|
Unified Credit Shelter Trust
A Unified Credit Shelter Trust (UCST) will typically
provide a surviving spouse with trust income and the right to invade trust principal for
health, maintenance and support. After the surviving spouses death, the amount in
the trust passes to named beneficiaries (usually, the couples children). The purpose
of a UCST is not only to provide the surviving spouse with income, but also to protect
trust principal from estate taxes. If properly drafted and executed, the balance of a UCST
at the second death will not be subject to estate taxes because the first decedent used,
instead of wasted, his unified credit (the "exemption equivalent" amount). It is
preferable to create a UCST with discretionary, not mandatory, income distributions to the
surviving spouse; because UCSTs do not have to qualify for the marital deduction, income
distributions are not required. The purpose of making income distributions discretionary
is to create a post-mortem option of allowing the trust to grow. After the surviving
spouses death, the trust (with additional accumulations) would pass to heirs
(usually children) free of estate taxes.
Traditionally, tax advisers have preferred to fund their clients UCSTs with
after-tax dollars and/or life insurance proceeds. Some tax and estate planning attorneys,
however, customarily draft intricate IRA and retirement plan beneficiary designations that
have the effect of funding UCSTs with IRA or other retirement accounts if they are
needed to fund the trust fully. The strategy of using IRAs and retirement plans to fund a
UCST will become more popular as the post-TRA 97 Sec. 2010(c) exemption equivalent
increases from $600,000 in 1997 to $1 million by 20063, and the
contributions and growth in IRAs and retirement plans continue.
Use of disclaimers: IRA owners should
consider disclaimer provisions for their IRA beneficiary designation. These sophisticated
IRA and retirement plan beneficiary designations should consider the use of disclaimer
provisions. The disclaimer strategy will typically name the surviving spouse as the
primary beneficiary and the UCST as the secondary beneficiary of the retirement plan or
IRA. The disclaimer strategy allows a "free second look" for a surviving spouse
to decide whether to retain all of the IRA proceeds outright (using the marital deduction)
or to disclaim all or a portion of the IRA proceeds into the UCST. The surviving spouse
makes this decision after the first death, when the financial picture of the survivor and
the family is known.
If the disclaimer strategy is used in both the will (or revocable trust) and the IRA
with integrated language between the will and IRA beneficiary designation, the surviving
spouse would be able to choose which assets (if any) would be used to fund the trust.
Having disclaimers in both the will and the IRA is referred to as a "double
disclaimer" strategy. In many cases, this strategy will yield a better result than
drafting wills and IRA beneficiary designations based on projections about who will die
first, when they will die, the familys needs, and the amount of after-tax and IRA
funds available to fund the UCST.
Advisers usually prefer funding a UCST with after-tax funds, if available, instead of
pre-tax funds, because an after-tax dollar is worth more to an heir than a pre-tax dollar.
The income in respect of a decedent associated with pre-tax funds diminishes the value of
the UCST to the heir; however, Sec. 691 does not apply to a Roth IRA. Thus, advisers
should at least consider whether funding the UCST with Roth IRAs is preferable to using
after-tax accumulations. If the marital bequest or the surviving spouses independent
assets suffice to make the surviving spouse financially secure, children or grandchildren
should be named as the beneficiaries of Roth IRAs to the extent of the exemption
equivalent. The long life expectancy of a young beneficiary would require smaller minimum
distributions in early years, thereby resulting in significant tax-free growth of the Roth
IRA. Although this strategy is good for regular IRAs, it provides an estate planning bonus
with Roth IRAs.
Naming children instead of the surviving spouse as the primary beneficiaries will be
advisable only in larger estates. When the security of having the principal and income of
the exemption equivalent amount available to the surviving spouse is desired, the adviser
should consider recommending a double-disclaimer strategy. The client could take a
"wait and see" approach and allow the surviving spouse to determine the optimal
strategy after the first death, when more information is available.
Back To
Table of Contents
|