Monday, November 18, 2013

TAX TAX AND MORE TAX or Did anybody read this thing?

Today I thought I would post the new taxes required to pay part of the cost of the new healthcare act.  Keep in mind that for most of us the health care act will provide a high cost all encompassing plan covering that which  federal government thinks is appropriate for everyone.  The only variability is the deductible.  The bronze plan generally has a $5,000 deductible and on the average costs $600 per month per person.  Whether the taxpayer pays all or part of these costs for those with less than $45K income per year or whether the individual pays them, the cost is the same.  Also there is no organization that checks the validity of the input information.  Not even SSN's are checked according to the Navigators interviewed in a recent sting.  This means anyone world wide can buy the plan, fake the income numbers, lie about citizenship, and have the insurance company pay the provider directly all on your tax dollar.  Illegal aliens need not become citizens  to get Obamacare.  The fed has carefully scoped out enforcement to make it available to anyone.  All they need do is lie and they get it.  And the Navigators teach them how to lie.  A couple posts ago I wrote about what deductions are no longer available thanks to the Affordable Care Act.  This post is a list of taxes that are now or that will be imposed in 2014.  I don't know about you but the plan seems to give affordability to only those who have no earnings.  Those who do will find it not affordable.  They will be paying more tax, getting fewer deductions, and getting insurance that doesn't fit their situation for a much higher price than they were paying.  Clearly this ACA is only good for those who don't work or who are not citizens.  Also one thing that is not shown in any report I have read is the cost of complying with the ACA rules.  How many government workers, IRS agents, accountants in the insurance industry, corresponding people in you company etc.  From the look of it the cost of compliance will add maybe 140% to the medical insurance overhead and that provides absolutely no medical care for anyone. It is simply heat. Anyhow here are the new taxes and reported by Americans for Tax Reform:  I vetted the cites and they are correct.  Enjoy.

Full List of Obamacare Tax Hikes: Listed by Size of Tax Hike

Complied by Americans for Tax Reform
WASHINGTON, DC -- Obamacare contains 20 new or higher taxes on American families and small businesses. Arranged by their respective sizes according to CBO scores, below is the total list of all $500 billion-plus in tax hikes (over the next ten years) in Obamacare, their effective dates, and where to find them in the bill.
$123 Billion: Surtax on Investment Income (Takes effect Jan. 2013): A new, 3.8 percent surtax on investment income earned in households making at least $250,000 ($200,000 single). This would result in the following top tax rates on investment income:

Capital Gains
Dividends
Other*
2012
15%
15%
35%
2013+
23.8%
43.4%
43.4%
 
*Other unearned income includes (for surtax purposes) gross income from interest, annuities, royalties, net rents, and passive income in partnerships and Subchapter-S corporations.  It does not include municipal bond interest or life insurance proceeds, since those do not add to gross income.  It does not include active trade or business income, fair market value sales of ownership in pass-through entities, or distributions from retirement plans.  The 3.8% surtax does not apply to non-resident aliens. (Bill: Reconciliation Act; Page: 87-93)
$86 Billion: Hike in Medicare Payroll Tax (Takes effect Jan. 2013): Current law and changes:

First $200,000
($250,000 Married)
Employer/Employee
All Remaining Wages
Employer/Employee
Current Law
1.45%/1.45%
2.9% self-employed
1.45%/1.45%
2.9% self-employed
Obamacare Tax Hike
1.45%/1.45%
2.9% self-employed
1.45%/2.35%
3.8% self-employed
 
Bill: PPACA, Reconciliation Act; Page: 2000-2003; 87-93
 
$65 Billion: Individual Mandate Excise Tax and Employer Mandate Tax (Both taxes take effect Jan. 2014):
Individual: Anyone not buying “qualifying” health insurance as defined by Obama-appointed HHS bureaucrats must pay an income surtax according to the higher of the following

1 Adult
2 Adults
3+ Adults
2014
1% AGI/$95
1% AGI/$190
1% AGI/$285
2015
2% AGI/$325
2% AGI/$650
2% AGI/$975
2016 +
2.5% AGI/$695
2.5% AGI/$1390
2.5% AGI/$2085
 
Exemptions for religious objectors, undocumented immigrants, prisoners, those earning less than the poverty line, members of Indian tribes, and hardship cases (determined by HHS). Bill: PPACA; Page: 317-337
 
Employer: If an employer does not offer health coverage, and at least one employee qualifies for a health tax credit, the employer must pay an additional non-deductible tax of $2000 for all full-time employees.  Applies to all employers with 50 or more employees. If any employee actually receives coverage through the exchange, the penalty on the employer for that employee rises to $3000. If the employer requires a waiting period to enroll in coverage of 30-60 days, there is a $400 tax per employee ($600 if the period is 60 days or longer). Bill: PPACA; Page: 345-346
(Combined score of individual and employer mandate tax penalty: $65 billion)
$60.1 Billion: Tax on Health Insurers (Takes effect Jan. 2014): Annual tax on the industry imposed relative to health insurance premiums collected that year.  Phases in gradually until 2018.  Fully-imposed on firms with $50 million in profits. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,986-1,993
$32 Billion: Excise Tax on Comprehensive Health Insurance Plans (Takes effect Jan. 2018): Starting in 2018, new 40 percent excise tax on “Cadillac” health insurance plans ($10,200 single/$27,500 family).  Higher threshold ($11,500 single/$29,450 family) for early retirees and high-risk professions.  CPI +1 percentage point indexed. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,941-1,956
$23.6 Billion: “Black liquor” tax hike (Took effect in 2010) This is a tax increase on a type of bio-fuel. Bill: Reconciliation Act; Page: 105
$22.2 Billion: Tax on Innovator Drug Companies (Took effect in 2010): $2.3 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to share of sales made that year. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,971-1,980
$20 Billion: Tax on Medical Device Manufacturers (Takes effect Jan. 2013): Medical device manufacturers employ 360,000 people in 6000 plants across the country. This law imposes a new 2.3% excise tax.  Exempts items retailing for <$100. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,980-1,986
$15.2 Billion: High Medical Bills Tax (Takes effect Jan 1. 2013): Currently, those facing high medical expenses are allowed a deduction for medical expenses to the extent that those expenses exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI).  The new provision imposes a threshold of 10 percent of AGI. Waived for 65+ taxpayers in 2013-2016 only. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,994-1,995
$13.2 Billion: Flexible Spending Account Cap – aka “Special Needs Kids Tax” (Takes effect Jan. 2013): Imposes cap on FSAs of $2500 (now unlimited).  Indexed to inflation after 2013. There is one group of FSA owners for whom this new cap will be particularly cruel and onerous: parents of special needs children.  There are thousands of families with special needs children in the United States, and many of them use FSAs to pay for special needs education.  Tuition rates at one leading school that teaches special needs children in Washington, D.C. (National Child Research Center) can easily exceed $14,000 per year. Under tax rules, FSA dollars can be used to pay for this type of special needs education. Bill: PPACA; Page: 2,388-2,389
$5 Billion: Medicine Cabinet Tax (Took effect Jan. 2011): Americans no longer able to use health savings account (HSA), flexible spending account (FSA), or health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insulin). Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,957-1,959
$4.5 Billion: Elimination of tax deduction for employer-provided retirement Rx drug coverage in coordination with Medicare Part D (Takes effect Jan. 2013) Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,994
$4.5 Billion: Codification of the “economic substance doctrine” (Took effect in 2010): This provision allows the IRS to disallow completely-legal tax deductions and other legal tax-minimizing plans just because the IRS deems that the action lacks “substance” and is merely intended to reduce taxes owed. Bill: Reconciliation Act; Page: 108-113
$2.7 Billion: Tax on Indoor Tanning Services (Took effect July 1, 2010): New 10 percent excise tax on Americans using indoor tanning salons. Bill: PPACA; Page: 2,397-2,399
$1.4 Billion: HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike (Took effect Jan. 2011): Increases additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10 to 20 percent, disadvantaging them relative to IRAs and other tax-advantaged accounts, which remain at 10 percent. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,959
$0.6 Billion: $500,000 Annual Executive Compensation Limit for Health Insurance Executives (Takes effect Jan. 2013): Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,995-2,000                                                                                                                
$0.4 Billion: Blue Cross/Blue Shield Tax Hike (Took effect in 2010): The special tax deduction in current law for Blue Cross/Blue Shield companies would only be allowed if 85 percent or more of premium revenues are spent on clinical services. Bill: PPACA; Page: 2,004
$ Negligible: Excise Tax on Charitable Hospitals (Took effect in 2010): $50,000 per hospital if they fail to meet new "community health assessment needs," "financial assistance," and "billing and collection" rules set by HHS. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,961-1,971
$ Negligible: Employer Reporting of Insurance on W-2 (Took effect in Jan. 2012): Preamble to taxing health benefits on individual tax returns. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,957

Wednesday, July 31, 2013

Beware your next raise





We spoke about the tax trap in 2010 2011 and 2012 thru our newsletter.  Now that Obamacare is months away CNBC is finally looked at one of the problems.  They looked only at the difference between the minimum help for people buying Obamacare though.  The subsidies are truly breathtaking for lower wage folks until at 100% the poverty level the taxpayer funds 100% of any Obamacare plan (up to $30K per family) plus all copays and other costs.  For an individual to jump from a low paying service company job to a entry level regular career job, as those on welfare are supposed to do, the career job will have to pay far more than it currently should.  For instance going from a McDonalds clerk to an apprentice plumber would mean the plumber would have to pay almost $25 per hour on a 40 hour week just to be equal; Same for engineering, secretarial, nurses, etc.  It pays to be poor under Obamacare.  And when you factor in all the other benefits It really pays to be poor.   On the other hand think of the person who loses the benefits of Obamacare because they make $1 more...Just think, their taxes pay for those making $1 less.  If is not only falling off the cliff it is being pushed off with a lead weight attached to you.  Everything about this was known when it passed the house and senate in 2010 but neither party even discussed it.  Something to think about if you go to a town hall to meet your candidate.  By the way the costs and losses in California beat the ones in the east.

Anyhow here it the CNBC article.  They knew in 10 too.  Why now? well it's too late to do anything about it is my guess.

Be careful you don't fall off the Obamacare "cliff" when the boss asks you to put in some overtime.
Working more could ultimately mean thousands of dollars less for you under a quirk in the new health-care law going into effect this fall. This could prompt some people to cut back on their hours to avoid losing money.
"Working more can actually leave you worse off," the price-comparison site ValuePenguin.com notes in a new analysis.
"It's sort of an absurd scenario," said Jonathan Wu, ValuePenguin.com's co-founder. "It's something for people to be aware of."
In that scenario, an individual or family whose annual income surpasses maximums set by the federal government—if only by $1—will totally lose subsidies available to buy health insurance under the Affordable Care Act.
The loss of those subsidies in some cases will mean that people potentially would have been better off financially if they had worked less during the year, Wu said. And they then would have to work significantly more to make up for the lost subsidy.
"I think they'd be surprised to see how drastic it is," said Wu. "I'd be kind of shocked to see if I make $100 less (in total income each year), I get all these benefits, but if I make $100 more, I get nothing."
"You basically don't want to fall in that hole," said Wu, adding that he believed contractors and others with more control over their incomes would be apt to adjust their hours worked to avoid the subsidy cliff.
He also said that because of lower insurance premiums often offered younger people, the effect will more likely be seen by older people. But "you will see it across all age groups" in the seven states including New York and Vermont where insurance premiums are either barred from being affected by age, or restricted from being dramatically affected, he said.
Under the ACA, federal subsidies in the form of tax credits to buy insurance on new state health insurance exchanges will be available to millions of people who can start enrolling on those exchanges Oct. 1. The subsidies are available to people or families whose incomes total 400 percent above the federal poverty level or less, and are designed to cap their insurance premiums at 9.5 percent of their total income.
Doing the math
For a single person, that FPL income maximum is $45,960 per year. The maximums are adjusted upward for couples and families until maxing out at $94,200 for a family of four.
Under a scenario that ValuePenguin.com identified, a couple in Ohio, both age 50, would be eligible for subsidies worth $3,452 to purchase a so-called silver insurance plan—a moderately priced level of benefits under the ACA's scheme—that costs $9,346 annually if they made up to $62,040 per year.
But if they made just $1 more than that, they would lose the subsidy. Wu noted that the couple then would have to earn at least $65,492 to make up for the lost subsidy.
Maximum income levels for Obamacare insurance subsidies, and premium maximums
Household Size
400% FPL
Premium Cap
1 (Single)
$45,960
$4,366
2 (Couple)
$62,040
$5,893
3
$78,120
$7,421
4
$94,200
$8,949
Source: ValuePenguin.com
In New York, a family of three whose annual income totals $78,120, would pay $12,784 for the second-lower-priced silver plan on that state's insurance exchange. After getting a $5,363 tax credit, the family's net cost for the insurance would be $7,421.
But if the family earned even slightly more than $78,120, they would have to pay the entire $12,784 for the insurance because they then wouldn't qualify for the subsidy.
To make up for that, the family's annual income would have to reach $83,483, Wu said.
The age effect
The stark effect of peoples' age in determining their risk from the subsidy cliff is seen in two examples from Connecticut.
There, Wu said, a 27-year-old single man would pay $3,636 annually for the second-cheapest silver plan—less than the $4,366 cap on insurance premiums for individuals earning $45,960 or less annually. That person would not be eligible for subsidies, and thus would see no disincentive in working more hours.  
But the annual premiums for a 50-year-old Connecticut couple buying that plan would be $12,468. If their combined incomes were $62,040 or less, they would receive $6,575 in subsidies to offset the cost.
However, if their income was more than that, they would lose the subsidies, leaving them out of pocket $6,575. They then would have to earn at least $68,615 to make up for that lost subsidy, Wu said.

Friday, October 26, 2012



The Law Offices of James A. Busse Jr.
Long Beach CA, Carson City NV.
September 2012

Planning ................
Taxes and more Taxes
TAX. That is the word. The Obama health care act is the largest tax increase in real dollars and as a percentage since the implementation of income, estate, sales and excise Tax in the history of the United States. The embedded taxes in your health care insurance already comprise twenty additional percent since 2010. This newsletter, so long in coming, will highlight the tax consequences of the Obamacare which for those single divorced or widowed with health care or who make over $44,000 per year, adds nothing but tax, (no roads, no bridges, no military, no nothing) and for those making less than $44,000 per year (married filing jointly $88K) funds some or all of their their health care insurance, deductibles, and co pays even if they pay no tax at all.. i.e. If you make $42K per year now, don't take the raise or look for better employment unless the offer is over $60K per year. You need that just to break even with the increased tax and loss of benefits . Under Obamacare it pays to be poor.


Here are the Bush cuts that come back in 2013: FYI The 2001 Bush cuts simply rolled back the Clinton tax increases.


CAPITAL GAINS/DIVIDENDS: The highest capital gain tax in the world starts at 36% and is not adjusted for earnings. So if you are living off your investments in retirement expect a 100% increase in your income tax.


DEDUCTIONS: If you earn more than $84K you lose part of your house deduction and it is entirely gone if you earn more than $150K per year.

CHILD TAX CREDIT: The $1,000 per child credit ends.

ADOPTION CREDIT: Adoption credit ends.

EMPLOYER PROVIDED CHILD CARE: Employer credit reduced.

EDUCATION: Can't deduct interest on student loan if you get a good private sector job. Deductions and credits will still available for those who choose to work for the government.

AMT: AMT will effect most people who earn income from investments.

SOCIAL SECURITY TAX: The 6.4% reduction ends

FEDERAL ESTATE TAX: Back to estate pays about 46% tax on the value over $1,000,000.

NEW OBAMACARE TAXES

-A 3.8% surtax on "investment income" when your adjusted gross income is more than $200,000 ($250,000 for joint-filers). Rents, dividends, interest, capital gains, annuities, house sales, partnerships, etc. Taxes on dividends will rise from 15% to 18.8%--if Congress extends the Bush tax cuts. If Congress does not extend the Bush tax cuts, taxes on dividends will rise from 15% to 43.8%. (WSJ)

-A 0.9% surtax on Medicare taxes for those making $200,000 or more ($250,000 joint).

-Increased medicare tax Now 2.9% split between you and your employer. 2013 4.7% total. (WSJ)

-Flexible Spending Account contributions will be capped at $2,500. Currently, there is no real limit on how much you can set aside to pay for medical expenses. (ATR.org)

-The itemized-deduction hurdle for medical expenses goes from $7,500 to $10,000.

-The penalty on non-medical withdrawals from HSA's is now 20%. That's twice the penalty that applies to annuities, IRAs, and other tax-deferred vehicles. (ATR.org)

-The federal tax of 10% on indoor tanning services continues (since 2010). (ATR.org)

- Starting in 2018.Those whose employers pay for all or most of employee healthcare plans (costing $10,200 for an individual or $27,500 for families) will have to pay a 40% tax on the amount their employer pays. Total not just the amount over. (ATR.org)

-A"Medicine Cabinet Tax" that eliminates the ability to pay for OTC medicines from a pre-tax Flexible Spending Account. This started in January 2011. (ATR.org)

A tax on medical devices costing more than $100.Starting in 2013, medical device manufacturers will have to pay a 2.3% excise tax on medical equipment. This is expected to raise the cost of medical procedures. (Breitbart.com)

Even though the 3.8% investment income hike and the Medicare tax increase--only hit you if you're income exceeds $200,000 a year. The rest hit you no matter how much you're making. Of course, if you sell the house you purchased for $50,000 in 78 for $320,000 you made more than $200K, didn't you? (Replacement cost is immaterial.)

Here's How Much The Obamacare Penalty Tax will cost if you choose not to buy insurance and if your income from all sources is over $44K per person before deductions. Keep in mind you still don't get healthcare you get nothing for this. And, although the insurance companies can not deny you coverage for pre-existing conditions they can charge pretty much what they want or not offer insurance at all. So you still may be out of luck if you don't have insurance, pay the penalty, and try and buy after you are either injured or fall prey to a nasty illness. Of course, if you make less than $44K the government gives you a tax credit (even if you pay no taxes you get a check) to pay for the insurance, co-pays and deductibles. Obamacare taxes those who work for a living to pay the healthcare insurance for those who don't, and at the same time it lowers the quality of healthcare, increases time to get procedures done, starts the destruction of medicare, and bans those who want to work outside Obamacare from doing so, at least in the USA. In short , it turns our healthcare system into a third world system while costing USA prices and for most a 20% tax increase.. Those of you who might remember Nixon's wage and price control understand the parallels. They too did nothing for the people. They only increased the size of government and caused higher prices for the same things. The obvious strategy is to not pay, if you get sick enough, quit your job, go on welfare and let the remaining workers pick up the tab.

The penalty is based on income from all sources:
Less than $9,500 income = $0
$9,500 - $37,000 income = $695
$50,000 income = $1,000
$75,000 income = $1,600
$100,000 income = $2,250
$125,000 income = $2,900
$150,000 income = $3,500
$175,000 income = $4,100
$200,000 income = $4,700
Over $200,000 = The cost of a "bronze" health-insurance plan, about $19K.
The IRS will collect the penalty-tax,
The IRS will not have the power to charge you criminally or seize your assets if you refuse to pay. The IRS will only have the ability to sue you. And the most the IRS can collect from you if it wins the suit is 2X the amount you owe plus the standard penalty and interest which I think is about 10--16% per year.
-Employees whose employers only offer plans that cost the employee more than 8% of the employee's income, Indians, and certain non SSI religions are exempt from the penalty.

Jim Busse

Tuesday, May 3, 2011

In this Post:
Planning ...................... Asset Protection for the Wary.
_______________________________________________________________________
Our law firm focuses on Estate and Life Planning for those who wish to preserve their assets for their family. By doing Probate work for our clients we have established Estate Planning methods that are court tested. Because the goal of every person is to have peace of mind their wishes will be carried out, our integrated approach constantly tests the effectiveness of your Estate Plan with actual California and Nevada Cases. We are particularly involved in Medicaid and Medi-Cal Estate planning. We create Special Needs Trusts and Estate Plans to ensure our clients meet the eligibility requirements, lower their share the cost expense, and reduce or eliminate the potential recovery by the State. Our law firm integrates low cost Probate with coordinated Estate Planning documents to significantly reduce the impact of the State claim for nursing home care.
This post is available as a newsletter at http://www.jabusse,com/
Protecting your home from Creditors (FLP’s).

            FLP is a slang term. There is no statute that uses Family Limited Partnership, nor does the Internal Revenue Code use it. What “Family Limited Partnership” refers to is a limited partnership formed to hold the family business or investments, with the idea that the parents will make gifts of their limited partnership interests to their children. Since the Parents are often Limited Partners they have some immunity from lawsuits since the Limited Partnership assets are essentially zero. Also, because the limited partnership interests are not liquid, they should be subject to substantial discounts for federal gift and estate tax planning purposes. Family Limited Partnerships also have some attraction as asset protection vehicles, primarily because the limited partnership interests may be subject to “charging order protection” in some states.
            A charging order is an order that allows a person who wins a lawsuit against the partnership to receive the dividends paid to the partners or stockholders of that business first.  Of course the savvy FLP general partner stops paying dividends after the judgment and reinvests them in the business.  The Charging Order holder, is still assessed  the “Business profit” and has to pay the tax on money he or she did not receive (kind of like the reinvested dividends in your mutual fund).  Something to think about if you sue a FLP or LLC, or Small Family Corporation. You might win then lose a lot of money because of the charging order.
            Unfortunately, FLPs are marketed by numerous promoters who market one-size-fits-all cookie-cutter FLP structures and even sometimes also sell kits allowing clients to engage in do-it-yourself FLP planning.  I call this selling a yugo to your ego.

            FLPs are almost never correctly utilized. The following brief list is some of the ways creditors and the IRS has BROKEN Family Limited Partnerships. and allowed the creditor or IRS to attach the personal assets of the FLP creator. There are more ways:

Failure to Fund the FLP- It has to have funds
Failure to Maintain the FLP- Failure to Follow Formalities -  It needs to be managed with real records.
Non-Business Assets or Activities – There must be a real business activity for the FLP.
Parent as General Partner –if the Parent gets sued, the creditor could probably persuade the court to enter an order compelling the Parent to make a distribution to the Parent’s LP interest, thus totally subverting the charging order protection.
Parent as both General Partner and only Limited Partner – The parent owns the whole thing so the court says “no protection.”
Parent’s Living Trust as the GP Same as above. A living trust equals the individual.
Formation in the wrong State – Some jurisdictions do not limit the creditor’s remedy to a charging order.
Holding Assets in wrong State – The state where the assets are may ignore the FLP.
Failure to Diversify – All eggs in one basket.
Combined with Foreign Asset Protection Trust – This common “Platter” approach is easily recognized and easily broken.
Fraudulent Transfer – Move assets after you know you are going to be sued and the court will un-move them.
Failure to Make Gifts of the LP Interests – If you don’t gift the assets you don’t get the tax advantage..
Failure to Obtain Appraisals – since the funding of the FLP is evaluated on the date made you must have good records. Your notion of the value is not enough. You need to get it appraised.
Excessive Discount – Discounts of more than 15% get IRS attention. Discounts of over 20% are mostly sales gimmicks.
Gifting Limited Partnership Interests Directly to Children – Direct gifts are easily attached by creditors. Gifting to a trust with Medicaid and spendthrift clauses limits the creditor’s ability to get the child’s money.
----------------------------------------------------------
FLP’s have a place in one’s estate plan. As with other estate planning, I think it best to partner with a competent attorney or attorney’s to properly establish and manage your FLP.

Here are some FLP guidelines/, They are not exhaustive. 

Don't Overuse -- The Family Limited Partnership is just one of many available techniques. Avoid promoters who will try to stick nearly everything into the FLP.

Diversify – It is better to have several smaller FLPs than to have one oversized one.
Treat the FLP as a Business Entity not a Family Trust – An FLP is a business, A family Trust is a trust. If the FLP does not have a business purpose, a court will render the FLP a sham and allow the creditor to attach the personal assets without the charging order.
Have a Good Operating Agreement -- The agreement should cover what happens when sued.
Have Trusts Own the Children’s LP Interests The children’s trust must have spendthrift clauses and absolute discretion given to the trustee. The Trustee should not be the beneficiary (except maybe in Alaska and Nevada), the trust must not be revocable, and not allow for mandatory distributions for the general welfare (education, health, etc) of the beneficiary.
Maximize Transfers – Transfer assets immediately and make annual gifts to children without fail.
Avoid the Offshore Urge – unless you want to be audited.
Avoid Kits and Promoters – If you have enough in assets to justify having an FLP, then you should spend the time to go to an attorney in who has experience in structuring these entities the right way.

            The courts are full of people who found out that their FLP didn’t work. Some clients have come in after being sued and getting a judgment against them personally upset that their “on-Line” FLP didn’t protect them.  One spent over $150,000 in legal fees to find out the insurance didn’t pay and the FLP didn’t work.  That person thought he was knowledgeable because he had a book and saw a program on PBS. Of course he didn’t read the 150 or so court cases mostly dissolving FLP’s.  So;

            This newsletter is deliberately a bit vague. The odds are you now know that FLP’s are serious business with serious consequences if done and run improperly.  They can and do result in significant tax advantages for those who do them correctly, but I don’t think many do them correctly on their own.

            The next newsletter will review Family Foreign Grantor Trusts as asset protection strategies.

The Law Offices of James A. Busse Jr.
3937 Elm Ave.
Long Beach, CA 90807
(562) 490-4905
trust@jabusse.com          www.jabusse.com

..............................................Family Limited Partnerships (FLP)