\" new=\"New\" lang=\"EN-GB\">, Adv. D.Alaska, No. A09-90036-DMD (2011).</span></strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">This case deviated from previous DAPT holdings because, not only was Mortensen deemed solvent at the time of the transfer, but Alaska’s four-year statute of limitations for reaching the assets transferred to the DAPT had already run.  This controversial ruling has sparked heated debates among estate planners on whether its outcome could invalidate thousands of trusts formerly thought to provide exceedingly reliable asset protection.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Following his costly divorce in 1998, Thomas Mortensen personally drafted the “Mortensen Seldovia Trust (An Alaska Asset Preservation Trust)” in February of 2005.  Mortensen had admittedly “not recovered from the financial carnage” of his divorce, and created the trust to hold and protect his recreational real property located in Seldovia, Alaska, worth approximately $60,000 at the time of the transfer.  His mother also gave him $100,000 “to transfer the property to trust because she wanted to preserve it for her grandchildren.”  In April of 2009, Mortensen became ill, accrued massive credit card debt and filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in August of the same year.  He disclosed $26,421 in assets on the itemized personal property list provided to the Court, but did not include his interest in the DAPT (although he revealed the existence of the trust).</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Despite Alaska’s four-year statute of limitations for reaching assets transferred to a DAPT, the Court applied federal law, which includes a ten-year statute of limitations from the date a bankruptcy petition is filed for setting aside a fraudulent transfer if the transfer was made with “actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud” a creditor.  <i>See </i>Bankruptcy Code Section 548(e). Therefore, the remaining issue to be decided was whether Mortensen made the transfer to his trust with the actual intent required to set aside the transfer.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Since, by the terms of the DAPT, the purpose of its establishment was “to maximize the protection of the trust estate or estates from creditors’ claims,” the Court held that the transfer was made by Mortensen with the clear intent to hinder, delay or defraud his creditors.  Although Alaska law also states that “a settlor’s express intention to protect trust assets from a beneficiary’s potential future creditors is not evidence of an intent to defraud,” the ten-year statute of limitations under federal law was enacted in order to close this self-settled trust loophole, and the Court followed this legislative intent.  In determining Mortensen’s actual intent, the Court not only looked to the purpose provision within the trust, but also considered his continual steady decrease in income, mounting credit card debt, statements of financial strife after his divorce and his lost stock market investment of the $100,000 from his mother (rather than using the funds to pay off his substantial credit card debt).  Thus, the transfer to the DAPT was set aside and the recreational property was sold to satisfy his creditors.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Is this ruling the beginning of the end of DAPT planning, or was this merely an advisory, fact-specific ruling that provides additional clarity to the current DAPT rules?  Lawyers are split as they speculate whether this outcome was a fluke or the new reality.  Although the Court did not uphold Alaska’s four-year statute of limitations to prevent Mortensen’s transfer from being set aside, the four-year rule is still effective and powerful against claims for assets held by a DAPT.  However, when Mortensen erred by filing for bankruptcy without consulting an attorney, he unknowingly exposed himself to the Bankruptcy Code and its ten-year “clawback” rule.  Had he not filed, Mortensen would have remained protected by Alaska’s four-year rule.  Despite the concern that this case signals the end of the utility of all DAPTs, many argue that Mortensen was simply a case of bad facts with an unsurprising result, given that the debtor elected to file for bankruptcy prior to the expiration of the ten-year statute of limitations, and openly admitted that the trust was created to protect his assets from creditors – the very intent that is required by federal law to set aside the transfer!</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Ultimately, Mortensen was not a proper candidate for a DAPT since he had waning anticipated income, almost no net worth beyond the Alaska recreational property and escalating debt.  While some contend that the sky is falling and landmines are erupting in the realm of DAPTs, this case provides clarity and guidelines for properly establishing an asset protection trust.  Rather than contributing to uncertainty, the Court ultimately validated those DAPTs that were not established to defraud creditors, as well as those trusts established more than ten years prior to filing for bankruptcy, regardless of their purpose.  In light of this holding, DAPTs remain an effective asset protection strategy when properly marketed, drafted and implemented.</p>','An Overview of Battley v. Mortensen: The End of Domestic Asset Protection Trusts?','','publish','open','open','','an-overview-of-battley-v-mortensen-the-end-of-domestic-asset-protection-trusts','','','2016-03-02 22:10:38','2016-03-02 22:10:38','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6191',4,'post','',0),(6192,1,'2012-02-21 00:00:00','2012-02-21 00:00:00','','2012.2.21-changes-to-estate-tax','','inherit','open','closed','','2012-2-21-changes-to-estate-tax','','','2016-02-22 18:06:51','2016-02-22 18:06:51','',6193,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2012.2.21-changes-to-estate-tax.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6193,1,'2012-02-21 13:29:53','2012-02-21 13:29:53','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>On February 13, the President released his federal budget proposals for the 2013 fiscal year.  The proposed budget includes over 130 large and small proposed tax changes for businesses and individuals, including new incentives to “insource” jobs, higher taxes for upper-income taxpayers, and the extension of key tax breaks.  Below are some of the key estate and gift tax proposals made.</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2012.2.21-changes-to-estate-tax.pdf\" target=\"_blank\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2012.2.21-changes-to-estate-tax.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" border=\"0\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div>   <ol> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>Return to 2009 estate and gift tax exemption and rate.</strong></span> The estate, generation-skipping transfer (GST), and gift tax exemption top tax rate would be 45% and the exclusion amount would be $3.5 million for estate and GST taxes, and $1 million for gift taxes.  These changes would apply for estates of decedents dying, and for transfers made, after December 31, 2012.</li> <br /> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>Portable estate tax exclusion made permanent.</strong></span> The provisions allowing a surviving spouse to use the deceased spouse’s unused estate and gift tax exclusion (but not the GST tax exemption) , which expires for decedents dying after December 31, 2012, would be made permanent.</li> <br /> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>Basis consistency and reporting requirement for donated and inherited property.</strong></span> Current law does not explicitly require that the recipient’s basis in inherited property be the same as the value reported for estate tax purposes.  The proposal would require that the basis of property in the hands of the recipient be no greater than the value of that property as determined for estate or gift tax purposes (subject to subsequent adjustments).   A reporting requirement would be imposed on executors and donors to provide the necessary valuation and basis information to both the recipient and IRS.</li> <br /> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>Toughened rules for valuation discounts. </strong></span> Certain restrictions (“disregarded restrictions”) would be ignored in valuing an interest in a family-controlled entity transferred to a member of the family if, after the transfer, the restriction will lapse or may be removed by the transferor and/or the transferor’s family.  The transferred interest would be valued by substituting for the disregarded restrictions certain assumptions to be specified in regulations that will undoubtedly limit or eliminate a valuation discount in these circumstances.  These rules would apply to transfers after the enactment date of property subject to restrictions created after Oct. 8, 1990 (the effective date of Code Sec. 2704).</li> <br /> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>Minimum and maximum term for grantor retained annuity trusts (GRATs).</strong></span> A GRAT would be required to have a minimum term of ten years and a maximum term of the life expectancy of the annuitant plus ten years.  Also, the remainder interest would have to have a value greater than zero at the time the interest is created and any decrease in the annuity during the GRAT term would be prohibited.  These rules would apply to GRATs created after the enactment date.</li> <br /> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>Duration of GST tax exemption limited.</strong></span>  Under the proposal, the GST exemption allocated to a trust would terminate after 90 years.  This rule would apply to trusts created after the enactment date, and to the portion of a preexisting trust attributable to additions to such a trust made after that date.</li> <br /> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>Coordination of income and transfer tax rules applicable to grantor trusts.</strong></span> The current lack of coordination between the income and transfer tax rules applicable to a grantor trust creates opportunities to structure transactions between the deemed owner and the trust that can result in the transfer of significant wealth by the deemed owner without transfer tax consequences (e.g., installment sales to grantor trusts).  New rules for grantor trusts would prevent this by: (1) including the assets of the trust in the gross estate of the grantor for estate tax purposes, (2) subjecting to gift tax any distribution from the trust to one or more beneficiaries during the grantor’s life, and (3) subjecting to gift tax the remaining trust assets at any time during the grantor’s life he or she ceases to be treated as an owner of the trust for income tax purposes.  These rules would apply for trusts created on or after the enactment date and with regard to any portion of a pre-enactment trust attributable to a contribution made on or after the enactment date.</li> <br /> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>Extension of estate tax lien on Code Sec. 6166 deferrals.</strong></span> The estate tax lien under Code Sec. 6324(a)(1) would be extended to apply throughout the Code Sec. 6166 deferral period, effective for estates of decedents dying on or after the effective date and for estates of decedents dying before the enactment date as to which the current law Code Sec. 6324(a)(1) lien period had not expired on the effective date.</li> </ol> <div class=\"a2a_kit a2a_default_style\"> <p> </p> </div>','Changes to the Estate and Gift Tax Rules in the Proposed 2013 Federal Budget','','publish','open','open','','changes-to-the-estate-and-gift-tax-rules-in-the-proposed-2013-federal-budget','','','2016-03-02 22:11:05','2016-03-02 22:11:05','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6193',4,'post','',0),(6194,1,'2012-02-21 00:00:00','2012-02-21 00:00:00','','2012.2.21-deadline-for-estates','','inherit','open','closed','','2012-2-21-deadline-for-estates','','','2016-02-22 18:06:51','2016-02-22 18:06:51','',6195,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2012.2.21-deadline-for-estates.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6195,1,'2012-02-21 13:29:53','2012-02-21 13:29:53','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>The Internal Revenue Service today issued guidance that allows certain estates of married individuals who died during the first six months of 2011 an extension of the deadline to make the portability election.</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2012.2.21-deadline-for-estates.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2012.2.21-deadline-for-estates.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\"></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The portability election passes along a decedent’s unused estate and gift tax exclusion amount to a surviving spouse. An extension is available to estates of married individuals with assets of $5 million or less, but only if the decedent died in the first six months of 2011, and the executor files Form 4768 requesting an extension no later than 15 months after the decedent\'s date of death. The extra time is available to an estate even if the estate did not request an automatic six-month filing extension on Form 4768 prior to the regular nine-month filing deadline. As a result, these estates will now have until 15 months after the date of death, rather than the usual nine months, to make the election by filing an estate tax return on Form 706. Thus, the first estate tax returns for estates eligible to make the portability election (because the date of death is after Dec. 31, 2010) are now due on Monday, April 2, 2012. Affected estates should submit both a properly-prepared Form 4768 and Form 706 to the IRS no later than 15 months after the decedent’s date of death. Further details are in Notice 2012-21, posted today on www.IRS.gov.  </p>','IRS Extends Deadline for Estates to  File Estate Tax Return to Make Portability Election Benefiting Surviving Spouses','','publish','open','open','','irs-extends-deadline-for-estates-to-file-estate-tax-return-to-make-portability-election-benefiting-surviving-spouses','','','2016-03-02 22:11:20','2016-03-02 22:11:20','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6195',4,'post','',0),(6196,1,'2012-02-02 00:00:00','2012-02-02 00:00:00','','2012.2.29-mortgage-debt-forgiveness','','inherit','open','closed','','2012-2-29-mortgage-debt-forgiveness','','','2016-02-22 18:06:51','2016-02-22 18:06:51','',6197,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2012.2.29-mortgage-debt-forgiveness.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6197,1,'2012-02-02 13:29:53','2012-02-02 13:29:53','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Canceled debt is normally taxable to you, but there are exceptions.  One of those exceptions is available to homeowners whose mortgage debt is partly or entirely forgiven during tax years 2007 through 2012.</p>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2012.2.29-mortgage-debt-forgiveness.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"pdfs/featured_posts/pdfs/featured_posts/2012.2.29-mortgage-debt-forgiveness.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><i><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\" new=\"New\" lang=\"EN-GB\"> </span></i></strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Here are 10 facts homeowners should know about Mortgage Debt Forgiveness:</p> <ol style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <li>Normally, debt forgiveness results in taxable income. However, under the Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act of 2007, you may be able to exclude up to $2 million of debt forgiven on your principal residence.</li> <li>The limit is $1 million for a married person filing a separate return.</li> <li>You may exclude debt reduced through mortgage restructuring, as well as mortgage debt forgiven in a foreclosure.</li> <li>To qualify, the debt must have been used to buy, build or substantially improve your principal residence and be secured by that residence.</li> <li>Refinanced debt proceeds used for the purpose of substantially improving your principal residence also qualify for the exclusion.</li> <li>Proceeds of refinanced debt used for other purposes – for example, to pay off credit card debt – do not qualify for the exclusion.</li> <li>If you qualify, claim the special exclusion by filling out Form 982, Reduction of Tax Attributes Due to Discharge of Indebtedness, and attach it to your federal income tax return for the tax year in which the qualified debt was forgiven.</li> <li>Debt forgiven on second homes, rental property, business property, credit cards or car loans does not qualify for the tax relief provision.  In some cases, however, other tax relief provisions – such as insolvency – may be applicable.  IRS Form 982 provides more details about these provisions.</li> <li>If your debt is reduced or eliminated you normally will receive a year-end statement, Form 1099-C, Cancellation of Debt, from your lender.  By law, this form must show the amount of debt forgiven and the fair market value of any property foreclosed.</li> <li>Examine the Form 1099-C carefully.  Notify the lender immediately if any of the information shown is incorrect.  You should pay particular attention to the amount of debt forgiven in Box 2 as well as the value listed for your home in Box 7.</li> </ol> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">For more information about the Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act of 2007, visit <a href=\"http://links.govdelivery.com/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTIwMjI4LjU4NDE0NDEmbWVzc2FnZWlkPU1EQi1QUkQtQlVMLTIwMTIwMjI4LjU4NDE0NDEmZGF0YWJhc2VpZD0xMDAxJnNlcmlhbD0xNjg5MjUyNCZlbWFpbGlkPW5hdGhhbi5vbGFuc2VuQHJhY2tsYXcuY29tJnVzZXJpZD1uYXRoYW4ub2xhbnNlbkByYWNrbGF3LmNvbSZmbD0mZXh0cmE9TXVsdGl2YXJpYXRlSWQ9JiYm&&&130&&&http://www.irs.gov\">www.irs.gov</a>. IRS Publication 4681, Canceled Debts, Foreclosures, Repossessions and Abandonments, is also an excellent resource.</p>','Mortgage Debt Forgiveness: 10 Key Facts','','publish','open','open','','mortgage-debt-forgiveness-10-key-facts','','','2016-03-02 22:10:21','2016-03-02 22:10:21','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6197',3,'post','',0),(6198,1,'2012-03-15 00:00:00','2012-03-15 00:00:00','','2012.3.15.-transfer-life-estate','','inherit','open','closed','','2012-3-15-transfer-life-estate','','','2016-02-22 18:06:51','2016-02-22 18:06:51','',6199,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/2012.3.15.-transfer-life-estate.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6199,1,'2012-03-15 13:29:53','2012-03-15 13:29:53','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">A Medicaid applicant was determined to have made an uncompensated transfer, thereby resulting in an imposed penalty period, after he recorded a deed transferring his residence to his children and reserving a life estate for himself.</p>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/2012.3.15.-transfer-life-estate.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/2012.3.15.-transfer-life-estate.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><i><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\" new=\"New\" lang=\"EN-GB\"> </span></i></strong></p> <p><strong>Fimon v. Commissioner of Minnesota Department of Human Services (Minn. App. Ct., No. A11–561, Oct. 24, 2011).</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts:</strong> In May of 2003,  Mr. Rodney Fimon executed a deed that transferred the ownership of his  residence to his two sons and himself as joint tenants.  By owning the  property jointly with both of his sons, Mr. Fimon maintained an  ownership interest in the residence.  Over six years later, in July of  2009, Mr. Fimon prepared a subsequent deed, this time transferring his  remaining interest in the residence to his two sons and reserving a life  estate for himself.  He claimed that the 2009 deed was prepared in  order to correct the 2003 deed; however, a life estate ownership (as  opposed to the former joint tenancy ownership) is considered an exempt  asset for the purposes of Medicaid eligibility.  Several months later,  Mr. Fimon applied for Medicaid benefits, and he was denied.  The state  of Minnesota determined that the transfer of the residence formerly  owned as a joint tenant, without compensation from his sons, was an  uncompensated transfer, and therefore the state imposed a penalty period  on Mr. Fimon.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Mr. Fimon appealed this decision,  arguing that the 2009 deed was prepared in order to correct the 2003  deed.  The state denied the appeal, and the trial court affirmed the  state’s decision. Mr. Fimon then appealed to the Minnesota Court of  Appeals.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Court’s Decision: </strong> The  Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the trial court,  determining that the evidence presented supported the notion that Mr.  Fimon transferred his joint tenancy interest to his sons for less than  fair market value, and retained a life estate interest because such  ownership is an exempt asset for the determination of Medicaid benefits.   Since there was no viable evidence that the initial 2003 deed was  intended to reserve a life estate for Mr. Fimon, the subsequent deed had  the effect of changing his interest in the property, rather than simply  correcting a clerical error.  This penalty period may have been avoided  if Mr. Fimon had consulted an elder law attorney and properly planned  for his Medicaid eligibility prior to applying for benefits.</p>','Court Rejects Claim That Transfer Reserving Life Estate Simply Corrected Earlier Deed','','publish','open','open','','court-rejects-claim-that-transfer-reserving-life-estate-simply-corrected-earlier-deed','','','2016-03-02 22:11:36','2016-03-02 22:11:36','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6199',4,'post','',0),(6200,1,'2012-03-20 00:00:00','2012-03-20 00:00:00','','2012.3.20-medicaid-community-spouse','','inherit','open','closed','','2012-3-20-medicaid-community-spouse','','','2016-02-22 18:06:51','2016-02-22 18:06:51','',6201,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/2012.3.20-medicaid-community-spouse.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6201,1,'2012-03-20 13:29:53','2012-03-20 13:29:53','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">After settling the federal claims in a Medicaid case, a U.S. district court remanded the remaining issues back to the state court in Indiana since the case involved significant issues concerning the transfer of property to the community spouse that would ultimately affect the administration of Medicaid benefits in Indiana.</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/2012.3.20-medicaid-community-spouse.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/2012.3.20-medicaid-community-spouse.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Novak v. Indiana Family and Social Services Administration (U.S. Dist. Ct., S.D. Ind., No. 1:10–cv–677–RLY–DKL, Feb. 29, 2012).</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts: </strong> Mr. Novak, the Medicaid applicant, obtained an Order from a state court in Indiana that permitted his legal guardian to transfer all of Mr. Novak’s assets (retaining only $1,000) to his wife, to be applied for her care and support.  The following year, Mr. Novak applied for Medicaid benefits and his application was denied.  The reason for his ineligibility was the transfer of resources to his wife the previous year.  Following this disconcerting decision, his wife filed an appeal on his behalf, and the case was removed to federal court.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Court’s Decision: </strong> The federal court ultimately ordered that the case be remanded back to the state court of Indiana since the final undecided issue was the judicial review of a state administrative agency decision denying Medicaid eligibility.  Mrs. Novak requested that the federal court retain jurisdiction and rule on the remaining issue, claiming that the judicial economy would be better served if they remained in federal court.  Since the case was already on the docket for 18 months, and Mrs. Novak was 82 years of age, they argued that they would be prejudiced by the additional delay caused by the remand.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The federal court denied their request, and remanded the case back to state court.  In remanding the case, the court determined that the final case will involve two issues:  (i) \"When can a person petition a court for an order approving the transfer of assets for the benefit of the community spouse?\" and (ii) if assets can be transferred prior to an assessment, \"whether the assets which the state court ordered transferred must actually be transferred in order for the Community Spouse Resource Allowance to be calculated on the basis of that state court order.\"  According to the federal court, the outcome of these issues will have lasting effect on the administration of Medicaid benefits in Indiana, so any potential prejudice against the Novaks was outweighed.</p>','Medicaid Eligibility:  Federal v. State Court Authority on the Effect of Lifetime Transfers to a Community Spouse','','publish','open','open','','medicaid-eligibility-federal-v-state-court-authority-on-the-effect-of-lifetime-transfers-to-a-community-spouse','','','2016-03-02 22:12:08','2016-03-02 22:12:08','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6201',4,'post','',0),(6202,1,'2012-04-04 00:00:00','2012-04-04 00:00:00','','2012.4.4-state-cannot-recover','','inherit','open','closed','','2012-4-4-state-cannot-recover','','','2016-02-22 18:06:51','2016-02-22 18:06:51','',6203,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/2012.4.4-state-cannot-recover.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6203,1,'2012-04-04 13:29:53','2012-04-04 13:29:53','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>An Idaho district court ruled that the state cannot recover assets from the estate of a Medicaid recipient’s spouse since those assets were transferred by the Medicaid recipient to her husband prior to her death.</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/2012.4.4-state-cannot-recover.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/2012.4.4-state-cannot-recover.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\"></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>In Re: Estate of Perry (Idaho Dist. Ct., 4th Dist., No. CV-IE-2009-05214, March 16, 2011).</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts.</strong>  Mr. and Mrs. Perry owned joint property, which was transferred to Mr. Perry individually when Mrs. Perry moved into a nursing home.  Soon thereafter, Mrs. Perry applied for and began receiving Medicaid benefits.  Mr. Perry predeceased Mrs. Perry and, upon his death, the property was sold as a part of his estate.  The state then filed a claim against Mr. Perry’s estate in an attempt to recover over $100,000 in Medicaid benefits paid on behalf of Mrs. Perry.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Since Mrs. Perry had an interest in the property at one time during the marriage (before she applied for Medicaid benefits), the state argued that it could recover the portion of the property from Mr. Perry’s estate that represented her prior ownership interest.  In response, the personal representative of the estate asserted that the state could recover no more than the amount equal to Mrs. Perry\'s interest in the home at the time of her death, which was nothing.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Procedural History.</strong>  The magistrate division of Idaho\'s fourth judicial district determined that the state\'s authority to recover Medicaid benefits paid on behalf of Mrs. Perry was limited only to those assets that were transferred to Mr. Perry upon her death.  The state could not recover lifetime gifts made by Mrs. Perry to her husband.  The state appealed this decision and, while the appeal was pending, Mrs. Perry passed away.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Court’s Ruling.</strong>  The Idaho District Court affirmed the fourth judicial district, holding that the definition of \"estate\" in federal Medicaid law does not permit the state to claim reimbursement from property interests that Mrs. Perry transferred before her death.  Although the state argued that its laws allowed the recovery of property transferred to a spouse during life (if that property was previously community property), the Court disagreed and determined that, since there was a conflict between federal law and Idaho’s law, federal law must prevail over state law.</p>','Assets Transferred Before Medicaid Recipient Died Cannot be Recovered by State','','publish','open','open','','assets-transferred-before-medicaid-recipient-died-cannot-be-recovered-by-state','','','2016-03-02 22:12:46','2016-03-02 22:12:46','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6203',4,'post','',0),(6204,1,'2012-04-17 00:00:00','2012-04-17 00:00:00','','2012.4.18-automatic-claim-challenge','','inherit','open','closed','','2012-4-18-automatic-claim-challenge','','','2016-02-22 18:06:51','2016-02-22 18:06:51','',6205,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/2012.4.18-automatic-claim-challenge.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6205,1,'2016-02-25 13:29:53','2016-02-25 13:29:53','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">﻿﻿﻿The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that when a personal injury settlement does not include an allocation of past medical expenses, a Medicaid recipient is entitled to an adversarial proceeding to challenge the state\'s automatic claim for receipt of one-third of the settlement.</p>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/2012.4.18-automatic-claim-challenge.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/2012.4.18-automatic-claim-challenge.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><i><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\" new=\"New\" lang=\"EN-GB\"> </span></i></strong></p> <p><strong>E.M.A. v. Cansler (4th Cir., No. 10-1865, March 22, 2012).</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts.</strong>  E.M.A. was seriously injured during her birth and immediately began receiving Medicaid benefits.  When she was six years old, her representatives settled a medical malpractice action against her doctors for $2.8 million.  By the time the settlement was complete, the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) had provided E.M.A. with approximately $1.9 million in medical care benefits.  Pursuant to state law, DHHS is entitled to collect up to one-third of the settlement as reimbursement for past medical expenses, so DHHS asserted a lien in the amount of $933,333.33 against E.M.A.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Procedural History.</strong>  The representatives of E.M.A. filed a suit in federal court seeking a declaratory judgment and an injunction preventing DHHS from asserting its claim against the settlement funds.  E.M.A. argued that because North Carolina common law prevents a minor from asserting a cause of action for past medical expenses, none of the settlement proceeds could be attributed to her past medical expenses.  In the alternative, E.M.A. claimed that the state could not recover one-third of her settlement because caselaw necessitates a proportional analysis of the settlement to determine the proper amount of the lien.  The district court granted summary judgment in favor of DHHS, relying on a previous North Carolina Supreme Court decision upholding the one-third allocation.  E.M.A. appealed.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Court’s Decision</strong>.  After dismissing E.M.A.\'s common law argument, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court and remanded the case for a hearing that will allow E.M.A. to rebut the one-third presumption.  The court specified that \"on remand, the district court must determine the true value of the case in allocating medical expenses,” but caselaw “does not mandate such a ‘proportional analysis’ . . . the sum certain allocable to medical expenses must be determined by way of a fair and impartial adversarial procedure that affords the Medicaid beneficiary an opportunity to rebut the statutory presumption in favor of the state.\"</p>','Medicaid Recipient Entitled to Challenge Automatic Claim by State for Share of Settlement','','publish','open','open','','medicaid-recipient-entitled-to-challenge-automatic-claim-by-state-for-share-of-settlement','','','2016-02-25 13:29:53','2016-02-25 13:29:53','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6205',3,'post','',0),(6206,1,'2012-05-08 00:00:00','2012-05-08 00:00:00','','2012.5.8-medicaid-penalty-period','','inherit','open','closed','','2012-5-8-medicaid-penalty-period','','','2016-02-22 18:06:51','2016-02-22 18:06:51','',6207,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/2012.5.8-medicaid-penalty-period.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6207,1,'2012-05-08 13:29:53','2012-05-08 13:29:53','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">An appeals court in Massachusetts ruled that (1) a Medicaid applicant was subject to a penalty period for assets that were transferred to a trust as part of a court-approved estate plan, and (2) the penalty period would not begin until after she had spent down her excess assets.</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/2012.5.8-medicaid-penalty-period.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/2012.5.8-medicaid-penalty-period.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Lombardi v. Director of Office of Medicaid (Mass. App. Ct., No. 11–P–1208, April 17, 2012).</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts.</strong>  Catherine Lombardi, who had a court-appointed guardian, transferred $17,400 to a realty trust to benefit her children as part of a court-approved estate plan.  Mrs. Lombardi then applied for Medicaid benefits and the state assessed a penalty period based on the uncompensated transfer to the realty trust.  The state also determined that the applicant would be required to spend down her excess assets before the penalty period would begin.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Procedural History.</strong>  Ms. Lombardi appealed the determination that she would be subject to a penalty period, arguing that the court cannot consider a court-approved transfer of assets when determining Medicaid eligibility and that, therefore, the state improperly imposed a double penalty.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Court’s Decision. </strong> The Appeals Court of Massachusetts affirmed the decision, holding that the penalty period was properly applied to Mrs. Lombardi.  According to the Court, it did not matter that the transfer was \"court-approved\" because \"a probate judge cannot insulate asset transfers from being considered in the determination of eligibility for [Medicaid].\" The court also ruled that the penalty period properly began after Ms. Lombardi spent down her excess assets.</p>','Medicaid Penalty Period Applies to Assets Transferred as Part of Court-Approved Estate Plan','','publish','open','open','','medicaid-penalty-period-applies-to-assets-transferred-as-part-of-court-approved-estate-plan','','','2016-03-03 16:35:22','2016-03-03 16:35:22','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6207',4,'post','',0),(6208,1,'2012-05-16 00:00:00','2012-05-16 00:00:00','','2012.5.16-home-health-survey','','inherit','open','closed','','2012-5-16-home-health-survey','','','2016-02-22 18:06:52','2016-02-22 18:06:52','',6209,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/2012.5.16-home-health-survey.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6209,1,'2012-05-16 13:29:53','2012-05-16 13:29:53','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>Many seniors who require long-term care would rather remain at home than move to an assisted living or nursing facility; however, the selection of which company to hire for in-home assistance can be a difficult decision for family members to make.  The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ (CMS) have prepared a national survey requesting that patients describe their experiences with certain Medicare-certified home health agencies, and these results are now available on the agency’s Quality Care Finder website.</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/2012.5.16-home-health-survey.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/2012.5.16-home-health-survey.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\"></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"http://www.medicare.gov/quality-care-finder\">www.medicare.gov/quality-care-finder</a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The survey asks patients questions such as:</p> <ul style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <li>Whether their home health team gave care in a professional way;</li> <li>Whether their team communicated well with them in a courteous and respectful way;</li> <li>Whether the team discussed medicines, pain, and home safety; and</li> <li>Whether the patient would recommend the agency to friends and family.</li> </ul> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The survey results, which resource will be updated every four months with new information, will supplement the information already available on the agency’s Home Health Compare website, located at <a href=\"http://www.medicare.gov/homehealthcompare/search.aspx\">http://www.medicare.gov/homehealthcompare/search.aspx</a>.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">CMS has provided that the survey results were designed to create incentives for home health agencies to improve their quality of care, as well as to give patients additional information so they are aware of the types of care they will receive from various agencies.  The survey results will offer prospective patients, their families and caregivers the chance to compare home health agencies by reviewing such results.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The initial survey results cover the period from October 2010 to September 2011.  Currently, patients are generally giving their home health agencies favorable scores.  For example, 84 percent of patients gave their home health agency a rating of 9 or 10 on a scale from 0 (lowest) to 10 (highest), and 80 percent of patients said “yes, they would definitely recommend the home health agency to friends.”</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">For more information on the survey, visit <a href=\"https://homehealthcahps.org/\">https://homehealthcahps.org</a>.</p>','Results of Home Health Agency Patient Surveys Available to Medicare Recipients','','publish','open','open','','results-of-home-health-agency-patient-surveys-available-to-medicare-recipients','','','2016-03-03 16:35:42','2016-03-03 16:35:42','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6209',4,'post','',0),(6210,1,'2012-04-17 00:00:00','2012-04-17 00:00:00','','2012.5.30-offer-in-compromise','','inherit','open','closed','','2012-5-30-offer-in-compromise','','','2016-02-22 18:06:52','2016-02-22 18:06:52','',6211,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/2012.5.30-offer-in-compromise.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6211,1,'2016-02-25 13:29:53','2016-02-25 13:29:53','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The IRS has expanded its “Fresh Start” initiative, which is designed to help struggling taxpayers who owe taxes by offering more flexible terms in its Offer In Compromise (“OIC”) program.  These changes may allow some taxpayers to resolve their income tax problems in as little as two years, as compared to four or five years in the past. </p>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/2012.5.30-offer-in-compromise.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/2012.5.30-offer-in-compromise.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Specifically, the IRS has revised the calculation used to determine a taxpayer’s future income, and expanded the amount of allowable living expenses.  The IRS will now also consider credit card payments, bank fees and charges, student loan payments, and state and local delinquent taxes in determining OIC eligibility.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In general, an OIC is an agreement between a taxpayer and the IRS that settles the taxpayer’s tax liabilities for less than the full amount owed.  An OIC is generally not accepted if the IRS believes that the liability can be paid in full through a payment agreement or in a lump sum.  When deciding whether to accept an OIC, the IRS examines the taxpayer’s income and assets to make a determination of the taxpayer’s Reasonable Collection Potential (“RCP”).</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Where financial analysis is needed to determine a taxpayer’s ability to pay, the IRS uses the Allowable Living Expense standards, which provide consistency in collection determinations by incorporating average expenditures for basic necessities for citizens in similar geographic areas.  These standards are used when evaluating installment agreement and offer in compromise requests.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Fresh Start OIC initiative focuses on the financial analysis used to determine which taxpayers qualify for an OIC.  When the IRS calculates a taxpayer’s RCP, for offers paid in five or fewer months, it will now look at only one year of future income, rather than four years.  For offers paid in six to 24 months, the IRS will now look at only two years of future income, rather than five years.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The IRS has also made other changes to the OIC program, including narrowed parameters and clarification of when a dissipated asset (i.e., an asset that is no longer available to pay a tax liability because the taxpayer has sold, given away, or spent it on non-priority debts) will be included in the RCP calculation.  In addition, equity in income producing assets will generally not be included in the calculation of the RCP for an on-going business.  Finally, the new OIC initiative also provides that the National Standard miscellaneous allowance has been expanded to include allowance for expenses such as credit card payments and bank fees and charges.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">While not a panacea to all past due income tax liabilities, the liberalized OIC terms will certainly allow many taxpayers to make an Offer In Compromise who were previously unable to qualify.  For additional information on the Fresh Start initiative, and other IRS announcements, visit <a href=\"http://www.irs.gov\">www.irs.gov</a></p>','IRS Liberalizes Offer In Compromise Terms Under “Fresh Start” Initiative','','publish','open','open','','irs-liberalizes-offer-in-compromise-terms-under-fresh-start-initiative','','','2016-02-25 13:29:53','2016-02-25 13:29:53','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6211',4,'post','',0),(6212,1,'2012-07-10 00:00:00','2012-07-10 00:00:00','','2012.7.10-medicare-surtax','','inherit','open','closed','','2012-7-10-medicare-surtax','','','2016-02-22 18:06:52','2016-02-22 18:06:52','',6213,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/2012.7.10-medicare-surtax.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6213,1,'2012-07-10 13:29:52','2012-07-10 13:29:52','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which the Supreme Court largely declared constitutional last month, contains several new taxes.  Among the most significant is the new 3.8% Medicare surtax on investment income which takes effect January 1, 2013.</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/2012.7.10-medicare-surtax.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/2012.7.10-medicare-surtax.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" width=\"15\" height=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The new Medicare tax, designed to raise revenue to offset the cost of health care reform, applies to individuals earning more than $200,000 and married couples earning more than $250,000.  The Medicare tax is imposed on the <em>lesser</em> of:</p> <ul> <li>Net investment income for the tax year; or</li> <li>The amount by which the modified adjusted gross income (“MAGI”) exceeds $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for married couples.</li> </ul> <p>Net investment income includes the following items, reduced by deductions allocated to such income:</p> <ul> <li>Interest, dividends, royalties, annuities, and rents</li> <li>Income derived from passive activities</li> <li>Trading of financial instruments and commodities</li> <li>Net capital gains derived from the disposition of property not held in an active trade or business</li> </ul> <p>Net investment income does not include:</p> <ul> <li>Active trade and/or business income</li> <li>Any of the above sources of income (e.g. interest, dividends, capital gains, etc.) if derived from an active trade and/or business</li> <li>Distributions from IRAs or other qualified retirement plans</li> <li>Any income taken into account for self-employment tax purposes</li> </ul> <p>Examples:</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Single Individual. </strong> John has $215,000 of dividend, interest, and rental income with no other sources of income.  The 3.8% Medicare surtax applies to $15,000 of income since it is the lesser of net investment income of $215,000 or the excess of the $200,000 MAGI threshold.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Married Filing Jointly without Net Investment Income.</strong>  John and Jane file a joint return reporting $300,000 in salaries and do not have any net investment income.  The 3.8% Medicare surtax does not apply.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Married Filing Jointly with Net Investment Income.</strong>  John and Jane file a joint return reporting $225,000 in salaries and $75,000 of interest, dividend, and rental income for a total MAGI of $300,000.  The 3.8% Medicare surtax applies to $50,000 of income because it is the lesser of the couple’s $75,000 of net investment income or the excess over the $250,000 MAGI threshold.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>IRA Distributions.</strong>  In 2013, Michael, a single taxpayer age 69, has investment income of $150,000 and is not subject to the Medicare surtax.  In 2014 when he turns 70 ½, Michael takes a $125,000 required minimum distribution from his IRA in addition to $150,000 of investment income.  In this case, the 3.8% Medicare surtax applies to $75,000 of income because it is the lesser of his $150,000 net investment income or the excess over the $200,000 MAGI threshold.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Even though various provisions of The 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act are likely to be challenged well into the future, it is best to consider the new Medicare surtax as being permanent and plan accordingly.</p>','Individual Taxpayers and The 3.8% Medicare Surtax','','publish','open','open','','individual-taxpayers-and-the-38-medicare-surtax','','','2016-03-03 16:36:20','2016-03-03 16:36:20','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6213',3,'post','',0),(6420,1,'2016-02-23 21:22:14','2016-02-23 21:22:14','<em>Kevin Rack</em> was elected to serve a 3-year term on the Board of Directors for the Central Business District Association of Virginia Beach. Kevin has been a leader in many community organizations and activities, and he will be contributing his knowledge and experience to support the goals of the businesses and professions which make up the Association.','Rack Elected to Board of Directors for Beach CBDA','','publish','open','open','','rack-elected-to-board-of-directors-for-beach-cbda','','','2016-02-25 13:29:56','2016-02-25 13:29:56','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6420',0,'post','',0),(6421,1,'2016-02-23 21:22:14','2016-02-23 21:22:14','<em>Kevin Rack</em> was elected to serve a 3-year term on the Board of Directors for the Central Business District Association of Virginia Beach. Kevin has been a leader in many community organizations and activities, and he will be contributing his knowledge and experience to support the goals of the businesses and professions which make up the Association.','Rack Elected to Board of Directors for Beach CBDA','','inherit','closed','closed','','6420-revision-v1','','','2016-02-23 21:22:14','2016-02-23 21:22:14','',6420,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/23/6420-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6422,1,'2016-02-23 21:22:38','2016-02-23 21:22:38','Kevin B. Rack served as Master of Ceremonies for the <em>Bringing Breast Cancer to Light</em> event held September 25, 2010 at the First Baptist Church of Norfolk. The event included presentations by Jennifer Reed, M.D., FACS, Michael Danso, M.D., and Lauries Jesz, RN, CBNC and included a fashion show in which the models were beautiful breast cancer survivors. The events aimed to provide essential information about early detection, treatment and prevention of breast cancer Girl Scouts from local troop 164 were able to use this event to achieve their Gold Award which compares in recognition to the Boy Scouts award of Eagle Scout.','Bringing Breast Cancer to Light','','publish','open','open','','bringing-breast-cancer-to-light','','','2016-02-25 13:29:56','2016-02-25 13:29:56','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6422',0,'post','',0),(6215,1,'2012-07-07 00:00:00','2012-07-07 00:00:00','','2012.7.7-estate-portability-regulations','','inherit','open','closed','','2012-7-7-estate-portability-regulations','','','2016-02-22 18:06:52','2016-02-22 18:06:52','',6216,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/2012.7.7-estate-portability-regulations.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6216,1,'2012-07-07 13:29:53','2012-07-07 13:29:53','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>IRS has issued long-awaited temporary and proposed regulations providing guidance on the requirements for electing portability of a deceased spousal unused exclusion amount (“DSUEA”) to the surviving spouse, and on the rules for the surviving spouse\'s use of this DSUEA.</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/2012.7.7-estate-portability-regulations.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/2012.7.7-estate-portability-regulations.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\"></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Background on the portability election.</strong>  The Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010 added a new “portability feature” for estates of decedents dying after 2010 and before 2013, under which the applicable exclusion amount is the sum of (1) the “basic exclusion amount” (i.e., $5 million with an adjustment for inflation after 2011), and (2) in the case of a surviving spouse, the DSUEA.  (I.R.C. § 2010(c)(2))</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The DSUEA <em>is the lesser of</em>:</p> <ol> <li>(1) the basic exclusion amount, or</li> <li>(2) the excess of (i) the basic exclusion amount of the last deceased spouse of the surviving spouse, over (ii) the amount with respect to which the tentative tax is determined under I.R.C. § 2001(b)(1) on the estate of such deceased spouse. (I.R.C. §2010(c)(4)).</li> </ol> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">A surviving spouse may use the DSUEA in addition to her own $5 million exclusion (as indexed) for taxable transfers made during life or at death, but if a surviving spouse is predeceased by more than one spouse, the amount of unused exclusion that is available for use by the surviving spouse is limited to the lesser of $5 million or the unused exclusion of the last deceased spouse.  (I.R.C. § 2010(c)(4)).  The DSUEA cannot, however, be taken into account by a surviving spouse unless the executor of the estate of the deceased spouse elects to do so by timely filing an estate tax return on which the DSUEA is computed.  Once filed, the IRS has the authority to examine the estate tax return of the deceased, to make determinations with respect to the calculation of the DSUEA, even after the statute of limitations on assessment has expired.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Here are some of the highlights of the temporary regulations on the DSUEA.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Making the portability election.</strong>  Treas. Reg. § 20.2010-2T(a), requires an executor electing portability to make that election on a timely-filed estate tax return.  The last return filed by the return due date, including extensions actually granted, will supersede any previously-filed return. Thus, an executor generally may supersede a previously-filed portability election on a subsequent timely-filed estate tax return.  The estate tax return must be filed within nine months of the decedent’s date of death, unless an extension of time for filing has been granted.  A portability election is irrevocable once the due date (as extended) of the estate tax return has passed.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Filing of complete and properly prepared estate tax return.</strong>  A number of commenters have asked the IRS for clarification of what was required under the Notice 2011-82 rule that the estate of a decedent (survived by a spouse) makes the portability election by timely filing a “complete and properly-prepared estate tax return” for the decedent’s estate.  Commentators also asked for relief for estates that are not required to file a return, but are doing so only to elect portability of the decedent\'s DSUEA.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In response, Treas. Reg. § 20.2010-2T(a)(7), provides that an estate tax return prepared in accordance with all applicable requirements is considered a “complete and properly-prepared” estate tax return.   Executors of estates that are not otherwise required to file an estate tax return under do not have to report the value of certain property that qualifies for the marital or charitable deduction.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">An executor who chooses to make use of this special rule in filing an estate tax return must estimate the total value of the gross estate (including the values of the property that do not have to be reported on the estate tax return under this provision), based on a determination made in good faith and with due diligence regarding the value of all of the assets includible in the gross estate.  The Instructions for Form 706 will provide ranges of dollar values, and the executor must identify on the estate tax return the particular range within which falls the executor’s best estimate of the total gross estate.  By signing the return, the executor will be certifying, under penalties of perjury, that the estimate falls within the identified range of values to the best of the executor\'s knowledge and belief.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Executor responsible for making portability election.</strong>  The administrator that is appointed, qualified, and acting within the U. S. for the decedent\'s estate (an appointed executor), may file an estate tax return to elect portability or to opt to have the portability election not apply. If there is no appointed executor, any person in actual or constructive possession of any property of the decedent (a “nonappointed executor”) may file the estate tax return to elect portability or to opt to have the portability election not apply. A portability election made by a non-appointed executor cannot be superseded by a contrary election made by another non-appointed executor of that same decedent\'s estate. (Treas. Reg. § 20.2010-2T(a)(6)).</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>How to opt out of portability election.</strong>  Under Treas. Reg. § 20.2010-2T(a)(3), an executor must make an affirmative statement on the estate tax return signifying the decision to have the portability election not apply.  If no estate tax return is required, not filing an estate tax return will be considered to be an affirmative statement signifying the decision not to make a portability election.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Use of the DSUEA by the surviving spouse.</strong>  Under Treas. Reg. § 20.2010-3T(c)(1) and Treas. Reg. § 20.2010-2T(d)(1), a portability election made by the executor of a decedent’s estate is effective as of the date of the decedent’s death.  Thus, the DSUEA of a decedent survived by a spouse may be included in determining the applicable exclusion amount of the surviving spouse, subject to any applicable limitations, with respect to all transfers occurring after the death of the decedent, if the executor of the decedent\'s estate makes a portability election and the election is not superseded by the executor of the decedent’s estate before the due date of the return, including extensions.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Under Treas. Reg. § 20.2010-1T(d)(5), the term “last deceased spouse” referred to in I.R.C. § 2010(c)(4)(B)(i) means the most recently deceased individual who was married to the surviving spouse at that individual’s death, except that an individual dying before calendar year 2011 cannot be considered the last deceased spouse of such surviving spouse.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Other provisions.  </strong>The Regulations also discuss the DSUEA where there are multiple spouses and previously applied DSUEAs, the IRS’s authority to examine returns of deceased spouses, applicability of the portability rules to nonresidents who are not citizens, and the applicability of portability in case of qualified domestic trusts.</p>','New, Temporary Regulations Explain Estate Tax Portability Election','','publish','open','open','','new-temporary-regulations-explain-estate-tax-portability-election','','','2016-03-03 16:36:03','2016-03-03 16:36:03','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6216',3,'post','',0),(6217,1,'2012-07-20 00:00:00','2012-07-20 00:00:00','','2012.7.20-promissory-note-counts','','inherit','open','closed','','2012-7-20-promissory-note-counts','','','2016-02-22 18:06:52','2016-02-22 18:06:52','',6218,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/2012.7.20-promissory-note-counts.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6218,1,'2012-07-20 13:29:53','2012-07-20 13:29:53','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">A U.S. district court rules that a Medicaid applicant whose son gave him a promissory note in exchange for rental property had excess resources.</p>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/2012.7.20-promissory-note-counts.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/2012.7.20-promissory-note-counts.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <p><strong>Gragert v. Hendrick (U.S. Dist. Ct., W.D. Okla., No. CIV-11-984-C, May 24, 2012).</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts.</strong>  George Gragert owned a rental property at the time he entered a nursing home and applied for Medicaid.  On May 1, 2011, Mr. Gragert\'s son gave Mr. Gragert\'s wife a promissory note in which he promised to pay $28,800 in 96 monthly installments of $330.28. One the same day, the Gragerts deeded the rental property, which was worth $22,800, to their son.  The state denied Mr. Gragert\'s Medicaid application, finding that he had excess resources due to the promissory note.  Mr. Gragert sued the state in federal court, and both parties asked for summary judgment.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Court’s Decision. </strong> The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma granted summary judgment in favor of the state, holding that Mr. Gragert is not eligible for Medicaid. According to the court, a promissory note is typically considered an available resource, and Mr. Gragert offered no evidence to rebut this presumption.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Virginia Law. </strong> In some situations and under certain state laws, it may be proper to implement a strategy structured around the preparation of a promissory note as a short-term planning tool to contribute toward the costs of long-term care during a Medicaid ineligibility penalty period.  In this scenario, the Medicaid applicant would transfer a portion of his or her estate as a gift (intentionally causing an ineligibility period), and then prepare a promissory note, as the maker, for the remaining portion of the estate.  The note would be structured to require monthly repayments in the amount needed to pay for long-term care for the duration of the ineligibility period, resulting in a completed gift upon the scheduled termination of the note.  However, even if a promissory note complies with the Deficit Reduction Act regulations, the note balance could still be deemed an available resource.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Unfortunately, the Virginia Medicaid Manual (S1140.300) provides an instruction to “[a]ssume that the value of a promissory note, loan or property agreement as a resource is its outstanding principal balance unless the individual furnishes reliable evidence that it has a CMV of less than the outstanding principal balance.”  Therefore, this strategy is not typically recommended in Virginia, as it is extremely risky and likely to trigger a lengthy penalty/ineligibility period that may extend well beyond what the applicant’s resources could sustain.</p>','Medicaid Applicant\'s Promissory Note is Considered Countable Resource','','publish','open','open','','medicaid-applicants-promissory-note-is-considered-countable-resource','','','2016-03-03 16:36:37','2016-03-03 16:36:37','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6218',5,'post','',0),(6219,1,'2012-07-25 13:29:53','2012-07-25 13:29:53','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>Nathan Moccia Shareholder of Rack & Moccia, P.C., will conduct a national teleconference for the National Business Institute on Wednesday August 1, 2012, titled \"Estate Planning for Blended Families\".</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"pdfs/featured_posts/2012.76.11-nbi-announcement.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"pdfs/featured_posts/2012.76.11-nbi-announcement.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\"></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Blended families are becoming more “rule” than “exception.” Do you have the skills to help the the growing number of re-married spouses plan for their future?  This insightful program will arm you with the knowledge and a set of techniques that will allow you to customize your practice to fit this growing client base. <a href=\"http://www.nbi-sems.com/SemTeleDetails.aspx/R-60028ER|?ctname=SPKEM\">Click here</a> fore more information.</p> <p><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>Program Description</strong></span></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The teleconference will inform practitioners of the key provisions in pre- and post-marital agreements aimed to protect assets and plan bequests.  It will guide participants through the proper steps to ensure your clients biological children are not accidentally disinherited, while learning to anticipate and minimize the potential complications which stem from significant age and/or wealth difference between spouses.</p> <p><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>Program Outline<br /></strong></span></p> <ul style=\"list-style-type: circle;\"> <li>Pre-Nuptial and Post-Nuptial Agreements</li> <li>Common issues in estate planning for blended families</li> <li>Advanced estate planning issues</li> </ul>','Rack & Moccia,P.C. Attorney to conduct National teleconference','','publish','open','open','','rack-a-olansenpc-attorney-to-conduct-national-teleconference','','','2016-03-03 16:36:57','2016-03-03 16:36:57','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6219',2,'post','',0),(6220,1,'2012-08-30 00:00:00','2012-08-30 00:00:00','','2012.8.30-custodial-care','','inherit','open','closed','','2012-8-30-custodial-care','','','2016-02-22 18:06:52','2016-02-22 18:06:52','',6221,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/2012.8.30-custodial-care.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6221,1,'2012-08-30 13:29:53','2012-08-30 13:29:53','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>A U.S. Court of Appeals held that a nursing home patient was not entitled to coverage from her health insurance plan for her nursing home stay because she received primarily custodial care, not skilled nursing services.</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/2012.8.30-custodial-care.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/2012.8.30-custodial-care.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\"></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Becker v. Chrysler LLC Health Care Benefits Plan, 7th Cir., No. 11-2624 (Aug. 20, 2012).</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts.</strong>  Ms. Evelyn Jeranek received health insurance through her husband\'s employer.  The healthcare plan provided that it would not cover benefits for a terminally ill enrollee whose condition is primarily custodial and no longer requires skilled nursing service. Ms. Jeranek entered a nursing home suffering from congenital heart failure, among other maladies. She refused treatment several times, as well as her doctor\'s recommendation that she go to the hospital.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The nursing home submitted a claim to Ms. Jeranek\'s insurance company, which denied the claim after finding that Ms. Jeranek had a chronic stable condition that did not require skilled nursing care.  After Ms. Jeranek died, her personal representative sued the insurer, arguing that Ms. Jeranek was a complex patient that required the care of skilled nursing personnel.  The district court granted summary judgment to the insurance company, and Ms. Jeranek\'s personal representative appealed.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Court Determination. </strong> The U.S. Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit, affirmed the decision of the lower court, holding that the health insurance plan did not cover Ms. Jeranek\'s nursing home stay because she did not receive skilled nursing services.  According to the court, there is nothing in the plan that \"suggests that \'skilled nursing personnel\' equates with the provision of \'skilled nursing services,\'\" so there was a basis for the insurance company\'s conclusion that the care provided was entirely custodial.</p>','Nursing Home Patient Under Custodial Care Not Entitled to Coverage from Insurance','','publish','open','open','','nursing-home-patient-under-custodial-care-not-entitled-to-coverage-from-insurance','','','2016-03-03 16:37:14','2016-03-03 16:37:14','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6221',4,'post','',0),(6222,1,'2012-09-20 00:00:00','2012-09-20 00:00:00','','2012.9.20-caregiver-child-exemption','','inherit','open','closed','','2012-9-20-caregiver-child-exemption','','','2016-02-22 18:06:52','2016-02-22 18:06:52','',6223,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/2012.9.20-caregiver-child-exemption.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6223,1,'2012-09-20 13:29:53','2012-09-20 13:29:53','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">On appeal, the court reversed a lower court ruling by determining that the caregiver child exemption for the transfer of a house still applied because the Medicaid applicant\'s attorney-in-fact transferred the house, not the Medicaid applicant himself.</p>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/2012.9.20-caregiver-child-exemption.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/2012.9.20-caregiver-child-exemption.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" width=\"15\" height=\"15\" /></a></div> <p><strong>Dahly v. Anderson (N.D., No.20120013, Aug. 30,2012).</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts:</strong>  Wilfred and Geraldine Dahly appointed their son, Rick, to serve as their attorney-in-fact. In 2007, the couple began suffering from dementia and their daughter, LeAnn Greenwall, moved from Kentucky to live with and care for them under a written care agreement. Mrs. Dahly eventually entered a nursing home and Ms. Greenwall continued to care for Mr. Dahly.  In 2009, Rick, as attorney-in-fact, transferred Mrs. Dahly\'s interest in the home to Mr. Dahly.  In 2010, Rick transferred Mr. Dahly\'s interest in the home to Ms. Greenwell. Mr. Dahly then entered a nursing home, and Ms. Greenwell sold the home and gave half of the proceeds to Rick.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Mr. Dahly applied for Medicaid, but the state denied him benefits because the proceeds from the sale of the house were an available asset. Mr. Dahly appealed, arguing the caregiver child exemption for the transfer of the family home applied.  The state argued that the exemption did not apply because Mr. Dahly did not transfer the house himself; instead Rick transferred the house as attorney-in-fact, which created a presumption of undue influence. The trial court agreed, and Mr. Dahly appealed.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Ruling:  </strong>The Supreme Court of North Dakota reversed the ruling, holding the caregiver child exemption did apply. The court ruled that Mr. Dahly and Ms. Greenwall complied precisely with the requirements of the exemption and the state was attempting to \"circumvent a clear expression of federal law through an overly broad application of state trust law.\"  The court also noted that if the state\'s decision were upheld, then only mentally competent Medicaid applicants could use the caregiver child exemption.  One justice dissented, arguing the exemption should not apply because the transfer was not to allow the daughter to remain in the home, \"but rather to divide the applicant\'s assets among his children.\"</p>','Caregiver Child Exemption Applies Even Though Attorney-in-Fact Transferred House','','publish','open','open','','caregiver-child-exemption-applies-even-though-attorney-in-fact-transferred-house','','','2016-03-03 16:37:38','2016-03-03 16:37:38','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6223',3,'post','',0),(6224,1,'2012-10-10 00:00:00','2012-10-10 00:00:00','','2012.10.10-treasury-responds-claims','','inherit','open','closed','','2012-10-10-treasury-responds-claims','','','2016-02-22 18:06:53','2016-02-22 18:06:53','',6226,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2012.10.10-treasury-responds-claims.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6225,1,'2012-10-10 00:00:00','2012-10-10 00:00:00','','2012.10.10-ltr-from-treasury','','inherit','open','closed','','2012-10-10-ltr-from-treasury','','','2016-02-22 18:06:53','2016-02-22 18:06:53','',6226,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2012.10.10-ltr-from-treasury.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6226,1,'2012-10-10 13:29:52','2012-10-10 13:29:52','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Treasury has answered a letter from Democratic Representatives voicing suspicions that the contribution limits for tax-deferred retirement accounts are being avoided by undervaluing the contributed assets.   Treasury highlighted the IRS’s enforcement efforts, opined that current tax rules provide little incentive to shift investment gains to IRAs and SEP-IRAs by using undervalued assets, and highlighted current law’s fair market value standard for valuing assets contributed to IRAs.</p>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2012.10.10-treasury-responds-claims.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2012.10.10-treasury-responds-claims.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Background. </strong> Annual contributions to defined contribution plans are limited to an inflation adjusted figure ($50,000 for 2012), and contributions to IRAs are limited to $5,000 for 2012, plus a $1,000 catch-up contribution for those age 50 or older.  Taxpayers generally may roll over their defined contribution plans to IRAs on a tax-free basis.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Question of valuation.  In an August 2, 2012, letter to the Treasury Department and Employee Benefits Security Administration, Reps. George Miller (D-CA), Sander Levin (D-MI), and Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), expressed concern that taxpayers may be getting around the above contribution limits for tax-deferred retirement accounts by assigning low values to property contributed to the account.  They cited, as an example, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s high-value IRAs, which reportedly hold stakes in businesses relating to his employment at Bain Capital.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Democratic Congressmen requested answers to specific questions, such as: the current standards related to the valuation of assets that are purchased by tax-deferred retirement accounts; the proof taxpayers must submit if they are examined as to the value of assets held by retirement accounts when those assets are not publicly traded or their value cannot be established by reference to an established market; and the number of audits the IRS has recently conducted on the valuation of assets held in tax-deferred retirement accounts.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Treasury’s response.</strong>  In identical letters responding to Reps. Levin, Miller, and Van Hollen, Treasury Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy Mark Mazur said IRS was aware of potential valuation problems for IRAs (as well as SEP IRAs), and had raised the issue in Notice 2004-8, 2004-4 IRB 333, which listed the undervaluation of IRA assets as a listed transaction that must be disclosed to IRS.  Specifically targeted were transactions attempting to bypass contribution limits that involved a business owned by a taxpayer and a corporation owned by the taxpayer’s Roth IRA (the Roth IRA corporation).</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Although IRS has gone after listed transactions identified by Notice 2004-8, and instances where assets of traditional IRAs and qualified plans have been abusively undervalued, Mazur maintained that under current tax rules, there is relatively little incentive to shift investment gains into traditional IRAs or SEP IRAs through the use of undervalued assets.  While sales or other dispositions of assets within an IRA are not taxable, any appreciation (or other earnings) on assets distributed from traditional IRAs and SEP IRAs are taxed at ordinary income tax rates when distributions occur and are not eligible for favorable capital gains treatment that might apply to the sale of capital assets held directly by the taxpayer.  Mazur said that although value-shifting strategies involving traditional IRAs and SEP IRAs may have offered greater advantages in the early ‘90s when the tax treatment of long-term capital gains was closer to that for ordinary income, these advantages appear to be much smaller given the spread in ordinary versus long-term capital gains tax rates.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Mazur pointed out that IRS rules generally require all IRA assets, including those not publicly traded, to be valued using a FMV standard (as opposed to liquidation or other value), and that FMV of IRA and qualified plan assets must be reported on Form 5498 (IRA Contribution Information) and Form 5500 (Annual Return/Report of Employee Benefit Plan), as applicable.  Responding to the Representatives’ request for audit information, Mazur said the IRS is currently working to obtain a reliable estimate of the number of audits that specifically involve IRA asset valuation issues and an estimate of the size of associated tax compliance problems.  He also said IRS has assembled a working group to study ways of improving compliance and enforcement in the IRA/SEP IRA valuation area.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2012.10.10-ltr-from-treasury.pdf\">Click here to read Treasury’s complete response.</a></p>','Treasury Responds to Claims of Undervaluation in Contributed Retirement Plan Assets','','publish','open','open','','treasury-responds-to-claims-of-undervaluation-in-contributed-retirement-plan-assets','','','2016-03-03 16:37:55','2016-03-03 16:37:55','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6226',2,'post','',0),(6227,1,'2013-01-03 00:00:00','2013-01-03 00:00:00','','2013.1.3-taxpayer-relief-2013','','inherit','open','closed','','2013-1-3-taxpayer-relief-2013','','','2016-02-22 18:06:53','2016-02-22 18:06:53','',6228,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/2013.1.3-taxpayer-relief-2013.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6228,1,'2013-01-03 13:29:52','2013-01-03 13:29:52','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">On January 1, 2013, Congress passed the American Taxpayer Relief Act (“2012 Taxpayer Relief Act”), which the President has vowed to sign as soon as it is ready for his signature.  The 2012 Taxpayer Relief Act will prevent many of the tax hikes scheduled to go into effect this year and retain many favorable tax breaks that were scheduled to expire.  The 2012 Taxpayer Relief Act also increases income taxes for some “high-income” individuals, modifies the 2012 transfer tax rates slightly, and extends a host of expired and expiring tax breaks for businesses and individuals.  Here are a few highlights of the new legislation.  We will provide additional information regarding other provisions of the new legislation in the coming days.</p>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/2013.1.3-taxpayer-relief-2013.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/2013.1.3-taxpayer-relief-2013.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" width=\"15\" height=\"15\" /></a></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Estate, Gift and Generation Skipping Transfer Tax Provisions Kept Mostly Intact</strong><br />The 2012 Taxpayer Relief Act prevents steep increases in estate, gift and generation-skipping transfer (“GST”) tax that were slated to occur for individuals dying and gifts made after 2012 by permanently keeping the unified exemption level at $5,000,000 (currently $5,120,000 as indexed for inflation).  However, the 2012 Taxpayer Relief Act also permanently increases the top estate, gift and GST tax rate from 35% to 40%.  The 2012 Taxpayer Relief Act also continues the portability feature that allows the estate of the first spouse to die to transfer his or her unused exclusion amount to the surviving spouse.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Individual Income Tax Rates</strong><br />For tax years beginning January 1, 2013, the income tax rates for most individuals will stay at 10%, 15%, 25%, 28%, 33% and 35% (instead of moving to 15%, 28%, 31%, 36% and 39.6% as would have occurred if current tax rates had been allowed to expire).  However, a 39.6% tax rate now applies to income exceeding $450,000 for joint filers and surviving spouses; $425,000 for heads of household; $400,000 for single filers; and $225,000 for married individuals filing seperately.  These dollar amounts are inflation-adjusted for tax years after 2013.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Capital Gain and Dividend Rates</strong><br />For tax years beginning January 1, 2013, the top rate for long-term capital gains and qualified dividends will permanently rise to 20% (up from 15%) for taxpayers with incomes exceeding $400,000 ($450,000 for married taxpayers).  When accounting for I.R.C. § 1411’s 3.8% surtax on investment-type income and gains for tax years beginning January 1, 2013, the overall rate for higher-income taxpayers will be 23.8% on both long-term capital gains and qualified dividends.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">For taxpayers whose ordinary income is generally taxed at a rate below 25%, long-term capital gains and qualified dividends will permanently be subject to a 0% rate.  Taxpayers who are subject to a 25% or greater tax rate on their ordinary income, but whose income levels fall below the $400,000/$450,000 thresholds, will continue to be subject to a 15% rate on long-term capital gains and qualified dividends.  The tax rate will be 18.8% for those subject to the 3.8% surtax (i.e., those with modified adjusted gross income over $250,000 for joint filers or surviving spouses, $125,000 for a married individual filing a separate return, and $200,000 in any other case).</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Permanent Alternative Minimum Tax Relief</strong><br />The 2012 Taxpayer Relief Act provides permanent alternative minimum tax (“AMT”) relief.  The AMT is the excess, if any, of the tentative minimum tax for the year over the regular tax for the year.  In arriving at the tentative minimum tax, an individual begins with taxable income, modifies it with various adjustments and preferences, and then subtracts an exemption amount (which phases out at higher income levels).  The result is alternative minimum taxable income (“AMTI”), which is subject to an AMT rate of 26% or 28%.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Prior to the 2012 Taxpayer Relief Act, the individual AMT exemption amounts for 2012 were to have been $33,750 for unmarried taxpayers; $45,000 for joint filers; and $22,500 for married persons filing separately.  Retroactively effective for tax years beginning January 1, 2012, the 2012 Taxpayer Relief Act permanently increases these exemption amounts to $50,600 for unmarried taxpayers; $78,750 for joint filers; and $39,375 for married persons filing separately.  In addition, for tax years beginning after January 1, 2012, the AMT exemption amounts are indexed for inflation.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Also, prior to the 2012 Taxpayer Relief Act nonrefundable personal credits—other than the adoption credit; the child credit; the savers’ credit; the residential energy efficient property credit; the non-depreciable property portions of the alternative motor vehicle credit; the qualified plug-in electric vehicle credit; and the new qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicle credit—would have been allowed in 2012 only to the extent that the individual’s regular income tax liability exceeded his tentative minimum tax, determined without regard to the minimum tax foreign tax credit.  Retroactively effective for tax years beginning after January 1, 2012, the 2012 Taxpayer Relief Act permanently allows an individual to offset his entire regular tax liability and AMT liability by the nonrefundable personal credits.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Personal Exemption Phaseout Limitations Reinstated</strong><br />For tax years beginning January 1, 2013, the Personal Exemption Phaseout (“PEP”), which had previously been suspended, is reinstated with a starting adjusted gross income (“AGI”) threshold of $300,000 for joint filers and surviving spouses; $275,000 for heads of household; $250,000 for single filers; and $150,000 for married taxpayers filing separately.  Under the phaseout, the total amount of exemptions that can be claimed by a taxpayer subject to the limitation is reduced by 2% for each $2,500 (or portion thereof) by which the taxpayer’s AGI exceeds the applicable threshold.  These dollar amounts are inflation-adjusted for tax years after 2013.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Itemized Deduction Limitations Reinstated</strong><br />For tax years beginning January 1, 2013, the “Pease” limitation on itemized deductions, which had previously been suspended, is reinstated with a starting threshold of $300,000 for joint filers and surviving spouses; $275,000 for heads of household; $250,000 for single filers; and $150,000 for married taxpayers filing separately.  Thus, for taxpayers subject to the “Pease” limitation, the total amount of their itemized deductions is reduced by 3% of the amount by which the taxpayer’s AGI exceeds the threshold amount, with the reduction not to exceed 80% of the otherwise allowable itemized deductions.  These dollar amounts are inflation-adjusted for tax years after 2013.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Historical Individual Tax Extenders</strong></p> <ul> <li>The 2012 Taxpayer Relief Act extends the following tax items through the end of 2013:</li> <li>Deduction for certain expenses of elementary and secondary school teachers;</li> <li>Exclusion for discharge of qualified principal residence indebtedness;</li> <li>Treatment of mortgage insurance premiums as qualified residence interest;</li> <li>Option to deduct State and local general sales taxes;</li> <li>The special rule for contributions of capital gain real property made for conservation purposes;</li> <li>The above-the-line deduction for qualified tuition and related expenses; and</li> <li>Tax-free distributions from individual retirement plans for charitable purposes are continued through 2013.  Since 2012 has already passed, a special rule permits distributions taken in 2012 to be transferred to charities for a limited period in 2013. Another special rule permits certain distributions made in 2013 to be deemed as made on December 31, 2012.</li> </ul>','Highlights of the American Taxpayer Relief Act – Part I','','publish','open','open','','highlights-of-the-american-taxpayer-relief-act-part-i','','','2016-03-03 16:38:17','2016-03-03 16:38:17','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6228',2,'post','',0),(6229,1,'2013-02-26 00:00:00','2013-02-26 00:00:00','','2013.2.26-nbi-announcement','','inherit','open','closed','','2013-2-26-nbi-announcement','','','2016-02-22 18:06:53','2016-02-22 18:06:53','',6230,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/2013.2.26-nbi-announcement.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6230,1,'2013-02-26 13:29:52','2013-02-26 13:29:52','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>Nathan Moccia, shareholder of Rack & Moccia P.C., will conduct a national teleconference for the National Business Institute on Tuesday April 30, 2013, titled “Estate Planning Basics”</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/2013.2.26-nbi-announcement.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/2013.2.26-nbi-announcement.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\"></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Do you have the skills to ensure your clients are well taken care of in case of incapacity? Can you minimize their tax liability through carefully planned asset transfers? Gain the knowledge you need to help your clients through their estate planning needs with this fundamental program. Be prepared to effectively represent your clients.  Click Here fore more information.</p> <p><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Program Description</span></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The teleconference will give practitioners the fundamental understanding of basic principles in drafting wills and trusts to effectively document your client’s wishes.  Attendees will learn what impact gift and estate taxes will have on beneficiaries and how your plan can address how these taxes are handled.  Practitioners will gain the knowledge to help clients plan for incapacity by understanding how to proactively address common legal and financial issues that can arise when health deterirates.</p> <p><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Program Outline</span></p> <p>Wills and Trusts<br />BasicTaxes You Need to Be Aware of<br />Considerations in Planning for Incapacity</p>','Rack & Moccia,P.C. Attorney to conduct National teleconference','','publish','open','open','','rack-a-olansenpc-attorney-to-conduct-national-teleconference-3','','','2016-03-03 16:38:46','2016-03-03 16:38:46','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6230',2,'post','',0),(6231,1,'2013-02-26 00:00:00','2013-02-26 00:00:00','','2013.4.17-nbi-announcement','','inherit','open','closed','','2013-4-17-nbi-announcement','','','2016-02-22 18:06:53','2016-02-22 18:06:53','',6232,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/2013.4.17-nbi-announcement.pdf',0,'attachment','application/pdf',0),(6232,1,'2013-02-26 13:29:52','2013-02-26 13:29:52','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>Nathan Moccia, shareholder of Rack & Moccia P.C., will join other esteemed colleagues to conduct a day-long national teleconference for the National Business Institute on Wednesday June 19, 2013, titled “Trusts 101”. <span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.nbi-sems.com/Details.aspx/Trusts-101/Live-Seminar/R-62354ER|?NavigationDataSource1=Ntk:All|62354|3|,Rpp:20,Nra:pEventDate%2bpEventStartTime%2bCredit+Hours%2bpCreditRecordCreditHours%2bCredit_C2%2bpStandardPrice%2bSeminar+Location%2bScope+of+Content%2bpLocationCity%2bpDescription%2bpDivision%2bpProductId%2bpProductDescription%2bProductCode+%28HIDDEN%29%2bpAdditionalFormats%2bpEventId%2bpAltSpaceDesc%2bpEventIndicator\">Click here</a></span> for more information</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/2013.4.17-nbi-announcement.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/2013.4.17-nbi-announcement.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\"></div> <p><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Program Description</span></p> <p>When assessing complex information, it often helps to break items into  basic building blocks. The same approach can be successful when dealing  with asset protection. Be prepared for specific challenges associated  with various types of trusts by understanding their unique  characteristics. Our intensive full-day primer will provide you with a  comprehensive overview of the wide variety of trusts available.</p> <ul> <li>Determine what role the settlor will play by weighing the pros and cons of establishing an irrevocable trust over a revocable trust.</li> <li>Learn what not to do when selecting and drafting a revocable trust to avoid common mistakes.</li> <li>Learn how to choose the most beneficial vehicle for preserving your client’s wealth: understand the purpose behind the various types of irrevocable trusts.</li> <li>Explore the powers and duties of personal representatives in irrevocable trusts.</li> <li>Save money on taxes with effective use of defective trusts.</li> <li>Learn why it’s important to know when to file the tax return for grantor trusts.</li> <li>Determine whether a client qualifies as a beneficiary of a special needs trust.</li> <li>Don’t reinvent the wheel - modify our sample trust documents and use our drafting tips to create airtight trusts.</li> </ul>','Rack & Moccia,P.C. Attorney to conduct National teleconference','','publish','open','open','','rack-a-olansenpc-attorney-to-conduct-national-teleconference-2','','','2016-03-03 16:38:53','2016-03-03 16:38:53','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6232',1,'post','',0),(6455,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:40','2016-02-25 13:28:40','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">A U.S. district court rules that a Medicaid applicant whose son gave him a promissory note in exchange for rental property had excess resources.</p>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/2012.7.20-promissory-note-counts.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/2012.7.20-promissory-note-counts.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <p><strong>Gragert v. Hendrick (U.S. Dist. Ct., W.D. Okla., No. CIV-11-984-C, May 24, 2012).</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts.</strong>  George Gragert owned a rental property at the time he entered a nursing home and applied for Medicaid.  On May 1, 2011, Mr. Gragert\'s son gave Mr. Gragert\'s wife a promissory note in which he promised to pay $28,800 in 96 monthly installments of $330.28. One the same day, the Gragerts deeded the rental property, which was worth $22,800, to their son.  The state denied Mr. Gragert\'s Medicaid application, finding that he had excess resources due to the promissory note.  Mr. Gragert sued the state in federal court, and both parties asked for summary judgment.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Court’s Decision. </strong> The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma granted summary judgment in favor of the state, holding that Mr. Gragert is not eligible for Medicaid. According to the court, a promissory note is typically considered an available resource, and Mr. Gragert offered no evidence to rebut this presumption.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Virginia Law. </strong> In some situations and under certain state laws, it may be proper to implement a strategy structured around the preparation of a promissory note as a short-term planning tool to contribute toward the costs of long-term care during a Medicaid ineligibility penalty period.  In this scenario, the Medicaid applicant would transfer a portion of his or her estate as a gift (intentionally causing an ineligibility period), and then prepare a promissory note, as the maker, for the remaining portion of the estate.  The note would be structured to require monthly repayments in the amount needed to pay for long-term care for the duration of the ineligibility period, resulting in a completed gift upon the scheduled termination of the note.  However, even if a promissory note complies with the Deficit Reduction Act regulations, the note balance could still be deemed an available resource.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Unfortunately, the Virginia Medicaid Manual (S1140.300) provides an instruction to “[a]ssume that the value of a promissory note, loan or property agreement as a resource is its outstanding principal balance unless the individual furnishes reliable evidence that it has a CMV of less than the outstanding principal balance.”  Therefore, this strategy is not typically recommended in Virginia, as it is extremely risky and likely to trigger a lengthy penalty/ineligibility period that may extend well beyond what the applicant’s resources could sustain.</p>','Medicaid Applicant\'s Promissory Note is Considered Countable Resource','','inherit','closed','closed','','6218-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:40','2016-02-25 13:28:40','',6218,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6218-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6456,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:40','2016-02-25 13:28:40','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which the Supreme Court largely declared constitutional last month, contains several new taxes.  Among the most significant is the new 3.8% Medicare surtax on investment income which takes effect January 1, 2013.</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/2012.7.10-medicare-surtax.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/2012.7.10-medicare-surtax.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" width=\"15\" height=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The new Medicare tax, designed to raise revenue to offset the cost of health care reform, applies to individuals earning more than $200,000 and married couples earning more than $250,000.  The Medicare tax is imposed on the <em>lesser</em> of:</p> <ul> <li>Net investment income for the tax year; or</li> <li>The amount by which the modified adjusted gross income (“MAGI”) exceeds $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for married couples.</li> </ul> <p>Net investment income includes the following items, reduced by deductions allocated to such income:</p> <ul> <li>Interest, dividends, royalties, annuities, and rents</li> <li>Income derived from passive activities</li> <li>Trading of financial instruments and commodities</li> <li>Net capital gains derived from the disposition of property not held in an active trade or business</li> </ul> <p>Net investment income does not include:</p> <ul> <li>Active trade and/or business income</li> <li>Any of the above sources of income (e.g. interest, dividends, capital gains, etc.) if derived from an active trade and/or business</li> <li>Distributions from IRAs or other qualified retirement plans</li> <li>Any income taken into account for self-employment tax purposes</li> </ul> <p>Examples:</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Single Individual. </strong> John has $215,000 of dividend, interest, and rental income with no other sources of income.  The 3.8% Medicare surtax applies to $15,000 of income since it is the lesser of net investment income of $215,000 or the excess of the $200,000 MAGI threshold.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Married Filing Jointly without Net Investment Income.</strong>  John and Jane file a joint return reporting $300,000 in salaries and do not have any net investment income.  The 3.8% Medicare surtax does not apply.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Married Filing Jointly with Net Investment Income.</strong>  John and Jane file a joint return reporting $225,000 in salaries and $75,000 of interest, dividend, and rental income for a total MAGI of $300,000.  The 3.8% Medicare surtax applies to $50,000 of income because it is the lesser of the couple’s $75,000 of net investment income or the excess over the $250,000 MAGI threshold.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>IRA Distributions.</strong>  In 2013, Michael, a single taxpayer age 69, has investment income of $150,000 and is not subject to the Medicare surtax.  In 2014 when he turns 70 ½, Michael takes a $125,000 required minimum distribution from his IRA in addition to $150,000 of investment income.  In this case, the 3.8% Medicare surtax applies to $75,000 of income because it is the lesser of his $150,000 net investment income or the excess over the $200,000 MAGI threshold.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Even though various provisions of The 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act are likely to be challenged well into the future, it is best to consider the new Medicare surtax as being permanent and plan accordingly.</p>','Individual Taxpayers and The 3.8% Medicare Surtax','','inherit','closed','closed','','6213-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:40','2016-02-25 13:28:40','',6213,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6213-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6236,1,'2014-04-28 13:56:02','2014-04-28 13:56:02','','secure90x72','','inherit','open','closed','','secure90x72','','','2016-02-22 18:06:53','2016-02-22 18:06:53','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/secure90x72.gif',0,'attachment','image/gif',0),(6457,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:40','2016-02-25 13:28:40','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>IRS has issued long-awaited temporary and proposed regulations providing guidance on the requirements for electing portability of a deceased spousal unused exclusion amount (“DSUEA”) to the surviving spouse, and on the rules for the surviving spouse\'s use of this DSUEA.</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/2012.7.7-estate-portability-regulations.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/2012.7.7-estate-portability-regulations.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\"></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Background on the portability election.</strong>  The Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010 added a new “portability feature” for estates of decedents dying after 2010 and before 2013, under which the applicable exclusion amount is the sum of (1) the “basic exclusion amount” (i.e., $5 million with an adjustment for inflation after 2011), and (2) in the case of a surviving spouse, the DSUEA.  (I.R.C. § 2010(c)(2))</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The DSUEA <em>is the lesser of</em>:</p> <ol> <li>(1) the basic exclusion amount, or</li> <li>(2) the excess of (i) the basic exclusion amount of the last deceased spouse of the surviving spouse, over (ii) the amount with respect to which the tentative tax is determined under I.R.C. § 2001(b)(1) on the estate of such deceased spouse. (I.R.C. §2010(c)(4)).</li> </ol> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">A surviving spouse may use the DSUEA in addition to her own $5 million exclusion (as indexed) for taxable transfers made during life or at death, but if a surviving spouse is predeceased by more than one spouse, the amount of unused exclusion that is available for use by the surviving spouse is limited to the lesser of $5 million or the unused exclusion of the last deceased spouse.  (I.R.C. § 2010(c)(4)).  The DSUEA cannot, however, be taken into account by a surviving spouse unless the executor of the estate of the deceased spouse elects to do so by timely filing an estate tax return on which the DSUEA is computed.  Once filed, the IRS has the authority to examine the estate tax return of the deceased, to make determinations with respect to the calculation of the DSUEA, even after the statute of limitations on assessment has expired.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Here are some of the highlights of the temporary regulations on the DSUEA.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Making the portability election.</strong>  Treas. Reg. § 20.2010-2T(a), requires an executor electing portability to make that election on a timely-filed estate tax return.  The last return filed by the return due date, including extensions actually granted, will supersede any previously-filed return. Thus, an executor generally may supersede a previously-filed portability election on a subsequent timely-filed estate tax return.  The estate tax return must be filed within nine months of the decedent’s date of death, unless an extension of time for filing has been granted.  A portability election is irrevocable once the due date (as extended) of the estate tax return has passed.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Filing of complete and properly prepared estate tax return.</strong>  A number of commenters have asked the IRS for clarification of what was required under the Notice 2011-82 rule that the estate of a decedent (survived by a spouse) makes the portability election by timely filing a “complete and properly-prepared estate tax return” for the decedent’s estate.  Commentators also asked for relief for estates that are not required to file a return, but are doing so only to elect portability of the decedent\'s DSUEA.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In response, Treas. Reg. § 20.2010-2T(a)(7), provides that an estate tax return prepared in accordance with all applicable requirements is considered a “complete and properly-prepared” estate tax return.   Executors of estates that are not otherwise required to file an estate tax return under do not have to report the value of certain property that qualifies for the marital or charitable deduction.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">An executor who chooses to make use of this special rule in filing an estate tax return must estimate the total value of the gross estate (including the values of the property that do not have to be reported on the estate tax return under this provision), based on a determination made in good faith and with due diligence regarding the value of all of the assets includible in the gross estate.  The Instructions for Form 706 will provide ranges of dollar values, and the executor must identify on the estate tax return the particular range within which falls the executor’s best estimate of the total gross estate.  By signing the return, the executor will be certifying, under penalties of perjury, that the estimate falls within the identified range of values to the best of the executor\'s knowledge and belief.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Executor responsible for making portability election.</strong>  The administrator that is appointed, qualified, and acting within the U. S. for the decedent\'s estate (an appointed executor), may file an estate tax return to elect portability or to opt to have the portability election not apply. If there is no appointed executor, any person in actual or constructive possession of any property of the decedent (a “nonappointed executor”) may file the estate tax return to elect portability or to opt to have the portability election not apply. A portability election made by a non-appointed executor cannot be superseded by a contrary election made by another non-appointed executor of that same decedent\'s estate. (Treas. Reg. § 20.2010-2T(a)(6)).</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>How to opt out of portability election.</strong>  Under Treas. Reg. § 20.2010-2T(a)(3), an executor must make an affirmative statement on the estate tax return signifying the decision to have the portability election not apply.  If no estate tax return is required, not filing an estate tax return will be considered to be an affirmative statement signifying the decision not to make a portability election.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Use of the DSUEA by the surviving spouse.</strong>  Under Treas. Reg. § 20.2010-3T(c)(1) and Treas. Reg. § 20.2010-2T(d)(1), a portability election made by the executor of a decedent’s estate is effective as of the date of the decedent’s death.  Thus, the DSUEA of a decedent survived by a spouse may be included in determining the applicable exclusion amount of the surviving spouse, subject to any applicable limitations, with respect to all transfers occurring after the death of the decedent, if the executor of the decedent\'s estate makes a portability election and the election is not superseded by the executor of the decedent’s estate before the due date of the return, including extensions.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Under Treas. Reg. § 20.2010-1T(d)(5), the term “last deceased spouse” referred to in I.R.C. § 2010(c)(4)(B)(i) means the most recently deceased individual who was married to the surviving spouse at that individual’s death, except that an individual dying before calendar year 2011 cannot be considered the last deceased spouse of such surviving spouse.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Other provisions.  </strong>The Regulations also discuss the DSUEA where there are multiple spouses and previously applied DSUEAs, the IRS’s authority to examine returns of deceased spouses, applicability of the portability rules to nonresidents who are not citizens, and the applicability of portability in case of qualified domestic trusts.</p>','New, Temporary Regulations Explain Estate Tax Portability Election','','inherit','closed','closed','','6216-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:40','2016-02-25 13:28:40','',6216,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6216-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6426,1,'2016-02-23 21:23:36','2016-02-23 21:23:36','<div>Congratulations to Kevin on being presented the Distinguished Service Award in recognition and appreciation of Kevin\'s valuable contributions and dedicated service as a Director.</div>\r\nRack &amp; Moccia, P.C. is proud to be a member of the National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys, Inc. (NAELA)','Virginia Academy of Elder Law Attorneys, Inc.','','inherit','closed','closed','','6424-revision-v1','','','2016-02-23 21:23:36','2016-02-23 21:23:36','',6424,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/23/6424-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6245,1,'2016-02-22 18:14:26','2016-02-22 18:14:26','<p><img src=\"http://placehold.it/1000x300\"></p>\r\n<p>Our attorneys, paralegals, and staff are committed to providing the highest caliber of client-specific legal solutions, including strategies designed to protect certain beneficiaries, minimize or eliminate taxes, preserve family businesses and leverage charitable gifts. The Firm is unique in that our dedicated focus on matters involving estates and trusts supports our related litigation practice.  We likewise limit our litigation matters to issues like will contests, removal of executors and trustees, and representation of clients in all manner of tax controversies.</p>','Our Firm','','publish','closed','closed','','our-firm','','','2016-03-14 17:37:25','2016-03-14 17:37:25','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?page_id=6245',0,'page','',0),(6246,1,'2016-02-22 18:14:26','2016-02-22 18:14:26','Our attorneys, paralegals, and staff are committed to providing the highest caliber of client-specific legal solutions, including strategies designed to protect certain beneficiaries, minimize or eliminate taxes, preserve family businesses and leverage charitable gifts.\r\n\r\nThe Firm is unique in that our dedicated focus on matters involving estates and trusts supports our related litigation practice.  We likewise limit our litigation matters to issues like will contests, removal of executors and trustees, and representation of clients in all manner of tax controversies.','Our Firm','','inherit','closed','closed','','6245-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 18:14:26','2016-02-22 18:14:26','',6245,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6245-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6282,1,'2016-02-22 18:15:01','2016-02-22 18:15:01','','Home Page 1','','inherit','closed','closed','','2358-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 18:15:01','2016-02-22 18:15:01','',2358,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/2358-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6287,1,'2016-02-22 18:16:14','2016-02-22 18:16:14','<div class=\"sub-title\">Our team of staff and paralegals</div>','Our Team','','publish','closed','closed','','our-team','','','2016-03-03 17:24:58','2016-03-03 17:24:58','',6245,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?page_id=6287',0,'page','',0),(6288,1,'2016-02-22 18:16:14','2016-02-22 18:16:14','','Our Team','','inherit','closed','closed','','6287-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 18:16:14','2016-02-22 18:16:14','',6287,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6287-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6290,1,'2016-02-22 18:19:59','0000-00-00 00:00:00','<div class=\"one_third first_column\"><div class=\"cmsms_composer_column_head\"><a href=\"#\" class=\"cmsms_composer_column_button cmsms_composer_column_delete\" title=\"Delete\">Delete</a><a href=\"#\" class=\"cmsms_composer_column_button cmsms_composer_column_arrow\" title=\"Animation effects\">Animation effects</a><a href=\"#\" class=\"cmsms_composer_column_button cmsms_composer_column_copy\" title=\"Copy\">Copy</a><a href=\"#\" class=\"cmsms_composer_column_button cmsms_composer_column_plus\" title=\"Wider\">Copy</a><a href=\"#\" class=\"cmsms_composer_column_button cmsms_composer_column_minus\" title=\"Narrower\">Copy</a><span class=\"cmsms_composer_column_width\">1/3</span><span class=\"cmsms_composer_column_title\">Column</span></div><div class=\"cmsms_composer_column_elements ui-droppable ui-sortable\" data-folder=\"column\" data-type=\"\"></div></div><div class=\"one_third\"><div class=\"cmsms_composer_column_head\"><a href=\"#\" class=\"cmsms_composer_column_button cmsms_composer_column_delete\" title=\"Delete\">Delete</a><a href=\"#\" class=\"cmsms_composer_column_button cmsms_composer_column_arrow\" title=\"Animation effects\">Animation effects</a><a href=\"#\" class=\"cmsms_composer_column_button cmsms_composer_column_copy\" title=\"Copy\">Copy</a><a href=\"#\" class=\"cmsms_composer_column_button cmsms_composer_column_plus\" title=\"Wider\">Copy</a><a href=\"#\" class=\"cmsms_composer_column_button cmsms_composer_column_minus\" title=\"Narrower\">Copy</a><span class=\"cmsms_composer_column_width\">1/3</span><span class=\"cmsms_composer_column_title\">Column</span></div><div class=\"cmsms_composer_column_elements ui-droppable ui-sortable\" data-folder=\"column\" data-type=\"\"></div></div><div class=\"one_third\"><div class=\"cmsms_composer_column_head\"><a href=\"#\" class=\"cmsms_composer_column_button cmsms_composer_column_delete\" title=\"Delete\">Delete</a><a href=\"#\" class=\"cmsms_composer_column_button cmsms_composer_column_arrow\" title=\"Animation effects\">Animation effects</a><a href=\"#\" class=\"cmsms_composer_column_button cmsms_composer_column_copy\" title=\"Copy\">Copy</a><a href=\"#\" class=\"cmsms_composer_column_button cmsms_composer_column_plus\" title=\"Wider\">Copy</a><a href=\"#\" class=\"cmsms_composer_column_button cmsms_composer_column_minus\" title=\"Narrower\">Copy</a><span class=\"cmsms_composer_column_width\">1/3</span><span class=\"cmsms_composer_column_title\">Column</span></div><div class=\"cmsms_composer_column_elements ui-droppable ui-sortable\" data-folder=\"column\" data-type=\"\"></div></div>','3 block callout','','draft','closed','closed','','3-block-callout','','','2016-02-22 18:19:59','0000-00-00 00:00:00','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6290',0,'content_template','',0),(6292,1,'2016-02-22 18:42:04','2016-02-22 18:42:04','<div class=\"sub-title\">Our team of staff and paralegals</div>','Our Team','','inherit','closed','closed','','6287-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 18:42:04','2016-02-22 18:42:04','',6287,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6287-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6291,1,'2016-02-22 18:23:35','2016-02-22 18:23:35','Our team of staff and paralegals\r\n\r\n&nbsp;','Our Team','','inherit','closed','closed','','6287-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 18:23:35','2016-02-22 18:23:35','',6287,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6287-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6293,1,'2016-02-22 20:44:46','2016-02-22 20:44:46','','mbw','','inherit','open','closed','','mbw','','','2016-02-22 20:44:46','2016-02-22 20:44:46','',6287,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/mbw.jpg',0,'attachment','image/jpeg',0),(6294,1,'2016-02-22 20:45:05','2016-02-22 20:45:05','','suggs','','inherit','open','closed','','suggs','','','2016-02-22 20:45:05','2016-02-22 20:45:05','',6287,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/suggs.jpg',0,'attachment','image/jpeg',0),(6295,1,'2016-02-22 20:47:47','2016-02-22 20:47:47','','mccarthy','','inherit','open','closed','','mccarthy','','','2016-02-22 20:47:47','2016-02-22 20:47:47','',6287,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/mccarthy.jpg',0,'attachment','image/jpeg',0),(6296,1,'2016-02-22 20:48:20','2016-02-22 20:48:20','','parsons','','inherit','open','closed','','parsons','','','2016-02-22 20:48:20','2016-02-22 20:48:20','',6287,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/parsons.jpg',0,'attachment','image/jpeg',0),(6297,1,'2016-02-22 20:49:30','2016-02-22 20:49:30','','nicki','','inherit','open','closed','','nicki','','','2016-02-22 20:49:30','2016-02-22 20:49:30','',6287,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/nicki.jpg',0,'attachment','image/jpeg',0),(6298,1,'2016-02-22 20:49:49','2016-02-22 20:49:49','','judge','','inherit','open','closed','','judge','','','2016-02-22 20:49:49','2016-02-22 20:49:49','',6287,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/judge.jpg',0,'attachment','image/jpeg',0),(6299,1,'2016-02-22 20:59:36','2016-02-22 20:59:36','<p><img src=\"http://placehold.it/1000x300\" /></p>\r\n<blockquote>The mission of the Firm is to deliver the highest caliber of legal representation to our clients, to provide client service that meets or exceeds expectations, to conduct the practice of law with professional integrity and to contribute as a Firm to the betterment of our community.</blockquote>','Mission Statement','','publish','closed','closed','','mission-statement','','','2016-03-14 18:23:08','2016-03-14 18:23:08','',6245,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?page_id=6299',0,'page','',0),(6300,1,'2016-02-22 20:59:36','2016-02-22 20:59:36','<blockquote>The mission of the Firm is to deliver the highest caliber of legal representation to our clients, to provide client service that meets or exceeds expectations, to conduct the practice of law with professional integrity and to contribute as a Firm to the betterment of our community.</blockquote>','Mission Statement','','inherit','closed','closed','','6299-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 20:59:36','2016-02-22 20:59:36','',6299,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6299-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6301,1,'2016-02-22 21:00:59','2016-02-22 21:00:59','<p><img src=\"http://placehold.it/1000x300\" /></p><p>At Rack &amp; Moccia, P.C., we believe in giving back to the community some of the gifts we have received.  As lawyers, we contribute our special knowledge and experience to local charities in which we are involved.  As parents, we donate our time to educational, religious and recreational activities.  As active members of the growing Hampton Roads business community, we seek to promote better support and opportunity for our fellow citizens. Charitable organizations seek out attorneys as volunteers for their knowledge and experience in matters as diverse as formation and administration of charitable entities, tax planning, fund-raising issues, contract matters and litigation avoidance, to name a few.</p><p><strong>We are proud to serve in leadership positions with or contribute to the following organizations for the betterment of our community:</strong></p><table style=\"width: 100%;\"><tbody><tr><td style=\"vertical-align: top;\"><ul><li>Alzheimer\'s Association, Southeastern Virginia Chapter Board of Directors</li><li>Alzheimer\'s Association, Southeastern Virginia Chapter Planned Gifts Advisory Committee</li><li>Cape Henry Rotary Club</li><li>Catholic Charities of Hampton Roads Foundation Board</li><li>Central Business District Association of Virginia Beach</li><li>Children\'s Health Foundation Board</li><li>Children\'s Hospital of the King\'s Daughters Development Advisory Board</li><li>Community Tax Law Project</li><li>Governor\'s Advisory Board on Aging (Gov.  George Allen)</li><li>Hampton Roads Community Foundation</li><li>Hampton Roads Estate Planning Council</li><li>Hampton Roads Tax Forum- Board of Directors</li><li>James Madison University Alumni Association, Chapter President</li><li>James Madison University Planned Support Advisory Council</li><li>Kings Grant Baptist Church- Long Range Planning Committee</li></ul></td><td style=\"vertical-align: top; width: 40px;\"></td><td style=\"vertical-align: top;\"><ul><li>Leave a Legacy Hampton Roads, Inc.</li><li>Little Neck Swim &amp; Racquet Club, Inc.</li><li>Mayor\'s Committee on Aging, Virginia Beach</li><li>Norfolk City Union of the King\'s Daughters, Driftwood Circle</li><li>Old Dominion University Tax Conference Faculty</li><li>Senior Services of South Hampton Roads (SEVAMP), Board of Directors</li><li>St. Nicholas Catholic Church Finance Council/Pastoral Council</li><li>Tidewater Jewish Foundation Professional Education Committee</li><li>Tomcat Sunset, Inc.</li><li>United Way Foundation Professional Advisory Council</li><li>United Way of South Hampton Roads (Community Funding Committee)</li><li>Virginia Aquarium and Marine Science Center</li><li>Virginia Beach Foundation, Beach Fund Steering Committee</li><li>Virginia Beach Foundation, Professional Advisors Committee</li><li>Virginia Symphony, Board of Directors</li></ul></td></tr></tbody></table>','Community Involvement','','publish','closed','closed','','community-involvement','','','2016-03-14 17:38:02','2016-03-14 17:38:02','',6245,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?page_id=6301',0,'page','',0),(6302,1,'2016-02-22 21:00:59','2016-02-22 21:00:59','At Rack &amp; Moccia, P.C., we believe in giving back to the community some of the gifts we have received.  As lawyers, we contribute our special knowledge and experience to local charities in which we are involved.  As parents, we donate our time to educational, religious and recreational activities.  As active members of the growing Hampton Roads business community, we seek to promote better support and opportunity for our fellow citizens.\r\n\r\nCharitable organizations seek out attorneys as volunteers for their knowledge and experience in matters as diverse as formation and administration of charitable entities, tax planning, fund-raising issues, contract matters and litigation avoidance, to name a few.  We are proud to serve in leadership positions with or contribute to the following organizations for the betterment of our community:\r\n\r\n&nbsp;','Community Involvement','','inherit','closed','closed','','6301-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 21:00:59','2016-02-22 21:00:59','',6301,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6301-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6303,1,'2016-02-22 21:04:15','2016-02-22 21:04:15','At Rack &amp; Moccia, P.C., we believe in giving back to the community some of the gifts we have received.  As lawyers, we contribute our special knowledge and experience to local charities in which we are involved.  As parents, we donate our time to educational, religious and recreational activities.  As active members of the growing Hampton Roads business community, we seek to promote better support and opportunity for our fellow citizens.\n\nCharitable organizations seek out attorneys as volunteers for their knowledge and experience in matters as diverse as formation and administration of charitable entities, tax planning, fund-raising issues, contract matters and litigation avoidance, to name a few.  We are proud to serve in leadership positions with or contribute to the following organizations for the betterment of our community:\n<table style=\"width: 100%;\">\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td style=\"vertical-align: top;\">\n<ul>\n	<li>Alzheimer\'s Association, Southeastern Virginia Chapter Board of Directors</li>\n	<li>Alzheimer\'s Association, Southeastern Virginia Chapter Planned Gifts Advisory\nCommittee</li>\n	<li>Cape Henry Rotary Club</li>\n	<li>Catholic Charities of Hampton Roads Foundation Board</li>\n	<li>Central Business District Association of Virginia Beach</li>\n	<li>Children\'s Health Foundation Board</li>\n	<li>Children\'s Hospital of the King\'s Daughters Development Advisory Board</li>\n	<li>Community Tax Law Project</li>\n	<li>Governor\'s Advisory Board on Aging (Gov.  George Allen)</li>\n	<li>Hampton Roads Community Foundation</li>\n	<li>Hampton Roads Estate Planning Council</li>\n	<li>Hampton Roads Tax Forum- Board of Directors</li>\n	<li>James Madison University Alumni Association, Chapter President</li>\n	<li>James Madison University Planned Support Advisory Council</li>\n	<li>Kings Grant Baptist Church- Long Range Planning Committee</li>\n</ul>\n</td>\n<td style=\"vertical-align: top;\">\n<ul>\n	<li>Leave a Legacy Hampton Roads, Inc.</li>\n	<li>Little Neck Swim &amp; Racquet Club, Inc.</li>\n	<li>Mayor\'s Committee on Aging, Virginia Beach</li>\n	<li>Norfolk City Union of the King\'s Daughters, Driftwood Circle</li>\n	<li>Old Dominion University Tax Conference Faculty</li>\n	<li>Senior Services of South Hampton Roads (SEVAMP), Board of Directors</li>\n	<li>St. Nicholas Catholic Church Finance Council/Pastoral Council</li>\n	<li>Tidewater Jewish Foundation Professional Education Committee</li>\n	<li>Tomcat Sunset, Inc.</li>\n	<li>United Way Foundation Professional Advisory Council</li>\n	<li>United Way of South Hampton Roads (Community Funding Committee)</li>\n	<li>Virginia Aquarium and Marine Science Center</li>\n	<li>Virginia Beach Foundation, Beach Fund Steering Committee</li>\n	<li>Virginia Beach Foundation, Professional Advisors Committee</li>\n	<li>Virginia Symphony, Board of Directors</li>\n</ul>\n</td>\n</tr>\n</tbody>\n</table>','Community Involvement','','inherit','closed','closed','','6301-autosave-v1','','','2016-02-22 21:04:15','2016-02-22 21:04:15','',6301,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6301-autosave-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6304,1,'2016-02-22 21:04:23','2016-02-22 21:04:23','At Rack &amp; Moccia, P.C., we believe in giving back to the community some of the gifts we have received.  As lawyers, we contribute our special knowledge and experience to local charities in which we are involved.  As parents, we donate our time to educational, religious and recreational activities.  As active members of the growing Hampton Roads business community, we seek to promote better support and opportunity for our fellow citizens.\r\n\r\nCharitable organizations seek out attorneys as volunteers for their knowledge and experience in matters as diverse as formation and administration of charitable entities, tax planning, fund-raising issues, contract matters and litigation avoidance, to name a few.  We are proud to serve in leadership positions with or contribute to the following organizations for the betterment of our community:\r\n<table style=\"width: 100%;\">\r\n<tbody>\r\n<tr>\r\n<td style=\"vertical-align: top;\">\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Alzheimer\'s Association, Southeastern Virginia Chapter Board of Directors</li>\r\n	<li>Alzheimer\'s Association, Southeastern Virginia Chapter Planned Gifts Advisory\r\nCommittee</li>\r\n	<li>Cape Henry Rotary Club</li>\r\n	<li>Catholic Charities of Hampton Roads Foundation Board</li>\r\n	<li>Central Business District Association of Virginia Beach</li>\r\n	<li>Children\'s Health Foundation Board</li>\r\n	<li>Children\'s Hospital of the King\'s Daughters Development Advisory Board</li>\r\n	<li>Community Tax Law Project</li>\r\n	<li>Governor\'s Advisory Board on Aging (Gov.  George Allen)</li>\r\n	<li>Hampton Roads Community Foundation</li>\r\n	<li>Hampton Roads Estate Planning Council</li>\r\n	<li>Hampton Roads Tax Forum- Board of Directors</li>\r\n	<li>James Madison University Alumni Association, Chapter President</li>\r\n	<li>James Madison University Planned Support Advisory Council</li>\r\n	<li>Kings Grant Baptist Church- Long Range Planning Committee</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n</td>\r\n<td style=\"vertical-align: top;\">\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Leave a Legacy Hampton Roads, Inc.</li>\r\n	<li>Little Neck Swim &amp; Racquet Club, Inc.</li>\r\n	<li>Mayor\'s Committee on Aging, Virginia Beach</li>\r\n	<li>Norfolk City Union of the King\'s Daughters, Driftwood Circle</li>\r\n	<li>Old Dominion University Tax Conference Faculty</li>\r\n	<li>Senior Services of South Hampton Roads (SEVAMP), Board of Directors</li>\r\n	<li>St. Nicholas Catholic Church Finance Council/Pastoral Council</li>\r\n	<li>Tidewater Jewish Foundation Professional Education Committee</li>\r\n	<li>Tomcat Sunset, Inc.</li>\r\n	<li>United Way Foundation Professional Advisory Council</li>\r\n	<li>United Way of South Hampton Roads (Community Funding Committee)</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Aquarium and Marine Science Center</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Beach Foundation, Beach Fund Steering Committee</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Beach Foundation, Professional Advisors Committee</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Symphony, Board of Directors</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n</td>\r\n</tr>\r\n</tbody>\r\n</table>','Community Involvement','','inherit','closed','closed','','6301-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 21:04:23','2016-02-22 21:04:23','',6301,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6301-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6305,1,'2016-02-22 21:04:50','2016-02-22 21:04:50','At Rack &amp; Moccia, P.C., we believe in giving back to the community some of the gifts we have received.  As lawyers, we contribute our special knowledge and experience to local charities in which we are involved.  As parents, we donate our time to educational, religious and recreational activities.  As active members of the growing Hampton Roads business community, we seek to promote better support and opportunity for our fellow citizens.\r\n\r\nCharitable organizations seek out attorneys as volunteers for their knowledge and experience in matters as diverse as formation and administration of charitable entities, tax planning, fund-raising issues, contract matters and litigation avoidance, to name a few.  We are proud to serve in leadership positions with or contribute to the following organizations for the betterment of our community:\r\n<table style=\"width: 100%;\" cellspacing=\"15\" cellpadding=\"15\">\r\n<tbody>\r\n<tr>\r\n<td style=\"vertical-align: top;\">\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Alzheimer\'s Association, Southeastern Virginia Chapter Board of Directors</li>\r\n	<li>Alzheimer\'s Association, Southeastern Virginia Chapter Planned Gifts Advisory\r\nCommittee</li>\r\n	<li>Cape Henry Rotary Club</li>\r\n	<li>Catholic Charities of Hampton Roads Foundation Board</li>\r\n	<li>Central Business District Association of Virginia Beach</li>\r\n	<li>Children\'s Health Foundation Board</li>\r\n	<li>Children\'s Hospital of the King\'s Daughters Development Advisory Board</li>\r\n	<li>Community Tax Law Project</li>\r\n	<li>Governor\'s Advisory Board on Aging (Gov.  George Allen)</li>\r\n	<li>Hampton Roads Community Foundation</li>\r\n	<li>Hampton Roads Estate Planning Council</li>\r\n	<li>Hampton Roads Tax Forum- Board of Directors</li>\r\n	<li>James Madison University Alumni Association, Chapter President</li>\r\n	<li>James Madison University Planned Support Advisory Council</li>\r\n	<li>Kings Grant Baptist Church- Long Range Planning Committee</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n</td>\r\n<td style=\"vertical-align: top;\">\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Leave a Legacy Hampton Roads, Inc.</li>\r\n	<li>Little Neck Swim &amp; Racquet Club, Inc.</li>\r\n	<li>Mayor\'s Committee on Aging, Virginia Beach</li>\r\n	<li>Norfolk City Union of the King\'s Daughters, Driftwood Circle</li>\r\n	<li>Old Dominion University Tax Conference Faculty</li>\r\n	<li>Senior Services of South Hampton Roads (SEVAMP), Board of Directors</li>\r\n	<li>St. Nicholas Catholic Church Finance Council/Pastoral Council</li>\r\n	<li>Tidewater Jewish Foundation Professional Education Committee</li>\r\n	<li>Tomcat Sunset, Inc.</li>\r\n	<li>United Way Foundation Professional Advisory Council</li>\r\n	<li>United Way of South Hampton Roads (Community Funding Committee)</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Aquarium and Marine Science Center</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Beach Foundation, Beach Fund Steering Committee</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Beach Foundation, Professional Advisors Committee</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Symphony, Board of Directors</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n</td>\r\n</tr>\r\n</tbody>\r\n</table>','Community Involvement','','inherit','closed','closed','','6301-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 21:04:50','2016-02-22 21:04:50','',6301,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6301-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6306,1,'2016-02-22 21:05:06','2016-02-22 21:05:06','At Rack &amp; Moccia, P.C., we believe in giving back to the community some of the gifts we have received.  As lawyers, we contribute our special knowledge and experience to local charities in which we are involved.  As parents, we donate our time to educational, religious and recreational activities.  As active members of the growing Hampton Roads business community, we seek to promote better support and opportunity for our fellow citizens.\r\n\r\nCharitable organizations seek out attorneys as volunteers for their knowledge and experience in matters as diverse as formation and administration of charitable entities, tax planning, fund-raising issues, contract matters and litigation avoidance, to name a few.  We are proud to serve in leadership positions with or contribute to the following organizations for the betterment of our community:\r\n<table style=\"width: 100%;\" cellspacing=\"15px\" cellpadding=\"15px\">\r\n<tbody>\r\n<tr>\r\n<td style=\"vertical-align: top;\">\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Alzheimer\'s Association, Southeastern Virginia Chapter Board of Directors</li>\r\n	<li>Alzheimer\'s Association, Southeastern Virginia Chapter Planned Gifts Advisory\r\nCommittee</li>\r\n	<li>Cape Henry Rotary Club</li>\r\n	<li>Catholic Charities of Hampton Roads Foundation Board</li>\r\n	<li>Central Business District Association of Virginia Beach</li>\r\n	<li>Children\'s Health Foundation Board</li>\r\n	<li>Children\'s Hospital of the King\'s Daughters Development Advisory Board</li>\r\n	<li>Community Tax Law Project</li>\r\n	<li>Governor\'s Advisory Board on Aging (Gov.  George Allen)</li>\r\n	<li>Hampton Roads Community Foundation</li>\r\n	<li>Hampton Roads Estate Planning Council</li>\r\n	<li>Hampton Roads Tax Forum- Board of Directors</li>\r\n	<li>James Madison University Alumni Association, Chapter President</li>\r\n	<li>James Madison University Planned Support Advisory Council</li>\r\n	<li>Kings Grant Baptist Church- Long Range Planning Committee</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n</td>\r\n<td style=\"vertical-align: top;\">\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Leave a Legacy Hampton Roads, Inc.</li>\r\n	<li>Little Neck Swim &amp; Racquet Club, Inc.</li>\r\n	<li>Mayor\'s Committee on Aging, Virginia Beach</li>\r\n	<li>Norfolk City Union of the King\'s Daughters, Driftwood Circle</li>\r\n	<li>Old Dominion University Tax Conference Faculty</li>\r\n	<li>Senior Services of South Hampton Roads (SEVAMP), Board of Directors</li>\r\n	<li>St. Nicholas Catholic Church Finance Council/Pastoral Council</li>\r\n	<li>Tidewater Jewish Foundation Professional Education Committee</li>\r\n	<li>Tomcat Sunset, Inc.</li>\r\n	<li>United Way Foundation Professional Advisory Council</li>\r\n	<li>United Way of South Hampton Roads (Community Funding Committee)</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Aquarium and Marine Science Center</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Beach Foundation, Beach Fund Steering Committee</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Beach Foundation, Professional Advisors Committee</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Symphony, Board of Directors</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n</td>\r\n</tr>\r\n</tbody>\r\n</table>','Community Involvement','','inherit','closed','closed','','6301-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 21:05:06','2016-02-22 21:05:06','',6301,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6301-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6665,1,'2016-02-29 19:53:30','2016-02-29 19:53:30','<p>At Rack &amp; Moccia, P.C., we believe in giving back to the community some of the gifts we have received.  As lawyers, we contribute our special knowledge and experience to local charities in which we are involved.  As parents, we donate our time to educational, religious and recreational activities.  As active members of the growing Hampton Roads business community, we seek to promote better support and opportunity for our fellow citizens. Charitable organizations seek out attorneys as volunteers for their knowledge and experience in matters as diverse as formation and administration of charitable entities, tax planning, fund-raising issues, contract matters and litigation avoidance, to name a few.  We are proud to serve in leadership positions with or contribute to the following organizations for the betterment of our community:</p><table style=\"width: 100%;\"><tbody><tr><td style=\"vertical-align: top;\"><ul><li>Alzheimer\'s Association, Southeastern Virginia Chapter Board of Directors</li><li>Alzheimer\'s Association, Southeastern Virginia Chapter Planned Gifts Advisory Committee</li><li>Cape Henry Rotary Club</li><li>Catholic Charities of Hampton Roads Foundation Board</li><li>Central Business District Association of Virginia Beach</li><li>Children\'s Health Foundation Board</li><li>Children\'s Hospital of the King\'s Daughters Development Advisory Board</li><li>Community Tax Law Project</li><li>Governor\'s Advisory Board on Aging (Gov.  George Allen)</li><li>Hampton Roads Community Foundation</li><li>Hampton Roads Estate Planning Council</li><li>Hampton Roads Tax Forum- Board of Directors</li><li>James Madison University Alumni Association, Chapter President</li><li>James Madison University Planned Support Advisory Council</li><li>Kings Grant Baptist Church- Long Range Planning Committee</li></ul></td><td style=\"vertical-align: top; width: 40px;\"></td><td style=\"vertical-align: top;\"><ul><li>Leave a Legacy Hampton Roads, Inc.</li><li>Little Neck Swim &amp; Racquet Club, Inc.</li><li>Mayor\'s Committee on Aging, Virginia Beach</li><li>Norfolk City Union of the King\'s Daughters, Driftwood Circle</li><li>Old Dominion University Tax Conference Faculty</li><li>Senior Services of South Hampton Roads (SEVAMP), Board of Directors</li><li>St. Nicholas Catholic Church Finance Council/Pastoral Council</li><li>Tidewater Jewish Foundation Professional Education Committee</li><li>Tomcat Sunset, Inc.</li><li>United Way Foundation Professional Advisory Council</li><li>United Way of South Hampton Roads (Community Funding Committee)</li><li>Virginia Aquarium and Marine Science Center</li><li>Virginia Beach Foundation, Beach Fund Steering Committee</li><li>Virginia Beach Foundation, Professional Advisors Committee</li><li>Virginia Symphony, Board of Directors</li></ul></td></tr></tbody></table>','Community Involvement','','inherit','closed','closed','','6301-revision-v1','','','2016-02-29 19:53:30','2016-02-29 19:53:30','',6301,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/29/6301-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6307,1,'2016-02-22 21:06:15','2016-02-22 21:06:15','At Rack &amp; Moccia, P.C., we believe in giving back to the community some of the gifts we have received.  As lawyers, we contribute our special knowledge and experience to local charities in which we are involved.  As parents, we donate our time to educational, religious and recreational activities.  As active members of the growing Hampton Roads business community, we seek to promote better support and opportunity for our fellow citizens.\r\n\r\nCharitable organizations seek out attorneys as volunteers for their knowledge and experience in matters as diverse as formation and administration of charitable entities, tax planning, fund-raising issues, contract matters and litigation avoidance, to name a few.  We are proud to serve in leadership positions with or contribute to the following organizations for the betterment of our community:\r\n<table style=\"width: 100%;\">\r\n<tbody>\r\n<tr>\r\n<td style=\"vertical-align: top;\">\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Alzheimer\'s Association, Southeastern Virginia Chapter Board of Directors</li>\r\n	<li>Alzheimer\'s Association, Southeastern Virginia Chapter Planned Gifts Advisory\r\nCommittee</li>\r\n	<li>Cape Henry Rotary Club</li>\r\n	<li>Catholic Charities of Hampton Roads Foundation Board</li>\r\n	<li>Central Business District Association of Virginia Beach</li>\r\n	<li>Children\'s Health Foundation Board</li>\r\n	<li>Children\'s Hospital of the King\'s Daughters Development Advisory Board</li>\r\n	<li>Community Tax Law Project</li>\r\n	<li>Governor\'s Advisory Board on Aging (Gov.  George Allen)</li>\r\n	<li>Hampton Roads Community Foundation</li>\r\n	<li>Hampton Roads Estate Planning Council</li>\r\n	<li>Hampton Roads Tax Forum- Board of Directors</li>\r\n	<li>James Madison University Alumni Association, Chapter President</li>\r\n	<li>James Madison University Planned Support Advisory Council</li>\r\n	<li>Kings Grant Baptist Church- Long Range Planning Committee</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n</td>\r\n<td style=\"vertical-align: top; width: 40px;\"></td>\r\n<td style=\"vertical-align: top;\">\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Leave a Legacy Hampton Roads, Inc.</li>\r\n	<li>Little Neck Swim &amp; Racquet Club, Inc.</li>\r\n	<li>Mayor\'s Committee on Aging, Virginia Beach</li>\r\n	<li>Norfolk City Union of the King\'s Daughters, Driftwood Circle</li>\r\n	<li>Old Dominion University Tax Conference Faculty</li>\r\n	<li>Senior Services of South Hampton Roads (SEVAMP), Board of Directors</li>\r\n	<li>St. Nicholas Catholic Church Finance Council/Pastoral Council</li>\r\n	<li>Tidewater Jewish Foundation Professional Education Committee</li>\r\n	<li>Tomcat Sunset, Inc.</li>\r\n	<li>United Way Foundation Professional Advisory Council</li>\r\n	<li>United Way of South Hampton Roads (Community Funding Committee)</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Aquarium and Marine Science Center</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Beach Foundation, Beach Fund Steering Committee</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Beach Foundation, Professional Advisors Committee</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Symphony, Board of Directors</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n</td>\r\n</tr>\r\n</tbody>\r\n</table>','Community Involvement','','inherit','closed','closed','','6301-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 21:06:15','2016-02-22 21:06:15','',6301,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6301-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6308,1,'2016-02-22 21:06:54','2016-02-22 21:06:54','At Rack &amp; Moccia, P.C., we believe in giving back to the community some of the gifts we have received.  As lawyers, we contribute our special knowledge and experience to local charities in which we are involved.  As parents, we donate our time to educational, religious and recreational activities.  As active members of the growing Hampton Roads business community, we seek to promote better support and opportunity for our fellow citizens.\r\n\r\nCharitable organizations seek out attorneys as volunteers for their knowledge and experience in matters as diverse as formation and administration of charitable entities, tax planning, fund-raising issues, contract matters and litigation avoidance, to name a few.  We are proud to serve in leadership positions with or contribute to the following organizations for the betterment of our community:\r\n<table style=\"width: 100%;\">\r\n<tbody>\r\n<tr>\r\n<td style=\"vertical-align: top;\">\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Alzheimer\'s Association, Southeastern Virginia Chapter Board of Directors</li>\r\n	<li>Alzheimer\'s Association, Southeastern Virginia Chapter Planned Gifts Advisory\r\nCommittee</li>\r\n	<li>Cape Henry Rotary Club</li>\r\n	<li>Catholic Charities of Hampton Roads Foundation Board</li>\r\n	<li>Central Business District Association of Virginia Beach</li>\r\n	<li>Children\'s Health Foundation Board</li>\r\n	<li>Children\'s Hospital of the King\'s Daughters Development Advisory Board</li>\r\n	<li>Community Tax Law Project</li>\r\n	<li>Governor\'s Advisory Board on Aging (Gov.  George Allen)</li>\r\n	<li>Hampton Roads Community Foundation</li>\r\n	<li>Hampton Roads Estate Planning Council</li>\r\n	<li>Hampton Roads Tax Forum- Board of Directors</li>\r\n	<li>James Madison University Alumni Association, Chapter President</li>\r\n	<li>James Madison University Planned Support Advisory Council</li>\r\n	<li>Kings Grant Baptist Church- Long Range Planning Committee</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n</td>\r\n<td style=\"vertical-align: top; width: 40px;\"></td>\r\n<td style=\"vertical-align: top;\">\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Leave a Legacy Hampton Roads, Inc.</li>\r\n	<li>Little Neck Swim &amp; Racquet Club, Inc.</li>\r\n	<li>Mayor\'s Committee on Aging, Virginia Beach</li>\r\n	<li>Norfolk City Union of the King\'s Daughters, Driftwood Circle</li>\r\n	<li>Old Dominion University Tax Conference Faculty</li>\r\n	<li>Senior Services of South Hampton Roads (SEVAMP), Board of Directors</li>\r\n	<li>St. Nicholas Catholic Church Finance Council/Pastoral Council</li>\r\n	<li>Tidewater Jewish Foundation Professional Education Committee</li>\r\n	<li>Tomcat Sunset, Inc.</li>\r\n	<li>United Way Foundation Professional Advisory Council</li>\r\n	<li>United Way of South Hampton Roads (Community Funding Committee)</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Aquarium and Marine Science Center</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Beach Foundation, Beach Fund Steering Committee</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Beach Foundation, Professional Advisors Committee</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Symphony, Board of Directors</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n</td>\r\n</tr>\r\n</tbody>\r\n</table>','Community Involvement','','inherit','closed','closed','','6301-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 21:06:54','2016-02-22 21:06:54','',6301,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6301-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6309,1,'2016-02-22 21:07:23','2016-02-22 21:07:23','','Our Attorneys','','publish','closed','closed','','our-attorneys','','','2016-02-29 19:53:08','2016-02-29 19:53:08','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?page_id=6309',0,'page','',0),(6310,1,'2016-02-22 21:07:23','2016-02-22 21:07:23','','Our Attorneys','','inherit','closed','closed','','6309-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 21:07:23','2016-02-22 21:07:23','',6309,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6309-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6311,1,'2016-02-22 21:16:50','2016-02-22 21:16:50','Mr. Rack, founder of the Firm, concentrates his practice in the planning and drafting of estate planning documents and the administration of trusts and decedents’ estates.  He handles sophisticated asset protection and wealth preservation matters, including related estate and gift taxation compliance transactions.  He is also experienced in the litigation and mediation of estate and trust disputes, will contests, trustee removals and related fiduciary matters.  Mr. Rack is also recognized for his experience in legal matters affecting the elderly.\r\n\r\nMr. Rack has been selected by his peers as one of the “Best Lawyers in America” every year since 2009.  For all but two of the past years, Mr. Rack has been named as one of Virginia’s \"Legal Elite\" by Virginia Business magazine in the category of attorneys specializing in “Taxation, Trusts and Estates.”   Mr. Rack has also been named to the list of Virginia “Super Lawyers” for the last ten years.\r\n\r\nKevin is a Past President of the Hampton Roads Estate Planning Council, and is a Past Chairman of the Elder Law Section of the Virginia Bar Association.\r\n<h3>Education<b> </b></h3>\r\n<strong>Marshall-Wythe School of Law</strong>\r\n\r\n<strong>College of William &amp; Mary</strong>\r\nMaster of Laws (LL.M.) in Taxation (1993)\r\n\r\n<strong>T.C. Williams School of Law</strong>\r\n\r\n<strong>University of Richmond</strong>\r\nJuris Doctor (1984)\r\n\r\n<strong>James Madison University</strong>\r\nBachelor of Arts, English (Minor in Political Science) (1980)\r\n<h3>Practice Areas</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Advanced Estate Planning</li>\r\n	<li>Probate and Trust Administration</li>\r\n	<li>Elder Law / Medicaid Planning</li>\r\n	<li>Fiduciary Litigation / Will Contests</li>\r\n	<li>Business Succession Planning</li>\r\n	<li>Tax-Exempt Organizations</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Admissions to Practice<b> </b></h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit</li>\r\n	<li>United States District Court, Eastern District of Virginia</li>\r\n	<li>United States Tax Court</li>\r\n	<li>Supreme Court of Virginia</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Professional Recognition</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Selected to “The Best Lawyers in America in Trusts and Estates” (2009 - 2015) by U.S. News and World Report</li>\r\n	<li>Accredited Estate Planner (AEP)\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>(Honorary designation, approved by National Association of Estate Planners &amp; Councils)</li>\r\n	<li>Outstanding Achievement Award from the Virginia Chapter of the National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys</li>\r\n	<li>Best Lawyers in Virginia – Coastal Virginia Magazine</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Professional Affiliations</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Virginia State Bar</li>\r\n	<li>Wills, Trusts and Estates Section</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Bar Association\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Trusts &amp; Estates Section</li>\r\n	<li>Elder Law Section, Chair (2005-2007)</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Beach Bar Association</li>\r\n	<li>National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Academy of Elder Law Attorneys</li>\r\n	<li>Hampton Roads Estate Planning Council (Past President)</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Community Involvement</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Alzheimer’s Association, Southeastern Virginia Chapter\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Vice-President, Board of Directors</li>\r\n	<li>Founding Chairman, Planned Gifts Advisory Committee</li>\r\n	<li>Member, Governor’s Advisory Board on Aging (Virginia)</li>\r\n	<li>Chairman, Mayor’s Committee for the Aging (Virginia Beach)</li>\r\n	<li>Member, Board of Directors, Children’s Health Systems</li>\r\n	<li>Member, Board of Directors, Children’s Health Foundation</li>\r\n	<li>Member, Development Advisory Board, Children’s Hospital of the King’s Daughters</li>\r\n	<li>Member, Board of Directors, Virginia Symphony</li>\r\n	<li>Member, Board of Directors, Central Business District Association of Virginia Beach</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<img class=\"alignnone size-full wp-image-6384\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/2014_VirginiaCLE_Faculty_Badge-100px.jpg\" alt=\"2014_VirginiaCLE_Faculty_Badge-100px\" width=\"100\" height=\"108\" />','Kevin B. Rack','','publish','open','open','','kevin-b-rack','','','2016-02-23 19:35:53','2016-02-23 19:35:53','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?post_type=service&#038;p=6311',0,'service','',0),(6312,1,'2016-02-22 21:16:50','2016-02-22 21:16:50','','Kevin B. Rack','','inherit','closed','closed','','6311-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 21:16:50','2016-02-22 21:16:50','',6311,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6311-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6313,1,'2016-02-22 21:17:07','2016-02-22 21:17:07','Ms. Moccia concentrates her practice in every aspect of estate planning, from simple wills and powers of attorney to advanced tax planning involving revocable and irrevocable trusts and other sophisticated planning techniques.  She also serves as counsel to family members serving as fiduciary for the administration of trusts and estates, which typically involves the preparation of fiduciary income tax returns.  Ms. Moccia has expanded her practice as an elder law attorney, providing counsel to seniors and their families on matters ranging from Medicaid eligibility for long term care and federal benefits for veterans to petitions for guardianship and conservator-ship.\r\n\r\nMs. Moccia contributes her time and talent to her community, currently serving on the Planned Giving Committee of St. Mary’s Home, and having volunteered as a Certified Mediator for the Virginia Beach, Norfolk and Chesapeake Courts.  As a Board Member of the Virginia State Bar Young Lawyers Conference, she served as the VSB liaison for various projects, including: Wills for Heroes, Docket Call publication, Pro Bono Commission, Children in the Law Commission, Professional Development Conference and the Professional Development Series.  She previously served as a restoration project coordinator for the Norfolk Environmental Commission, a fund-raising organizer and volunteer for St. Jude\'s Children\'s Research Hospital, and a conflict resolution seminar trainer for The Dwelling Place and FORkids Shelter.\r\n<h3>Education<b>\r\n</b></h3>\r\n<strong>University of Miami School of Law</strong>\r\nMaster of Laws (LL.M.) in Estate Planning (2008)\r\n\r\n<strong>Regent University School of Law</strong>\r\nJuris Doctor (2007)\r\n\r\n<strong>The College of William and Mary</strong>\r\nBachelor of Arts, Psychology\r\nMinor in Business Management (2003)\r\n<h3>Practice Areas</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Essential and Advanced Estate Planning</li>\r\n	<li>Estate and Trust Administration</li>\r\n	<li>Estate and Gift Taxation</li>\r\n	<li>Elder Law</li>\r\n	<li>Conservatorships/Guardianships</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Admissions to Practice<b> </b></h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>United States Tax Court</li>\r\n	<li>Supreme Court of Virginia</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Professional Recognition</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Virginia’s Legal Elite for Taxes, Estates, Trusts, Elder Law (2014)</li>\r\n	<li>Top Attorneys in Virginia Rising Star (2013, 2014, 2015, 2016)</li>\r\n	<li>AVVO Client’s Choice Award (2015)</li>\r\n	<li>Accredited Attorney for the Department of Veterans Affairs (2010-2015)Certified Mediator (2007-2010)</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Professional Affiliations</h3>\r\n<strong>Virginia State Bar</strong>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Board of Governors, Trusts and Estates Section (2012-2016)</li>\r\n	<li>Vice Chair (2015-2016)</li>\r\n	<li>Secretary (2014-2015)</li>\r\n	<li>Newsletter Editor (2013-2014)</li>\r\n	<li>Assistant Newsletter Editor (2012-2013)</li>\r\n	<li>Board of Governors, Young Lawyers Conference (2011-2015)</li>\r\n	<li>Professional Development Conference (Committee Chair 2009-2011)</li>\r\n	<li>Education Section Prelaw Mentor Program – Mentor (2012-2013)</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<strong>American Bar Association (2009-2014)</strong>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Real Property, Trust and Estate Law Section</li>\r\n	<li>Project Salute:  Pro Bono Veterans Law Clinic</li>\r\n	<li>Young Lawyer Ambassador</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<strong>Hampton Roads Estate Planning Council Member</strong>\r\n\r\n<strong>St. Mary’s Home – Planned Giving Committee Member</strong>\r\n<h3>Publications</h3>\r\nAn Overview of <i>Battley v.</i> <i>Mortensen</i>: The End of Domestic Asset Protection Trusts?, Virginia State Bar Trusts &amp; Estates Newsletter, Spring 2012 (abridged version published in Wealthcounsel Quarterly, January 2012)\r\n\r\nTaxation of Special Needs Trusts:  Income, Gift and Estate Tax Considerations of Self-Settled and Third-Party Special Needs Trusts, Virginia State Bar Trusts &amp; Estates Newsletter, Spring 2011\r\n\r\nEstate Planning Considerations for Blended Families, Wealthcounsel Quarterly, July 2011\r\n\r\nAspirational Standards of Conduct from NAELA:  Meaningful Guidance on Ethics for the Elder Law Attorney, Co-authored with Kevin B. Rack, Esq. for 17<sup>th</sup> Advanced Elder Law Seminar, Virginia CLE (September 2008)\r\n\r\nEstate Planning Basics, Co-authored with Nathan R. Moccia, Esq., CLE Materials for NBI Teleconference, December 2011\r\n\r\nFun with Trust Funding Formulae, Co-authored with Kevin B. Rack, Esq. for Virginia CLE, 30<sup>th</sup> Annual Trusts and Estates Seminar, October 2011','Jennifer L. Moccia','','publish','open','open','','jennifer-l-moccia','','','2016-02-23 19:38:10','2016-02-23 19:38:10','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?post_type=service&#038;p=6313',0,'service','',0),(6314,1,'2016-02-22 21:17:07','2016-02-22 21:17:07','','Jennifer L. Moccia','','inherit','closed','closed','','6313-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 21:17:07','2016-02-22 21:17:07','',6313,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6313-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6315,1,'2016-02-22 21:17:38','2016-02-22 21:17:38','Ms. Rack brings her considerable litigation experience to the Firm to handle disputes arising in the context of contested wills and trusts, breaches of fiduciary duty, abuses of power of attorney against seniors, as well as removal of executors, trustees and conservators.  These complex issues call for seasoned trial lawyers whose practice is limited to these related areas of the law.\r\n\r\nWhile pursuing her law degree at the T.C. Williams School of Law at the University of Richmond, Ms. Rack was named to the Moot Court Board for brief-writing and appellate advocacy skills.  As a practicing attorney, she was named a Barrister in the American Inns of Court, an elite association of judges, attorneys and law students dedicated to excellence and professionalism in the practice of law in the courtroom.\r\n<h3>Education</h3>\r\n<strong> T.C. Williams School of Law</strong>\r\nUniversity of Richmond\r\nJuris Doctor (1985)\r\n\r\n<strong>University of Virginia</strong>\r\nBachelor of Arts, English &amp; History\r\n(With Distinction) (1981)\r\n<h3>Practice Areas</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Fiduciary Litigation</li>\r\n	<li>Guardianships</li>\r\n	<li>Will Contests</li>\r\n	<li>Estate Planning</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Admissions to Practice</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Supreme Court of Virginia (1985)</li>\r\n	<li>United States District Court, Eastern District of Virginia</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Professional Recognition</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>American Inns of Court, Lawrence W. I’Anson Chapter (Barrister)</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Professional Affiliations</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Virginia State Bar</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Bar Association</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Community Involvement</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Member, Board of Directors, Sinkinson Dyslexia Foundation, Inc.</li>\r\n	<li>Member, Board of Directors, Spirit House, Inc.</li>\r\n	<li>Norfolk City Union of the Children’s Hospital of the King’s Daughters, Driftwood Chapter</li>\r\n	<li>Co-Chair, Liturgy Committee, St. Nicholas Catholic Church in Virginia Beach\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>First Colonial High School PTA: Parliamentarian, Recipient of Patriot Award</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n</li>\r\n</ul>','Michelle R. Rack','','publish','open','open','','michelle-r-rack','','','2016-02-23 19:40:40','2016-02-23 19:40:40','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?post_type=service&#038;p=6315',0,'service','',0),(6316,1,'2016-02-22 21:17:38','2016-02-22 21:17:38','','Michelle R. Rack','','inherit','closed','closed','','6315-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 21:17:38','2016-02-22 21:17:38','',6315,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6315-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6317,1,'2016-02-22 21:17:56','2016-02-22 21:17:56','Mrs. Morris concentrates her practice in the administration of trusts and estates, which includes advising fiduciaries regarding their powers and responsibilities, guiding fiduciaries through the intricacies inherent in those tasks, and protecting executors, trustees and conservators from liability by ensuring full compliance with their statutory duties and obligations under the will and/or trust document.\r\n\r\nMrs. Morris regularly serves as counsel to fiduciary clients who require assistance with the organization and maintenance of financial documentation for the estate and/or trust, and she prepares the required fiduciary inventory and accountings for filing with the Commissioner of Accounts.  In addition, she counsels beneficiaries of estates and trusts with regard to the protection of their rights and interests.\r\n<h3>Education</h3>\r\n<strong>West Virginia University College of Law</strong>\r\nJuris Doctor (2008)\r\n<strong>College of Charleston</strong>\r\nBachelor of Science in Economics, <i>cum laude\r\n</i>Minor in Finance (2005)\r\n<h3>Practice Areas<b> </b></h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Estate and Trust Administration</li>\r\n	<li>Fiduciary Accounting</li>\r\n	<li>Fiduciary Litigation Support</li>\r\n	<li>Estate Planning</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Admissions to Practice<b> </b></h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Supreme Court of Virginia</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Academic Recognition<b> </b></h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Order of the Coif, West Virginia University College of Law</li>\r\n	<li>Honors Program Graduate, <i>cum laude</i>, College of Charleston</li>\r\n	<li>Recipient, Thomas N. Chambers Award in Taxation</li>\r\n	<li>Recipient, CALI Excellence for the Future Award in Federal Corporate Taxation and Land Use Planning</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Professional Affiliations<b> </b></h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Virginia State Bar</li>\r\n	<li>Member, Wills, Trusts &amp; Estates Section</li>\r\n</ul>','Nichole D. Morris','','publish','open','open','','nichole-d-morris','','','2016-02-23 19:41:59','2016-02-23 19:41:59','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?post_type=service&#038;p=6317',0,'service','',0),(6318,1,'2016-02-22 21:17:56','2016-02-22 21:17:56','','Nichole D. Morris','','inherit','closed','closed','','6317-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 21:17:56','2016-02-22 21:17:56','',6317,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6317-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6319,1,'2016-02-22 21:18:16','2016-02-22 21:18:16','Mr. Weaver concentrates his practice in the representation of business owners in all aspects of the business life cycle, including the formation of corporations, limited liability companies, and partnerships, compliance with statutory reporting requirements, preparation of commercial agreements and lease documents, and planning for the succession or dissolution of business entities.  Mr. Weaver also serves as counsel to fiduciaries and beneficiaries in actions seeking the removal of executors, trustees, conservators and attorneys-in-fact.\r\n<h3>Education<b> </b></h3>\r\n<strong>George Mason University School of Law (2013)</strong>\r\nJuris Doctor\r\n\r\n<strong>James Madison University (2009)</strong>\r\nBachelor of Arts, Philosophy and Religion; French language minor\r\n<h3>Practice Areas<b> </b></h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Formation of Corporations, Limited Liability Companies and Partnerships</li>\r\n	<li>Drafting Business Entity and Shareholder Agreements</li>\r\n	<li>Drafting and Reviewing Commercial Contracts and Leases</li>\r\n	<li>Business Succession Planning</li>\r\n	<li>Estate and Business Litigation</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Court Admissions</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Supreme Court of Virginia (2013)</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Academic Recognition</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>American Inns of Court – George Mason Chapter</li>\r\n	<li>Trial Advocacy / Moot Court Competition</li>\r\n	<li>Dean\'s List (JMU)</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Professional Affiliations<b> </b></h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Virginia State Bar</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Beach Bar Association</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Community Involvement</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li><b> </b>Team Leader for Hurricane Katrina disaster assistance (2005 – 2006)</li>\r\n</ul>','James E. Weaver','','draft','open','open','','james-e-weaver','','','2016-06-09 13:28:46','2016-06-09 13:28:46','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?post_type=service&#038;p=6319',0,'service','',0),(6320,1,'2016-02-22 21:18:16','2016-02-22 21:18:16','','James E. Weaver','','inherit','closed','closed','','6319-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 21:18:16','2016-02-22 21:18:16','',6319,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6319-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6321,1,'2016-02-22 21:18:32','2016-02-22 21:18:32','Mrs. Radspinner concentrates her practice in the administration of trusts and estates, which includes advising fiduciaries regarding their powers and responsibilities, guiding fiduciaries through the intricacies inherent in those tasks, and protecting executors, trustees and conservators from liability by ensuring full compliance with their statutory duties and obligations under the will and/or trust document.\r\n\r\nMrs. Radspinner serves as counsel to fiduciary clients who request that we maintain and organize the financial documentation of the estate and/or trust and prepare the required fiduciary inventory and accountings for filing with the Commissioner of Accounts. In addition, she counsels beneficiaries of estates and trusts with regard to the protection of their rights and interests.\r\n<h3>Education</h3>\r\n<strong>Villanova University School of Law (with Distinction)</strong>\r\nJuris Doctor (2012)\r\n\r\n<strong>Georgetown University</strong>\r\nBachelor of Arts, Russian Language (Minor in Business) (2007)\r\n<h3>Practice Areas</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Estate and Trust Administration</li>\r\n	<li>Fiduciary Accounting</li>\r\n	<li>Fiduciary Litigation Support</li>\r\n	<li>Estate Planning</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Court Admissions</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Supreme Court of Virginia</li>\r\n	<li>U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Academic Recognition</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Awarded Fulbright-Hays Scholarship for study abroad program with Moscow International University</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Professional Affiliations</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Virginia State Bar</li>\r\n	<li>Hampton Roads Estate Planning Council</li>\r\n</ul>','Rachel E. Radspinner','','publish','open','open','','rachel-e-radspinner','','','2016-02-23 19:45:19','2016-02-23 19:45:19','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?post_type=service&#038;p=6321',0,'service','',0),(6322,1,'2016-02-22 21:18:32','2016-02-22 21:18:32','','Rachel E. Radspinner','','inherit','closed','closed','','6321-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 21:18:32','2016-02-22 21:18:32','',6321,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6321-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6323,1,'2016-02-22 21:18:57','2016-02-22 21:18:57','Mr. Keeton concentrates his practice in estate planning and business representation. Drawing upon his past experience as General Counsel for James River Wealth Advisors, a Registered Investment Advisory firm in Richmond, Virginia, Mr. Keeton provides legal counsel for new businesses on formation of corporations and business structures, drafting internal policies and structuring commercial transactions.\r\n\r\nMr. Keeton also focuses on every aspect of estate planning, from simple wills and powers of attorney to advanced tax planning involving revocable and irrevocable trusts and other sophisticated planning techniques, with an emphasis on the business owner seeking strategies for the transfer of the family business legacy to the next generations.\r\n<h3>Education</h3>\r\n<strong>Villanova University School of Law</strong>\r\nMaster of Laws (LL.M.) in Taxation (2009)\r\n\r\n<strong>T.C. Williams School of Law</strong>\r\n\r\n<strong>University of Richmond</strong>\r\nJuris Doctor (2008)\r\n\r\n<strong>Virginia Commonwealth University</strong>\r\nMaster of Arts in History (2004)\r\n\r\n<strong>James Madison University</strong>\r\nBachelor of Arts in History (1999)\r\n<h3>Practice Areas</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Essential and Advanced Estate Planning</li>\r\n	<li>Estate and Trust Administration</li>\r\n	<li>Formation of Business Entities</li>\r\n	<li>Representation of Business Owners</li>\r\n	<li>Commercial Transactions and Leases</li>\r\n	<li>Tax Free Reorganizations for Businesses</li>\r\n	<li>Fiduciary Income Taxation</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Admissions to Practice</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Supreme Court of Virginia (2008)</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Professional Affiliations</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Richmond Estate Planning Council</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia State Bar\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Wills, Trusts and Estates Section</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Lecturer</h3>\r\nContinuing Legal Education teacher for the National Business Institute\r\n\r\n<strong>Seminar Speaker on topics such as:</strong>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Transferring Values to the Next Generation: How to transfer wealth and family values to your children</li>\r\n	<li>Gun Trusts</li>\r\n	<li>Domestic Asset Protection TrustsIRA Planning</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Publications</h3>\r\nPhillip S. Marstiller, Whistleblowers; The Exposure of Corporate Fraud Pursuant to the Sarbanes Oxley Act, The Journal, Virginia Trial\r\n\r\nLawyers Association, Volume 19, Number 2, 2007 at 22 (assisted in research and writing; received attribution).','James M Keeton, III','','publish','open','open','','james-m-keeton-iii','','','2016-02-23 19:46:35','2016-02-23 19:46:35','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?post_type=service&#038;p=6323',0,'service','',0),(6324,1,'2016-02-22 21:18:57','2016-02-22 21:18:57','','James M Keeton, III','','inherit','closed','closed','','6323-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 21:18:57','2016-02-22 21:18:57','',6323,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6323-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6325,1,'2016-02-23 18:54:48','2016-02-23 18:54:48','Mr. Rack, founder of the Firm, concentrates his practice in the planning and drafting of estate planning documents and the administration of trusts and decedents’ estates.  He handles sophisticated asset protection and wealth preservation matters, including related estate and gift taxation compliance transactions.  He is also experienced in the litigation and mediation of estate and trust disputes, will contests, trustee removals and related fiduciary matters.  Mr. Rack is also recognized for his experience in legal matters affecting the elderly.\n\nMr. Rack has been selected by his peers as one of the “Best Lawyers in America” every year since 2009.  For all but two of the past years, Mr. Rack has been named as one of Virginia’s \"Legal Elite\" by Virginia Business magazine in the category of attorneys specializing in “Taxation, Trusts and Estates.”   Mr. Rack has also been named to the list of Virginia “Super Lawyers” for the last ten years.\n\nKevin is a Past President of the Hampton Roads Estate Planning Council, and is a Past Chairman of the Elder Law Section of the Virginia Bar Association.\n<h3>Education<b> </b></h3>\n<strong>Marshall-Wythe School of Law</strong>\n\n<strong>College of William &amp; Mary</strong>\nMaster of Laws (LL.M.) in Taxation (1993)\n\n<strong>T.C. Williams School of Law</strong>\n\n<strong>University of Richmond</strong>\nJuris Doctor (1984)\n\n<strong>James Madison University</strong>\nBachelor of Arts, English (Minor in Political Science) (1980)\n<h3>Practice Areas</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Advanced Estate Planning</li>\n	<li>Probate and Trust Administration</li>\n	<li>Elder Law / Medicaid Planning</li>\n	<li>Fiduciary Litigation / Will Contests</li>\n	<li>Business Succession Planning</li>\n	<li>Tax-Exempt Organizations</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Admissions to Practice<b> </b></h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit</li>\n	<li>United States District Court, Eastern District of Virginia</li>\n	<li>United States Tax Court</li>\n	<li>Supreme Court of Virginia</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Professional Recognition</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Selected to “The Best Lawyers in America in Trusts and Estates” (2009 - 2015) by U.S. News and World Report</li>\n	<li>Accredited Estate Planner (AEP)\n<ul>\n	<li>(Honorary designation, approved by National Association of Estate Planners &amp; Councils)</li>\n	<li>Outstanding Achievement Award from the Virginia Chapter of the National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys</li>\n	<li>Best Lawyers in Virginia – Coastal Virginia Magazine</li>\n</ul>\n</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Professional Affiliations</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Virginia State Bar</li>\n	<li>Wills, Trusts and Estates Section</li>\n	<li>Virginia Bar Association\n<ul>\n	<li>Trusts &amp; Estates Section</li>\n	<li>Elder Law Section, Chair (2005-2007)</li>\n	<li>Virginia Beach Bar Association</li>\n	<li>National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys</li>\n	<li>Virginia Academy of Elder Law Attorneys</li>\n	<li>Hampton Roads Estate Planning Council (Past President)</li>\n</ul>\n</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Community Involvement</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Alzheimer’s Association, Southeastern Virginia Chapter\n<ul>\n	<li>Vice-President, Board of Directors</li>\n	<li>Founding Chairman, Planned Gifts Advisory Committee</li>\n	<li>Member, Governor’s Advisory Board on Aging (Virginia)</li>\n	<li>Chairman, Mayor’s Committee for the Aging (Virginia Beach)</li>\n	<li>Member, Board of Directors, Children’s Health Systems</li>\n	<li>Member, Board of Directors, Children’s Health Foundation</li>\n	<li>Member, Development Advisory Board, Children’s Hospital of the King’s Daughters</li>\n	<li>Member, Board of Directors, Virginia Symphony</li>\n	<li>Member, Board of Directors, Central Business District Association of Virginia Beach</li>\n</ul>\n</li>\n</ul>\n<img class=\"alignnone size-full wp-image-6384\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/2014_VirginiaCLE_Faculty_Badge-100px.jpg\" alt=\"2014_VirginiaCLE_Faculty_Badge-100px\" width=\"100\" height=\"108\" />','Kevin B. Rack','','inherit','closed','closed','','6311-autosave-v1','','','2016-02-23 18:54:48','2016-02-23 18:54:48','',6311,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6311-autosave-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6326,1,'2016-02-22 21:25:39','2016-02-22 21:25:39','','Kevin-Library','','inherit','open','closed','','kevin-library','','','2016-02-22 21:25:39','2016-02-22 21:25:39','',6311,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Kevin-Library.jpg',0,'attachment','image/jpeg',0),(6327,1,'2016-02-22 21:27:30','2016-02-22 21:27:30','Mr. Rack, founder of the Firm, concentrates his practice in the planning and drafting of estate planning documents and the administration of trusts and decedents’ estates.  He handles sophisticated asset protection and wealth preservation matters, including related estate and gift taxation compliance transactions.  He is also experienced in the litigation and mediation of estate and trust disputes, will contests, trustee removals and related fiduciary matters.  Mr. Rack is also recognized for his experience in legal matters affecting the elderly.\n\nMr. Rack has been selected by his peers as one of the “Best Lawyers in America” every year since 2009.  For all but two of the past years, Mr. Rack has been named as one of Virginia’s \"Legal Elite\" by Virginia Business magazine in the category of attorneys specializing in “Taxation, Trusts and Estates.”   Mr. Rack has also been named to the list of Virginia “Super Lawyers” for the last ten years.\n\nKevin is a Past President of the Hampton Roads Estate Planning Council, and is a Past Chairman of the Elder Law Section of the Virginia Bar Association.\n<h3>Education<b> </b></h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Marshall-Wythe School of Law</li>\n	<li>College of William &amp; Mary</li>\n	<li>Master of Laws (LL.M.) in Taxation (1993)</li>\n	<li>T.C. Williams School of Law</li>\n	<li>University of Richmond</li>\n	<li>Juris Doctor (1984)</li>\n	<li>James Madison University</li>\n	<li>Bachelor of Arts, English (Minor in Political Science) (1980)</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Practice Areas</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Advanced Estate Planning</li>\n	<li>Probate and Trust Administration</li>\n	<li>Elder Law / Medicaid Planning</li>\n	<li>Fiduciary Litigation / Will Contests</li>\n	<li>Business Succession Planning</li>\n	<li>Tax-Exempt Organizations</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Admissions to Practice<b> </b></h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit</li>\n	<li>United States District Court, Eastern District of Virginia</li>\n	<li>United States Tax Court</li>\n	<li>Supreme Court of Virginia</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Professional Recognition</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Selected to “The Best Lawyers in America in Trusts and Estates” (2009 - 2015) by U.S. News and World Report</li>\n	<li>Accredited Estate Planner (AEP)\n<ul>\n	<li>(Honorary designation, approved by National Association of Estate Planners &amp; Councils)</li>\n	<li>Outstanding Achievement Award from the Virginia Chapter of the National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys</li>\n	<li>Best Lawyers in Virginia – Coastal Virginia Magazine</li>\n</ul>\n</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Professional Affiliations</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Virginia State Bar</li>\n	<li>Wills, Trusts and Estates Section</li>\n	<li>Virginia Bar Association\n<ul>\n	<li>Trusts &amp; Estates Section</li>\n	<li>Elder Law Section, Chair (2005-2007)</li>\n	<li>Virginia Beach Bar Association</li>\n	<li>National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys</li>\n	<li>Virginia Academy of Elder Law Attorneys</li>\n	<li>Hampton Roads Estate Planning Council (Past President)</li>\n</ul>\n</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Community Involvement</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Alzheimer’s Association, Southeastern Virginia Chapter\n<ul>\n	<li>Vice-President, Board of Directors</li>\n	<li>Founding Chairman, Planned Gifts Advisory Committee</li>\n	<li>Member, Governor’s Advisory Board on Aging (Virginia)</li>\n	<li>Chairman, Mayor’s Committee for the Aging (Virginia Beach)</li>\n	<li>Member, Board of Directors, Children’s Health Systems</li>\n	<li>Member, Board of Directors, Children’s Health Foundation</li>\n	<li>Member, Development Advisory Board, Children’s Hospital of the King’s Daughters</li>\n	<li>Member, Board of Directors, Virginia Symphony</li>\n	<li>Member, Board of Directors, Central Business District Association of Virginia Beach</li>\n</ul>\n</li>\n</ul>','Kevin B. Rack','','inherit','closed','closed','','6311-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 21:27:30','2016-02-22 21:27:30','',6311,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6311-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6328,1,'2016-02-22 21:33:53','2016-02-22 21:33:53','Ms. Moccia concentrates her practice in every aspect of estate planning, from simple wills and powers of attorney to advanced tax planning involving revocable and irrevocable trusts and other sophisticated planning techniques.  She also serves as counsel to family members serving as fiduciary for the administration of trusts and estates, which typically involves the preparation of fiduciary income tax returns.  Ms. Moccia has expanded her practice as an elder law attorney, providing counsel to seniors and their families on matters ranging from Medicaid eligibility for long term care and federal benefits for veterans to petitions for guardianship and conservatorship.\r\n\r\nMs. Moccia contributes her time and talent to her community, currently serving on the Planned Giving Committee of St. Mary’s Home, and having volunteered as a Certified Mediator for the Virginia Beach, Norfolk and Chesapeake Courts.  As a Board Member of the Virginia State Bar Young Lawyers Conference, she served as the VSB liaison for various projects, including: Wills for Heroes, Docket Call publication, Pro Bono Commission, Children in the Law Commission, Professional Development Conference and the Professional Development Series.  She previously served as a restoration project coordinator for the Norfolk Environmental Commission, a fund-raising organizer and volunteer for St. Jude\'s Children\'s Research Hospital, and a conflict resolution seminar trainer for The Dwelling Place and FORkids Shelter.\r\n\r\n<b>Education\r\n</b>\r\n\r\nUniversity of Miami School of Law\r\nMaster of Laws (LL.M.) in Estate Planning (2008)\r\n\r\nRegent University School of Law\r\nJuris Doctor (2007)\r\n\r\nThe College of William and Mary\r\nBachelor of Arts, Psychology\r\nMinor in Business Management (2003)\r\n\r\n<b>Practice Areas</b>\r\n\r\nEssential and Advanced Estate Planning\r\nEstate and Trust Administration\r\n\r\nEstate and Gift Taxation\r\n\r\nElder Law\r\n\r\nConservatorships/Guardianships\r\n\r\n<b>Admissions to Practice </b>\r\n\r\nUnited States Tax Court\r\n\r\nSupreme Court of Virginia\r\n\r\n<b>Professional Recognition </b>\r\n\r\nVirginia’s Legal Elite for Taxes, Estates, Trusts, Elder Law (2014)\r\n\r\nTop Attorneys in Virginia Rising Star (2013, 2014, 2015, 2016)\r\n\r\nAVVO Client’s Choice Award (2015)\r\n\r\nAccredited Attorney for the Department of Veterans Affairs (2010-2015)\r\n\r\nCertified Mediator (2007-2010)\r\n\r\n<b>Professional Affiliations</b>\r\n\r\nVirginia State Bar\r\n\r\n- Board of Governors, Trusts and Estates Section (2012-2016)\r\n\r\n- Vice Chair (2015-2016)\r\n\r\n- Secretary (2014-2015)\r\n\r\n- Newsletter Editor (2013-2014)\r\n\r\n- Assistant Newsletter Editor (2012-2013)\r\n\r\n- Board of Governors, Young Lawyers Conference (2011-2015)\r\n\r\n- Professional Development Conference (Committee Chair 2009-2011)\r\n\r\n- Education Section Prelaw Mentor Program – Mentor (2012-2013)\r\n\r\nAmerican Bar Association (2009-2014)\r\n\r\n- Real Property, Trust and Estate Law Section\r\n\r\n- Project Salute:  Pro Bono Veterans Law Clinic\r\n\r\n- Young Lawyer Ambassador\r\n\r\nHampton Roads Estate Planning Council Member\r\n\r\nSt. Mary’s Home – Planned Giving Committee Member\r\n\r\n<b>Publications</b>\r\n\r\nAn Overview of <i>Battley v.</i> <i>Mortensen</i>: The End of Domestic Asset Protection Trusts?, Virginia State Bar Trusts &amp; Estates Newsletter, Spring 2012 (abridged version published in Wealthcounsel Quarterly, January 2012)\r\n\r\nTaxation of Special Needs Trusts:  Income, Gift and Estate Tax Considerations of Self-Settled and Third-Party Special Needs Trusts, Virginia State Bar Trusts &amp; Estates Newsletter, Spring 2011\r\n\r\nEstate Planning Considerations for Blended Families, Wealthcounsel Quarterly, July 2011\r\n\r\nAspirational Standards of Conduct from NAELA:  Meaningful Guidance on Ethics for the Elder Law Attorney, Co-authored with Kevin B. Rack, Esq. for 17<sup>th</sup> Advanced Elder Law Seminar, Virginia CLE (September 2008)\r\n\r\nEstate Planning Basics, Co-authored with Nathan R. Moccia, Esq., CLE Materials for NBI Teleconference, December 2011\r\n\r\nFun with Trust Funding Formulae, Co-authored with Kevin B. Rack, Esq. for Virginia CLE, 30<sup>th</sup> Annual Trusts and Estates Seminar, October 2011','Jennifer L. Moccia','','inherit','closed','closed','','6313-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 21:33:53','2016-02-22 21:33:53','',6313,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6313-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6329,1,'2016-02-23 19:36:01','2016-02-23 19:36:01','Ms. Moccia concentrates her practice in every aspect of estate planning, from simple wills and powers of attorney to advanced tax planning involving revocable and irrevocable trusts and other sophisticated planning techniques.  She also serves as counsel to family members serving as fiduciary for the administration of trusts and estates, which typically involves the preparation of fiduciary income tax returns.  Ms. Moccia has expanded her practice as an elder law attorney, providing counsel to seniors and their families on matters ranging from Medicaid eligibility for long term care and federal benefits for veterans to petitions for guardianship and conservator-ship.\n\nMs. Moccia contributes her time and talent to her community, currently serving on the Planned Giving Committee of St. Mary’s Home, and having volunteered as a Certified Mediator for the Virginia Beach, Norfolk and Chesapeake Courts.  As a Board Member of the Virginia State Bar Young Lawyers Conference, she served as the VSB liaison for various projects, including: Wills for Heroes, Docket Call publication, Pro Bono Commission, Children in the Law Commission, Professional Development Conference and the Professional Development Series.  She previously served as a restoration project coordinator for the Norfolk Environmental Commission, a fund-raising organizer and volunteer for St. Jude\'s Children\'s Research Hospital, and a conflict resolution seminar trainer for The Dwelling Place and FORkids Shelter.\n<h3>Education<b>\n</b></h3>\n<strong>University of Miami School of Law</strong>\nMaster of Laws (LL.M.) in Estate Planning (2008)\n\n<strong>Regent University School of Law</strong>\nJuris Doctor (2007)\n\n<strong>The College of William and Mary</strong>\nBachelor of Arts, Psychology\nMinor in Business Management (2003)\n<h3>Practice Areas</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Essential and Advanced Estate Planning</li>\n	<li>Estate and Trust Administration</li>\n	<li>Estate and Gift Taxation</li>\n	<li>Elder Law</li>\n	<li>Conservatorships/Guardianships</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Admissions to Practice<b> </b></h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>United States Tax Court</li>\n	<li>Supreme Court of Virginia</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Professional Recognition</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Virginia’s Legal Elite for Taxes, Estates, Trusts, Elder Law (2014)</li>\n	<li>Top Attorneys in Virginia Rising Star (2013, 2014, 2015, 2016)</li>\n	<li>AVVO Client’s Choice Award (2015)</li>\n	<li>Accredited Attorney for the Department of Veterans Affairs (2010-2015)Certified Mediator (2007-2010)</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Professional Affiliations</h3>\n<strong>Virginia State Bar</strong>\n<ul>\n	<li>Board of Governors, Trusts and Estates Section (2012-2016)</li>\n	<li>Vice Chair (2015-2016)</li>\n	<li>Secretary (2014-2015)</li>\n	<li>Newsletter Editor (2013-2014)</li>\n	<li>Assistant Newsletter Editor (2012-2013)</li>\n	<li>Board of Governors, Young Lawyers Conference (2011-2015)</li>\n	<li>Professional Development Conference (Committee Chair 2009-2011)</li>\n	<li>Education Section Prelaw Mentor Program – Mentor (2012-2013)</li>\n</ul>\n<strong>American Bar Association (2009-2014)</strong>\n<ul>\n	<li>Real Property, Trust and Estate Law Section</li>\n	<li>Project Salute:  Pro Bono Veterans Law Clinic</li>\n	<li>Young Lawyer Ambassador</li>\n</ul>\n<strong>Hampton Roads Estate Planning Council Member</strong>\n\n<strong>St. Mary’s Home – Planned Giving Committee Member</strong>\n<h3>Publications</h3>\nAn Overview of <i>Battley v.</i> <i>Mortensen</i>: The End of Domestic Asset Protection Trusts?, Virginia State Bar Trusts &amp; Estates Newsletter, Spring 2012 (abridged version published in Wealthcounsel Quarterly, January 2012)\n\nTaxation of Special Needs Trusts:  Income, Gift and Estate Tax Considerations of Self-Settled and Third-Party Special Needs Trusts, Virginia State Bar Trusts &amp; Estates Newsletter, Spring 2011\n\nEstate Planning Considerations for Blended Families, Wealthcounsel Quarterly, July 2011\n\nAspirational Standards of Conduct from NAELA:  Meaningful Guidance on Ethics for the Elder Law Attorney, Co-authored with Kevin B. Rack, Esq. for 17<sup>th</sup> Advanced Elder Law Seminar, Virginia CLE (September 2008)\n\nEstate Planning Basics, Co-authored with Nathan R. Moccia, Esq., CLE Materials for NBI Teleconference, December 2011\n\nFun with Trust Funding Formulae, Co-authored with Kevin B. Rack, Esq. for Virginia CLE, 30<sup>th</sup> Annual Trusts and Estates Seminar, October 2011','Jennifer L. Moccia','','inherit','closed','closed','','6313-autosave-v1','','','2016-02-23 19:36:01','2016-02-23 19:36:01','',6313,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6313-autosave-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6330,1,'2016-02-22 21:40:39','2016-02-22 21:40:39','','Jennifer-Library','','inherit','open','closed','','jennifer-library','','','2016-02-22 21:40:39','2016-02-22 21:40:39','',6313,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Jennifer-Library.jpg',0,'attachment','image/jpeg',0),(6331,1,'2016-02-22 21:40:48','2016-02-22 21:40:48','Ms. Moccia concentrates her practice in every aspect of estate planning, from simple wills and powers of attorney to advanced tax planning involving revocable and irrevocable trusts and other sophisticated planning techniques.  She also serves as counsel to family members serving as fiduciary for the administration of trusts and estates, which typically involves the preparation of fiduciary income tax returns.  Ms. Moccia has expanded her practice as an elder law attorney, providing counsel to seniors and their families on matters ranging from Medicaid eligibility for long term care and federal benefits for veterans to petitions for guardianship and conservator-ship.\r\n\r\nMs. Moccia contributes her time and talent to her community, currently serving on the Planned Giving Committee of St. Mary’s Home, and having volunteered as a Certified Mediator for the Virginia Beach, Norfolk and Chesapeake Courts.  As a Board Member of the Virginia State Bar Young Lawyers Conference, she served as the VSB liaison for various projects, including: Wills for Heroes, Docket Call publication, Pro Bono Commission, Children in the Law Commission, Professional Development Conference and the Professional Development Series.  She previously served as a restoration project coordinator for the Norfolk Environmental Commission, a fund-raising organizer and volunteer for St. Jude\'s Children\'s Research Hospital, and a conflict resolution seminar trainer for The Dwelling Place and FORkids Shelter.\r\n<h3>Education<b>\r\n</b></h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>University of Miami School of Law</li>\r\n	<li>Master of Laws (LL.M.) in Estate Planning (2008)</li>\r\n	<li>Regent University School of Law</li>\r\n	<li>Juris Doctor (2007)</li>\r\n	<li>The College of William and Mary</li>\r\n	<li>Bachelor of Arts, Psychology</li>\r\n	<li>Minor in Business Management (2003)</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Practice Areas</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Essential and Advanced Estate Planning</li>\r\n	<li>Estate and Trust Administration</li>\r\n	<li>Estate and Gift Taxation</li>\r\n	<li>Elder Law</li>\r\n	<li>Conservatorships/Guardianships</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Admissions to Practice<b> </b></h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>United States Tax Court</li>\r\n	<li>Supreme Court of Virginia</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Professional Recognition</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Virginia’s Legal Elite for Taxes, Estates, Trusts, Elder Law (2014)</li>\r\n	<li>Top Attorneys in Virginia Rising Star (2013, 2014, 2015, 2016)</li>\r\n	<li>AVVO Client’s Choice Award (2015)</li>\r\n	<li>Accredited Attorney for the Department of Veterans Affairs (2010-2015)Certified Mediator (2007-2010)</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Professional Affiliations</h3>\r\n<strong>Virginia State Bar</strong>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Board of Governors, Trusts and Estates Section (2012-2016)</li>\r\n	<li>Vice Chair (2015-2016)</li>\r\n	<li>Secretary (2014-2015)</li>\r\n	<li>Newsletter Editor (2013-2014)</li>\r\n	<li>Assistant Newsletter Editor (2012-2013)</li>\r\n	<li>Board of Governors, Young Lawyers Conference (2011-2015)</li>\r\n	<li>Professional Development Conference (Committee Chair 2009-2011)</li>\r\n	<li>Education Section Prelaw Mentor Program – Mentor (2012-2013)</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<strong>American Bar Association (2009-2014)</strong>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Real Property, Trust and Estate Law Section</li>\r\n	<li>Project Salute:  Pro Bono Veterans Law Clinic</li>\r\n	<li>Young Lawyer Ambassador</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<strong>Hampton Roads Estate Planning Council Member</strong>\r\n\r\n<strong>St. Mary’s Home – Planned Giving Committee Member</strong>\r\n<h3>Publications</h3>\r\nAn Overview of <i>Battley v.</i> <i>Mortensen</i>: The End of Domestic Asset Protection Trusts?, Virginia State Bar Trusts &amp; Estates Newsletter, Spring 2012 (abridged version published in Wealthcounsel Quarterly, January 2012)\r\n\r\nTaxation of Special Needs Trusts:  Income, Gift and Estate Tax Considerations of Self-Settled and Third-Party Special Needs Trusts, Virginia State Bar Trusts &amp; Estates Newsletter, Spring 2011\r\n\r\nEstate Planning Considerations for Blended Families, Wealthcounsel Quarterly, July 2011\r\n\r\nAspirational Standards of Conduct from NAELA:  Meaningful Guidance on Ethics for the Elder Law Attorney, Co-authored with Kevin B. Rack, Esq. for 17<sup>th</sup> Advanced Elder Law Seminar, Virginia CLE (September 2008)\r\n\r\nEstate Planning Basics, Co-authored with Nathan R. Moccia, Esq., CLE Materials for NBI Teleconference, December 2011\r\n\r\nFun with Trust Funding Formulae, Co-authored with Kevin B. Rack, Esq. for Virginia CLE, 30<sup>th</sup> Annual Trusts and Estates Seminar, October 2011','Jennifer L. Moccia','','inherit','closed','closed','','6313-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 21:40:48','2016-02-22 21:40:48','',6313,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6313-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6332,1,'2016-02-22 21:55:02','2016-02-22 21:55:02','Ms. Rack brings her considerable litigation experience to the Firm to handle disputes arising in the context of contested wills and trusts, breaches of fiduciary duty, abuses of power of attorney against seniors, as well as removal of executors, trustees and conservators.  These complex issues call for seasoned trial lawyers whose practice is limited to these related areas of the law.\n\nWhile pursuing her law degree at the T.C. Williams School of Law at the University of Richmond, Ms. Rack was named to the Moot Court Board for brief-writing and appellate advocacy skills.  As a practicing attorney, she was named a Barrister in the American Inns of Court, an elite association of judges, attorneys and law students dedicated to excellence and professionalism in the practice of law in the courtroom.\n<h3>Education</h3>\n<strong> T.C. Williams School of Law</strong>\nUniversity of Richmond\nJuris Doctor (1985)\n\n<strong>University of Virginia</strong>\nBachelor of Arts, English &amp; History\n(With Distinction) (1981)\n<h3>Practice Areas</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Fiduciary Litigation</li>\n	<li>Guardianships</li>\n	<li>Will Contests</li>\n	<li>Estate Planning</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Admissions to Practice</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Supreme Court of Virginia (1985)</li>\n	<li>United States District Court, Eastern District of Virginia</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Professional Recognition</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>American Inns of Court, Lawrence W. I’Anson Chapter (Barrister)</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Professional Affiliations</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Virginia State Bar</li>\n	<li>Virginia Bar Association</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Community Involvement</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Member, Board of Directors, Sinkinson Dyslexia Foundation, Inc.</li>\n	<li>Member, Board of Directors, Spirit House, Inc.</li>\n	<li>Norfolk City Union of the Children’s Hospital of the King’s Daughters, Driftwood Chapter</li>\n	<li>Co-Chair, Liturgy Committee, St. Nicholas Catholic Church in Virginia Beach\n<ul>\n	<li>First Colonial High School PTA: Parliamentarian, Recipient of Patriot Award</li>\n</ul>\n</li>\n</ul>','Michelle R. Rack','','inherit','closed','closed','','6315-autosave-v1','','','2016-02-22 21:55:02','2016-02-22 21:55:02','',6315,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6315-autosave-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6333,1,'2016-02-22 21:53:13','2016-02-22 21:53:13','','Michelle-Library','','inherit','open','closed','','michelle-library','','','2016-02-22 21:53:13','2016-02-22 21:53:13','',6315,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Michelle-Library.jpg',0,'attachment','image/jpeg',0),(6334,1,'2016-02-22 21:55:14','2016-02-22 21:55:14','Ms. Rack brings her considerable litigation experience to the Firm to handle disputes arising in the context of contested wills and trusts, breaches of fiduciary duty, abuses of power of attorney against seniors, as well as removal of executors, trustees and conservators.  These complex issues call for seasoned trial lawyers whose practice is limited to these related areas of the law.\r\n\r\nWhile pursuing her law degree at the T.C. Williams School of Law at the University of Richmond, Ms. Rack was named to the Moot Court Board for brief-writing and appellate advocacy skills.  As a practicing attorney, she was named a Barrister in the American Inns of Court, an elite association of judges, attorneys and law students dedicated to excellence and professionalism in the practice of law in the courtroom.\r\n<h3>Education</h3>\r\n<strong> T.C. Williams School of Law</strong>\r\nUniversity of Richmond\r\nJuris Doctor (1985)\r\n\r\n<strong>University of Virginia</strong>\r\nBachelor of Arts, English &amp; History\r\n(With Distinction) (1981)\r\n<h3>Practice Areas</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Fiduciary Litigation</li>\r\n	<li>Guardianships</li>\r\n	<li>Will Contests</li>\r\n	<li>Estate Planning</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Admissions to Practice</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Supreme Court of Virginia (1985)</li>\r\n	<li>United States District Court, Eastern District of Virginia</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Professional Recognition</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>American Inns of Court, Lawrence W. I’Anson Chapter (Barrister)</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Professional Affiliations</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Virginia State Bar</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Bar Association</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Community Involvement</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Member, Board of Directors, Sinkinson Dyslexia Foundation, Inc.</li>\r\n	<li>Member, Board of Directors, Spirit House, Inc.</li>\r\n	<li>Norfolk City Union of the Children’s Hospital of the King’s Daughters, Driftwood Chapter</li>\r\n	<li>Co-Chair, Liturgy Committee, St. Nicholas Catholic Church in Virginia Beach\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>First Colonial High School PTA: Parliamentarian, Recipient of Patriot Award</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n</li>\r\n</ul>','Michelle R. Rack','','inherit','closed','closed','','6315-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 21:55:14','2016-02-22 21:55:14','',6315,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6315-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6670,1,'2016-03-02 14:06:25','2016-03-02 14:06:25','<p>In a continued effort to provide secure and efficient service to our clients, we are pleased to announce the availability of our electronic payment gateway. Clients may submit payment for invoices using their Visa, MasterCard, American Express or Discover card. To proceed with payment of an invoice please select the button below labeled \"Submit an Invoice Payment\", you will be redirected to our secure online form to complete payment. <strong>Should you have any questions regarding your invoice, please call at 757-605-5000.</strong></p>\r\n<hr />\r\n<table style=\"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;\" align=\"center\" border=\"0\" width=\"195\" height=\"55\">\r\n<tbody>\r\n<tr>\r\n<td align=\"center\">\r\n<form action=\"https://Simplecheckout.authorize.net/payment/CatalogPayment.aspx\" method=\"post\" name=\"PrePage\"><input name=\"LinkId\" value=\"80626abe-c1c6-45e7-b817-de90073cac92\" type=\"hidden\" /> <input class=\"button_large\" value=\"Submit an Invoice Payment\" type=\"submit\" /></form>\r\n</td>\r\n</tr>\r\n</tbody>\r\n</table>\r\n<p class=\"text\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">*Please have your File Number in order to complete payment processing*</span></p>\r\n<hr />\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"font-size: 8pt;\"><em>Rack &amp; Moccia, P.C. is a separate legal entity from the credit card merchant\'s site you are about to enter. Rack &amp; Moccia, P.C. disclaims all liability or responsibility whatsoever for the transactions, representations and liabilities of the credit card merchant company that will be processing your payments once you enter the merchant\'s site, specifically including the privacy of the personal information you enter in support of your payment. In no event shall Rack &amp; Moccia, P.C. be deemed the guarantor of any transaction processed via the merchant payment web site.</em></span></p>\r\n<p><a href=\"http://www.authorize.net/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"attachment wp-att-6595\"><img class=\"aligncenter wp-image-6595 size-full\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/secure90x72.png\" alt=\"secure90x72\" width=\"90\" height=\"72\" /></a></p>','ePay Online Payments','','inherit','closed','closed','','6594-revision-v1','','','2016-03-02 14:06:25','2016-03-02 14:06:25','',6594,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/03/02/6594-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6336,1,'2016-02-22 21:55:49','2016-02-22 21:55:49','','Nicole-Library','','inherit','open','closed','','nicole-library','','','2016-02-22 21:55:49','2016-02-22 21:55:49','',6317,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Nicole-Library.jpg',0,'attachment','image/jpeg',0),(6337,1,'2016-02-22 21:56:27','2016-02-22 21:56:27','Mrs. Morris concentrates her practice in the administration of trusts and estates, which includes advising fiduciaries regarding their powers and responsibilities, guiding fiduciaries through the intricacies inherent in those tasks, and protecting executors, trustees and conservators from liability by ensuring full compliance with their statutory duties and obligations under the will and/or trust document.\n\nMrs. Morris regularly serves as counsel to fiduciary clients who require assistance with the organization and maintenance of financial documentation for the estate and/or trust, and she prepares the required fiduciary inventory and accountings for filing with the Commissioner of Accounts.  In addition, she counsels beneficiaries of estates and trusts with regard to the protection of their rights and interests.\n\n<b> Education</b>\n\n<strong>West Virginia University College of Law</strong>\nJuris Doctor (2008)\n<strong>College of Charleston</strong>\nBachelor of Science in Economics, <i>cum laude\n</i>Minor in Finance (2005)\n\n<b>Practice Areas </b>\n\nEstate and Trust Administration\n\nFiduciary Accounting\n\nFiduciary Litigation Support\n\nEstate Planning\n\n<b>Admissions to Practice </b>\n\nSupreme Court of Virginia\n<b>Academic Recognition </b>\n\nOrder of the Coif, West Virginia University College of Law\n\nHonors Program Graduate, <i>cum laude</i>, College of Charleston\nRecipient, Thomas N. Chambers Award in Taxation\n\nRecipient, CALI Excellence for the Future Award in Federal Corporate Taxation and Land Use Planning\n\n<b>Professional Affiliations </b>\n\nVirginia State Bar\n\n- Member, Wills, Trusts &amp; Estates Section','Nichole D. Morris','','inherit','closed','closed','','6317-autosave-v1','','','2016-02-22 21:56:27','2016-02-22 21:56:27','',6317,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6317-autosave-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6338,1,'2016-02-22 21:57:38','2016-02-22 21:57:38','Mrs. Morris concentrates her practice in the administration of trusts and estates, which includes advising fiduciaries regarding their powers and responsibilities, guiding fiduciaries through the intricacies inherent in those tasks, and protecting executors, trustees and conservators from liability by ensuring full compliance with their statutory duties and obligations under the will and/or trust document.\r\n\r\nMrs. Morris regularly serves as counsel to fiduciary clients who require assistance with the organization and maintenance of financial documentation for the estate and/or trust, and she prepares the required fiduciary inventory and accountings for filing with the Commissioner of Accounts.  In addition, she counsels beneficiaries of estates and trusts with regard to the protection of their rights and interests.\r\n<h3>Education</h3>\r\n<strong>West Virginia University College of Law</strong>\r\nJuris Doctor (2008)\r\n<strong>College of Charleston</strong>\r\nBachelor of Science in Economics, <i>cum laude\r\n</i>Minor in Finance (2005)\r\n<h3>Practice Areas<b> </b></h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Estate and Trust Administration</li>\r\n	<li>Fiduciary Accounting</li>\r\n	<li>Fiduciary Litigation Support</li>\r\n	<li>Estate Planning</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Admissions to Practice<b> </b></h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Supreme Court of Virginia</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Academic Recognition<b> </b></h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Order of the Coif, West Virginia University College of Law</li>\r\n	<li>Honors Program Graduate, <i>cum laude</i>, College of Charleston</li>\r\n	<li>Recipient, Thomas N. Chambers Award in Taxation</li>\r\n	<li>Recipient, CALI Excellence for the Future Award in Federal Corporate Taxation and Land Use Planning</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Professional Affiliations<b> </b></h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Virginia State Bar</li>\r\n	<li>Member, Wills, Trusts &amp; Estates Section</li>\r\n</ul>','Nichole D. Morris','','inherit','closed','closed','','6317-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 21:57:38','2016-02-22 21:57:38','',6317,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6317-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6339,1,'2016-02-22 22:00:52','2016-02-22 22:00:52','Mr. Weaver concentrates his practice in the representation of business owners in all aspects of the business life cycle, including the formation of corporations, limited liability companies, and partnerships, compliance with statutory reporting requirements, preparation of commercial agreements and lease documents, and planning for the succession or dissolution of business entities.  Mr. Weaver also serves as counsel to fiduciaries and beneficiaries in actions seeking the removal of executors, trustees, conservators and attorneys-in-fact.\n<h3>Education<b> </b></h3>\n<strong>George Mason University School of Law (2013)</strong>\nJuris Doctor\n\n<strong>James Madison University (2009)</strong>\nBachelor of Arts, Philosophy and Religion; French language minor\n<h3>Practice Areas<b> </b></h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Formation of Corporations, Limited Liability Companies and Partnerships</li>\n	<li>Drafting Business Entity and Shareholder Agreements</li>\n	<li>Drafting and Reviewing Commercial Contracts and Leases</li>\n	<li>Business Succession Planning</li>\n	<li>Estate and Business Litigation</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Court Admissions</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Supreme Court of Virginia (2013)</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Academic Recognition</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>American Inns of Court – George Mason Chapter</li>\n	<li>Trial Advocacy / Moot Court Competition</li>\n	<li>Dean\'s List (JMU)</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Professional Affiliations<b> </b></h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Virginia State Bar</li>\n	<li>Virginia Beach Bar Association</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Community Involvement</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li><b> </b>Team Leader for Hurricane Katrina disaster assistance (2005 – 2006)</li>\n</ul>','James E. Weaver','','inherit','closed','closed','','6319-autosave-v1','','','2016-02-22 22:00:52','2016-02-22 22:00:52','',6319,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6319-autosave-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6340,1,'2016-02-22 21:59:46','2016-02-22 21:59:46','','James-library','','inherit','open','closed','','james-library','','','2016-02-22 21:59:46','2016-02-22 21:59:46','',6319,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/James-library.png',0,'attachment','image/png',0),(6341,1,'2016-02-22 22:01:46','2016-02-22 22:01:46','Mr. Weaver concentrates his practice in the representation of business owners in all aspects of the business life cycle, including the formation of corporations, limited liability companies, and partnerships, compliance with statutory reporting requirements, preparation of commercial agreements and lease documents, and planning for the succession or dissolution of business entities.  Mr. Weaver also serves as counsel to fiduciaries and beneficiaries in actions seeking the removal of executors, trustees, conservators and attorneys-in-fact.\r\n<h3>Education<b> </b></h3>\r\n<strong>George Mason University School of Law (2013)</strong>\r\nJuris Doctor\r\n\r\n<strong>James Madison University (2009)</strong>\r\nBachelor of Arts, Philosophy and Religion; French language minor\r\n<h3>Practice Areas<b> </b></h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Formation of Corporations, Limited Liability Companies and Partnerships</li>\r\n	<li>Drafting Business Entity and Shareholder Agreements</li>\r\n	<li>Drafting and Reviewing Commercial Contracts and Leases</li>\r\n	<li>Business Succession Planning</li>\r\n	<li>Estate and Business Litigation</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Court Admissions</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Supreme Court of Virginia (2013)</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Academic Recognition</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>American Inns of Court – George Mason Chapter</li>\r\n	<li>Trial Advocacy / Moot Court Competition</li>\r\n	<li>Dean\'s List (JMU)</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Professional Affiliations<b> </b></h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Virginia State Bar</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Beach Bar Association</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Community Involvement</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li><b> </b>Team Leader for Hurricane Katrina disaster assistance (2005 – 2006)</li>\r\n</ul>','James E. Weaver','','inherit','closed','closed','','6319-revision-v1','','','2016-02-22 22:01:46','2016-02-22 22:01:46','',6319,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/22/6319-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6342,1,'2016-02-23 15:38:24','2016-02-23 15:38:24','Mrs. Radspinner concentrates her practice in the administration of trusts and estates, which includes advising fiduciaries regarding their powers and responsibilities, guiding fiduciaries through the intricacies inherent in those tasks, and protecting executors, trustees and conservators from liability by ensuring full compliance with their statutory duties and obligations under the will and/or trust document.\n\nMrs. Radspinner serves as counsel to fiduciary clients who request that we maintain and organize the financial documentation of the estate and/or trust and prepare the required fiduciary inventory and accountings for filing with the Commissioner of Accounts. In addition, she counsels beneficiaries of estates and trusts with regard to the protection of their rights and interests.\n<h3>Education</h3>\nVillanova University School of Law (with Distinction) Juris Doctor (2012)\n\nGeorgetown University\nBachelor of Arts, Russian Language (Minor in Business) (2007)\n<h3>Practice Areas</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Estate and Trust Administration</li>\n	<li>Fiduciary Accounting</li>\n	<li>Fiduciary Litigation Support</li>\n	<li>Estate Planning</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Court Admissions</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Supreme Court of Virginia</li>\n	<li>U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Academic Recognition</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Awarded Fulbright-Hays Scholarship for study abroad program with Moscow International University</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Professional Affiliations</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Virginia State Bar</li>\n	<li>Hampton Roads Estate Planning Council</li>\n</ul>','Rachel E. Radspinner','','inherit','closed','closed','','6321-autosave-v1','','','2016-02-23 15:38:24','2016-02-23 15:38:24','',6321,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/23/6321-autosave-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6343,1,'2016-02-23 15:38:50','2016-02-23 15:38:50','','Rachel-Library','','inherit','open','closed','','rachel-library','','','2016-02-23 15:38:50','2016-02-23 15:38:50','',6321,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Rachel-Library.jpg',0,'attachment','image/jpeg',0),(6344,1,'2016-02-23 15:39:42','2016-02-23 15:39:42','Mrs. Radspinner concentrates her practice in the administration of trusts and estates, which includes advising fiduciaries regarding their powers and responsibilities, guiding fiduciaries through the intricacies inherent in those tasks, and protecting executors, trustees and conservators from liability by ensuring full compliance with their statutory duties and obligations under the will and/or trust document.\r\n\r\nMrs. Radspinner serves as counsel to fiduciary clients who request that we maintain and organize the financial documentation of the estate and/or trust and prepare the required fiduciary inventory and accountings for filing with the Commissioner of Accounts. In addition, she counsels beneficiaries of estates and trusts with regard to the protection of their rights and interests.\r\n<h3>Education</h3>\r\n<strong>Villanova University School of Law (with Distinction)</strong>\r\nJuris Doctor (2012)\r\n\r\n<strong>Georgetown University</strong>\r\nBachelor of Arts, Russian Language (Minor in Business) (2007)\r\n<h3>Practice Areas</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Estate and Trust Administration</li>\r\n	<li>Fiduciary Accounting</li>\r\n	<li>Fiduciary Litigation Support</li>\r\n	<li>Estate Planning</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Court Admissions</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Supreme Court of Virginia</li>\r\n	<li>U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Academic Recognition</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Awarded Fulbright-Hays Scholarship for study abroad program with Moscow International University</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Professional Affiliations</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Virginia State Bar</li>\r\n	<li>Hampton Roads Estate Planning Council</li>\r\n</ul>','Rachel E. Radspinner','','inherit','closed','closed','','6321-revision-v1','','','2016-02-23 15:39:42','2016-02-23 15:39:42','',6321,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/23/6321-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6345,1,'2016-02-23 16:20:52','2016-02-23 16:20:52','Mr. Keeton concentrates his practice in estate planning and business representation. Drawing upon his past experience as General Counsel for James River Wealth Advisors, a Registered Investment Advisory firm in Richmond, Virginia.  Mr. Keeton provides legal counsel for new businesses on formation of corporations and business structures, drafting internal policies and structuring commercial transactions.\n\nMr. Keeton also focuses on every aspect of estate planning, from simple wills and powers of attorney to advanced tax planning involving revocable and irrevocable trusts and other sophisticated planning techniques, with an emphasis on the business owner seeking strategies for the transfer of the family business legacy to the next generations.\n<h3>Education</h3>\n<strong>Villanova University School of Law</strong>\nMaster of Laws (LL.M.) in Taxation (2009)\n\n<strong>T.C. Williams School of Law</strong>\n\n<strong>University of Richmond</strong>\nJuris Doctor (2008)\n\n<strong>Virginia Commonwealth University</strong>\nMaster of Arts in History (2004)\n\n<strong>James Madison University</strong>\nBachelor of Arts in History (1999)\n<h3>Practice Areas</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Essential and Advanced Estate Planning</li>\n	<li>Estate and Trust Administration</li>\n	<li>Formation of Business Entities</li>\n	<li>Representation of Business Owners</li>\n	<li>Commercial Transactions and Leases</li>\n	<li>Tax Free Reorganizations for Businesses</li>\n	<li>Fiduciary Income Taxation</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Admissions to Practice</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Supreme Court of Virginia (2008)</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Professional Affiliations</h3>\n<ul>\n	<li>Richmond Estate Planning Council</li>\n	<li>Virginia State Bar\n<ul>\n	<li>Wills, Trusts and Estates Section</li>\n</ul>\n</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Lecturer</h3>\nContinuing Legal Education teacher for the National Business Institute\n\n<strong>Seminar Speaker on topics such as:</strong>\n<ul>\n	<li>Transferring Values to the Next Generation: How to transfer wealth and family values to your children</li>\n	<li>Gun Trusts</li>\n	<li>Domestic Asset Protection TrustsIRA Planning</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>Publications</h3>\nPhillip S. Marstiller, Whistleblowers; The Exposure of Corporate Fraud Pursuant to the Sarbanes Oxley Act, The Journal, Virginia Trial\n\nLawyers Association, Volume 19, Number 2, 2007 at 22 (assisted in research and writing; received attribution).','James M Keeton, III','','inherit','closed','closed','','6323-autosave-v1','','','2016-02-23 16:20:52','2016-02-23 16:20:52','',6323,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/23/6323-autosave-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6347,1,'2016-02-23 15:44:40','2016-02-23 15:44:40','','rack-moccia-logo','','inherit','open','closed','','rack-moccia-logo','','','2016-02-23 15:44:40','2016-02-23 15:44:40','',6323,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/rack-moccia-logo.jpg',0,'attachment','image/jpeg',0),(6348,1,'2016-02-23 15:46:54','2016-02-23 15:46:54','Mr. Keeton concentrates his practice in estate planning and business representation. Drawing upon his past experience as General Counsel for James River Wealth Advisors, a Registered Investment Advisory firm in Richmond, Virginia, Mr. Keeton provides legal counsel for new businesses on formation of corporations and business structures, drafting internal policies and structuring commercial transactions.\r\n\r\nMr. Keeton also focuses on every aspect of estate planning, from simple wills and powers of attorney to advanced tax planning involving revocable and irrevocable trusts and other sophisticated planning techniques, with an emphasis on the business owner seeking strategies for the transfer of the family business legacy to the next generations.\r\n<h3>Education</h3>\r\n<strong>Villanova University School of Law</strong>\r\nMaster of Laws (LL.M.) in Taxation (2009)\r\n\r\n<strong>T.C. Williams School of Law</strong>\r\n\r\n<strong>University of Richmond</strong>\r\nJuris Doctor (2008)\r\n\r\n<strong>Virginia Commonwealth University</strong>\r\nMaster of Arts in History (2004)\r\n\r\n<strong>James Madison University</strong>\r\nBachelor of Arts in History (1999)\r\n<h3>Practice Areas</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Essential and Advanced Estate Planning</li>\r\n	<li>Estate and Trust Administration</li>\r\n	<li>Formation of Business Entities</li>\r\n	<li>Representation of Business Owners</li>\r\n	<li>Commercial Transactions and Leases</li>\r\n	<li>Tax Free Reorganizations for Businesses</li>\r\n	<li>Fiduciary Income Taxation</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Admissions to Practice</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Supreme Court of Virginia (2008)</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Professional Affiliations</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Richmond Estate Planning Council</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia State Bar\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Wills, Trusts and Estates Section</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Lecturer</h3>\r\nContinuing Legal Education teacher for the National Business Institute\r\n\r\n<strong>Seminar Speaker on topics such as:</strong>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Transferring Values to the Next Generation: How to transfer wealth and family values to your children</li>\r\n	<li>Gun Trusts</li>\r\n	<li>Domestic Asset Protection TrustsIRA Planning</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Publications</h3>\r\nPhillip S. Marstiller, Whistleblowers; The Exposure of Corporate Fraud Pursuant to the Sarbanes Oxley Act, The Journal, Virginia Trial\r\n\r\nLawyers Association, Volume 19, Number 2, 2007 at 22 (assisted in research and writing; received attribution).','James M Keeton, III','','inherit','closed','closed','','6323-revision-v1','','','2016-02-23 15:46:54','2016-02-23 15:46:54','',6323,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/23/6323-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6349,1,'2016-02-23 15:47:40','2016-02-23 15:47:40','Mr. Rack, founder of the Firm, concentrates his practice in the planning and drafting of estate planning documents and the administration of trusts and decedents’ estates.  He handles sophisticated asset protection and wealth preservation matters, including related estate and gift taxation compliance transactions.  He is also experienced in the litigation and mediation of estate and trust disputes, will contests, trustee removals and related fiduciary matters.  Mr. Rack is also recognized for his experience in legal matters affecting the elderly.\r\n\r\nMr. Rack has been selected by his peers as one of the “Best Lawyers in America” every year since 2009.  For all but two of the past years, Mr. Rack has been named as one of Virginia’s \"Legal Elite\" by Virginia Business magazine in the category of attorneys specializing in “Taxation, Trusts and Estates.”   Mr. Rack has also been named to the list of Virginia “Super Lawyers” for the last ten years.\r\n\r\nKevin is a Past President of the Hampton Roads Estate Planning Council, and is a Past Chairman of the Elder Law Section of the Virginia Bar Association.\r\n<h3>Education<b> </b></h3>\r\n<strong>Marshall-Wythe School of Law</strong>\r\n\r\n<strong>College of William &amp; Mary</strong>\r\nMaster of Laws (LL.M.) in Taxation (1993)\r\n\r\n<strong>T.C. Williams School of Law</strong>\r\n\r\n<strong>University of Richmond</strong>\r\nJuris Doctor (1984)\r\n\r\n<strong>James Madison University</strong>\r\nBachelor of Arts, English (Minor in Political Science) (1980)\r\n<h3>Practice Areas</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Advanced Estate Planning</li>\r\n	<li>Probate and Trust Administration</li>\r\n	<li>Elder Law / Medicaid Planning</li>\r\n	<li>Fiduciary Litigation / Will Contests</li>\r\n	<li>Business Succession Planning</li>\r\n	<li>Tax-Exempt Organizations</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Admissions to Practice<b> </b></h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit</li>\r\n	<li>United States District Court, Eastern District of Virginia</li>\r\n	<li>United States Tax Court</li>\r\n	<li>Supreme Court of Virginia</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Professional Recognition</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Selected to “The Best Lawyers in America in Trusts and Estates” (2009 - 2015) by U.S. News and World Report</li>\r\n	<li>Accredited Estate Planner (AEP)\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>(Honorary designation, approved by National Association of Estate Planners &amp; Councils)</li>\r\n	<li>Outstanding Achievement Award from the Virginia Chapter of the National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys</li>\r\n	<li>Best Lawyers in Virginia – Coastal Virginia Magazine</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Professional Affiliations</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Virginia State Bar</li>\r\n	<li>Wills, Trusts and Estates Section</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Bar Association\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Trusts &amp; Estates Section</li>\r\n	<li>Elder Law Section, Chair (2005-2007)</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Beach Bar Association</li>\r\n	<li>National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys</li>\r\n	<li>Virginia Academy of Elder Law Attorneys</li>\r\n	<li>Hampton Roads Estate Planning Council (Past President)</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Community Involvement</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Alzheimer’s Association, Southeastern Virginia Chapter\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Vice-President, Board of Directors</li>\r\n	<li>Founding Chairman, Planned Gifts Advisory Committee</li>\r\n	<li>Member, Governor’s Advisory Board on Aging (Virginia)</li>\r\n	<li>Chairman, Mayor’s Committee for the Aging (Virginia Beach)</li>\r\n	<li>Member, Board of Directors, Children’s Health Systems</li>\r\n	<li>Member, Board of Directors, Children’s Health Foundation</li>\r\n	<li>Member, Development Advisory Board, Children’s Hospital of the King’s Daughters</li>\r\n	<li>Member, Board of Directors, Virginia Symphony</li>\r\n	<li>Member, Board of Directors, Central Business District Association of Virginia Beach</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n</li>\r\n</ul>','Kevin B. Rack','','inherit','closed','closed','','6311-revision-v1','','','2016-02-23 15:47:40','2016-02-23 15:47:40','',6311,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/23/6311-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6350,1,'2016-02-23 15:48:21','2016-02-23 15:48:21','Ms. Moccia concentrates her practice in every aspect of estate planning, from simple wills and powers of attorney to advanced tax planning involving revocable and irrevocable trusts and other sophisticated planning techniques.  She also serves as counsel to family members serving as fiduciary for the administration of trusts and estates, which typically involves the preparation of fiduciary income tax returns.  Ms. Moccia has expanded her practice as an elder law attorney, providing counsel to seniors and their families on matters ranging from Medicaid eligibility for long term care and federal benefits for veterans to petitions for guardianship and conservator-ship.\r\n\r\nMs. Moccia contributes her time and talent to her community, currently serving on the Planned Giving Committee of St. Mary’s Home, and having volunteered as a Certified Mediator for the Virginia Beach, Norfolk and Chesapeake Courts.  As a Board Member of the Virginia State Bar Young Lawyers Conference, she served as the VSB liaison for various projects, including: Wills for Heroes, Docket Call publication, Pro Bono Commission, Children in the Law Commission, Professional Development Conference and the Professional Development Series.  She previously served as a restoration project coordinator for the Norfolk Environmental Commission, a fund-raising organizer and volunteer for St. Jude\'s Children\'s Research Hospital, and a conflict resolution seminar trainer for The Dwelling Place and FORkids Shelter.\r\n<h3>Education<b>\r\n</b></h3>\r\n<strong>University of Miami School of Law</strong>\r\nMaster of Laws (LL.M.) in Estate Planning (2008)\r\n\r\n<strong>Regent University School of Law</strong>\r\nJuris Doctor (2007)\r\n\r\n<strong>The College of William and Mary</strong>\r\nBachelor of Arts, Psychology\r\nMinor in Business Management (2003)\r\n<h3>Practice Areas</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Essential and Advanced Estate Planning</li>\r\n	<li>Estate and Trust Administration</li>\r\n	<li>Estate and Gift Taxation</li>\r\n	<li>Elder Law</li>\r\n	<li>Conservatorships/Guardianships</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Admissions to Practice<b> </b></h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>United States Tax Court</li>\r\n	<li>Supreme Court of Virginia</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Professional Recognition</h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Virginia’s Legal Elite for Taxes, Estates, Trusts, Elder Law (2014)</li>\r\n	<li>Top Attorneys in Virginia Rising Star (2013, 2014, 2015, 2016)</li>\r\n	<li>AVVO Client’s Choice Award (2015)</li>\r\n	<li>Accredited Attorney for the Department of Veterans Affairs (2010-2015)Certified Mediator (2007-2010)</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<h3>Professional Affiliations</h3>\r\n<strong>Virginia State Bar</strong>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Board of Governors, Trusts and Estates Section (2012-2016)</li>\r\n	<li>Vice Chair (2015-2016)</li>\r\n	<li>Secretary (2014-2015)</li>\r\n	<li>Newsletter Editor (2013-2014)</li>\r\n	<li>Assistant Newsletter Editor (2012-2013)</li>\r\n	<li>Board of Governors, Young Lawyers Conference (2011-2015)</li>\r\n	<li>Professional Development Conference (Committee Chair 2009-2011)</li>\r\n	<li>Education Section Prelaw Mentor Program – Mentor (2012-2013)</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<strong>American Bar Association (2009-2014)</strong>\r\n<ul>\r\n	<li>Real Property, Trust and Estate Law Section</li>\r\n	<li>Project Salute:  Pro Bono Veterans Law Clinic</li>\r\n	<li>Young Lawyer Ambassador</li>\r\n</ul>\r\n<strong>Hampton Roads Estate Planning Council Member</strong>\r\n\r\n<strong>St. Mary’s Home – Planned Giving Committee Member</strong>\r\n<h3>Publications</h3>\r\nAn Overview of <i>Battley v.</i> <i>Mortensen</i>: The End of Domestic Asset Protection Trusts?, Virginia State Bar Trusts &amp; Estates Newsletter, Spring 2012 (abridged version published in Wealthcounsel Quarterly, January 2012)\r\n\r\nTaxation of Special Needs Trusts:  Income, Gift and Estate Tax Considerations of Self-Settled and Third-Party Special Needs Trusts, Virginia State Bar Trusts &amp; Estates Newsletter, Spring 2011\r\n\r\nEstate Planning Considerations for Blended Families, Wealthcounsel Quarterly, July 2011\r\n\r\nAspirational Standards of Conduct from NAELA:  Meaningful Guidance on Ethics for the Elder Law Attorney, Co-authored with Kevin B. Rack, Esq. for 17<sup>th</sup> Advanced Elder Law Seminar, Virginia CLE (September 2008)\r\n\r\nEstate Planning Basics, Co-authored with Nathan R. Moccia, Esq., CLE Materials for NBI Teleconference, December 2011\r\n\r\nFun with Trust Funding Formulae, Co-authored with Kevin B. Rack, Esq. for Virginia CLE, 30<sup>th</sup> Annual Trusts and Estates Seminar, October 2011','Jennifer L. Moccia','','inherit','closed','closed','','6313-revision-v1','','','2016-02-23 15:48:21','2016-02-23 15:48:21','',6313,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/23/6313-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6372,1,'2016-02-23 16:35:25','2016-02-23 16:35:25','','Practice Areas','','inherit','closed','closed','','5447-revision-v1','','','2016-02-23 16:35:25','2016-02-23 16:35:25','',5447,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/23/5447-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6373,1,'2016-02-23 16:35:56','2016-02-23 16:35:56','The areas of practice in the Firm are concentrated to estate planning and administration, elder law, fiduciary services, taxation and charitable entities. In this way, we are able to focus our efforts on separate but related legal matters for our clients. Business owners, for example, have access to legal counsel on matters ranging from living trusts to stockholder agreements to tax planning for exit strategies. Our lawyers handle disputes involving will contests, removal of trustees, appointment of guardians and taxpayer litigation. In sum, we strive to meet or exceed client expectations for the type and level of services provided within the specialized areas of a “boutique” law firm.','Practice Areas','','inherit','closed','closed','','5447-revision-v1','','','2016-02-23 16:35:56','2016-02-23 16:35:56','',5447,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/23/5447-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6438,1,'2016-02-24 21:38:50','2016-02-24 21:38:50','Since the internet is the most significant resource of all time, and since many of our clients, advisors and friends seek answers on the world wide web, we decided to establish a listing of our favorite websites for visitors to ours.  Some addresses are for the charitable organizations which we support, either on a professional basis or a personal one, while others are included for general interest in the information or services provided.  Several are just plain curiosities and, alas, all are rated G. <strong>Please enjoy!</strong>\r\n<h3>Alzheimer\'s Association</h3>\r\nThe mission of the association is to eliminate Alzheimer\'s disease through the advancement of research; to provide and enhance care and support for all affected; and to reduce the risk of dementia through the promotion of brain health. - The Alzheimer’s Association - Southeastern Virginia Chapter has been proudly helping those in need for the last 30 years. We serve the community on a local level with four offices reaching deep into the 7,400 square mile area. Our goal is to provide help for today and hope for tomorrow for those living with Alzheimer\'s disease and their families.\r\nWebsite: <a href=\"http://www.alz.org/seva\">www.alz.org</a>\r\nSoutheastern Virginia Chapter website: <a href=\"http://www.alz.org/seva\">www.alz.org/seva</a>\r\n<h3>Catholic Charities of Hampton Roads Foundation</h3>\r\nCatholic Charities USA is the national office for local Catholic Charities agencies and affiliates nationwide. Catholic Charities USA provides strong leadership and support to enhance the work of local agencies in their efforts to reduce poverty, support families, and empower communities.  Catholic Charities USA\'s members provide help and create hope for more than 9 million people of all faiths each year.\r\nWebsite: <a href=\"http://www.catholiccharitiesusa.org\">www.catholiccharitiesusa.org</a>\r\nCatholic Charities of Eastern Virginia website: <a href=\"http://www.cceva.org/\">www.cceva.org/</a>\r\n<h3>Children\'s Hospital of the King\'s Daughters</h3>\r\nChildren’s Hospital of The King’s Daughters is the facility of choice for pediatric care in southeastern Virginia and northeastern North Carolina.\r\n\r\nWhether a child needs hospitalization, ongoing care for a chronic illness, outpatient surgery or primary care, CHKD Health System provides the staff, facilities and technologies that address the unique demands of childhood.\r\n\r\nSince the Norfolk City Union of The King’s Daughters established the hospital in 1961, CHKD has undergone two major renovations and expansions and is now at the hub of a comprehensive system of caring dedicated exclusively to children.\r\nWebsite: <a href=\"http://www.chkd.org\">www.chkd.org</a>\r\n<h3>Commonwealth Community Trust</h3>\r\nCommonwealth Community Trust (CCT) is a 501(C) 3 nonprofit organization that was founded in 1990 by family members who have a loved one with a disability and by concerned professionals.\r\n\r\nThe mission of CCT is to administer Special Needs Trusts so that people with disabilities and their loved ones can plan for their financial future. For clients who receive Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and/or Medicaid, the trust will not jeopardize government benefits.\r\nWebsite: <a href=\"http://www.commonwealthcommunitytrust.org\">www.commonwealthcommunitytrust.org</a>\r\n<h3>Hampton Roads Community Foundation</h3>\r\nTo inspire philanthropy and transform the quality of life in southeastern Virginia.  We connect you with charitable causes to improve life in our region.\r\n\r\nAs the largest community foundation in the Hampton Roads area of Virginia, we manage permanent funds created by people from all walks of life. We invest their gifts to grow over time while awarding grants to nonprofit organizations and scholarships to students.\r\nWebsite: <a href=\"http://www.norfolkfoundation.org\">www.norfolkfoundation.org</a>\r\n<h3>Internal Revenue Service</h3>\r\nProvide America\'s taxpayers top quality service by helping them understand and meet their tax responsibilities and enforce the law with integrity and fairness to all.\r\nWebsite: <a href=\"http://www.irs.gov\">www.irs.gov</a>\r\n<h3>Mary Buckley Foundation</h3>\r\nAll our efforts are directed toward helping people with traumatic brain injuries feel that they are a part of society again, as well as supporting their families. In addition, we provide educational services to the community through school and youth groups. We are dedicated to enhancing the lives of brain injury survivors by maximizing their potential vocationally, socially and emotionally.\r\nWebsite: <a href=\"http://www.maryfoundation.org\">www.maryfoundation.org</a>\r\n<h3>Operation Smile</h3>\r\nOperation Smile mobilizes a world of generous hearts to heal children\'s smiles and transform lives across the globe.\r\n\r\nWe believe that all children deserve to live their lives with dignity. And for those suffering from cleft lip, cleft palate or other facial deformities, dignity begins with a smile.\r\n\r\nDriven by our universal compassion for children, we work worldwide to repair childhood facial deformities by delivering safe, effective surgical care directly to patients. The global partnerships we create, the knowledge we share and the infrastructure we build leave a legacy that lives well beyond our medical missions, making a lasting difference in our world.\r\n\r\nOur impact is felt not just through the children we heal, but through the daily transformation of donors, volunteers and staff as we fulfill our shared vision and see immediate, life-changing results.\r\nWebsite: <a href=\"http://www.operationsmile.org\">www.operationsmile.org</a>\r\n<h3>Senior Services of South Hampton Roads</h3>\r\nSenior Services of Southeastern Virginia is the Area Agency on Aging serving residents of Chesapeake, Franklin, Norfolk, Portsmouth, Suffolk, Virginia Beach and Isle of Wight and Southampton counties. Our mission: Senior Services of Southeastern Virginia is the regional organization in South Hampton Roads that supports and enriches the lives of older Virginians and their families through advocacy, education, information, products and comprehensive services.\r\nWebsite: <a href=\"http://www.ssseva.org/\">www.ssseva.org/</a>\r\n<h3>Jewish Family Services of Tidewater</h3>\r\nJewish Family Service (JFS) provides a full spectrum of services to meet the health, education and welfare needs of Hampton Roads residents. Established in 1946, JFS has had a long-standing tradition of caring and concern for the community it serves. Services are provided by highly trained staff and caring volunteers, supported by an active Board of Directors and liaisons with professionals in the community. JFS truly embraces the community it serves, providing innovative solutions for multi-generational needs.\r\nWebsite: <a>www.jfshamptonroads.org</a>\r\n<h3>United Way Foundation</h3>\r\nUnited Way Worldwide is the leadership and support organization for the network of nearly 1,800 community-based United Ways in 45 countries and territories. We advance the common good by focusing on improving education, helping people achieve financial stability, and promoting healthy lives, and by mobilizing millions of people to give, advocate, and volunteer to improve the conditions in which they live.\r\nWebsite: <a href=\"http://liveunited.org\">liveunited.org</a>\r\nUnited Way Foundation of Hampton Roads website: <a href=\"http://www.unitedwayfoundation.org\">www.unitedwayfoundation.org</a>\r\n<h3>Wings Over America Scholarship Foundation</h3>\r\nThe Foundation was established in 1987. Our mission is to provide college scholarships to dependent children and spouses of all US Navy - officer and enlisted - active duty, retired or deceased who served within Naval Air Forces. Recipients are selected on the basis of scholastic merit and community service. Wings over America annually sponsors over forty scholarships to students who have chosen to continue their education. The foundation is funded solely through the generous contributions of private and corporate sources, and has proudly awarded over $375,000 to outstanding students since 1987.\r\nWebsite: <a href=\"http://www.wingsoveramerica.us\">www.wingsoveramerica.us</a>','Web Resources','','inherit','closed','closed','','6437-revision-v1','','','2016-02-24 21:38:50','2016-02-24 21:38:50','',6437,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/24/6437-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6423,1,'2016-02-23 21:22:38','2016-02-23 21:22:38','Kevin B. Rack served as Master of Ceremonies for the <em>Bringing Breast Cancer to Light</em> event held September 25, 2010 at the First Baptist Church of Norfolk. The event included presentations by Jennifer Reed, M.D., FACS, Michael Danso, M.D., and Lauries Jesz, RN, CBNC and included a fashion show in which the models were beautiful breast cancer survivors. The events aimed to provide essential information about early detection, treatment and prevention of breast cancer Girl Scouts from local troop 164 were able to use this event to achieve their Gold Award which compares in recognition to the Boy Scouts award of Eagle Scout.','Bringing Breast Cancer to Light','','inherit','closed','closed','','6422-revision-v1','','','2016-02-23 21:22:38','2016-02-23 21:22:38','',6422,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/23/6422-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6424,1,'2016-02-23 21:23:36','2016-02-23 21:23:36','<div>Congratulations to Kevin on being presented the Distinguished Service Award in recognition and appreciation of Kevin\'s valuable contributions and dedicated service as a Director.</div>\r\nRack &amp; Moccia, P.C. is proud to be a member of the National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys, Inc. (NAELA)','Virginia Academy of Elder Law Attorneys, Inc.','','publish','open','open','','virginia-academy-of-elder-law-attorneys-inc','','','2016-02-25 13:29:56','2016-02-25 13:29:56','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6424',0,'post','',0),(6425,1,'2016-02-23 21:23:30','2016-02-23 21:23:30','','naela_logo','','inherit','open','closed','','naela_logo-2','','','2016-02-23 21:23:30','2016-02-23 21:23:30','',6424,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/naela_logo.gif',0,'attachment','image/gif',0),(6418,1,'2016-02-23 21:21:52','2016-02-23 21:21:52','As a graduate of the Master of Laws program in Estate Planning at the University of Miami Law School, our associate Jennifer L. Moccia, has a particular interest in the Heckerling Institute on Estate Planning.  Sponsored by Miami Law School, Heckerling is the nation’s leading conference for estate and tax planning professionals, and is attended by attorneys, accountants, trust officers, insurance advisors and wealth management professionals.  Jennifer attended Miami Law School as a graduate student, and decided it was time for her traditional mid-winter Florida homecoming visit.\r\n\r\nThe 45th Annual Heckerling Institute, now held in Orlando due to the popularity of the program, featured numerous specialized presentations highlighting estate planning and tax strategies such as: grantor retained annuity trusts, sales to grantor trusts, valuation discounts, post-mortem estate planning, special needs trusts and retirement planning.  The Institute also offered in-depth panel discussions featuring the country’s leading estate and tax planning experts on recently enacted estate and gift tax laws.\r\n\r\nUpon her return from Florida, Jennifer has helped prepare our recent correspondence addressing estate and tax planning considerations arising from the Tax Relief Act of 2010, contributed to the Estate Steward Program Seminar presentation summarizing the Tax Act, and has authored various Featured Posts on our recently updated website.','5th Annual Heckerling Institute on Estate Planning','','publish','open','open','','5th-annual-heckerling-institute-on-estate-planning','','','2016-02-25 13:29:56','2016-02-25 13:29:56','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6418',0,'post','',0),(6419,1,'2016-02-23 21:21:52','2016-02-23 21:21:52','As a graduate of the Master of Laws program in Estate Planning at the University of Miami Law School, our associate Jennifer L. Moccia, has a particular interest in the Heckerling Institute on Estate Planning.  Sponsored by Miami Law School, Heckerling is the nation’s leading conference for estate and tax planning professionals, and is attended by attorneys, accountants, trust officers, insurance advisors and wealth management professionals.  Jennifer attended Miami Law School as a graduate student, and decided it was time for her traditional mid-winter Florida homecoming visit.\r\n\r\nThe 45th Annual Heckerling Institute, now held in Orlando due to the popularity of the program, featured numerous specialized presentations highlighting estate planning and tax strategies such as: grantor retained annuity trusts, sales to grantor trusts, valuation discounts, post-mortem estate planning, special needs trusts and retirement planning.  The Institute also offered in-depth panel discussions featuring the country’s leading estate and tax planning experts on recently enacted estate and gift tax laws.\r\n\r\nUpon her return from Florida, Jennifer has helped prepare our recent correspondence addressing estate and tax planning considerations arising from the Tax Relief Act of 2010, contributed to the Estate Steward Program Seminar presentation summarizing the Tax Act, and has authored various Featured Posts on our recently updated website.','5th Annual Heckerling Institute on Estate Planning','','inherit','closed','closed','','6418-revision-v1','','','2016-02-23 21:21:52','2016-02-23 21:21:52','',6418,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/23/6418-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6417,1,'2016-02-23 21:20:53','2016-02-23 21:20:53','Rack &amp; Moccia, P.C. served as a State Liaison for National Healthcare Decisions Day, held on April 16th.  National Healthcare Decisions Day highlights the importance of establishing an Advance Medical Directive in order to ensure that your wishes regarding healthcare decisions are reduced to a legally enforceable writing so that they will be carried out, whether for medical treatment or for the withholding of life-prolonging procedures, in the event you cannot speak for yourself.\r\n\r\nAdvance medical directives are now widely considered to be a standard document in even the most basic of estate plans.  These instruments, executed in advance of incapacity, allow for the designation of an agent to make health care decisions and authorize medical treatment on your behalf.  In a section of the advance medical directive often entitled, “Health Care Power of Attorney,” the appointed health care agent is given authority to provide direction to health care providers and other parties regarding the type and extent of medical treatment you would, or would not, want to be given to you, including residential arrangements for long term care.\r\n\r\nThe instructions you give pertaining to the withholding of life-prolonging procedures in the event of a terminal illness or persistent vegetative state are typically set forth in the portion of your advance medical directive commonly referred to as the “Living Will.”\r\n\r\nIn the absence of an advance medical directive, family members are often required to apply to the courts for appointment as a guardian or conservator in order to address your health care decisions or financial matters, respectively.  Sadly, these proceedings sometimes become family battlegrounds for control, leading to costly and divisive litigation.  Since our law practice focuses on both estate planning and the appointment of guardians and conservators, our experience motivates us to encourage every adult to implement an Advance Medical Directive naming at least two health care agents and clarifying the values and choices to be applied in the making of health care decisions.   And we specifically urge you not to wait until next National Healthcare Decisions Day, just in case.','National Healthcare Decisions Day- April 16th','','inherit','closed','closed','','6416-revision-v1','','','2016-02-23 21:20:53','2016-02-23 21:20:53','',6416,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/23/6416-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6414,1,'2016-02-23 21:20:31','2016-02-23 21:20:31','Please join us in congratulating our estate planning associate, Jennifer L. Moccia, for being elected to serve for a two year term on the Board of Governors of the Virginia State Bar Young Lawyers Conference. Jennifer is known for her incredible attention to detail and strong work ethic, as well as growing expertise in the estate planning and elder law fields of practice. In her role as the 2nd District Representative for the Board of Governors, Ms. Moccia will lead the Young Lawyers Conference by serving as a state bar liaison to program committee chairs, coordinating programs and projects for the bar, initiating and voting on policy decisions and participating in state-wide board meetings.\r\n\r\nThe Young Lawyers Conference (YLC) focuses its efforts on the special interests and concerns of young and new lawyers. Through a diverse group of projects, the YLC is a vehicle through which young lawyers can participate in the governance of the Virginia State Bar, serve the profession and the public, and enhance the public awareness of the legal profession.','Associate elected to Virginia Bar Association Young Lawyers Conference Board of Governors','','publish','open','open','','associate-elected-to-virginia-bar-association-young-lawyers-conference-board-of-governors','','','2016-02-25 13:29:56','2016-02-25 13:29:56','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6414',0,'post','',0),(6415,1,'2016-02-23 21:20:31','2016-02-23 21:20:31','Please join us in congratulating our estate planning associate, Jennifer L. Moccia, for being elected to serve for a two year term on the Board of Governors of the Virginia State Bar Young Lawyers Conference. Jennifer is known for her incredible attention to detail and strong work ethic, as well as growing expertise in the estate planning and elder law fields of practice. In her role as the 2nd District Representative for the Board of Governors, Ms. Moccia will lead the Young Lawyers Conference by serving as a state bar liaison to program committee chairs, coordinating programs and projects for the bar, initiating and voting on policy decisions and participating in state-wide board meetings.\r\n\r\nThe Young Lawyers Conference (YLC) focuses its efforts on the special interests and concerns of young and new lawyers. Through a diverse group of projects, the YLC is a vehicle through which young lawyers can participate in the governance of the Virginia State Bar, serve the profession and the public, and enhance the public awareness of the legal profession.','Associate elected to Virginia Bar Association Young Lawyers Conference Board of Governors','','inherit','closed','closed','','6414-revision-v1','','','2016-02-23 21:20:31','2016-02-23 21:20:31','',6414,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/23/6414-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6416,1,'2016-02-23 21:20:53','2016-02-23 21:20:53','Rack &amp; Moccia, P.C. served as a State Liaison for National Healthcare Decisions Day, held on April 16th.  National Healthcare Decisions Day highlights the importance of establishing an Advance Medical Directive in order to ensure that your wishes regarding healthcare decisions are reduced to a legally enforceable writing so that they will be carried out, whether for medical treatment or for the withholding of life-prolonging procedures, in the event you cannot speak for yourself.\r\n\r\nAdvance medical directives are now widely considered to be a standard document in even the most basic of estate plans.  These instruments, executed in advance of incapacity, allow for the designation of an agent to make health care decisions and authorize medical treatment on your behalf.  In a section of the advance medical directive often entitled, “Health Care Power of Attorney,” the appointed health care agent is given authority to provide direction to health care providers and other parties regarding the type and extent of medical treatment you would, or would not, want to be given to you, including residential arrangements for long term care.\r\n\r\nThe instructions you give pertaining to the withholding of life-prolonging procedures in the event of a terminal illness or persistent vegetative state are typically set forth in the portion of your advance medical directive commonly referred to as the “Living Will.”\r\n\r\nIn the absence of an advance medical directive, family members are often required to apply to the courts for appointment as a guardian or conservator in order to address your health care decisions or financial matters, respectively.  Sadly, these proceedings sometimes become family battlegrounds for control, leading to costly and divisive litigation.  Since our law practice focuses on both estate planning and the appointment of guardians and conservators, our experience motivates us to encourage every adult to implement an Advance Medical Directive naming at least two health care agents and clarifying the values and choices to be applied in the making of health care decisions.   And we specifically urge you not to wait until next National Healthcare Decisions Day, just in case.','National Healthcare Decisions Day- April 16th','','publish','open','open','','national-healthcare-decisions-day-april-16th','','','2016-02-25 13:29:56','2016-02-25 13:29:56','',0,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/?p=6416',0,'post','',0),(6448,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:40','2016-02-25 13:28:40','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>Nathan Moccia, shareholder of Rack & Moccia P.C., will conduct a national teleconference for the National Business Institute on Tuesday April 30, 2013, titled “Estate Planning Basics”</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/2013.2.26-nbi-announcement.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/2013.2.26-nbi-announcement.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\"></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Do you have the skills to ensure your clients are well taken care of in case of incapacity? Can you minimize their tax liability through carefully planned asset transfers? Gain the knowledge you need to help your clients through their estate planning needs with this fundamental program. Be prepared to effectively represent your clients.  Click Here fore more information.</p> <p><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Program Description</span></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The teleconference will give practitioners the fundamental understanding of basic principles in drafting wills and trusts to effectively document your client’s wishes.  Attendees will learn what impact gift and estate taxes will have on beneficiaries and how your plan can address how these taxes are handled.  Practitioners will gain the knowledge to help clients plan for incapacity by understanding how to proactively address common legal and financial issues that can arise when health deterirates.</p> <p><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Program Outline</span></p> <p>Wills and Trusts<br />BasicTaxes You Need to Be Aware of<br />Considerations in Planning for Incapacity</p>','Rack & Moccia,P.C. Attorney to conduct National teleconference','','inherit','closed','closed','','6230-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:40','2016-02-25 13:28:40','',6230,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6230-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6452,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:40','2016-02-25 13:28:40','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">On appeal, the court reversed a lower court ruling by determining that the caregiver child exemption for the transfer of a house still applied because the Medicaid applicant\'s attorney-in-fact transferred the house, not the Medicaid applicant himself.</p>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/2012.9.20-caregiver-child-exemption.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/2012.9.20-caregiver-child-exemption.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" width=\"15\" height=\"15\" /></a></div> <p><strong>Dahly v. Anderson (N.D., No.20120013, Aug. 30,2012).</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts:</strong>  Wilfred and Geraldine Dahly appointed their son, Rick, to serve as their attorney-in-fact. In 2007, the couple began suffering from dementia and their daughter, LeAnn Greenwall, moved from Kentucky to live with and care for them under a written care agreement. Mrs. Dahly eventually entered a nursing home and Ms. Greenwall continued to care for Mr. Dahly.  In 2009, Rick, as attorney-in-fact, transferred Mrs. Dahly\'s interest in the home to Mr. Dahly.  In 2010, Rick transferred Mr. Dahly\'s interest in the home to Ms. Greenwell. Mr. Dahly then entered a nursing home, and Ms. Greenwell sold the home and gave half of the proceeds to Rick.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Mr. Dahly applied for Medicaid, but the state denied him benefits because the proceeds from the sale of the house were an available asset. Mr. Dahly appealed, arguing the caregiver child exemption for the transfer of the family home applied.  The state argued that the exemption did not apply because Mr. Dahly did not transfer the house himself; instead Rick transferred the house as attorney-in-fact, which created a presumption of undue influence. The trial court agreed, and Mr. Dahly appealed.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Ruling:  </strong>The Supreme Court of North Dakota reversed the ruling, holding the caregiver child exemption did apply. The court ruled that Mr. Dahly and Ms. Greenwall complied precisely with the requirements of the exemption and the state was attempting to \"circumvent a clear expression of federal law through an overly broad application of state trust law.\"  The court also noted that if the state\'s decision were upheld, then only mentally competent Medicaid applicants could use the caregiver child exemption.  One justice dissented, arguing the exemption should not apply because the transfer was not to allow the daughter to remain in the home, \"but rather to divide the applicant\'s assets among his children.\"</p>','Caregiver Child Exemption Applies Even Though Attorney-in-Fact Transferred House','','inherit','closed','closed','','6223-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:40','2016-02-25 13:28:40','',6223,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6223-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6451,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:40','2016-02-25 13:28:40','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Treasury has answered a letter from Democratic Representatives voicing suspicions that the contribution limits for tax-deferred retirement accounts are being avoided by undervaluing the contributed assets.   Treasury highlighted the IRS’s enforcement efforts, opined that current tax rules provide little incentive to shift investment gains to IRAs and SEP-IRAs by using undervalued assets, and highlighted current law’s fair market value standard for valuing assets contributed to IRAs.</p>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2012.10.10-treasury-responds-claims.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2012.10.10-treasury-responds-claims.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Background. </strong> Annual contributions to defined contribution plans are limited to an inflation adjusted figure ($50,000 for 2012), and contributions to IRAs are limited to $5,000 for 2012, plus a $1,000 catch-up contribution for those age 50 or older.  Taxpayers generally may roll over their defined contribution plans to IRAs on a tax-free basis.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Question of valuation.  In an August 2, 2012, letter to the Treasury Department and Employee Benefits Security Administration, Reps. George Miller (D-CA), Sander Levin (D-MI), and Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), expressed concern that taxpayers may be getting around the above contribution limits for tax-deferred retirement accounts by assigning low values to property contributed to the account.  They cited, as an example, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s high-value IRAs, which reportedly hold stakes in businesses relating to his employment at Bain Capital.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Democratic Congressmen requested answers to specific questions, such as: the current standards related to the valuation of assets that are purchased by tax-deferred retirement accounts; the proof taxpayers must submit if they are examined as to the value of assets held by retirement accounts when those assets are not publicly traded or their value cannot be established by reference to an established market; and the number of audits the IRS has recently conducted on the valuation of assets held in tax-deferred retirement accounts.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Treasury’s response.</strong>  In identical letters responding to Reps. Levin, Miller, and Van Hollen, Treasury Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy Mark Mazur said IRS was aware of potential valuation problems for IRAs (as well as SEP IRAs), and had raised the issue in Notice 2004-8, 2004-4 IRB 333, which listed the undervaluation of IRA assets as a listed transaction that must be disclosed to IRS.  Specifically targeted were transactions attempting to bypass contribution limits that involved a business owned by a taxpayer and a corporation owned by the taxpayer’s Roth IRA (the Roth IRA corporation).</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Although IRS has gone after listed transactions identified by Notice 2004-8, and instances where assets of traditional IRAs and qualified plans have been abusively undervalued, Mazur maintained that under current tax rules, there is relatively little incentive to shift investment gains into traditional IRAs or SEP IRAs through the use of undervalued assets.  While sales or other dispositions of assets within an IRA are not taxable, any appreciation (or other earnings) on assets distributed from traditional IRAs and SEP IRAs are taxed at ordinary income tax rates when distributions occur and are not eligible for favorable capital gains treatment that might apply to the sale of capital assets held directly by the taxpayer.  Mazur said that although value-shifting strategies involving traditional IRAs and SEP IRAs may have offered greater advantages in the early ‘90s when the tax treatment of long-term capital gains was closer to that for ordinary income, these advantages appear to be much smaller given the spread in ordinary versus long-term capital gains tax rates.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Mazur pointed out that IRS rules generally require all IRA assets, including those not publicly traded, to be valued using a FMV standard (as opposed to liquidation or other value), and that FMV of IRA and qualified plan assets must be reported on Form 5498 (IRA Contribution Information) and Form 5500 (Annual Return/Report of Employee Benefit Plan), as applicable.  Responding to the Representatives’ request for audit information, Mazur said the IRS is currently working to obtain a reliable estimate of the number of audits that specifically involve IRA asset valuation issues and an estimate of the size of associated tax compliance problems.  He also said IRS has assembled a working group to study ways of improving compliance and enforcement in the IRA/SEP IRA valuation area.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2012.10.10-ltr-from-treasury.pdf\">Click here to read Treasury’s complete response.</a></p>','Treasury Responds to Claims of Undervaluation in Contributed Retirement Plan Assets','','inherit','closed','closed','','6226-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:40','2016-02-25 13:28:40','',6226,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6226-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6449,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:40','2016-02-25 13:28:40','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>Nathan Moccia, shareholder of Rack & Moccia P.C., will join other esteemed colleagues to conduct a day-long national teleconference for the National Business Institute on Wednesday June 19, 2013, titled “Trusts 101”. <span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.nbi-sems.com/Details.aspx/Trusts-101/Live-Seminar/R-62354ER|?NavigationDataSource1=Ntk:All|62354|3|,Rpp:20,Nra:pEventDate%2bpEventStartTime%2bCredit+Hours%2bpCreditRecordCreditHours%2bCredit_C2%2bpStandardPrice%2bSeminar+Location%2bScope+of+Content%2bpLocationCity%2bpDescription%2bpDivision%2bpProductId%2bpProductDescription%2bProductCode+%28HIDDEN%29%2bpAdditionalFormats%2bpEventId%2bpAltSpaceDesc%2bpEventIndicator\">Click here</a></span> for more information</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/2013.4.17-nbi-announcement.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/2013.4.17-nbi-announcement.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\"></div> <p><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Program Description</span></p> <p>When assessing complex information, it often helps to break items into  basic building blocks. The same approach can be successful when dealing  with asset protection. Be prepared for specific challenges associated  with various types of trusts by understanding their unique  characteristics. Our intensive full-day primer will provide you with a  comprehensive overview of the wide variety of trusts available.</p> <ul> <li>Determine what role the settlor will play by weighing the pros and cons of establishing an irrevocable trust over a revocable trust.</li> <li>Learn what not to do when selecting and drafting a revocable trust to avoid common mistakes.</li> <li>Learn how to choose the most beneficial vehicle for preserving your client’s wealth: understand the purpose behind the various types of irrevocable trusts.</li> <li>Explore the powers and duties of personal representatives in irrevocable trusts.</li> <li>Save money on taxes with effective use of defective trusts.</li> <li>Learn why it’s important to know when to file the tax return for grantor trusts.</li> <li>Determine whether a client qualifies as a beneficiary of a special needs trust.</li> <li>Don’t reinvent the wheel - modify our sample trust documents and use our drafting tips to create airtight trusts.</li> </ul>','Rack & Moccia,P.C. Attorney to conduct National teleconference','','inherit','closed','closed','','6232-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:40','2016-02-25 13:28:40','',6232,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6232-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6458,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>Many seniors who require long-term care would rather remain at home than move to an assisted living or nursing facility; however, the selection of which company to hire for in-home assistance can be a difficult decision for family members to make.  The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ (CMS) have prepared a national survey requesting that patients describe their experiences with certain Medicare-certified home health agencies, and these results are now available on the agency’s Quality Care Finder website.</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/2012.5.16-home-health-survey.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/2012.5.16-home-health-survey.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\"></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"http://www.medicare.gov/quality-care-finder\">www.medicare.gov/quality-care-finder</a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The survey asks patients questions such as:</p> <ul style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <li>Whether their home health team gave care in a professional way;</li> <li>Whether their team communicated well with them in a courteous and respectful way;</li> <li>Whether the team discussed medicines, pain, and home safety; and</li> <li>Whether the patient would recommend the agency to friends and family.</li> </ul> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The survey results, which resource will be updated every four months with new information, will supplement the information already available on the agency’s Home Health Compare website, located at <a href=\"http://www.medicare.gov/homehealthcompare/search.aspx\">http://www.medicare.gov/homehealthcompare/search.aspx</a>.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">CMS has provided that the survey results were designed to create incentives for home health agencies to improve their quality of care, as well as to give patients additional information so they are aware of the types of care they will receive from various agencies.  The survey results will offer prospective patients, their families and caregivers the chance to compare home health agencies by reviewing such results.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The initial survey results cover the period from October 2010 to September 2011.  Currently, patients are generally giving their home health agencies favorable scores.  For example, 84 percent of patients gave their home health agency a rating of 9 or 10 on a scale from 0 (lowest) to 10 (highest), and 80 percent of patients said “yes, they would definitely recommend the home health agency to friends.”</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">For more information on the survey, visit <a href=\"https://homehealthcahps.org/\">https://homehealthcahps.org</a>.</p>','Results of Home Health Agency Patient Surveys Available to Medicare Recipients','','inherit','closed','closed','','6209-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','',6209,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6209-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6459,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">An appeals court in Massachusetts ruled that (1) a Medicaid applicant was subject to a penalty period for assets that were transferred to a trust as part of a court-approved estate plan, and (2) the penalty period would not begin until after she had spent down her excess assets.</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/2012.5.8-medicaid-penalty-period.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/2012.5.8-medicaid-penalty-period.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Lombardi v. Director of Office of Medicaid (Mass. App. Ct., No. 11–P–1208, April 17, 2012).</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts.</strong>  Catherine Lombardi, who had a court-appointed guardian, transferred $17,400 to a realty trust to benefit her children as part of a court-approved estate plan.  Mrs. Lombardi then applied for Medicaid benefits and the state assessed a penalty period based on the uncompensated transfer to the realty trust.  The state also determined that the applicant would be required to spend down her excess assets before the penalty period would begin.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Procedural History.</strong>  Ms. Lombardi appealed the determination that she would be subject to a penalty period, arguing that the court cannot consider a court-approved transfer of assets when determining Medicaid eligibility and that, therefore, the state improperly imposed a double penalty.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Court’s Decision. </strong> The Appeals Court of Massachusetts affirmed the decision, holding that the penalty period was properly applied to Mrs. Lombardi.  According to the Court, it did not matter that the transfer was \"court-approved\" because \"a probate judge cannot insulate asset transfers from being considered in the determination of eligibility for [Medicaid].\" The court also ruled that the penalty period properly began after Ms. Lombardi spent down her excess assets.</p>','Medicaid Penalty Period Applies to Assets Transferred as Part of Court-Approved Estate Plan','','inherit','closed','closed','','6207-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','',6207,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6207-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6460,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The IRS has expanded its “Fresh Start” initiative, which is designed to help struggling taxpayers who owe taxes by offering more flexible terms in its Offer In Compromise (“OIC”) program.  These changes may allow some taxpayers to resolve their income tax problems in as little as two years, as compared to four or five years in the past. </p>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/2012.5.30-offer-in-compromise.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/2012.5.30-offer-in-compromise.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Specifically, the IRS has revised the calculation used to determine a taxpayer’s future income, and expanded the amount of allowable living expenses.  The IRS will now also consider credit card payments, bank fees and charges, student loan payments, and state and local delinquent taxes in determining OIC eligibility.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In general, an OIC is an agreement between a taxpayer and the IRS that settles the taxpayer’s tax liabilities for less than the full amount owed.  An OIC is generally not accepted if the IRS believes that the liability can be paid in full through a payment agreement or in a lump sum.  When deciding whether to accept an OIC, the IRS examines the taxpayer’s income and assets to make a determination of the taxpayer’s Reasonable Collection Potential (“RCP”).</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Where financial analysis is needed to determine a taxpayer’s ability to pay, the IRS uses the Allowable Living Expense standards, which provide consistency in collection determinations by incorporating average expenditures for basic necessities for citizens in similar geographic areas.  These standards are used when evaluating installment agreement and offer in compromise requests.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Fresh Start OIC initiative focuses on the financial analysis used to determine which taxpayers qualify for an OIC.  When the IRS calculates a taxpayer’s RCP, for offers paid in five or fewer months, it will now look at only one year of future income, rather than four years.  For offers paid in six to 24 months, the IRS will now look at only two years of future income, rather than five years.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The IRS has also made other changes to the OIC program, including narrowed parameters and clarification of when a dissipated asset (i.e., an asset that is no longer available to pay a tax liability because the taxpayer has sold, given away, or spent it on non-priority debts) will be included in the RCP calculation.  In addition, equity in income producing assets will generally not be included in the calculation of the RCP for an on-going business.  Finally, the new OIC initiative also provides that the National Standard miscellaneous allowance has been expanded to include allowance for expenses such as credit card payments and bank fees and charges.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">While not a panacea to all past due income tax liabilities, the liberalized OIC terms will certainly allow many taxpayers to make an Offer In Compromise who were previously unable to qualify.  For additional information on the Fresh Start initiative, and other IRS announcements, visit <a href=\"http://www.irs.gov\">www.irs.gov</a></p>','IRS Liberalizes Offer In Compromise Terms Under “Fresh Start” Initiative','','inherit','closed','closed','','6211-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','',6211,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6211-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6461,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">﻿﻿﻿The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that when a personal injury settlement does not include an allocation of past medical expenses, a Medicaid recipient is entitled to an adversarial proceeding to challenge the state\'s automatic claim for receipt of one-third of the settlement.</p>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/2012.4.18-automatic-claim-challenge.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/2012.4.18-automatic-claim-challenge.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><i><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\" new=\"New\" lang=\"EN-GB\"> </span></i></strong></p> <p><strong>E.M.A. v. Cansler (4th Cir., No. 10-1865, March 22, 2012).</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts.</strong>  E.M.A. was seriously injured during her birth and immediately began receiving Medicaid benefits.  When she was six years old, her representatives settled a medical malpractice action against her doctors for $2.8 million.  By the time the settlement was complete, the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) had provided E.M.A. with approximately $1.9 million in medical care benefits.  Pursuant to state law, DHHS is entitled to collect up to one-third of the settlement as reimbursement for past medical expenses, so DHHS asserted a lien in the amount of $933,333.33 against E.M.A.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Procedural History.</strong>  The representatives of E.M.A. filed a suit in federal court seeking a declaratory judgment and an injunction preventing DHHS from asserting its claim against the settlement funds.  E.M.A. argued that because North Carolina common law prevents a minor from asserting a cause of action for past medical expenses, none of the settlement proceeds could be attributed to her past medical expenses.  In the alternative, E.M.A. claimed that the state could not recover one-third of her settlement because caselaw necessitates a proportional analysis of the settlement to determine the proper amount of the lien.  The district court granted summary judgment in favor of DHHS, relying on a previous North Carolina Supreme Court decision upholding the one-third allocation.  E.M.A. appealed.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Court’s Decision</strong>.  After dismissing E.M.A.\'s common law argument, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court and remanded the case for a hearing that will allow E.M.A. to rebut the one-third presumption.  The court specified that \"on remand, the district court must determine the true value of the case in allocating medical expenses,” but caselaw “does not mandate such a ‘proportional analysis’ . . . the sum certain allocable to medical expenses must be determined by way of a fair and impartial adversarial procedure that affords the Medicaid beneficiary an opportunity to rebut the statutory presumption in favor of the state.\"</p>','Medicaid Recipient Entitled to Challenge Automatic Claim by State for Share of Settlement','','inherit','closed','closed','','6205-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','',6205,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6205-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6462,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>An Idaho district court ruled that the state cannot recover assets from the estate of a Medicaid recipient’s spouse since those assets were transferred by the Medicaid recipient to her husband prior to her death.</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/2012.4.4-state-cannot-recover.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/2012.4.4-state-cannot-recover.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\"></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>In Re: Estate of Perry (Idaho Dist. Ct., 4th Dist., No. CV-IE-2009-05214, March 16, 2011).</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts.</strong>  Mr. and Mrs. Perry owned joint property, which was transferred to Mr. Perry individually when Mrs. Perry moved into a nursing home.  Soon thereafter, Mrs. Perry applied for and began receiving Medicaid benefits.  Mr. Perry predeceased Mrs. Perry and, upon his death, the property was sold as a part of his estate.  The state then filed a claim against Mr. Perry’s estate in an attempt to recover over $100,000 in Medicaid benefits paid on behalf of Mrs. Perry.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Since Mrs. Perry had an interest in the property at one time during the marriage (before she applied for Medicaid benefits), the state argued that it could recover the portion of the property from Mr. Perry’s estate that represented her prior ownership interest.  In response, the personal representative of the estate asserted that the state could recover no more than the amount equal to Mrs. Perry\'s interest in the home at the time of her death, which was nothing.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Procedural History.</strong>  The magistrate division of Idaho\'s fourth judicial district determined that the state\'s authority to recover Medicaid benefits paid on behalf of Mrs. Perry was limited only to those assets that were transferred to Mr. Perry upon her death.  The state could not recover lifetime gifts made by Mrs. Perry to her husband.  The state appealed this decision and, while the appeal was pending, Mrs. Perry passed away.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Court’s Ruling.</strong>  The Idaho District Court affirmed the fourth judicial district, holding that the definition of \"estate\" in federal Medicaid law does not permit the state to claim reimbursement from property interests that Mrs. Perry transferred before her death.  Although the state argued that its laws allowed the recovery of property transferred to a spouse during life (if that property was previously community property), the Court disagreed and determined that, since there was a conflict between federal law and Idaho’s law, federal law must prevail over state law.</p>','Assets Transferred Before Medicaid Recipient Died Cannot be Recovered by State','','inherit','closed','closed','','6203-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','',6203,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6203-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6463,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">After settling the federal claims in a Medicaid case, a U.S. district court remanded the remaining issues back to the state court in Indiana since the case involved significant issues concerning the transfer of property to the community spouse that would ultimately affect the administration of Medicaid benefits in Indiana.</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/2012.3.20-medicaid-community-spouse.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/2012.3.20-medicaid-community-spouse.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Novak v. Indiana Family and Social Services Administration (U.S. Dist. Ct., S.D. Ind., No. 1:10–cv–677–RLY–DKL, Feb. 29, 2012).</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts: </strong> Mr. Novak, the Medicaid applicant, obtained an Order from a state court in Indiana that permitted his legal guardian to transfer all of Mr. Novak’s assets (retaining only $1,000) to his wife, to be applied for her care and support.  The following year, Mr. Novak applied for Medicaid benefits and his application was denied.  The reason for his ineligibility was the transfer of resources to his wife the previous year.  Following this disconcerting decision, his wife filed an appeal on his behalf, and the case was removed to federal court.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Court’s Decision: </strong> The federal court ultimately ordered that the case be remanded back to the state court of Indiana since the final undecided issue was the judicial review of a state administrative agency decision denying Medicaid eligibility.  Mrs. Novak requested that the federal court retain jurisdiction and rule on the remaining issue, claiming that the judicial economy would be better served if they remained in federal court.  Since the case was already on the docket for 18 months, and Mrs. Novak was 82 years of age, they argued that they would be prejudiced by the additional delay caused by the remand.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The federal court denied their request, and remanded the case back to state court.  In remanding the case, the court determined that the final case will involve two issues:  (i) \"When can a person petition a court for an order approving the transfer of assets for the benefit of the community spouse?\" and (ii) if assets can be transferred prior to an assessment, \"whether the assets which the state court ordered transferred must actually be transferred in order for the Community Spouse Resource Allowance to be calculated on the basis of that state court order.\"  According to the federal court, the outcome of these issues will have lasting effect on the administration of Medicaid benefits in Indiana, so any potential prejudice against the Novaks was outweighed.</p>','Medicaid Eligibility:  Federal v. State Court Authority on the Effect of Lifetime Transfers to a Community Spouse','','inherit','closed','closed','','6201-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','',6201,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6201-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6464,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">A Medicaid applicant was determined to have made an uncompensated transfer, thereby resulting in an imposed penalty period, after he recorded a deed transferring his residence to his children and reserving a life estate for himself.</p>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/2012.3.15.-transfer-life-estate.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/2012.3.15.-transfer-life-estate.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><i><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\" new=\"New\" lang=\"EN-GB\"> </span></i></strong></p> <p><strong>Fimon v. Commissioner of Minnesota Department of Human Services (Minn. App. Ct., No. A11–561, Oct. 24, 2011).</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts:</strong> In May of 2003,  Mr. Rodney Fimon executed a deed that transferred the ownership of his  residence to his two sons and himself as joint tenants.  By owning the  property jointly with both of his sons, Mr. Fimon maintained an  ownership interest in the residence.  Over six years later, in July of  2009, Mr. Fimon prepared a subsequent deed, this time transferring his  remaining interest in the residence to his two sons and reserving a life  estate for himself.  He claimed that the 2009 deed was prepared in  order to correct the 2003 deed; however, a life estate ownership (as  opposed to the former joint tenancy ownership) is considered an exempt  asset for the purposes of Medicaid eligibility.  Several months later,  Mr. Fimon applied for Medicaid benefits, and he was denied.  The state  of Minnesota determined that the transfer of the residence formerly  owned as a joint tenant, without compensation from his sons, was an  uncompensated transfer, and therefore the state imposed a penalty period  on Mr. Fimon.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Mr. Fimon appealed this decision,  arguing that the 2009 deed was prepared in order to correct the 2003  deed.  The state denied the appeal, and the trial court affirmed the  state’s decision. Mr. Fimon then appealed to the Minnesota Court of  Appeals.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Court’s Decision: </strong> The  Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the trial court,  determining that the evidence presented supported the notion that Mr.  Fimon transferred his joint tenancy interest to his sons for less than  fair market value, and retained a life estate interest because such  ownership is an exempt asset for the determination of Medicaid benefits.   Since there was no viable evidence that the initial 2003 deed was  intended to reserve a life estate for Mr. Fimon, the subsequent deed had  the effect of changing his interest in the property, rather than simply  correcting a clerical error.  This penalty period may have been avoided  if Mr. Fimon had consulted an elder law attorney and properly planned  for his Medicaid eligibility prior to applying for benefits.</p>','Court Rejects Claim That Transfer Reserving Life Estate Simply Corrected Earlier Deed','','inherit','closed','closed','','6199-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','',6199,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6199-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6465,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>The Internal Revenue Service today issued guidance that allows certain estates of married individuals who died during the first six months of 2011 an extension of the deadline to make the portability election.</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2012.2.21-deadline-for-estates.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2012.2.21-deadline-for-estates.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\"></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The portability election passes along a decedent’s unused estate and gift tax exclusion amount to a surviving spouse. An extension is available to estates of married individuals with assets of $5 million or less, but only if the decedent died in the first six months of 2011, and the executor files Form 4768 requesting an extension no later than 15 months after the decedent\'s date of death. The extra time is available to an estate even if the estate did not request an automatic six-month filing extension on Form 4768 prior to the regular nine-month filing deadline. As a result, these estates will now have until 15 months after the date of death, rather than the usual nine months, to make the election by filing an estate tax return on Form 706. Thus, the first estate tax returns for estates eligible to make the portability election (because the date of death is after Dec. 31, 2010) are now due on Monday, April 2, 2012. Affected estates should submit both a properly-prepared Form 4768 and Form 706 to the IRS no later than 15 months after the decedent’s date of death. Further details are in Notice 2012-21, posted today on www.IRS.gov.  </p>','IRS Extends Deadline for Estates to  File Estate Tax Return to Make Portability Election Benefiting Surviving Spouses','','inherit','closed','closed','','6195-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','',6195,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6195-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6466,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>On February 13, the President released his federal budget proposals for the 2013 fiscal year.  The proposed budget includes over 130 large and small proposed tax changes for businesses and individuals, including new incentives to “insource” jobs, higher taxes for upper-income taxpayers, and the extension of key tax breaks.  Below are some of the key estate and gift tax proposals made.</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2012.2.21-changes-to-estate-tax.pdf\" target=\"_blank\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2012.2.21-changes-to-estate-tax.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" border=\"0\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div>   <ol> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>Return to 2009 estate and gift tax exemption and rate.</strong></span> The estate, generation-skipping transfer (GST), and gift tax exemption top tax rate would be 45% and the exclusion amount would be $3.5 million for estate and GST taxes, and $1 million for gift taxes.  These changes would apply for estates of decedents dying, and for transfers made, after December 31, 2012.</li> <br /> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>Portable estate tax exclusion made permanent.</strong></span> The provisions allowing a surviving spouse to use the deceased spouse’s unused estate and gift tax exclusion (but not the GST tax exemption) , which expires for decedents dying after December 31, 2012, would be made permanent.</li> <br /> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>Basis consistency and reporting requirement for donated and inherited property.</strong></span> Current law does not explicitly require that the recipient’s basis in inherited property be the same as the value reported for estate tax purposes.  The proposal would require that the basis of property in the hands of the recipient be no greater than the value of that property as determined for estate or gift tax purposes (subject to subsequent adjustments).   A reporting requirement would be imposed on executors and donors to provide the necessary valuation and basis information to both the recipient and IRS.</li> <br /> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>Toughened rules for valuation discounts. </strong></span> Certain restrictions (“disregarded restrictions”) would be ignored in valuing an interest in a family-controlled entity transferred to a member of the family if, after the transfer, the restriction will lapse or may be removed by the transferor and/or the transferor’s family.  The transferred interest would be valued by substituting for the disregarded restrictions certain assumptions to be specified in regulations that will undoubtedly limit or eliminate a valuation discount in these circumstances.  These rules would apply to transfers after the enactment date of property subject to restrictions created after Oct. 8, 1990 (the effective date of Code Sec. 2704).</li> <br /> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>Minimum and maximum term for grantor retained annuity trusts (GRATs).</strong></span> A GRAT would be required to have a minimum term of ten years and a maximum term of the life expectancy of the annuitant plus ten years.  Also, the remainder interest would have to have a value greater than zero at the time the interest is created and any decrease in the annuity during the GRAT term would be prohibited.  These rules would apply to GRATs created after the enactment date.</li> <br /> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>Duration of GST tax exemption limited.</strong></span>  Under the proposal, the GST exemption allocated to a trust would terminate after 90 years.  This rule would apply to trusts created after the enactment date, and to the portion of a preexisting trust attributable to additions to such a trust made after that date.</li> <br /> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>Coordination of income and transfer tax rules applicable to grantor trusts.</strong></span> The current lack of coordination between the income and transfer tax rules applicable to a grantor trust creates opportunities to structure transactions between the deemed owner and the trust that can result in the transfer of significant wealth by the deemed owner without transfer tax consequences (e.g., installment sales to grantor trusts).  New rules for grantor trusts would prevent this by: (1) including the assets of the trust in the gross estate of the grantor for estate tax purposes, (2) subjecting to gift tax any distribution from the trust to one or more beneficiaries during the grantor’s life, and (3) subjecting to gift tax the remaining trust assets at any time during the grantor’s life he or she ceases to be treated as an owner of the trust for income tax purposes.  These rules would apply for trusts created on or after the enactment date and with regard to any portion of a pre-enactment trust attributable to a contribution made on or after the enactment date.</li> <br /> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>Extension of estate tax lien on Code Sec. 6166 deferrals.</strong></span> The estate tax lien under Code Sec. 6324(a)(1) would be extended to apply throughout the Code Sec. 6166 deferral period, effective for estates of decedents dying on or after the effective date and for estates of decedents dying before the enactment date as to which the current law Code Sec. 6324(a)(1) lien period had not expired on the effective date.</li> </ol> <div class=\"a2a_kit a2a_default_style\"> <p> </p> </div>','Changes to the Estate and Gift Tax Rules in the Proposed 2013 Federal Budget','','inherit','closed','closed','','6193-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','',6193,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6193-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6467,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In early 2011, a landmark federal bankruptcy case shed doubt on the asset protection powers of the previously lauded domestic asset protection trust (DAPT), alarming many attorneys and distressing certain of those trust-wielding clients.  In a decision filed by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Alaska on May 26, 2011, Judge MacDonald set aside Thomas Mortensen’s transfer of real property to an Alaska asset protection trust as a fraudulent conveyance.</p>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/jlm-wealth-counsel.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/jlm-wealth-counsel.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><i><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\" new=\"New\" lang=\"EN-GB\">Battley v. Mortensen</span></i><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\" new=\"New\" lang=\"EN-GB\">, Adv. D.Alaska, No. A09-90036-DMD (2011).</span></strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">This case deviated from previous DAPT holdings because, not only was Mortensen deemed solvent at the time of the transfer, but Alaska’s four-year statute of limitations for reaching the assets transferred to the DAPT had already run.  This controversial ruling has sparked heated debates among estate planners on whether its outcome could invalidate thousands of trusts formerly thought to provide exceedingly reliable asset protection.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Following his costly divorce in 1998, Thomas Mortensen personally drafted the “Mortensen Seldovia Trust (An Alaska Asset Preservation Trust)” in February of 2005.  Mortensen had admittedly “not recovered from the financial carnage” of his divorce, and created the trust to hold and protect his recreational real property located in Seldovia, Alaska, worth approximately $60,000 at the time of the transfer.  His mother also gave him $100,000 “to transfer the property to trust because she wanted to preserve it for her grandchildren.”  In April of 2009, Mortensen became ill, accrued massive credit card debt and filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in August of the same year.  He disclosed $26,421 in assets on the itemized personal property list provided to the Court, but did not include his interest in the DAPT (although he revealed the existence of the trust).</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Despite Alaska’s four-year statute of limitations for reaching assets transferred to a DAPT, the Court applied federal law, which includes a ten-year statute of limitations from the date a bankruptcy petition is filed for setting aside a fraudulent transfer if the transfer was made with “actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud” a creditor.  <i>See </i>Bankruptcy Code Section 548(e). Therefore, the remaining issue to be decided was whether Mortensen made the transfer to his trust with the actual intent required to set aside the transfer.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Since, by the terms of the DAPT, the purpose of its establishment was “to maximize the protection of the trust estate or estates from creditors’ claims,” the Court held that the transfer was made by Mortensen with the clear intent to hinder, delay or defraud his creditors.  Although Alaska law also states that “a settlor’s express intention to protect trust assets from a beneficiary’s potential future creditors is not evidence of an intent to defraud,” the ten-year statute of limitations under federal law was enacted in order to close this self-settled trust loophole, and the Court followed this legislative intent.  In determining Mortensen’s actual intent, the Court not only looked to the purpose provision within the trust, but also considered his continual steady decrease in income, mounting credit card debt, statements of financial strife after his divorce and his lost stock market investment of the $100,000 from his mother (rather than using the funds to pay off his substantial credit card debt).  Thus, the transfer to the DAPT was set aside and the recreational property was sold to satisfy his creditors.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Is this ruling the beginning of the end of DAPT planning, or was this merely an advisory, fact-specific ruling that provides additional clarity to the current DAPT rules?  Lawyers are split as they speculate whether this outcome was a fluke or the new reality.  Although the Court did not uphold Alaska’s four-year statute of limitations to prevent Mortensen’s transfer from being set aside, the four-year rule is still effective and powerful against claims for assets held by a DAPT.  However, when Mortensen erred by filing for bankruptcy without consulting an attorney, he unknowingly exposed himself to the Bankruptcy Code and its ten-year “clawback” rule.  Had he not filed, Mortensen would have remained protected by Alaska’s four-year rule.  Despite the concern that this case signals the end of the utility of all DAPTs, many argue that Mortensen was simply a case of bad facts with an unsurprising result, given that the debtor elected to file for bankruptcy prior to the expiration of the ten-year statute of limitations, and openly admitted that the trust was created to protect his assets from creditors – the very intent that is required by federal law to set aside the transfer!</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Ultimately, Mortensen was not a proper candidate for a DAPT since he had waning anticipated income, almost no net worth beyond the Alaska recreational property and escalating debt.  While some contend that the sky is falling and landmines are erupting in the realm of DAPTs, this case provides clarity and guidelines for properly establishing an asset protection trust.  Rather than contributing to uncertainty, the Court ultimately validated those DAPTs that were not established to defraud creditors, as well as those trusts established more than ten years prior to filing for bankruptcy, regardless of their purpose.  In light of this holding, DAPTs remain an effective asset protection strategy when properly marketed, drafted and implemented.</p>','An Overview of Battley v. Mortensen: The End of Domestic Asset Protection Trusts?','','inherit','closed','closed','','6191-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','',6191,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6191-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6468,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Canceled debt is normally taxable to you, but there are exceptions.  One of those exceptions is available to homeowners whose mortgage debt is partly or entirely forgiven during tax years 2007 through 2012.</p>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2012.2.29-mortgage-debt-forgiveness.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"pdfs/featured_posts/pdfs/featured_posts/2012.2.29-mortgage-debt-forgiveness.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><i><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\" new=\"New\" lang=\"EN-GB\"> </span></i></strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Here are 10 facts homeowners should know about Mortgage Debt Forgiveness:</p> <ol style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <li>Normally, debt forgiveness results in taxable income. However, under the Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act of 2007, you may be able to exclude up to $2 million of debt forgiven on your principal residence.</li> <li>The limit is $1 million for a married person filing a separate return.</li> <li>You may exclude debt reduced through mortgage restructuring, as well as mortgage debt forgiven in a foreclosure.</li> <li>To qualify, the debt must have been used to buy, build or substantially improve your principal residence and be secured by that residence.</li> <li>Refinanced debt proceeds used for the purpose of substantially improving your principal residence also qualify for the exclusion.</li> <li>Proceeds of refinanced debt used for other purposes – for example, to pay off credit card debt – do not qualify for the exclusion.</li> <li>If you qualify, claim the special exclusion by filling out Form 982, Reduction of Tax Attributes Due to Discharge of Indebtedness, and attach it to your federal income tax return for the tax year in which the qualified debt was forgiven.</li> <li>Debt forgiven on second homes, rental property, business property, credit cards or car loans does not qualify for the tax relief provision.  In some cases, however, other tax relief provisions – such as insolvency – may be applicable.  IRS Form 982 provides more details about these provisions.</li> <li>If your debt is reduced or eliminated you normally will receive a year-end statement, Form 1099-C, Cancellation of Debt, from your lender.  By law, this form must show the amount of debt forgiven and the fair market value of any property foreclosed.</li> <li>Examine the Form 1099-C carefully.  Notify the lender immediately if any of the information shown is incorrect.  You should pay particular attention to the amount of debt forgiven in Box 2 as well as the value listed for your home in Box 7.</li> </ol> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">For more information about the Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act of 2007, visit <a href=\"http://links.govdelivery.com/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTIwMjI4LjU4NDE0NDEmbWVzc2FnZWlkPU1EQi1QUkQtQlVMLTIwMTIwMjI4LjU4NDE0NDEmZGF0YWJhc2VpZD0xMDAxJnNlcmlhbD0xNjg5MjUyNCZlbWFpbGlkPW5hdGhhbi5vbGFuc2VuQHJhY2tsYXcuY29tJnVzZXJpZD1uYXRoYW4ub2xhbnNlbkByYWNrbGF3LmNvbSZmbD0mZXh0cmE9TXVsdGl2YXJpYXRlSWQ9JiYm&&&130&&&http://www.irs.gov\">www.irs.gov</a>. IRS Publication 4681, Canceled Debts, Foreclosures, Repossessions and Abandonments, is also an excellent resource.</p>','Mortgage Debt Forgiveness: 10 Key Facts','','inherit','closed','closed','','6197-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','',6197,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6197-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6469,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>An appeals court in New Jersey ruled that a bank account held by a Medicaid recipient would not be considered a countable resource because the funds were being held on behalf of the applicant’s disabled grandson and not for the recipient’s personal use.</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2012.2.1-fund-for-disabled.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2012.2.1-fund-for-disabled.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\"></div> <p><strong><em>I.M. v. Division of Medical Assistance and Health Services</em> (N.J. Super. Ct., App. Div., No. A126509T3, June 3, 2011) (unpublished).</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts. </strong> A 79 year old Medicaid recipient (“Ms. M”) was named the sole caregiver of her 21-year-old mentally disabled grandson, (“J.M.”).  J.M. received a special needs grant of $2,000 from the New Jersey Division of Developmental Disabilities (“DDD”) in December of 2007.  Ms. M spent some of the funds for various needs of J.M., as intended, and established a bank account to hold the remaining grant funds ($1,480) for J.M.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Upon a review of Ms. M’s Medicaid status, The Division of Medical Assistance and Health Services (“DMAHS”) deemed the $1,480 to be a countable resource of Ms. M, thereby increasing her resource total in excess of the Medicaid limit of $2,000.  As a result, DMAHS terminated her Medicaid benefits.  In response to having her benefits terminated, Ms. M transferred the remaining grant funds to a new account in her grandson’s name, and added herself as a permitted user on the account.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">At the primary hearing, the Administrative Law Judge concluded that the termination of the Medicaid benefits had been improper, but that the bank account was still considered an available resource to Ms. M, so she appealed.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Ruling.</strong>  The Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, reversed the decision of the Administrative Law Judge, agreeing that the \"availability\" of countable assets under Medicaid regulations intends a legal, rather than physical, type of possession.  Although Ms. M has physical access to her grandson’s grant funds, she simply held them on his behalf “as his fiduciary, restricted in their use by the very terms of the DDD grant, as well as of the bank account in which they are held.\"  Ms. M’s Medicaid benefits were reinstated.</p>','Account Held on Behalf of Disabled Family Member Not a Countable Asset for Medicaid','','inherit','closed','closed','','6189-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','',6189,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6189-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6470,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>Most people spend a lifetime accumulating retirement assets in qualified plans, IRAs and other tax deferred retirement accounts.  Often times, these accounts constitute a significant portion of a person’s wealth.  While most of the time the account owner will diligently plan for the withdrawal of assets during retirement, very little time is spent on planning for the distribution or transfer of the account after the owner has passed.</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2012.1.27-beneficiary-designation-planning.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2012.1.27-beneficiary-designation-planning.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\"></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Without careful consideration of the many complex factors involved in beneficiary designation planning, the value of a retirement account can be drastically reduced or even destroyed upon the death of the account owner.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">For example, if the owner of an IRA or SEP fails to designate a beneficiary, the estate of the account owner automatically becomes the beneficiary.  Regardless of the size of the account, the owner’s estate will be forced to draw down the entire value of the account over no less than five years, and then distribute the net proceeds of the account to the heirs of the owner’s estate.  Estate’s are not able to “stretch-out” the receipt of retirement account distributions.  Since all distributions from IRAs and SEPs are taxable as ordinary income, and estates generally pay a 35% federal income tax, the net value of the account is likely to be only 60% of its original value the day the owner passed.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Even if the retirement account owner does designate an individual beneficiary, that beneficiary may not be capable of handling the assets.  Since the beneficiary is free to withdraw the assets of the retirement account as he or she chooses, negative personal circumstances such as creditor issues, poor spending habits, substance abuse issues, or dysfunctional personal relationships may cause the individual beneficiary to expedite the withdrawal of inherited retirement account assets.  Not only would we expect the beneficiary to pay more income tax than necessary, he or she would lose the benefit of continued tax-deferred growth, and may even squander the entire account on frivolous purchases or in attempting to solve personal problems.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">These are just a few simple examples of the inherent problems associated with beneficiary designation planning for retirement accounts.  Since there are so many factors to consider, there is no one size fits all solution.  Each account owner has different goals and priorities, and external forces such as income taxes, creditors, and spendthrift beneficiaries influence the planning process.  Considering the multitude of distribution possibilities and potential negative consequences for failing to properly plan, do not neglect this important area of your estate plan.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"> </p> <p> </p> <div class=\"a2a_kit a2a_default_style\"> <p> </p> </div>','The Importance of Beneficiary Designation Planning','','inherit','closed','closed','','6187-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','',6187,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6187-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6471,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','<p>Kelly Green, The Wall Street Journal,<em> Who Gets the Vacation Home?</em>:</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Is there a way to hand off a vacation home to the next generation so that everyone still wants to spend time together there?  Tensions often mount when a family figures out what to do with a property that could be a lightning rod for sibling rivalries—not to mention a sizable chunk of an estate.   Creating a new generation of family vacationers is the exception, not the rule, and it requires thoughtful planning.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204331304577140773728878042.html?mod=WSJ_FamilyFinance_MoreHeadlines\">Click here for the full article</a></p> <p><a href=\"http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204331304577140773728878042.html?mod=WSJ_FamilyFinance_MoreHeadlines\" target=\"_blank\"></a></p> <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p>','Keeping the Vacation Home in the Family Using LLCs, QPRTs and Dynasty Trusts','','inherit','closed','closed','','6183-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','',6183,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6183-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6472,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>IRS issues guidance for reporting the income tax consequences of 2010 conversions to Roth IRAs for taxpayers that did not elect to include the entire value of the conversion as income on their 2010 income tax return.</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2012.1.11-report-ira-conversion.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2012.1.11-report-ira-conversion.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\"></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Background.</strong>  Beginning in 2010, the rule that barred taxpayers with more than $100,000 of modified adjusted gross income from converting traditional IRAs to Roth IRAs was eliminated.  For conversions made in 2010, any amounts that would be included in income as a result of the conversion must be included in income in equal amounts in 2011 and 2012, unless the taxpayer elected to include the entire amount in income in 2010. (<a href=\"https://checkpoint.riag.com/app/main/docLinkNew?usid=137686dcaf6&DocID=iae497a0a19d711dcb1a9c7f8ee2eaa77&SrcDocId=T0NEWSLTR%3A604996.1dr6&feature=tnews&lastCpReqId=3025933&pinpnt=TCODE%3A40002.1&d=d#TCODE:40002.1\" target=\"_blank\"><b>Code Sec. 408A(d)(3)</b></a>).</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Income Tax Reporting.</strong>  Half of the taxable amount of the 2010 conversion must be reported on the 2011 income tax return unless the taxpayer (1) elected to include the taxable amount in income for 2010 by filing a 2010 Form 8606 (“Nondeductible IRAs”), and completed Part II or Part III or both, as applicable, and checked the box on line 19, the box on line 24, or both; (2) re-characterized the 2010 rollover or conversion to a Roth IRA; or (3) received a distribution in 2010 or 2011 of any of the taxable amount (in which case, an amount other than half may need to be reported on the 2011 tax return).</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">If no part of the 2010 conversion to a Roth IRA was distributed in 2010 or 2011, the amount from line 20a of the 2010 Form 8606 must be reported on:</p> <ul> <li>line 15b of the 2011 Form 1040;</li> <li>line 11b of the 2011 Form 1040A; or</li> <li>line 16b of the 2011 Form 1040NR.</li> </ul> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">If, as required, distributions of a 2010 conversion to a Roth IRA were reported on the taxpayer’s 2010 tax return, the taxpayer must, on the 2011 return, report:</p> <ul> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\">on Form 1040, line 15b (Form 1040A, line 11b; or Form 1040NR, line 16b) the smaller of (a) the amount from the 2010 Form 8606, line 20a, or (b) the remaining taxable amount of the 2010 conversions to a Roth IRA; and</li> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\">on Form 1040, line 16b (Form 1040A, line 12b; or Form 1040NR, line 17b) the smaller of (a) the amount from the 2010 Form 8606, line 25a, or (b) the remaining taxable amount of the 2010 rollovers to a Roth IRA and IPRRs.</li> </ul> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Example.</strong>  A taxpayer converted $30,000 from a traditional IRA to a new Roth IRA on February 1, 2010.  On June 1, 2010, the taxpayer received a $20,000 distribution of the converted amount from the Roth IRA.  Part II of the 2010 Form 8606 was completed to report the $30,000 as the taxable amount of the conversion, and the taxpayer elected to include $15,000 of the taxable amount in income for 2011 and $15,000 for 2012.  The $30,000 was the only amount put into the new Roth IRA in 2010, so the entire $20,000 distribution was from the taxable amount of the conversion.  The $20,000 was included in the taxpayer’s 2010 income by reporting it on line 15b of the 2010 Form 1040.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Example.</strong>  A taxpayer converted $30,000 from a traditional IRA to a new Roth IRA on February 1, 2010.  On June 1, 2010, the taxpayer received a $20,000 distribution of the converted amount from the Roth IRA.  Part II of the 2010 Form 8606 was completed to report the $30,000 as the taxable amount of the conversion, and the taxpayer elected to include $15,000 of the taxable amount in income for 2011 and $15,000 for 2012.  The $30,000 was the only amount put into the new Roth IRA in 2010, so the entire $20,000 distribution was from the taxable amount of the conversion.  The $20,000 was included in the taxpayer’s 2010 income by reporting it on line 15b of the 2010 Form 1040.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Only $10,000 of the 2010 conversion remains to be taxed, and because this is smaller than the $15,000 listed on line 20a of the 2010 Form 8606 (half of the total 2010 conversion to a Roth IRA), $10,000 must be included on line 15b of the 2011 Form 1040. None of the 2010 conversion to a Roth IRA will have to be reported in 2012 income.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Additionally, a taxpayer may have to include in 2011 income all or some of the taxable amount of 2010 rollovers and conversion to a Roth IRA and IPRRs that would have otherwise been included in 2012 income. To determine the amount to report in 2011, the 2011 Form 8606 must be completed, using Part III for distributions from a Roth IRA and Part IV for distributions from a designated Roth account.</p> <p><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.irs.gov/retirement/article/0,,id=251832,00.html\">Click here</a></span> to view the original IRS article.</p> <p>For additional information see:</p> <p>IRS <a href=\"http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p590.pdf\"><b>Publication 590</b></a>, Individual Retirement Arrangements (IRAs)</p> <p>Retirement Plans FAQs: <a href=\"http://www.irs.gov/retirement/article/0,,id=111413,00.html\"><b>IRAs</b></a></p> <p><a href=\"http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc413.html\"><b>Topic 413</b></a> - Rollovers from Retirement Plans</p> <p><a href=\"http://www.irs.gov/irb/2009-39_IRB/ar15.html\"><b>Notice 2009-75</b></a>, Rollovers from Employer Plans to Roth IRAs</p> <p><a href=\"http://www.irs.gov/irb/2010-51_IRB/ar11.html\"><b>Notice 2010-84</b></a>, Guidance on In-Plan Roth Rollovers</p> <ul> <li></li> </ul>','How to report 2010 Roth IRA rollovers and conversions','','inherit','closed','closed','','6185-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','',6185,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6185-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6473,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">While the process of obtaining a divorce decree is rarely simple, the ordeal can become much more complicated when an involved family member, such as a spouse or child, has special needs.  Further, many attorneys who specialize in family law may not be aware of the estate planning strategies and protective measures that may be available to the family – a situation which can produce devastating results.</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2012.1.6-divorce-special-needs.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2012.1.6-divorce-special-needs.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">As with many areas of law, each special needs planning situation varies based on the facts and circumstances of the case.  However, when any special needs individual is involved, divorce negotiations and proceedings should always include planning for the well-being of such person.  The following is a list of examples of situations that can arise from such a case:</p> <ul> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\">When a divorce involves a minor special needs child, spousal support payments made to the primary custodial parent and child support payments made to a child can be included in the total income computation of the household, which can result in ineligibility for government benefits (such as Social Security Income) which may have otherwise been available to the child.  Further, if benefits are received and the income is later disclosed, the family may be required to reimburse the government for past benefits received – most of which may have already been spent for support needs.</li> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\">An award of spousal support directly payable to a spouse with special needs could result in increasing the recipient spouse’s income in excess of the limitations required for certain government benefits (such as Medicaid), thereby disqualifying the special needs spouse from continued eligibility.</li> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\">A parent may still be required to provide support for an adult special needs child, which can reduce certain benefits on a dollar-for-dollar basis.  This can be avoided if the payments are made to approved recipients on behalf of the special needs adult child or to a special needs trust.</li> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\">If a family with a special needs member properly plans during a divorce, the non-special needs person can agree to make support payments directly to certain creditors so that the direct receipt of the funds by the special needs person does not become ineligible for government benefits.  For example, in lieu of a cash payment, payments can be made directly to a caregiver.  (However, the paying spouse would not be able to deduct such payments, as he or she would when making direct spousal support payments – an issue which may reduce the agreed upon support payment amount.)</li> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\">In cases where the divorcing parties are not amicable, one party can request that the court direct payments to be made in a manner that does not create ineligibility for benefits on the part of the special needs individual (such as establishing a third-party special needs trust).<span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\" new=\"New\" lang=\"EN\"></span></li> </ul> <p>A divorce settlement involving a special needs person should not be executed without consulting an attorney specializing in such areas.  When properly planned, potentially upsetting results can be avoided in favor of a well-crafted plan that benefits the family, and provides for the special needs person, for years to come.</p>','The Effect of Divorce on Special Needs Planning','','inherit','closed','closed','','6182-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','',6182,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6182-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6474,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>December 31st marked the expiration of 53 tax break commonly referred to as the “extenders.”</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2012.1.6-expired-tax-breaks.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2012.1.6-expired-tax-breaks.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\"></div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\">December 31st marked the expiration of 53 tax breaks commonly referred to as the “extenders” because Congress usually votes to extend them for one more year.  The expired provisions include several popular tax breaks, such as:</div> <div style=\"text-align: left;\"> <ul> <li>the AMT patch (which protects 30 million middle-class taxpayers from the Alternative Minimum Tax; </li> <li>the employee mass transit subsidy;</li> <li>research and development tax credits;</li> <li>bonus depreciation; </li> <li>and 100% expensing.</li> </ul> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Congressional Budget Office assumes the expiration of these provisions, therefore masking the true size of the deficit if they are extended.   Also, many of the 53 tax breaks are questionable at best, but are typically extended as part of the budget package (for which members of Congress troll for campaign contributions from affected individuals and businesses).  For a complete list of the 53 expired tax breaks, see Joint Committee on Taxation, <a href=\"http://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=startdown&id=3722\" target=\"_blank\">List of Expiring Federal Tax Provisions 2010-2020</a> (JCX-2-11).</p> </div>','53 Tax Breaks Expired on December 31, 2011','','inherit','closed','closed','','6180-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','',6180,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6180-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6475,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','<p>Rev. Rul. 2012-2, 2012-3 IRB</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/2011.5.27-applicable-federal-rates.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/2011.5.27-applicable-federal-rates.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"> </span></strong></span></p> <table style=\"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;\" height=\"497\" border=\"3\" cellpadding=\"3\" width=\"483\" align=\"center\"> <caption> <p><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong>Table 1 (Section 1274(d) Rate) Period for Compounding<br /></strong></span></p> </caption>  <tbody> <tr bgcolor=\"7093DB\"> <th><br /></th><th style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Annual</span></th><th style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Semiannual</span></th><th style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Quarterly</span></th><th style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Month</span></th> </tr> <tr> <td colspan=\"5\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Short-Term</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"7093DB\"> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.19%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.19%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.19%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.19%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">110% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.21%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.21%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.21%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.21%</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"7093DB\"> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">120% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.23%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.23%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.23%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.23%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">130% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.25%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.25%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.25%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.25%</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"7093DB\"> <td colspan=\"5\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Mid-Term</span></td> </tr> <tr cellpading=\"10\"> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.17%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.17%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.17%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.17%</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"7093DB\"> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">110% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.29%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.29%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.29%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.29%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">120% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.40%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.40%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.40%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.40%</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"7093DB\"> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">130% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.53%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.52%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.52%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.52%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">150% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.77%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.76%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.76%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.75%</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"7093DB\"> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">175% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.06%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.05%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.04%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.04%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan=\"5\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Long-Term</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"7093DB\"> <td><strong>AFR</strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.63%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.61%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.60%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.60%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">110% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.89%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.87%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.86%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.85%</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"7093DB\"> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">120% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.15%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.13%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.12%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.11%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">130% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.42%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.39%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.38%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.37%</span></td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <table style=\"width: 475px; height: 246px; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;\" height=\"197\" border=\"3\" cellpadding=\"3\" width=\"466\"> <caption> <p style=\"text-align: center;\"> </p> <p> </p> <p><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong>Table 2 (Section 1288(b) Rate) Period for Compounding</strong></span></p> </caption>  <tbody> <tr cellpading=\"5\" bgcolor=\"7093DB\"> <th><br /></th><th><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Annual</span></th><th><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Semiannual</span></th><th><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Quarterly</span></th><th><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Month</span></th> </tr> <tr> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">Short-term </span></strong><br /><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">adjusted AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.38%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.38%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.38%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.38%</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"7093DB\"> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">Mid-term </span></strong><br /><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">adjusted AFR</span></strong><br /></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.50%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.49%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.49%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.49%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">Long-term</span></strong><br /><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">adjusted AFR</span></strong></p> </td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.47%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.44%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.43%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.42%</span></td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <table style=\"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;\" height=\"107\" border=\"3\" width=\"425\"> <caption> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong>Table 5 (Section 7520 Rate)</strong></span></p> </caption>  <tbody> <tr> <td> <p style=\"text-align: left;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">Applicable federal rate for determining the <br />present value of an annuity, an interest <br />for life or term of years, or a remainder or <br />reversionary interest</span></p> </td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.4%</span></td> </tr> </tbody> </table>','Applicable Federal Rates for January 2012','','inherit','closed','closed','','6178-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','',6178,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6178-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6476,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Late on December 22nd, House and Senate leaders agreed to end their stalemate over extending the payroll tax break, and have agreed to continue the 2% reduction in workers’ Social Security tax rate through the end of February 2012.</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/2011.12.27-temporary-extension-payroll.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/2011.12.27-temporary-extension-payroll.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The payroll extension agreement (bill number H.R. 3765, entitled, the “Temporary Payroll Tax Cut Continuation Act of 2011”) calls for new language to be inserted into the tax relief bill to prevent a potential payroll tax problem for employers.  According to information provided by the House Ways & Means Committee, the revision would allow employers to withhold employee payroll taxes at 4.2% (instead of 6.2%) on all wages paid during the two-month extension period, subject only to the full 2012 wage base ($110,100) and without regard to the $18,350 cap (two-twelfths of the wage base of $110,100) on wages earned through the end of February 2012.   If an employee’s wages during the first two months of 2012 exceed $18,350, and the payroll tax reduction is not extended for the remainder of 2012, an amount equal to 2% of those excess wages would ultimately be recaptured on the worker’s individual 2012 income tax return.  Under the agreement, both Republicans and Democrats in the Senate and House will immediately appoint negotiators to a conference to forge a full-year extension of the payroll tax reduction.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Both the Senate and House approved the bill on the morning of December 23, 2011, and it was signed into law by President Obama shortly thereafter.</p>','House and Senate Approve Bill Temporarily Extending the Payroll Tax Cut','','inherit','closed','closed','','6177-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','',6177,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6177-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6477,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>The Internal Revenue Service wants to remind all taxpayers that with the New Year fast approaching, there is still time for you to take steps that can lower your 2011 income taxes.  Here are six tax-saving tips the IRS suggests you consider before the calendar turns to 2012.</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/2011.12.21-six-tax-tips.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/2011.12.21-six-tax-tips.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"></a> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>1. Make Charitable Contributions.</strong></span>  If you itemize deductions, your donations must be made to qualified charities no later than December 31st to be deductible for 2011.  You must have a canceled check, a bank statement, credit card statement or a written statement from the charity, showing the name of the charity and the date and amount of the contribution for all cash donations.  Donations charged to a credit card by December 31st are deductible for 2011, even if the bill is not paid until 2012.  If you donate clothing or household items, they must be in good used condition or better to be deductible.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">2. Install Energy-Efficient Home Improvements.</span></strong>  You still have time this year to make energy-saving and green-energy home improvements, and qualify for either of two home energy credits.  Installing energy efficient improvements such as insulation, new windows and water heaters to your main home can provide up to $500 in tax savings.  Homeowners going green should also check out the Residential Energy Efficient Property Credit, designed to spur investment in alternative energy equipment.  The credit equals 30 percent of the cost of qualifying solar, wind, geothermal, or heat pump property.  For details see Special Edition Tax Tip 2011-08, Home Energy Credits Still Available for 2011 on the <a href=\"http://www.irs.gov/\">www.IRS.gov</a> website.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">3. Consider an Investment Portfolio Adjustment.</span></strong>  Check your investments for gains and losses and consider sales by December 31st.  You may normally deduct capital losses up to the amount of capital gains, plus $3,000 from other income.  If your net capital losses are more than $3,000, the excess can be carried forward and deducted in future years.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>4. Contribute the Maximum to Retirement Accounts.</strong></span>  Elective deferrals you make to employer-sponsored 401(k) plans or similar workplace retirement programs for 2011 must be made by December 31st.  However, you have until April 17, 2012, to set up a new IRA or add money to an existing IRA and still have it count for 2011.  You normally can contribute up to $5,000 to a traditional or Roth IRA, and up to $6,000 if you are age 50 or over.  The Saver’s Credit, also known as the Retirement Savings Contribution Credit, is also available to low- and moderate-income workers who voluntarily contribute to an IRA or workplace retirement plan.  The maximum Saver’s Credit is $1,000 for individuals and $2,000 for married couples, but the amount allowed could be reduced or eliminated for some taxpayers in part because of the impact of other deductions and credits.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>5. Make a Qualified Charitable Distribution.</strong></span>  If you are age 70½ or over, the qualified charitable distribution (QCD) allows you to make a distribution paid directly from your individual retirement account to a qualified charity, and exclude the amount of the distribution from your gross income.  The maximum annual exclusion for QCDs is $100,000.  The excluded amount can be used to satisfy any required minimum distributions that the individual must otherwise receive from their IRAs in 2011.  This benefit is available even if you do not itemize deductions.  Importantly, the exclusion for QCDs expires at the end of this year!</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>6. Do Not Overlook the Small Business Health Care Tax Credit.</strong></span>  If you are a small employer who pays at least half of your employee health insurance premiums, you may qualify for a tax credit of up to 35 percent of the premiums paid.  An employer with fewer than 25 full-time employees who pays an average wage of less than $50,000 a year may qualify.  For more information see the Small Business Health Care Tax Credit page on <a href=\"http://www.irs.gov/\">www.IRS.gov</a>.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">One final tip to remember: you should always save receipts and records related to your taxes.  Good recordkeeping is a must because you need records to prepare your tax return, and it will help you to file quickly and accurately next year.  In the unfortunate event your return is selected by the taxing authorities for examination, clear and accurate records will be the best defense to an unexpected tax bill.</p> </div>','Six Year-End Tips to Reduce 2011 Taxes','','inherit','closed','closed','','6175-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','',6175,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6175-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6479,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Nathan Moccia, shareholder of Rack & Moccia, to conduct a national teleconference for National Business Institute on Friday December 30, 2011, titled “Estate Planning Basics.”</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/2011.11.18-nbi-announcement.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/2011.11.18-nbi-announcement.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The program aims to provide a basic knowledge of the essential estate planning instruments and their use in a well-structured and funded plan.  The course will also cover their use during the incapacity and abuse and protection from controversy.  The core groups of registrants are attorneys; however, the course will also benefit professional partners to include trust officers, estate and financial planners, insurance professionals, bankers and paralegals.  For further information, or to register for this program <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><a href=\"http://www.nbi-sems.com/SemTeleDetails.aspx/R-58430ER%7C?ctname=SPKEM\">click here</a></span></p> <p><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>Program Description</strong></span></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Build a Solid Foundation in Estate Planning Basics.   Do you have the skills to ensure your clients are well taken care of in case of incapacity? Can you minimize their tax liability through carefully planned asset transfers? Gain the knowledge you need to help your clients through their estate planning needs with this fundamental program. Be prepared to effectively represent your clients. </p> <ul> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Gain a fundamental understanding of basic principles in drafting wills and trusts to effectively document your client\'s wishes.</li> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Learn what impact gift and estate taxes will have on beneficiaries and how your plan can address how these taxes are handled.</li> <li style=\"text-align: justify;\">Help your client plan for incapacity by understanding how to proactively address common legal and financial issues that can arise when health deteriorates.</li> </ul>','Rack & Moccia Attorney to conduct NBI Teleconference','','inherit','closed','closed','','6172-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','',6172,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6172-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6480,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The IRS has released a Notice reminding executors of estates of decedent’s dying after 2010 that they must file and make an election on Form 706, U.S. Estate Tax Return, in order to preserve a deceased spouse’s unused estate and gift tax exclusion amount for the surviving spouse.  Estate tax returns making this newly offered and irrevocable portability election must be filed nine months after the decedent’s date of death, and the first estate tax returns electing portability for estates of those dying after 2010 are due on October 3, 2011.</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/2011.11.7-portability-elections.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/2011.11.7-portability-elections.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p><strong>IR 2011-97, Notice 2011-82, 2011-42 IRB</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>What is the Portability Election?</strong>  The Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010 (“Tax Relief Act”) permits a surviving spouse an irrevocable “portability” election to carry over the unused estate and gift tax exemption of their deceased spouse dying after 2011 or 2012.  If the portability election is made, each surviving spouse is allowed their own personal $5 million exclusion (less any lifetime allocations of their $5 million exclusion) plus any remaining unused exclusion amount carried over from their deceased spouse.  IRC Section 2010(c)(2).  Then, during the lifetime of the surviving spouse, he or she may use the combined total exclusion for gifts made during life and taxable transfers made after death.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">If a surviving spouse who has elected to transfer the deceased spouse’s unused exclusion amount remarries another who also predeceases the surviving spouse, the amount of unused exclusion that is available for use by the still-surviving spouse is the unused exclusion of the most recently deceased spouse, regardless of which deceased spouse’s unused exclusion amount was higher.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Making the Portability Election. </strong> The portability election must be made by the deceased spouse’s executor on a properly and timely filed Form 706 (including extensions) regardless of whether the value of the gross estate of the decedent is large enough to cause an estate tax liability.  If an executor does not wish to make the portability election, he or she can either not file a Form 706 or, if the estate requires the filing of an estate tax return, the executor is given instructions on the proper procedure for preparing the Form 706 without making the portability election.  Be warned however, the portability election is made, the IRS may examine, and re-determine, the asset values used to calculate the unused exclusion amount up until the date of the surviving spouse’s death (which could be many years later), significantly different than the traditional, three-year statute of limitations.</p>','Executors Must Begin to Make Portability Elections for Estates of Decedent’s Dying after 2010','','inherit','closed','closed','','6170-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','',6170,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6170-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6481,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">At age 26, Anna Nicole Smith married J. Howard Marshall II, 89 year old billionaire and Texas oil tycoon, who died a year after their marriage.  Howard Marshall’s Will, executed after he married Anna Nicole, disinherited her almost entirely, allowing her to keep only the gifts he had given her during his lifetime (worth about $8 million).</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/2011.10.25-summary.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/2011.10.25-summary.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">She attempted to have the Will set aside, claiming that Howard intended to give her half of his estate, and his son, Pierce, defended the Will as valid.  Anna Nicole lost in her lawsuit, and received no additional assets from her late husband’s estate.  This decision was followed by over 15 years of complex litigation (including two appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court), during which time both Pierce and Anna Nicole died and their respective estates continued to fight over Howard’s fortune.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Prior to her death on February 8, 2007 (at age 39), Anna Nicole Smith had a daughter, Dannielynn, on June 1, 2006.  Soon thereafter, she tragically, lost her son, Daniel Wayne, to suicide on September 10, 2006.  Unfortunately, her Last Will and Testament, last updated on July 30, 2001 included the following language:</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">“I have one child DANIEL WAYNE SMITH.  I have no predeceased children nor predeceased children leaving issue.  Except as otherwise provided in this Will, I have intentionally omitted to provide for my spouse and other heirs, including future spouses and children and other descendants now living and those hereafter born or adopted, as well as existing and future stepchildren and foster children.”</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">A copy of her Will, recorded as public record in California, can be <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/anna-nicole-will.pdf\">read here</a>.  Since she named her son, who had since died, as the sole beneficiary of her estate – and specifically excluded any other children, even if not yet born – her minor daughter was effectively disinherited.  Also, Anna Nicole’s estranged mother, and at least two boyfriends, attempted to claim custody of Dannielynn since the Will did not appoint a guardian to care for her after her Anna Nicole’s death.  Presumably, the would-be guardians hoped that caring for Dannielynn would include access to large funds and posh living arrangements.  Further complicating the issue, paternity and jurisdiction investigations were required to be completed before Dannielynn’s custody could be determined (as a result, the father named on the birth certificate was found to be incorrect).</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Arguments in favor of Dannielynn receiving Anna Nicole’s estate are that the disinheritance was unintentional or, alternatively, that the Will was invalid.  In some U.S. states, if a parent unintentionally omits a child from her Will, the child can contest the validity of the Will and potentially receive a share of the estate (however, Anna Nicole was arguably residing in the Bahamas, not the U.S.).  Ultimately, on June 23, 2011, Anna Nicole’s representatives lost the fight against Howard’s son and brought the ongoing battle over the billionaire’s estate to an end.  Dannielynn will not receive a portion of Howard’s estate and, because of the costs of litigation, there were no assets left from her mother’s estate for her to inherit.  This epically long and costly battle could have been avoided if Anna Nicole had simply updated her Will to include, and appoint a guardian to care for, her minor daughter.  These simple revisions – reflecting significant life changes – could have clearly established her intent and provided closure and finality for her family after this series of tragic deaths.</p>','The Estate of Vickie Lynn Marshall (a.k.a Anna Nicole Smith)','','inherit','closed','closed','','6165-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','',6165,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6165-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6482,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>Before her death on August 20, 2007, billionaire hotelier Leona Helmsley established a charitable trust for “the benefit of dogs,” which was funded with more than $4 billion.</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/2011.10.20-leona-helmsley.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/2011.10.20-leona-helmsley.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> </a> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">She also established a trust for the benefit of her Maltese, Trouble.  Upon her death, Trouble’s trust was funded with $12 million.  Her brother received $15 million and two of her four grandchildren received $10 million, while the remaining 2 grandchildren were left out of the Will entirely.  She also left $100,000 to her chauffeur.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Predictably, the omitted grandchildren initiated a contest, and were able to successfully convince the judge to reduce the trust from $12 million to $2 million even though New York law does not provide inheritance rights to an omitted grandchild and the decedent’s intent typically should prevail.  To make matters worse, the result was especially unfortunate for Trouble as his annual care costs included: $100,000 for full-time security, $8,000 for grooming, $1,200 for food and $60,000 for the guardian fee.  The $10 million reduction was divided, with $6 million going to the grandchildren and $4 million going to the $4 billion charitable dog trust.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Although it was Leona’s intent to provide a charitable trust for the benefit of dogs, the court found that the separate mission statement to the trust – drafted by Leona and not incorporated into her Will or trust – included very broad discretionary distribution language; Leona had been warned that the mission statement may not be legally binding.  As a result of Leona’s personally drafted statement, the court determined that the distribution language of the trust allowed the trustees to distribute trust funds for such charitable purposes and in such amounts as they may, in their sole discretion, determine.  So far, distributions from the trust have been made to charities in the areas of health care, medical research, education and human services; however, distributions have not included charities such as the SPCA or The Humane Society.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">While these generous charitable distributions from the “dog trust’ will fund important research, the true intent of Leona Helmsley (whether or not some find her intent questionable) was not upheld.  Each person has the right to dispose of her property in accordance with her wishes – so, what went wrong in this case?  The result was caused by poor drafting on the part of Leona.  When properly drafted, charitable trusts (and pet trusts) are enforced by the courts.  Instead of being distributed in accordance with her wishes, a vast portion of her estate was given to various organizations without her knowledge or consent.  Even deliberately disinherited family members received a share of her fortune merely because they were related to the decedent.  If she wanted to disinherit two grandchildren, provide her wealth to animal charities and establish a valid pet trust, she should have sought the appropriate legal advice.</p> </div>','The Estate of Leona Helmsley','','inherit','closed','closed','','6167-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:41','2016-02-25 13:28:41','',6167,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6167-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6483,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Musician Jimi Hendrix died on September 18, 1970; shockingly, his estate was involved in litigation for over 34 years.  How could this possibly happen?  He died without a Will (and with millions of dollars).</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/2011.10.18-jimi-hendrix.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/2011.10.18-jimi-hendrix.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">When someone dies without a Will, state law typically determines who will receive an inheritance and how much each heir will receive.  The results are rarely ideal – and, depending on the laws in effect, can be downright appalling.  In Jimi’s case, his potential heirs included two children born out of wedlock, his father, his brother, a girlfriend with whom he was cohabitating at the time of his death, a woman who claimed to be his fiancée and his step-sister.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Initially, Jimi’s father, Al Hendrix, legally denied the claims of his “illegitimate” children and became the sole heir of his son’s estate.  In some circumstances, if children are not specifically included in a Will (or if there is no Will), the children are completely disinherited – a result which many parents find extremely unsettling.  Upon receiving the multi-million dollar estate, Jimi’s father sold the rights to his son’s music to a Panamanian tax shelter that, in return, paid Jimi’s father a fixed annual annuity payment.  The rights to Jimi’s image and likeness were sold to a different company.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Later, in 1993, Al Hendrix claimed to know nothing of these sales, and successfully sued for return of the rights to Jimi’s music and likeness; however, the saga did not end with this lawsuit.  In 2002, upon the death of Al Hendrix, the family discovered that Al had disinherited Jimi’s brother, Leon and left his estate – including all of Jimi’s assets – to his adoptive daughter, Janie, who he also named to serve as Trustee over his Trust.  Leon then proceeded to sue Janie in 2004, claiming that she exerted undue influence over Al and pressured him to exclude Leon from the Will.  Leon’s attorney fees and court costs ended up costing him over $3 million.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Since filing a lawsuit against Janie, Leon and seven other potential beneficiaries posed numerous issues for the court.  Ultimately, Janie was found to have mismanaged the Trust assets – but not before revealing to the court that Leon was a former drug addict.  In light of these discoveries, the court disinherited Leon and removed Janie as Trustee.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Although the resulting litigation was complicated, the solution is very simple.  If Jimi had a Will or Trust in place when he died, his multi-million dollar estate (and his family) would not have been wrapped up in litigation for over three decades.  Those rumored to be closest to Jimi during his lifetime, including his mother, did not receive anything and, with proper estate planning, Jimi could have left his vast estate to those who he wanted to enjoy his legacy – not those who the state decided should inherit a windfall.</p>','The Estate of James Marshall “Jimi” Hendrix','','inherit','closed','closed','','6162-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','',6162,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6162-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6484,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Until January 1, 2013 (when the estate tax exemption is scheduled to decrease to $1 million per taxpayer), the estate tax exemption rate is $5 million per taxpayer.  Accordingly, if the value of your assets (including life insurance death benefits) is less than $5 million, then no estate tax will apply to transfers to beneficiaries at death.</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/2011.10.25-summary.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/2011.10.25-summary.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Even though the current $5 million exemption amount may allow many taxpayers to avoid estate tax, one must still consider many other issues presented by individual and family circumstances as reasons to develop and implement an estate plan.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">As demonstrated by our National Estate Planning Awareness Week articles on the estates of Jimi Hendrix, Anna Nicole Smith and Leona Helmsley – devastating and costly non-tax related problems can result from outdated (or non-existent) estate plans.  The following list includes commonly overlooked issues which, if not addressed, can cause distressing outcomes:</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify; padding-left: 90px;\"><br />• Name a person (and an alternate) to handle your affairs in case of   incapacity</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify; padding-left: 90px;\">• Name a guardian (and an alternate) for your minor children</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify; padding-left: 90px;\">• Provide for a trustee to manage assets for your spouse or children, or both</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify; padding-left: 90px;\">• Protect assets for your special needs child</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify; padding-left: 90px;\">• Prevent disputes between your current spouse and children from a prior <br />  marriage</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify; padding-left: 90px;\">• Keep assets out of the control of in-laws</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify; padding-left: 90px;\">• Ensure that your estate has liquidity</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify; padding-left: 90px;\">• Update/revise your IRA or 401(k) plan beneficiary designations</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify; padding-left: 90px;\">• Protect the value of your business/practice for heirs</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify; padding-left: 90px;\">• Control the timing and manner in which your estate passes to intended <br />beneficiaries</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">If one or more of these issues applies to you or a loved one, don’t wait for the next tax law change to address your estate plan!</p>','The Importance of Estate Planning','','inherit','closed','closed','','6168-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','',6168,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6168-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6485,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>In order to help raise awareness about important estate planning issues, Rack & Moccia is joining WealthCounsel in a public relations campaign to showcase National Estate Planning Awareness Week.</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/2011.10.17-nep-intro.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/2011.10.17-nep-intro.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\">  </a> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">According to a 2010 industry trends survey of estate planners conducted by WealthCounsel, nearly 70% of the respondents indicated that Americans fail to plan because they lack awareness as to why they should plan.  At Rack & Moccia, we are passionate about building awareness of the importance of thoughtful estate planning and we are committed to educating the public about the negative consequences of what can happen to a family when a properly designed estate plan is not in place.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Rack & Moccia will be posting a series of articles addressing selected issues facing the surviving families of several recent – and well-publicized – deaths.  While many people are under the impression that formal “estate planning” is only for the wealthy, frequently, it is the numerous non-tax complications that arise unexpectedly after the death of a loved one that cause the most problems.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">These awareness articles will examine the estates of Jimi Hendrix, Anna Nicole Smith, Leona Helmsley and others, address the issues created by faulty (or non-existent) estate plans and provide preventative recommendations on how you can avoid these devastating problems.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">We invite you to read these articles, consider the issues and talk to your friends and family about the importance of estate planning to prevent family chaos after death, avoid lengthy and expensive probate, maintain privacy, prevent heirs from mismanaging their inheritance, provide for special needs beneficiaries and preserve assets for generations to come.</p> </div>','National Estate Planning Awareness Week 2011','','inherit','closed','closed','','6160-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','',6160,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6160-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6486,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Court of Federal Claims has held that the majority owner, CEO, and principal financier of a publishing corporation was responsible for its nonpayment of payroll tax, and willfully failed to pay over the funds to the government.  Although he did not exercise day-to-day control over the entity, he clearly had the capacity to do so.  He also drew on company funds in an attempt to recoup cash he advanced to the entity during the same time he knew payroll taxes were unpaid.</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/2011.9.23-responsible-person-penalty.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/2011.9.23-responsible-person-penalty.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Jenkins v. U.S., 108 AFTR 2d 2011-_____, 09/15/2011</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Trust Fund Recovery Penalty. </strong> Code Sec. 6672 imposes the trust fund recovery penalty on any person who: (1) is responsible for collecting, accounting for, and paying over payroll taxes; and (2) willfully fails to perform this responsibility.  The amount of the penalty is equal to the amount of the tax that was not collected and paid.  The penalty is imposed on a “responsible person,” i.e., anyone in a business entity who has the duty to collect, account for, or pay over the tax.  In determining whether there is “willfulness,” the courts have focused on whether a taxpayer had knowledge about the non-payment of the payroll taxes, or showed reckless disregard with respect to whether the payments were being made.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts.  </strong>In 1992, Timothy Jenkins and Gary Puckrein founded Dialogue Diaspora, Inc. (“DDI”), a corporation which published American Visions magazine and promoted African-American culture.  Jenkins was a majority stockholder, CEO, CFO, and publisher.  He also was a major financial backer of DDI.  He rented space to DDI, advanced money to it under a loan agreement secured by a factor\'s lien, and made a series of advances to DDI or American Visions totaling over $250,000.  Puckrein was DDI President and editor of American Visions andwas primarily responsible for the day-to-day management of the business from 1992 to 1994.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Early in 1995, Jenkins and Puckrein had a major falling out, and in April of that year, Jenkins learned that DDI had been experiencing employment tax problems with the IRS and had entered into an installment agreement for the payment of those taxes.  DDI did not stay compliant with the installment agreement and, in June of 1995 after having learned Puckrein was secretly operating a competing company, Jenkins changed the locks on DDI\'s premises, called a board meeting, and ousted Puckrein.  On July 5, 1995, Jenkins wrote a check on DDI\'s bank account for $16,668 made payable to himself and his wife (the last of 13 such checks), cashed the check and deposited the proceeds into one of his personal bank accounts.  Jenkins said that he wrote this check to himself based on the loan/factoring agreement and admitted that, at the time he wrote it, he knew about the unpaid IRS liability.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">After taking various procedural steps, the IRS collected $264,097.56 from Jenkins by levying on his individual retirement account and Social Security benefits.  Jenkins then filed a claim for refund seeking in an attempt to recover the levied assets.  The IRS disallowed Jenkins’ refund claim and, in turn, Jenkins filed a suit for refund in the Court of Federal Claims.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Court of Federal Claims Finds in Favor of the IRS.</strong>  Ruling in favor of the IRS, the Court held that Jenkins was a responsible person who willfully failed to collect, account for, or remit the withholding taxes.  Jenkins held various positions of significant authority within DDI, sat on the company\'s board and, together with his wife, owned at least 50% of the company\'s stock.  In addition, he had the ability to sign checks on DDI\'s primary bank account and the ability to withdraw funds from those accounts. Because of his stake in the corporation and his role as a director, Jenkins also had the ability to precipitate reorganizations of the corporation\'s leadership.  Moreover, he held an additional entrepreneurial stake in DDI via his role in financing the company and leasing the building that was used as its principal place of business.  Owing to his multi-faceted role within the corporation and his role as a financier of first resort, the Court held that Jenkins plainly had the leverage and authority to “avoid the default” and demand that the corporation not squander the taxes it withheld from its employees.  Although he claimed not to have exercised day-to-day decision making authority regarding DDI\'s tax obligations, Jenkins clearly possessed the effective power to do so.  The Court pointed out that it was well-accepted that a person need not actually perform an entity\'s tax functions (withhold and pay over payroll tax deposits) in order to be a responsible person under Code Sec. 6672.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Court also held that Jenkins willfully failed to collect, account for, and remit the withholding taxes owed by DDI.  There was little doubt that Jenkins had an earnest desire for DDI to pay the past due and current taxes it owed the IRS, but only if the payment did not adversely impact his own ability to recoup moneys owed to him by DDI.  It was in pursuit of the latter goal, and certainly not the former, that Jenkins wrote himself a check for $16,668.45 (the last of at least 13 checks) in an attempt to recover his investment in DDI.  The Court determined that every time he signed one of these checks, he should have wondered, in light of DDI\'s history of delinquency, its modest size, and the lack of improvement in its bottom line, whether history was repeating itself and he was signing over to creditors (and himself) money that belonged to the United States.</p>','Responsible Person Penalty Upheld Against Majority Owner and Financier of Company','','inherit','closed','closed','','6158-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','',6158,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6158-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6487,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','<p>Rev. Rul. 2011-22, 2011-41 IRB</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/2011.9.22-applicable-federal-rates.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/2011.9.22-applicable-federal-rates.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"> </span></strong></span></p> <table style=\"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;\" align=\"center\" border=\"3\" cellpadding=\"3\" height=\"497\" width=\"483\"> <caption> <p><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong>Table 1 (Section 1274(d) Rate) Period for Compounding<br /></strong></span></p> </caption>  <tbody> <tr bgcolor=\"#7093db\"> <th><br /></th><th style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Annual</span></th><th style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Semiannual</span></th><th style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Quarterly</span></th><th style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Month</span></th> </tr> <tr> <td colspan=\"5\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Short-Term</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"#7093db\"> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.16%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"> <p><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.16%</span></p> </td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"> <p><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.16%</span></p> </td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.16%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">110% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.18%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.18%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.18%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.18%</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"#7093db\"> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">120% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.19%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.19%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.19%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.19%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">130% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.21%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.21%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.21%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.21%</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"#7093db\"> <td colspan=\"5\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Mid-Term</span></td> </tr> <tr cellpading=\"10\"> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.19%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.19%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.19%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.19%</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"#7093db\"> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">110% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.31%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.31%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.31%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.31%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">120% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.44%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.43%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.43%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.43%</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"#7093db\"> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">130% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.56%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.55%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.55%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.55%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">150% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.80%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.79%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.79%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.79%</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"#7093db\"> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">175% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.09%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.08%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.07%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.07%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan=\"5\" style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Long-Term</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"#7093db\"> <td><strong>AFR</strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.95%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.93%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.92%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">2.91%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">110% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.25%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.22%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.21%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.20%</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"#7093db\"> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">120% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.55%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.52%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.50%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.49%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">130% AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.85%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.81%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.79%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.78%</span></td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <table style=\"width: 475px; height: 246px; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;\" border=\"3\" cellpadding=\"3\" height=\"197\" width=\"466\"> <caption> <p><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong>Table 2 (Section 1288(b) Rate) Period for Compounding</strong></span></p> </caption>  <tbody> <tr cellpading=\"5\" bgcolor=\"#7093db\"> <th><br /></th><th><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Annual</span></th><th><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Semiannual</span></th><th><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Quarterly</span></th><th><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Month</span></th> </tr> <tr> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">Short-term </span></strong><br /><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">adjusted AFR</span></strong></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.32%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.32%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.32%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">.32%</span></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=\"#7093db\"> <td><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">Mid-term </span></strong><br /><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">adjusted AFR</span></strong><br /></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.27%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.27%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.27%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.27%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">Long-term</span></strong><br /><strong><span style=\"color: #333333;\">adjusted AFR</span></strong></p> </td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.51%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.48%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.46%</span></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.46%</span></td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <table style=\"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;\" border=\"3\" height=\"107\" width=\"425\"> <caption>  <table style=\"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;\" border=\"3\" height=\"163\" width=\"425\"> <caption> <p><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong>Table 3 </strong></span></p> <p><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong>Rates Under Section 382 for October 2011<br /></strong></span></p> </caption>  <tbody> <tr> <td>Adjusted federal long-term rate for the current month<br /></td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.51%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td>Long-term tax-exempt rate for ownership changes during the current month (the highest of the adjusted federal long-term rates for the current month and the prior two months)</td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.82%</span></td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <table style=\"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;\" border=\"3\" height=\"163\" width=\"425\"> <caption> <p><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong>Table 4 </strong></span></p> <p><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong>Appropriate Percentages Under Section 42(b)(2)**</strong></span></p> </caption>  <tbody> <tr> <td>Appropraite percentage for the 70% present value low-income housing credit</td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">7.48%</span></td> </tr> <tr> <td>Appropriate percentage for the 30% present value low-income housing credit</td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">3.20%</span></td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong>Table 5 (Section 7520 Rate)</strong></span></p> </caption>  <tbody> <tr> <td> <p style=\"text-align: left;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">Applicable federal rate for determining the present value of an annuity, an interest for life or a term of years, or a remainder or reversionary interest</span></p> </td> <td style=\"text-align: right;\"><span style=\"color: #333333;\">1.4%</span></td> </tr> </tbody> </table>','Applicable Federal Rates for October 2011','','inherit','closed','closed','','6145-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','',6145,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6145-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6488,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>The transfer of a house owned by a Medicaid applicant to her caregiver son immediately preceding her application for benefits is not considered an uncompensated transfer subject to a Medicaid penalty period because it falls within the child caregiver exception.</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/2011.9.19-caregiver-exception-transfer.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/2011.9.19-caregiver-exception-transfer.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\">  <br /></a></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>V.P. v. Dept. of Human Services (N.J. Sup. Ct., App. Div., No. A-2362-09T1, Sept. 2, 2011).</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts.</strong>  Mother lived with her Son in Mother’s residence until she suffered a stroke and required the full-time care of a nursing home.  Prior to applying for Medicaid benefits, Mother transferred her residence to her Son and then applied to the state.  The state of New Jersey found that Mother impermissibly transferred her home and was, therefore, subject to a penalty period (based on the value of the transfer) before she would be allowed to receive Medicaid benefits.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Mother appealed the state’s decision, arguing that her house should not be considered a countable asset because the transfer fell within the child caregiver exception to the uncompensated transfer rule.  At the appeal hearing, several family members and Mother\'s doctor testified that Son regularly assisted Mother when she needed to walk, bathe, and cook, among other necessary activities.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Reversal of Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ) Decision. The ALJ determined that the witnesses were credible and held that the child caregiver exception applied to Mother’s case. However, the state\'s Medicaid director rejected the decision of the ALJ and determined that Mother only required normal support services, resulting in the transfer not being eligible for the child caregiver exception. Mother appealed.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Ruling of the New Jersey Superior Court. </strong> The Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court reversed the decision of the Medicaid director, holding that Mother is entitled to Medicaid benefits with no penalty period for the transfer of the residence to Son. According to the Superior Court, \"the credible evidence in the record supports the ALJ\'s finding that [Mother] needed, and [Son] provided, special care and attention essential to her health and safety.\"</p>','Child Caregiver Exception Permitted for Transfer of House of Medicaid Applicant to Son','','inherit','closed','closed','','6156-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','',6156,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6156-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6489,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Tax Court concludes that taxpayer recognized taxable income on the surrender of his life insurance policy when the insurance company applied the policy’s maturity value to the outstanding balance of his policy loans.</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/2011.8.31-taxpayer-constructive-distribution.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/2011.8.31-taxpayer-constructive-distribution.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p> </p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>James Ledger, et ux. v. Commissioner, TC Memo 2011-183.</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts.</strong>  In April of 1974, James Ledger (Ledger) purchased a life insurance policy from Prudential Insurance Co. of America (Prudential).  The policy was payable on the earlier of his death or his reaching age 65.  The face amount of the policy was $31,448, the maturity value considered for gain was $61,722, and the endowment maturity value was $42,403.  Monthly premium payments were $100.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In October of 1978, Ledger borrowed $2,000 against the policy.  Over approximately the next 27 years, he took out 13 additional loans against the policy.  As of May 27, 2005, his final loan balance and accrued interest against the policy totaled $56,220.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The policy matured on April 12, 2006, with a gross maturity value of $61,788, and a maturity value considered for gain value of $61,772.  Prudential paid Ledger $5,568 (which was the gross maturity value less final loan balance).  Prudential determined Ledger\'s investment in the contract at the time of maturity to be $20,780, and that policy\'s premiums were paid using the annual dividends from 1996 to 2005.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">For the 2006 tax year, Prudential issued Ledger a Form 1099-R (Distributions From Pensions, Annuities, Retirement or Profit-Sharing Plans, IRAs, Insurance Contracts, etc.) that identified taxable distributions of $40,992 (calculated as maturity value considered for gain less cost basis).  A letter sent by Prudential to Ledger explained how it calculated his cost basis and taxable distributions in the policy.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">On December 15, 2008, the IRS issued a notice of deficiency to Ledger, determining a $7,184 deficiency in income tax and a Code Sec. 6662(a) accuracy-related penalty of $1,433 for the 2006 tax year.  Ledger challenged IRS in Tax Court, contending that he should not be taxed on any distribution from Prudential in 2006 because he had already paid taxes on all funds issued to him under the policy.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Applicable Law.</strong>  An amount received under a life insurance contract that is not received as an annuity is included in gross income to the extent it exceeds the investment in the contract.  See Code Secs. 72(e)(1)(A); 72(e)(5)(A) and 72(e)(5)(C).  On any given date, the investment in the contract equals the aggregate amount of premiums or other consideration paid for the contract before that date, less the aggregate amount received under the contract before that date to the extent that amount was excludable from gross income.   Code Sec. 72(e)(6).</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">For federal income tax purposes, loans against a life insurance contract\'s cash value are treated as true loans from the insurance company to the policyholder with the policy serving as collateral. Thus, using a policy\'s proceeds to satisfy a loan has the same effect as paying the proceeds directly to the policyholder.  Minnis v. Commisioner, 71 TC 1049 (1979); Sanders v. Commissioner, TC Memo 2010-279.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Conclusion.</strong>  The Tax Court concluded that Ledger received $40,992 as a constructive distribution, taxable as income in his 2006 tax year. The evidence indicated that upon termination in 2006, the policy\'s cash value for tax purposes was $61,772, and Ledger\'s investment in the policy was $20,780.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">When Prudential terminated Ledger\'s policy in 2006, it applied the policy\'s maturity value to the outstanding balance on the policy loans.  This was the economic equivalent of Prudential paying Ledger the policy proceeds, including the untaxed inside buildup, with Ledger using most of those proceeds to pay off the policy loans. The constructive distribution was a payment of the policy proceeds and as such was gross income to Ledger to the extent the distribution exceeded his investment in the contract.</p>','Taxpayer Recognizes Taxable Income on Surrender of Life Insurance Policy','','inherit','closed','closed','','6154-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','',6154,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6154-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6490,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The IRS has privately ruled that flexible premium deferred annuity contracts purchased by a trust, of which each of the trust beneficiaries is the named annuitant of the contract in proportion to his residuary share of the trust, will be considered owned by natural persons, so that the distribution of the contracts to the beneficiaries will not be treated as a gratuitous transfer.</p>  <!--more-->  <div></div> <div></div> <div style=\"text-align: right;\"></div> <div style=\"text-align: right;\"></div> <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/2011.8.30-distribution-not-gratuitous.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/2011.8.30-distribution-not-gratuitous.pdf\"><img class=\" alignright size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" style=\"float: right;\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a></div> <p> </p> <p><b>PLR 201124008.</b></p> <p><strong>Facts. </strong> Husband established a grantor trust (the “Trust”) and named his Wife and their six descendants as beneficiaries of the Trust.  Husband and Wife served as co-trustees during Husband\'s life and, upon the death of Husband, Wife became the sole trustee.  Wife divided the Trust into Subtrusts A, B, and C, pursuant to the terms of the Trust.  Subtrust A was allocated an amount based on the allowed estate tax exemption and marital deduction.  Subtrust B was allocated an amount based on the estate tax exemption, provided the amount was not used for the payment of taxes, debts, or administration expenses of Husband\'s estate.  Once all taxes, debts, and expenses have been paid, the assets of Subtrust B were to be distributed to Subtrust C, which contained all of the remaining trust property.</p> <p>During the time that Wife is serving as trustee of the Trust, she is authorized to distribute the property in Subtrust C for the benefit of herself and others who she considered dependent upon her for support (subject to an ascertainable standard).  Upon her death, the Trust directs that the property of Subtrust C is to be divided and distributed among the children of Husband and Wife.</p> <p>While serving as trustee, Wife intends to purchase flexible premium deferred annuity contracts and name each of the children as the annuitant on one annuity contract, in proportion to each beneficiary\'s residuary share of Trust.  The material provisions of each contract will be substantially the same, except for differing dates of annuitization, and the Trust will be the owner and beneficiary of the contracts during Wife\'s lifetime.  The Trust is expected to have sufficient assets to fund its expenses and make nominal distributions to Wife, and there should not be any need for Trust to take a distribution from the annuity contracts.  Upon the final distribution of the Trust, each beneficiary will receive an outright distribution of the contract purchase on behalf of the beneficiary.  This distribution is anticipated to occur before the contract\'s annuity starting date.</p> <p>According to Internal Revenue Code Section 72(u), an annuity contract will not be treated as such if it is held by a person who is not a “natural person.”  Therefore, if the Trust is not considered a “natural person,” the income on the contract for any tax year of the policyholder would be treated as ordinary income received or accrued by the owner during that tax year and, when transferred for less than full and adequate consideration, is treated as receiving a nonannuity payment equal to the excess of: (i) the cash surrender value of the contract at the time of transfer, over (ii) his investment in the contract.  In order to determine whether the Trust would be treated as a “natural person,” Wife requested a private letter ruling from the IRS.</p> <p><strong>IRS’ Decision.</strong>  In a private letter ruling, the IRS determined that the annuity contracts are considered owned by natural persons for the purposes of Internal Revenue Code Section 72(u), and that the distribution of the contracts by the Trust to the beneficiaries will not be treated as an assignment of an annuity contract for less than full and adequate consideration.  This rule is intended to prohibit taxpayers from avoiding the required distribution rules by continuing tax deferral beyond the life of an individual taxpayer. Here, since the transfer of the contracts from Trust to the beneficiaries does not have the effect of avoiding the required distribution rules, the distribution of the contracts will not be treated as an assignment for less than full consideration. </p>','Distribution of Annuity Contracts from Trust to Beneficiaries Not Treated as Gratuitous Transfer','','inherit','closed','closed','','6152-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','',6152,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6152-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6491,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"> <p>The IRS has approved a court’s modification to a trust containing a drafting error that could have triggered significant transfer tax to the surviving spouse. As a result of the modification, the surviving spouse will not be considered to (1) possess a general power of appointment over the trust at his death, (2) have released a power during his life, or (3) have made a deemed gift of an interest in the trust.</p> </div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"pdfs/featured_posts/2011.8.30-irs-allows-modification.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"pdfs/featured_posts/2011.8.30-irs-allows-modification.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\">  <br /></a></div> <p><strong>PLR 201132017.</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts. </strong> Husband and Wife created an inter vivos revocable trust (Trust), drafted by Attorney A, and served as the original trustees of the Trust.  The terms of the Trust provided that, upon the death of the first spouse to die, the Trust assets would be divided among the Marital Trust, the By-Pass Trust and the Survivor\'s Trust.  The Trustee was directed to pay the debts of the surviving spouse, expenses, and death taxes due by reason of the surviving spouse\'s death from the assets allocated to the By-Pass Trust.  Wife died, survived by her Husband and their three children.  Husband was appointed to serve as the Executor of Wife\'s estate, and continued to serve as the sole Trustee of the Survivor\'s Trust, the By-Pass Trust, and the Marital Trust.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Husband consulted Attorney B (who had not drafted the Trust), who discovered an error in the article directing the Trustee to charge debts, expenses and death taxes against the By-Pass Trust, as the provision should have referred to the Survivor\'s Trust.  In sworn affidavits, Husband and Attorney A represented that it was the Husband and Wife\'s intent in the establishment of the Trust to minimize their estate taxes, including maximizing the use of the unified credit. Accordingly, the By-Pass Trust should have been drafted by Attorney A to ensure that the assets in the By-Pass Trust would not be included in the surviving spouse\'s gross estate, and that the surviving spouse would not have any property or other rights to the Trust property that would cause the assets to be included in the surviving spouse\'s gross estate upon her death.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In order to correct the error in the Trust and to accurately reflect the intent of Husband and Wife, Husband, as Trustee, filed a petition with a state court seeking authorization to modify Trust. Husband stated in the petition that it was at all times his intent and desire that the assets of the By-Pass Trust be administered so as to avoid taxation at the surviving spouse\'s death. He argued that the reference to the By-Pass Trust was a scrivener\'s error, and the state court agreed and modified the trust in the manner sought.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>IRS’ Ruling.</strong>  The IRS determined that the documentation submitted by Husband strongly indicated that he and Wife did not intend to have any control over the assets held in the By-Pass Trust, and that the provision of the Trust directing the Trustee to charge surviving spouse\'s debts, expenses and death taxes from the By-Pass Trust was the result of a scrivener\'s error.  In reforming the By-Pass Trust, the state court found that the modification of Trust was an equitable reformation of Trust under common law and a state statute providing that when through fraud or mutual mistake of the parties, or a mistake of one party, a written contract does not truly express the intention of the parties, it may be revised on the application of the party aggrieved.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Therefore, the IRS concluded that the state court order modifying the trust instrument based on a scrivener\'s error was consistent with applicable state law that would be applied by the highest court of that state.  The court-modified version of the Trust did not provide surviving spouse with a general power of appointment, under Section 2041(b) of the Internal Revenue Code, over the assets of the By-Pass Trust.  Consequently, the IRS concluded that the value of the assets in the By-Pass Trust will not be included in surviving spouse\'s gross estate upon his death.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The IRS also determined that the modification will not (1) constitute the exercise or release of a general power of appointment by surviving spouse within the meaning of Code Sec. 2514(b) , or (2) be treated as a deemed transfer of an interest in Trust by surviving spouse for gift tax purposes under Code Sec. 2501.</p>','IRS Allows Court-Approved Trust Modification to Prevent Drafting Error','','inherit','closed','closed','','6150-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','',6150,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6150-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6492,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">On August 11th, the last three members of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (JSC) were appointed by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA).  The duties of the JSC are to “provide recommendations and legislative language that will significantly improve the short-term and long-term fiscal imbalance of the Federal Government.”</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/2011.8.15-joint-select-committee.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/2011.8.15-joint-select-committee.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p> </p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">On August 11th, the last three members of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (JSC) were appointed by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA).  The duties of the JSC are to “provide recommendations and legislative language that will significantly improve the short-term and long-term fiscal imbalance of the Federal Government.”</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">On August 11th, the last three members of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (JSC) were appointed by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA).  They are Representatives Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Xavier Becerra (D-CA), and James Clyburn (D- SC).  The other nine committee members who were announced on August 9th, are:</p> <ul> <li>Senator Patty Murray (D-WA),</li> <li>Senate Finance Committee Chair Max Baucus (D-MT),</li> <li>Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chair John Kerry (D-MA),</li> <li>Senator John Kyl (R-AZ),</li> <li>Senator Pat Toomey (R-PA),</li> <li>Senator Rob Portman (R-OH),</li> <li>Ways & Means Chair Dave Camp (R-MI),</li> <li>Commerce Chair Fred Upton (R-MI), and</li> <li>Representative Jeb Hensarling (R-TX).</li> </ul> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Budget Control Act of 2011, which was signed into law by President Obama on August 2, 2011, included an initial $1 trillion of deficit reduction over fiscal years 2012 through 2021 with no corresponding revenue hikes.  The Act also created the Joint Select Committee, whose members must devise ways to reduce the deficit by an additional $1.5 trillion over fiscal years 2012 through 2021.  In identifying these savings, the duties of the JSC are to “provide recommendations and legislative language that will significantly improve the short-term and long-term fiscal imbalance of the Federal Government.”  The JSC will hold its first meeting no later than September 16, 2011.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">It is hard to say what, if anything, the JSC might recommend by way of tax changes; however,  based on past proposals, it is possible that:</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Businesses may have to give up certain tax breaks, such as accelerated depreciation under Code Sec. 168, the domestic production activities deduction under Code Sec. 199, and the election under Code Sec. 472 to use the last-in, first-out (LIFO) inventory accounting method.  Industries (such as oil and gas) may have to give up some of their tax preferences.  In return, corporations may wind up with a modestly lower top rate.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In the international arena, a territorial tax regime may be adopted, there may be a repatriation holiday to induce multinationals to bring home overseas profits, and there may be crackdowns on transfer pricing tax strategies.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">There could be a new round of loophole closers, such as a crackdown on “carried interest.”</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Individuals may find cutbacks in key tax breaks, such as the mortgage interest deduction, in exchange for flattened and lowered tax rates.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Other issues the JSC will have to deal with include:</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The post-2012 expiration of the Bush-era income tax cuts (including the current rate schedules, and low tax rates for long-term capital gains),</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The expiration of the Bush-era rules for estate and gift taxation, and</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The transfer tax rules in the 2010 Tax Relief Act, effective for estates of decedents dying, gifts made, or generation-skipping transfers made after Dec. 31, 2012.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">After signing the Budget Control Act of 2011 into law, the President reiterated his call for a balanced plan that includes revenue changes as well as spending cuts.  He remarked that “since you can’t close the deficit with just spending cuts, we’ll need a balanced approach where everything is on the table.  Yes, that means making some adjustments to protect health care programs like Medicare so they’re there for future generations.  It also means reforming our tax code so that the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations pay their fair share.  And it means getting rid of taxpayer subsidies to oil and gas companies, and tax loopholes that help billionaires pay a lower tax rate than teachers and nurses .... Everyone is going to have to chip in. It’s only fair.  That’s the principle I’ll be fighting for during the next phase of this process.”</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In their August 2nd press releases about the Budget Control Act of 2011, neither House Speaker Boehner (R-OH) nor Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) mentioned the possibility of tax reform as part of the deficit reduction package.</p>','Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction Ready to Start Work','','inherit','closed','closed','','6149-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','',6149,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6149-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6493,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"> </span></div>  <!--more-->  <div></div> <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/2011.8.3-2009-tax-return.pdf\"><img class=\" alignright size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" style=\"float: right;\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/2011.8.3-2009-tax-return.pdf\">Download PDF</a></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Publication 1304, Statistics of Income – 2009 – Individual Income Tax Returns, is now available in electronic format through the IRS website at: <br /><a href=\"http://www.irs.gov/taxstats/indtaxstats/article/0,,id=134951,00.html\">http://www.irs.gov/taxstats/indtaxstats/article/0,,id=134951,00.html</a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The publication includes sections on changes in law, explanation of terms, and the description of the sample, as well as data for tax provisions in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.  Tables from Publication 1304 present data for the number of returns filed, sources of income, exemptions, itemized deductions, and tax computations. Data in the tables are presented by size of adjusted gross income, marital status, age, type of tax computation, and rate at which tax was computed.</p>','2009 Individual Income Tax Return Data Now Available','','inherit','closed','closed','','6147-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','',6147,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6147-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6494,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','<div style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"line-height: 115%;\">The IRS has privately ruled that flexible premium deferred annuity contracts purchased by a trust, of which each of the trust beneficiaries is the named annuitant of the contract n proportion to his residuary share of the trust, will be considered owned by natural persons, so that the distribution of the contracts to the beneficiaries will not be treated as a gratuitous transfer.</span></div>  <!--more-->  <div style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/2011.8.3-distribution-of-annuity.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/2011.8.3-distribution-of-annuity.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\">  <br /></a></div> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"><strong>PLR201124008</strong></span></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts. </strong>Husband established a grantor trust (the “Trust”) and named his Wife and their six descendants as beneficiaries of the Trust.  Husband and Wife served as co-trustees during Husband\'s life and, upon the death of Husband, Wife became the sole trustee.  Wife divided the Trust into Subtrusts A, B, and C, pursuant to the terms of the Trust.  Subtrust A was allocated an amount based on the allowed estate tax exemption and marital deduction.  Subtrust B was allocated an amount based on the estate tax exemption, provided the amount was not used for the payment of taxes, debts, or administration expenses of Husband\'s estate.  Once all taxes, debts, and expenses have been paid, the assets of Subtrust B were to be distributed to Subtrust C, which contained all of the remaining trust property. </p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">During the time that Wife is serving as trustee of the Trust, she is authorized to distribute the property in Subtrust C for the benefit of herself and others who she considered dependent upon her for support (subject to an ascertainable standard).  Upon her death, the Trust directs that the property of Subtrust C is to be divided and distributed among the children of Husband and Wife. </p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">While serving as trustee, Wife intends to purchase flexible premium deferred annuity contracts and name each of the children as the annuitant on one annuity contract, in proportion to each beneficiary\'s residuary share of Trust.  The material provisions of each contract will be substantially the same, except for differing dates of annuitization, and the Trust will be the owner and beneficiary of the contracts during Wife\'s lifetime.  The Trust is expected to have sufficient assets to fund its expenses and make nominal distributions to Wife, and there should not be any need for Trust to take a distribution from the annuity contracts.  Upon the final distribution of the Trust, each beneficiary will receive an outright distribution of the contract purchase on behalf of the beneficiary.  This distribution is anticipated to occur before the contract\'s annuity starting date. </p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">According to Internal Revenue Code Section 72(u), an annuity contract will not be treated as such if it is held by a person who is not a “natural person.”  Therefore, if the Trust is not considered a “natural person,” the income on the contract for any tax year of the policyholder would be treated as ordinary income received or accrued by the owner during that tax year and, when transferred for less than full and adequate consideration, is treated as receiving a nonannuity payment equal to the excess of: (i) the cash surrender value of the contract at the time of transfer, over (ii) his investment in the contract.  In order to determine whether the Trust would be treated as a “natural person,” Wife requested a private letter ruling from<br />the IRS. </p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>IRS’ Decision.</strong>  In a private letter ruling, the IRS determined that the annuity contracts are considered owned by natural persons for the purposes of Internal Revenue Code Section 72(u), and that the distribution of the contracts by the Trust to the beneficiaries will not be treated as an assignment of an annuity contract for less than full and adequate consideration.   This rule is intended to prohibit taxpayers from avoiding the required distribution rules by continuing tax deferral beyond the life of an individual taxpayer. Here, since the transfer of the contracts from Trust to the beneficiaries does not have the effect of avoiding the required distribution rules, the distribution of the contracts will not be treated as an assignment for less than full consideration.</p>','Distribution of Annuity Contracts from Trust to Beneficiaries - Not Treated as Gratuitous Transfer','','inherit','closed','closed','','6143-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','',6143,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6143-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6495,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The IRS has privately ruled that a disclaimer of retirement benefits filed by the Administratrix of the estate of a deceased woman was a qualified disclaimer since the benefits, left to the woman upon the death of her husband, were not accepted by her during her lifetime.</p>  <!--more-->  <div></div> <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/2011.7.14-unaccepted-retirement-benefits.pdf\"><img class=\" alignright size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" style=\"float: right;\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/2011.7.14-unaccepted-retirement-benefits.pdf\">Download PDF</a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"> </p> <p><strong>PLR 201125009.</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts. </strong> Husband died, testate, survived by his Wife and their three children.  Upon his death, Husband held several investments in various retirement accounts, including a traditional IRA and two 403(b) accounts at Brokerage Firm A, and an additional 403(b) account at Brokerage Firm B.  The beneficiary designation forms for the retirement accounts listed Wife as the primary beneficiary of the accounts, and a testamentary trust established under Husband’s will as the contingent beneficiary.  At the time of his death, Husband was receiving RMDs from his retirement accounts, which amounts were deposited directly into their personal bank account (owned jointly with rights of survivorship by Husband and Wife).  Subsequent to his death, several RMDs were deposited into the same personal account.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Wife later passed away, and the court appointed Daughter to serve as Administratrix of Wife’s estate.  Daughter closed the personal bank account, transferred the balance into an Estate Account, and successfully petitioned the court to allow her to disclaim Wife’s interest in the retirement accounts.  Therefore, the Estate Account held the proceeds from the RMD which were distributed in the personal bank account after Husband’s death.  Wife received no other distributions from the retirement accounts.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>IRS Treatment of RMDs.</strong>  The IRS determined that Wife was deemed to have accepted the RMDs which were directly deposited into jointly owned bank account after Husband’s death, as well as the income attributable to these RMDs.  However, the IRS allowed Daughter, on behalf of Wife’s estate, to make a qualified disclaimer of the substantial balance remaining in the retirement accounts since Wife did not accept the assets during her lifetime.</p>','Post-death Disclaimer of Unaccepted Retirement Benefits Approved by IRS','','inherit','closed','closed','','6141-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','',6141,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6141-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6496,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">An issue currently under negotiation in the widely debated tax reform is the possible elimination of the mortgage interest deduction.  Currently, itemizing taxpayers can deduct their mortgage interest on up to $1 million of a qualified principal (and, in some cases, a second) residence; meanwhile, those who rent a home are not granted a similar deduction.  Itemizing taxpayers can also deduct interest on up to $100,000 of home equity debt.  According to various estimates, this deduction cost the Treasury Department between $80 and $103 billion in 2010, and its value over the next 10 years is anticipated to surpass $1 trillion.</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/2011.7.20-tax-reform-proposals.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/2011.7.20-tax-reform-proposals.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\">  <br /></a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Arguments in Favor of and Against the Mortgage Interest Deduction.</strong>  Proponents of the mortgage interest deduction argue that it encourages home ownership and makes it affordable (and in some cases, possible) to taxpayers who would otherwise not be able to own a home.  Critics respond that, rather than encouraging home ownership, the deduction actually encourages middle-class and wealthy taxpayers to take on more debt and buy larger homes than they otherwise would.  Further, critics make the assumption that the deduction tends to benefit taxpayers with larger incomes who likely would have purchased a home regardless of the deduction.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Another complaint of critics is that the deduction artificially drives up home prices; however, this same argument is cited by those who favor the deduction, who observe that eliminating the deduction could further impact home prices in an already depressed market by forcing current homeowners out of their homes and creating a market that would make it even more difficult to sell real property.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The mortgage interest deduction is also criticized as being an “upside-down” subsidy, in that it tends to provide greater benefit to taxpayers with higher incomes. The amount of interest paid by lower- and moderate-income taxpayers is less likely to be sufficiently high to make it worthwhile to forego the standard deduction, so they are less likely to receive any benefit from it.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Proposals.</strong>  Many proposals have been advanced regarding the mortgage interest deduction. Due to the widespread popularity of the deduction (as well as the strength of the real estate lobby), it appears unlikely that it would be repealed outright.  In general, the proposals have focused on converting the deduction to a credit, capping the maximum mortgage amount, and limiting the credit to a primary residence.</p> <ul> <li>The President\'s Fiscal Commission proposed a 12% nonrefundable credit on up to a $500,000 mortgage, with no credit for a second residence or for home equity.</li> <li>The Debt Reduction Task Force would have a 15% refundable tax credit capped at $25,000 (while other proposals suggest a 20% credit).</li> <li>Another proposal is to simply have a fixed credit for owning a home as opposed to having a mortgage.</li> <li>President Obama\'s 2012 budget proposal, as well as his 2011 proposal, suggested capping itemized deductions, including mortgage interest, for taxpayers in the top two tax brackets (33% and 35%). Under this proposal, these taxpayers would only be able to reduce their tax liability by a maximum of 28%.</li> </ul> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">(The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that President Obama\'s proposal to limit upper-income taxpayers\' itemized deductions to 28% would yield $293,261 million over the 2011 through 2021 period.)</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Economic effect. Given the amount of income “saved” or revenue “lost” due to the deduction (depending on the stance of the taxpayer), the effects of reforming or repealing the provision could be significant.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">If the deduction was repealed entirely, the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center (TPC) estimates that the average tax bill of those who claim the mortgage interest deduction would increase by $710.  However, this increase would inevitably vary widely among taxpayers.  Those earning $30,000 to $40,000 per year would end up paying an average increase of $70, whereas those making over $1 million would pay an average increase of $4,000.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">According to the TPC, replacing the current mortgage interest deduction with a 20% nonrefundable credit, limiting mortgages eligible for the credit to $500,000, and limiting the credit to primary residences would only have a nominal or positive effect on the majority of the tax bills of those who claim the deduction.  (Of course, those who would face the largest increase are taxpayers in the top tax brackets with the largest mortgages.)</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The economic effect of replacing the deduction with a flat credit for home owners, regardless of whether their home debt-financed, would obviously depend on the amount of the credit. In general, credits are considered more progressive than deductions, and the benefit of a flat credit to higher-income taxpayers would presumably be less than that under the current regime. However, the incentive towards home ownership would remain intact.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Conclusion.  Although it seems unlikely that the mortgage interest deduction will be repealed in its entirety, it is quite possible that this significant tax deduction could be reduced or limited in some way. The context of the massive and impending debt crisis may be the determining factor which forces lawmakers to make decisions regarding this issue.</p>','Tax Reform: Proposals to Reform or Eliminate the Mortgage Interest Deduction','','inherit','closed','closed','','6137-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','',6137,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6137-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6497,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">WealthCounsel Quarterly July 2011 Volume 5 No.3. featuring an article written by Rack & Moccia associate Jennifer L. Moccia.</p>  <!--more-->  <div></div> <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/7.15.2011-jlm-wealth-counsel.pdf\"><img class=\" alignright size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" style=\"float: right;\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/7.15.2011-jlm-wealth-counsel.pdf\">Download PDF</a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"> </p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">As the rates of divorce and remarriage climb, those with recently blended families may be witnessing the emergence of troublesome estate planning issues.  The interests of a new spouse and child can create conflict with a parent’s desire to provide fairly for children from a previous relationship, causing unforeseen complications, misunderstandings, and damage to the blended family unit.  For those family members without a clear understanding of their new rights and obligations, the following scenarios provide examples of common planning problems and potential solutions to these issues.  <a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/7.15.2011-jlm-wealth-counsel.pdf\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><em>For the remainder of the article click here</em></span></a></p>','Estate Planning Considerations for Blended Families','','inherit','closed','closed','','6139-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','',6139,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6139-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6498,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The U.S. Tax Court has allowed a deduction for medical care expenses for amounts paid to in-home caregivers for full-time assistance provided to an elderly client diagnosed with dementia in her home.  Such payments were considered qualified long-term care services under Internal Revenue Code Section 7702B(c), and thus satisfied the requirements of Internal Revenue Code Section 213.</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/2011.7.14-payments-to-caregivers.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/2011.7.14-payments-to-caregivers.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"> </p> <p><strong>Estate of Lillian Baral, Deceased v. Commissioner, 137 T.C. No. 1 (July 5, 2011).</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts.</strong>  Lillian Baral appointed her brother, David Baral, as her attorney-in-fact for her personal and financial affairs.  Lillian’s primary care physician diagnosed her with dementia, and prescribed two medications generally prescribed for patients diagnosed with dementia or suspected Alzheimer’s disease.  Lillian had difficulty complying with her medication regime and was hospitalized in 2004.  She was hospitalized again a few months later.  Following her second hospital admission, Lillian’s physician evaluated her to assess whether she was properly taking her prescribed medications and whether she could safely live alone in order to develop a long-term care plan.  His findings indicated that Lillian was confused and experienced difficulties communicating orally.  His records also indicated that she required assistance with activities of daily living, could not be left alone (as she was at risk of falling), and she required supervision due to her memory deficit and baseline homecare services.  Her physician ultimately determined that Lillian required supervision 24 hours a day for medical and safety reasons as a result of her diminished capacity, and recommended a company to provide these services.  David retained the company to provide the required services to Lillian, but subsequently terminated the company and directly hired one of its care providers to assist Lillian.  The provider assisted Lillian with bathing, dressing, taking medication, transferring to a wheelchair, and transporting to her physicians.  He also hired a second caregiver to provide assistance when Lillian’s primary provider was unavailable.  Neither of the caregivers were licensed health care providers.  David paid the providers with Lillian’s funds, and reimbursed them for expenses paid on behalf of Lillian as well as paid for medical care provided by her physicians and the hospital.  Lillian did not receive reimbursement from insurance or other third party for these expenses.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Lillian did not file a federal income tax return for 2007, nor did David, as her attorney-in-fact, file a return on her behalf.  The IRS prepared a substitute for return and determined that Lillian was entitled to a personal exemption and the standard deduction.  As a result, there was an income tax deficiency of $17,681.  David petitioned the U.S. Tax Court and challenged the deficiency.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>U.S. Tax Court Ruling. </strong> In his petition, David alleged that that Lillian was not required to file a return because she suffered from severe dementia, and the IRS had the burden of proof to establish that she was required to file.  The IRS moved for summary judgment.  David object to the motion for summary judgment, and asserted that Lillian was entitled to deduct amounts paid for medical care from her adjusted gross income.  The Tax Court granted partial summary judgment in favor of the IRS and determined that Lillian’s dementia did not relieve her from the requirement to file and pay income tax.  The Tax Court also determined that Lillian had the burden of proof to establish the deficiency was incorrect.  Accordingly, the remaining issue to be determined was whether Lillian was entitled to deduct the amounts paid to her caregivers and her physicians as medical care expenses.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Tax Court concluded that Lillian was entitled to deduct the amounts paid to the caregivers and her physicians as medical expenses under Internal Revenue Code Section 213.  Section 213 provides for an itemized deduction for expenses paid for medical care, which is defined as amounts paid for diagnosing, curing, mitigating, treating and preventing disease, amounts paid for transportation primarily for and essential to medical care, qualified long-term care services, or amounts paid insurance covering medical care or qualified long-term care insurance contacts.  Qualified long-term care services are those services necessary for diagnostic, preventive, therapeutic, curing, treating, mitigating and rehabilitation purposes, as well as maintenance and personal care services required by a chronically ill individual and provided in accordance with a care plan prescribed by a licensed health care provider.  Internal Revenue Code Section 7702B(c)(3) defines “maintenance or personal care services” as services whose primary purpose is to provide needed assistance “with any of the disabilities as a result of which the individual is a chronically ill individual (including the protection from threats to health and safety due to severe cognitive impairment.)” Emphasis added.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Tax Court determined that Lillian qualified as chronically ill, and therefore satisfied the requirements of Internal Revenue Code Section 7702B(c)(2), as she required substantial supervision to protect her from threats to her health and safety due to severe cognitive impairment and her physician had certified her as requiring such assistance.  Further, the services provided to Lillian by her caregivers were “necessary maintenance and personal care services” provided pursuant to a care plan prescribed by a licensed health care practitioner as a result of Lillian’s diminished capacity.  The Tax Court consequently allowed Lillian a deduction for those amounts paid to the caregivers and her physicians as medical care expenses that exceeded 7.5% of her adjusted gross income, but denied the deduction for the expenses reimbursed to the caregivers for failure to substantiate that such expenses were for medical care expenses.   </p>','Payments to Caregivers Assiting Taxpayer Suffering From Dementia is Deductible','','inherit','closed','closed','','6135-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','',6135,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6135-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6499,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Fourth Circuit has joined the Third and Seventh Circuits in finding that Treasury Regulation Section 1.6015(b), which imposes a two-year limitations period upon taxpayers to request equitable relief under the innocent spouse provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, is a valid regulation.  Internal Revenue Code Section 6015(f) is ambiguous as to the applicable statute of limitations, and therefore the Treasury Regulation is a reasonable interpretation of the statute.</p>  <!--more-->  <div></div> <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/2011.7.8-innocent-spouse.pdf\"><img class=\" alignright size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" style=\"float: right;\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/2011.7.8-innocent-spouse.pdf\">Download PDF</a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"> </p> <p><strong>Jones v. Commissioner, ---F.3d---, 107 A.F.T.R.2d 2011-2475 (4th Cir. 2011).</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts.</strong>  Robert and Octavia Jones separated in September 2000.  Pursuant to the couple’s separation agreement, Robert and Octavia filed a joint income tax return for tax year 2000.  Robert prepared the couple’s return and claimed a loss from his business, resulting in a refund.  The IRS subsequently performed an audit of the return and assessed additional tax and interest of $7,630.  Robert entered into an installment agreement to pay the additional amounts due, but defaulted on the agreement when he filed for bankruptcy in April 2005.  The IRS notified both Robert and Octavia of the default in August 2005, and commenced a collection action.   The notice of default issued to Robert and Octavia also notified them of the IRS’ intent to levy on property.  When Octavia received notification from her bank in January 2008 of an IRS levy on her bank account, she promptly filed IRS Form 8857 and requested innocent spouse relief under the equitable relief provisions of Internal Revenue Code Section 6015(f).  The IRS denied her request, however, because Octavia submitted the request for relief after expiration of the two-year limitations period found in Treasury Regulation Section 1.6015(b)(1).  Octavia filed a petition with the U.S. Tax Court in July 2008 and challenged the denial of her request, arguing that the Treasury Regulation imposing the two year limitations period was invalid.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>U.S. Tax Court Ruling.</strong>  The IRS Commissioner and Octavia stipulated that Octavia would be entitled to relief under Internal Revenue Code Section 6015(f), but for her submission of the request more than two years after the IRS began collection efforts.  The Commissioner and Octavia submitted cross-motions for summary judgment on the issue.  The Tax Court granted Octavia’s motion and determined the regulation to be invalid for the reasons outlined in Lantz v. Commissioner, 132 T.C. 131 (2009), despite the Seventh Circuit’s reversal of the Tax Court’s decision in Lantz v. Commissioner, 607 F.3d 479 (7th Cir. 2010).  The Tax Court specifically concluded that Congress’ failure to provide a limitations period in IRC § 6015(f) was intentional, considering the limitations period expressly imposed in IRC §§ 6015(b) and (c), and therefore the regulation imposing such a limitations period was invalid.  The Commissioner appealed the Tax Court’s decision to the Fourth Circuit.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Fourth Circuit Ruling.  </strong>On appeal, the Fourth Circuit reversed the decision of the Tax Court and concluded that the regulation was, in fact, valid.  In reaching this decision, the Court applied the two-prong standard established by Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984) and found Internal Revenue Code § 6015(f) to be ambiguous as to any relevant limitations period.  Because the statute was ambiguous, the Court was required to determine whether the Treasury Regulation “was a reasonable approach to resolving the statute’s ambiguity.”  The Fourth Circuit concluded that it was, and upheld the regulation establishing a two-year limitations period for requesting equitable relief as a permissible interpretation of IRC § 6015(f).  Its decision is consistent with the holdings of the Seventh Circuit in Lantz, as well as the Third Circuit in Mannella v. Commissioner, 631 F.3d 115 (2011).</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Given the harsh impact the limitations period has on victims of domestic violence seeking equitable relief, the regulation is currently under review by the IRS, and the National Taxpayer Advocate has recommended revising it to eliminate the two-year statute of limitations for requesting equitable relief.</p>','Treasury Regulation Imposing Two Year Limitations Period for Request of Equitable Relief as Innocent Spouse Upheld','','inherit','closed','closed','','6133-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','',6133,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6133-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6500,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">IRS privately ruled that flexible premium deferred annuity contracts purchased by a trust, of which each of the trust beneficiaries is the named annuitant of the contract in proportion to his residuary share of the trust, will be considered owned by natural persons, so that the distribution of the contracts to the beneficiaries will not be treated as a gratuitous transfer.</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/2011.6.30-gratuitous-transfer.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/2011.6.30-gratuitous-transfer.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p><strong>PLR 201124008.</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts.</strong>  Husband established a grantor trust (Trust) and named as beneficiaries his Wife and their six descendants. Husband and Wife served as co-trustees during Husband\'s life.  Upon the death of Husband, Wife became the sole trustee and divided the Trust into subtrusts A, B, and C.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Subtrust A was allocated an amount based on the allowed estate tax exemption and marital deduction.  Subtrust C was allocated an amount based on the estate tax exemption, provided the amount was not used for the payment of taxes, debts, or administration expenses of Husband\'s estate.  Once all taxes, debts, and expenses have been paid, the assets of Subtrust C were to be distributed to Subtrust B, for administration.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">During her life, and in her capacity as trustee, Wife was authorized to pay or use the property of Subtrust B for the benefit of herself and others who were partly or wholly dependent upon her.  Upon her death, the property of Subtrust B was directed to be divided and distributed among the descendant-beneficiaries in the proportions stated in the Subtrust B.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In seeking the private letter ruling, Wife proffered to the IRS that:</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">as trustee, she intended to purchase flexible premium deferred annuity contracts and name each of the descendant-beneficiaries as the annuitant on one annuity contract, in proportion to each beneficiary\'s residuary share of Trust;</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">the material provisions of each contract were  substantially the same, except for the dates of annuitization;</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">the Trust will be the owner and beneficiary of the contracts during Wife\'s life;</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">the Trust is anticipated to have sufficient assets to fund its expenses and make nominal distributions to Wife, so there should not be any need for the Trust to take a distribution from the annuity contracts; and</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Upon the final distribution of the Trust, each beneficiary will be distributed the contract for which that beneficiary is the annuitant. This distribution is anticipated to occur before the contract\'s annuity starting date.</p> <p>IRS\' Decision.  Under Internal Revenue <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/usc_sec_26_00000072----000-.html\">Code Section 72(u)</a>, an annuity contract will not be treated as an annuity contract if it is held by a person who isn\'t a \"natural person.\"  Instead, the income on the contract for any tax year of the policyholder will be treated as ordinary income received or accrued by the owner during that tax year (i.e., there is no deferral of income).  In issuing this ruling, the IRS determined that the annuity contracts owned by Wife\'s Trust are considered owned by natural persons for <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/usc_sec_26_00000072----000-.html\">Code Sec. 72(u)</a> purposes.</p>','Distribution of Annuity Contracts from Trust to Beneficiaries Ruled Not a Gratuitous Transfer','','inherit','closed','closed','','6131-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','',6131,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6131-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6501,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Court determines that nursing home may evict an elderly resident due to unpaid balance owed regardless of pending Medicaid appeal.</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/2011.6.30-court-supports-eviction.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/2011.6.30-court-supports-eviction.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"> </p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>King v. Butler Rest Home, Inc. (Ky. Ct. App., No. 2010-CA-001467-MR, June 17, 2011).</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Facts. In June of 2009, nursing home resident Geneva King applied for Medicaid benefits and immediately ceased making private payments to her nursing home.  Upon review of her application, Medicaid denied Ms. King\'s application for benefits and Ms. King reapplied.  Medicaid again denied the application.  During the entire application process, Ms. King accrued an outstanding balance of $41,683 due to the nursing home.  Upon learning of the second denial of Medicaid benefits, the nursing home notified Ms. King that she would be discharged from the home to her daughter\'s residence in one month for nonpayment.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Ms. King appealed her involuntary discharge from the nursing home to the state\'s Medicaid agency.  An administrative law judge (“ALJ”) agreed with the nursing home’s position and allowed the discharge.  Ms. King then appealed the decision in court, requesting an injunction in order to prevent the home from forcing her to leave before Medicaid made a decision regarding her pending appeal of the second benefit denial.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Court’s Decision.  Initially, the court granted Ms. King a temporary injunction against the nursing home, but then dissolved the injunction and upheld the decision of the ALJ.  Again, Ms. King appealed, arguing that state Medicaid regulations and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services\' State Operations Manual prohibited the nursing home from discharging her prior to her receiving a final decision from Medicaid on her appeal of the denial of benefits.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;\">The Court of Appeals of Kentucky affirmed the ALJ\'s decision and upheld the involuntary discharge of Ms. King from the nursing home for nonpayment.  While the nursing home did allow Ms. King to continue to live at the home during two applications and two denials, while accruing a bill of over $40,000, the appeals court found no requirement in the Medicaid regulations or the Manual that the Medicaid appeals process must be completely exhausted for a benefits claim to be considered \"denied.</span></p>','Court Supports Eviction of Nursing Home Resident During Medicaid Appeal','','inherit','closed','closed','','6129-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','',6129,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6129-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6502,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Taxpayers, including tax-exempt organizations, with foreign accounts whose aggregate value exceeded $10,000 at any time during 2010 must file Treasury Department Form <a href=\"http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f90221.pdf\">TD F 90-22.1</a> by June 30, 2011.</p>  <!--more-->  <div></div> <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/2011.6.16-fbar-due-june.pdf\"><img class=\" alignright size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" style=\"float: right;\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/2011.6.16-fbar-due-june.pdf\">Download PDF</a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"> </p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Form TD F 90-22.1 is filed with the Treasury Department and, because it is not a tax form, the June 30 deadline applies, even if a taxpayer obtains an extension of time to file their income tax return.  Details on this filing requirement are in <a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/p4261.pdf\" target=\"_blank\">Publication 4261</a>, Do You Have a Foreign Financial Account?</p>','Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBAR) Due June 30','','inherit','closed','closed','','6127-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','',6127,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6127-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6503,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">On May 23, 2011, the Tax Court has again held that transferable conservation easement income tax credits that a partnership received as a result of its charitable contribution donation, which it then sold, were capital assets subject to a short-term holding period.</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/2011.6.10-sale-of-state.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/2011.6.10-sale-of-state.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"> </p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>William M. McNeil, et ux. v. Commissioner, T.C.M 2011-109</strong></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts. </strong> William McNeil and Catherine McNeil were the only members of McNeil Ranch, LLC (the “McNeil Ranch”).  In 2003, McNeil Ranch sold a conservation easement in a bargain sale to the American Farmland Trust and to Ducks Unlimited.  The sale of the 2003 easements gave rise to a Colorado conservation easement credit of $260,000 to McNeil Ranch.  On December 18, 2003, McNeil Ranch sold $231,600 of its available $260,000 state conservation easement credit for $178,332 (“2003 transferred credit”).</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In 2005, McNeil Ranch sold an additional conservation easement in a bargain sale to Ducks Unlimited.  The sale of the 2005 easement gave rise to a Colorado conservation easement credit of $156,800.  On December 15, 2005, McNeil Ranch sold all of the $156,800 state conservation easement credit for $133,280 (“2005 transferred credit”).</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">All of the income, deductions, and credits reported on McNeil Ranch’s 2003 and 2005 income tax returns flowed through the company to the McNeils’ joint 2003 and 2005 individual income tax returns.  The McNeils reported the net gain from the 2003 and 2005 transferred credits as long-term capital gain.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">On audit, the IRS determined that the sale of the conservation easement credits resulted in ordinary income and not capital gain because the credits were merely a substitute for ordinary income (i.e., a substitute for a refund from Colorado that would have been ordinary income).  The McNeils sought relief in Tax Court.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Tax Court’s Decision. </strong> Relying on its previous decision in George H. Tempel, et ux. v. Commissioner, 136 T.C. No. 15 (2011) dealing with the same Colorado tax credit, the Tax Court held that the tax credits sold by McNeil Ranch were capital assets.  The Tax Court rejected the IRS’s contention that the credits should be treated as ordinary income, reasoning that under I.R.C. § 1221(a), a capital asset includes property held by the taxpayer (with exceptions for eight specifically excluded categories, none of which were state tax credits such as those at issue).</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Tax Court also held that the McNeils’ holding period in their Colorado tax credits was insufficient to qualify for long-term capital gain treatment.  The holding period in their credits began at the time the credits were granted and ended when they were sold.  Therefore, the capital gains from the sale of the credits were short-term.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">As in Tempel, the Tax Court rejected the taxpayers’ contention that their holding periods in their land and state tax credits were one and the same because they were both part of the bundle of their real property rights.  The Tax Court reasoned that a taxpayer had no property rights in a conservation easement contribution state tax credit until the donation was complete and the credits were granted.  Accordingly, the credits never were, nor did they become, part of the taxpayers’ real property rights.</p>','Sale of State Income Tax Credits Results in Short-Term Capital Gain','','inherit','closed','closed','','6119-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','',6119,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6119-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6504,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">A minimum of 3,700 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act contract and grant recipients owed an estimated $750 million in “known unpaid federal taxes” as of September 30, 2009, the Government Accountability Office (“GAO”) said in a report released on May 24, 2011.</p>  <!--more-->  <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/2011.6.10-recipients-owe-taxes.pdf\">Download PDF</a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/2011.6.10-recipients-owe-taxes.pdf\"><img class=\" size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/2011taxpayer.pdf\"> <br /></a></p> <p><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"> </span></strong></span></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act enacted on February 17, 2009 (the “Recovery Act”), appropriated $275 billion to be distributed for federal contracts, grants and loans in an effort to stimulate U.S. economic activity.  As of March 25, 2011, $191 billion of this $275 billion had been paid out.  As part of ensuring the proper administration of the appropriated funds, the GAO was asked to conduct this study to determine if Recovery Act contract and grant recipients have unpaid federal taxes.  What the GAO study reveals is nothing short of astonishing.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">According to the study, the 3,700 grant recipients received more than $24 billion in Recovery Act funds and represent approximately 5% of the contractors and grant recipients.  The delinquent parties include prime recipients, sub-recipients and vendors.  “Federal law does not prohibit the awarding of contracts or grants to entities because they owe federal taxes and does not permit IRS to disclose taxpayer information, including unpaid federal taxes, to federal agencies unless the taxpayer consents,” the GAO said.  “The estimated amount of known unpaid federal taxes is likely understated because IRS databases do not include amounts owed by recipients who have not filed tax returns or understated their taxable income and for which IRS has not assessed tax amounts due,” the GAO added.  In addition, the GAO’s analysis does not include Recovery Act contract and grant recipients who are noncompliant with or not subject to Recovery Act reporting requirements.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The full report can be found at <a href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/d11485.pdf\" target=\"new\">http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11485.pdf</a> .</p>','Thousands of Recovery Act Contract and Grant Recipients  Owe Hundreds of Millions in Federal Taxes','','inherit','closed','closed','','6122-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','',6122,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6122-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0),(6505,1,'2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Internal Revenue Service today <a href=\"http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=240239,00.html\" target=\"_blank\">announced</a> that it has released a listing of approximately 275,000 (6,274 of which are in Virginia) organizations that under federal law have automatically lost their tax-exempt status because they have not filed annual reports as legally required for the past three years.</p>  <!--more-->  <div></div> <p style=\"text-align: right;\"><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/2011.6.10-irs-identifies-organizations.pdf\"><img class=\" alignright size-full wp-image-5904\" src=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pdf-icon.png\" alt=\"pdf-icon\" style=\"float: right;\" height=\"15\" width=\"15\" /></a><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/2011.6.10-irs-identifies-organizations.pdf\">Download PDF</a></p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\"> </p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">If an organization appears on the <a href=\"http://www.irs.gov/charities/article/0,,id=240099,00.html\" target=\"_blank\">list of auto-revoked organizations</a> it is because IRS records indicate the organization has an income tax return filing requirement and has not filed the required returns or notices for 2007, 2008 and 2009.  The IRS has issued guidance on how organizations can apply for reinstatement of their tax-exempt status, including retroactive reinstatement.</p> <p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In addition, the IRS announced transition relief for certain smaller tax-exempt groups – those with annual gross receipts of $50,000 or less for 2010 and eligible to file Form 990-N, the e-Postcard.  The relief allows eligible revoked groups to gain retroactive tax-exempt status and pay a reduced application fee of $100 rather than the typical $400 fee.  More information, including <a href=\"http://www.irs.gov/charities/article/0,,id=221600,00.html\" target=\"_blank\">FAQs</a> and a <a href=\"http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/auto_revocation_fs_060811.pdf\" target=\"_blank\">Fact Sheet</a>, can be found on the <a href=\"http://www.irs.gov/charities/article/0,,id=239696,00.html\" target=\"_blank\">IRS website</a>.</p>','IRS Identifies Organizations that Have Lost Tax-Exempt Status –  Special Steps Announced to Help Revoked Groups','','inherit','closed','closed','','6124-revision-v1','','','2016-02-25 13:28:42','2016-02-25 13:28:42','',6124,'http://www.racklaw.com/new-site/2016/02/25/6124-revision-v1/',0,'revision','',0);
