Category: Technical Articles

Contract Under Seal

On: By: Bill Gatesman

Did you ever notice that many legal documents, such as contracts, trusts, powers of attorney, and Wills, have the word “SEAL” printed following the signature line. Some people assume that this means that a Notary Public must place a seal in that space, but that is not what that word means.

If a person signs a document, and the document has a signature line followed by the word “SEAL”, or something similar, under the law of most states the effect of that word “SEAL” is to impose a longer statute of limitations for the enforcement of that legal document.

For example, if one signs a contract in Maryland, and it is not signed under seal, the statute of limitations for the enforcement of such contract is three years, whereas the statute of limitations for a contract under seal in Maryland is 12 years. In other words, one would have 3 years within which to enforce a contract not signed under seal and 12 years to enforce a contract signed under seal.

In days of yore, to sign a contract under seal, one would first sign the document, then drop hot wax on the paper next to one’s signature and press his signet ring into the hot wax before it cooled. Or a corporate officer might apply the corporation’s seal stamp onto the document next to the signature of that corporate officer. In today’s world, the word SEAL printed on a document next to the signature line is the modern day equivalent the signet ring seal or the equivalent of affixing a corporate seal on a written instrument.

Not knowing the implications of the word SEAL next to the signature line of a legal document could have significant consequences for the person signing such document. William M. Gatesman stands ready to assist clients with all aspects of the legal documents that they sign, including advising them regarding the implications of the words in such document.

The Secret Handshake – How Do I Find Out What Rules Apply?

On: By: Bill Gatesman

The “Secret Handshake” refers to that gesture known only by the select few who are allowed access to an exclusive club.  I use that term in the title to this article because there are times when only those lawyers who closely follow Medicaid rule changes are aware of rules that impact clients. Everyone else is left in the dark.

One example relates to the use of a certain type of special needs trust. A person under age 65 who has high medical costs that would overwhelm that person’s income and assets may use a type of trust that allows such person to put his or her limited resources into the trust to enable such person to obtain Medicaid benefits to pay that person’s medical costs. This type of trust is useful where the amount of that person’s own assets cause such person to not be eligible for State medical care benefits, but which assets and the person’s income are too low to cover that person’s medical costs. I will call such person the “Beneficiary” for purposes of this article.

For many years, this special type of trust could only be created by the Beneficiary’s parent or guardian or by a court. If the Beneficiary’s parents were not living and the Beneficiary had no court appointed guardian, then there was an added cost, the cost of petitioning a court, to establish such a trust. It would be so much easier and less costly to the Beneficiary if the Beneficiary herself could be the person who created the trust.

And then, about 5 years ago, the rules changed, such that the Beneficiary could create such a trust and it would qualify to shelter the beneficiary’s assets so the beneficiary could obtain State benefits to pay for the Beneficiary’s high care costs.

But who knew? Who was privy to the fact that this rule had changed? Is it clear even today that this rule has changed? Consider this: Today, as was the case five years ago, the Maryland Medicaid eligibility manual, available online to anyone and the rule book used by public benefits case workers to evaluate applications for benefits, states at Section 800-16(c)4 that only those trusts that are created by a parent, guardian, or a court (and otherwise meet the special requirements for such trusts) are sufficient to shelter the Beneficiary’s assets.

Notwithstanding that the Maryland Medicaid manual no longer had accurate information after the rule changed, and still, to this day, has inaccurate information as to who may create such a trust, those lawyers who knew the “secret handshake,” that is, those lawyers who were privy to the discussions about Medicaid policy became aware of such rule change. This rule change was communicated to a select few Maryland lawyers by means of an email from the Office of Eligibility Services of the Maryland Department of Health. That email is reproduced below at the bottom of this article.

For a long time after the rule changed, even the Code of Maryland Regulations was not accurate, which regulations stated, like the Maryland Medicaid manual, that only those trusts that are created by a parent, guardian, or a court (and otherwise meet the special requirements for such trust) are sufficient to shelter the Beneficiary’s assets. The State of Maryland finally got around to updating its regulations, so that the regulation set forth at the Code of Maryland Regulations, Section 10.09.24.08-2 C, now correctly states that the Beneficiary herself may create the trust and it would qualify for the favorable treatment to enable such Beneficiary to obtain state benefits to pay high medical care costs.

But for years, the only guidance as to the issue in Maryland from the Maryland regulators was the obscure email shown below. And even today, the Maryland Medicaid manual, which is the rule book used by Medicaid caseworkers to evaluate applications for public benefits, is incorrect as to the issue of who may create such a trust.

Skilled public benefits lawyers bring a lot to the table to assist persons in need to enable them to participate in public benefits programs, not the least of which is such a lawyer’s access to timely and relevant information regarding the current state of the law and regulations that impact persons in need.

Regulator’s EmailDownload

Making a Claim in a Decedent’s Estate

On: By: Bill Gatesman

When making a claim in a decedent’s estate, may the claimant rely on information provided by the Register of Wills through it’s online website? Or is such reliance risky?

It is important that one who seeks to make a claim in a decedent’s estate do so within 6 months following the decedent’s death, and that the claimant follow all the rules for making such a claim. Unfortunately, there is a risk in relying on the information provided by the online estate docket for a particular estate published by the Registers of Wills in Maryland. A recent case handled by William M. Gatesman illustrates this point.

In that case, the State of Maryland filed a $120,000 claim in a decedent’s estate for Medicaid benefits paid by the State of Maryland for the nursing home costs of the decedent before she died. The rules of court governing such claims require that, if the claim is filed with the Register of Wills, it must also be sent to the Personal Representative of the estate.

In this particular case, however, the Personal Representative never received a copy of the claim, and so, she denied the claim. Maryland petitioned the probate court for allowance of the claim. During the court hearing, evidence was presented that the State of Maryland had relied on the Register of Wills web page which, at the time the claim was made, listed a particular post office box address as the address of the Personal Representative. However, that address was incorrect – apparently the Register of Wills clerk made a typographical error when entering the address on the online docket page.

The question boiled down to this: even though the State of Maryland as claimant did not send a copy of the claim to the Personal Representative at the Personal Representative’s actual address, could the claim nevertheless be valid under the rules governing claims in a decedent’s estate because Maryland sent a copy of the claim to the address of the Personal Representative shown on the Register of Wills web page pertaining to the particular estate? In other words, could the claimant rely on the information set forth on the online estate listing published by the Register of Wills?

The resolution of that question depended on a thorough analysis of the statute and rules applicable to claims in an estate, and to a review of case law regarding statutory requirements of delivery of claims in contexts other than decedent’s estates (there being no law directly on point with respect to such estates). At the probate court hearing, William M. Gatesman was prepared to present such an analysis.

In the end, the probate court ruled that Maryland failed to meet the requirement that it deliver a copy of the claim on the Personal Representative of the estate, and the Personal Representative’s denial of the $120,000 claim was upheld (i.e. Maryland was not allowed to collect on its claim).

What this story reveals is that there are technical requirements a claimant must meet in order for such claimant to collect funds owed to the claimant from a decedent’s estate, and that reliance on information published by the Register of Wills may lead to the claimant losing its opportunity to collect on its claim.

William M. Gatesman stands ready to assist clients, either as claimants in an estate, or as Personal Representatives seeking to defend an estate against claims that are not properly submitted.

Is it a Problem to Hold Estate Funds in a Lawyer Escrow Account?

On: By: Bill Gatesman

Maryland lawyers do not all agree as to whether a lawyer may hold funds belonging to a decedent’s estate in a general escrow account or a client funds account. While there may seem to be little guidance concerning the subject matter, there are at least two Maryland law cases that suggest that holding funds from a probate estate in a lawyer’s escrow account may be problematical.

In Attorney Grievance Commission v. Boehm, 293 Md. 476, 479 (footnote 2) (1982), the Maryland Court of Appeals states that “[i]t is the obligation of an attorney upon receiving funds representing the assets of an estate to deposit those funds in a separate estate account clearly identifiable by the name of the decedent. Such funds should not be commingled in an escrow account, general or otherwise.” Cf. Attorney Grievance Commission v. Owrutsky 322 Md. 334 (Md. 1991) .

In Attorney Grievance Commission v. Christopher, 383 Md. 624, 861 A.2d, 692, 699(2004), the same court noted with approval the conclusion of the lower court that made findings of fact, which lower court, in its “Conclusions of Law” stated that the lawyer violated the rules of professional responsibility when he, among other things, “mishandled estate funds when he closed the estate bank account . . . and transferred the funds into his trust account.”

I have written this article as a basis upon which I may continue to explore this issue with my colleagues.

— Bill Gatesman

Medicaid Asset Preservation with IRAs

On: By: Bill Gatesman

 

Spousal Protection Trusts  A very powerful asset preservation tool William M. Gatesman employs with married couples are Wills with Spousal Protection Trusts, a planning tool developed by Mr. Gatesman. With this tool, both spouses prepare a Will in which there is a trust for the benefit of the surviving spouse. Such trust is designed to be funded, not with assets passing through the estate, but with assets passing outside of probate, through pay on death accounts, beneficiary designations, life estate deeds, and by other means.

 

Protecting the Surviving Spouse  By using such a Spousal Protection Trust, spouses can set up their affairs such that, after the first of them dies, all the assets are set aside in the trust, available without restriction to the surviving spouse, but fully protected should the surviving spouse require long term care in a nursing home. Moreover, if such trust is properly implemented, the surviving spouse would be able to qualify for and obtain Medicaid benefits for long term care without delay if and when such spouse falls ill and requires nursing home care. In this way, all of the couple’s assets, to the extent not used by the surviving spouse prior to admission to a nursing home, would be preserved for future generations, and thereafter, all care costs would be covered by Medical Assistance. This is a very powerful planning strategy, but care must be taken to ensure that the plan is properly implemented.

 

Implementing the Plan with Tax Deferred Assets Often, when using this tool, the largest assets passing into such spousal protection trust are IRAs and other tax advantaged retirement plans. When this type of asset passes to a beneficiary – and the Spousal Protection Trust would be the beneficiary – special rules apply to continue the income tax deferral that is the hallmark of such investments. But the traditional method of preserving the tax deferred status of such accounts – by making regular required minimum distributions to the individual beneficiary – can reduce the primary benefit of using a Spousal Protection Trust, which is to protect all of the couple’s wealth if and when the surviving spouse requires long term care in a nursing home, which care could be paid for by the Medicaid program.

 

Asset Preservation with Tax Deferral  With proper guidance, however, a married couple can implement a plan that allows them to get the best of both worlds, that is, to prolong the income tax deferral on IRAs and qualified benefit plans for the longest time possible, on the one hand, and to prevent distributions of income and principal to the surviving spouse if and when such spouse might require long term care in a nursing home, on the other hand, thereby maximizing family wealth preservation.

 

Tax Planning Component of the Spousal Protection Trust  The key to obtaining “the best of both worlds” as discussed above is to structure the spousal protection trust as a retirement plan “accumulation trust.” Typically, estate planners will have clients utilize what is known as a “conduit trust” as the beneficiary of an IRA or other tax deferred retirement plan to ensure continued income tax deferral. However, while a properly drafted conduit trust will ensure continuing income tax deferral because such trust mandates that the retirement plan annual minimum distributions be paid from the trust to the surviving spouse, using a conduit trust for Medicaid asset preservation planning is counterproductive because all such minimum distributions received by the surviving spouse would be required to be paid to the nursing home as part of the surviving spouse’s contribution to her cost of care even after she would qualify for Medicaid benefits. [To be sure, the surviving spouse still could get Medicaid for nursing home care, however, the distribution of the required minimum distribution from the conduit trust to such spouse is a waste of assets because, with proper planning, such payments can be avoided.]

 

Putting it All Together  The way to continue the income tax deferral and to maximize income and asset preservation is to employ an accumulation trust in the Spousal Protection Trust. With an accumulation trust, the required minimum distribution from the retirement plan is distributed to the Trustee, but the Trustee is not required to pay such amount to the surviving spouse. Nevertheless because of the nature of the trust, the income tax deferral will continue to be allowed. This is easier said than done, however, because the tax law governing accumulation trusts for IRAs and other tax deferred retirement plans is intricate and complex.

 

Choosing the Right Advisor  Is it important, therefore, that the advocate you choose to assist you with your asset preservation estate planning be well versed in all aspects of law that would affect your situation, including estate planning, income tax planning, IRA planning, Medicaid planning, and other areas.

 

Qualifications  Before he studied law, William M. Gatesman obtained a Masters Degree in Accountancy with a focus on tax planning, and before becoming a lawyer, Mr. Gatesman worked as a tax consultant with a major CPA firm, and as a tax accountant in a major corporation. Mr. Gatesman has spent his career as a lawyer working in the area of estate planning and Medicaid planning, and related areas. Mr. Gatesman has the education, knowledge, and experience in all the areas of law that must be considered when doing asset preservation planning, and Mr. Gatesman relies on this background when he assist clients in employing Spousal Protection Trusts that include accumulation trusts as recipients of IRA and other retirement plan assets.

 

Maximizing Wealth Preservation  All of this knowledge and expertise enables William M. Gatesman to utilize sophisticated legal tools, such as the Spousal Protection Trust, which trust allows clients to maximize wealth preservation if a surviving spouse should require nursing home care in the future while still allowing such spouse to prolong the income tax deferral afforded by the inherited IRA or other retirement plan for as long as possible.

Applying for Medicaid Gives State Access to Bank Records

On: By: Bill Gatesman

In order to combat fraud and abuse, Congress passed a law in 2008 (referred to in this article as the “Asset Verification Statute”), which law just now is being implemented in Maryland, directing States to impose an electronic asset verification process to facilitate asset disclosure relating to Medicaid applications for long term care.

When Disclosure is allowed.  In most instances, under Federal law, banks may not disclose one’s financial records to the government except where there is a valid law enforcement or judicial subpoena or summons, or a search warrant.  However, that same federal law allows the account holders themselves to authorize such disclosure through a written instrument.

The Asset Verification Statute directs that States that provide Medicaid benefits to aged, blind or disabled persons to cover the costs of long term care in a nursing home, or care in assisted living or at home, require the applicants for such benefit programs to provide written authorization to the State to obtain documentation from banks and other financial institutions for accounts owned by the applicant or by any other person (such as the applicant’s spouse) whose assets are considered when one applies for such benefits. Continue reading “Applying for Medicaid Gives State Access to Bank Records” →

Sheltering Assets to Maintain Housing Benefits

On: By: Bill Gatesman

Various articles on this website address ways in which aged or disabled persons may protect their assets and still get government benefits such as Medicaid for long term care in a nursing home, or Medicaid for health care in the community.  By retaining accumulated assets or protecting assets one is about to inherit, an individual can ensure for herself a better quality of life, especially when the only other alternative is to fully impoverish oneself to retain government benefits.

One tool lawyers utilize to enable clients to shelter assets is a trust.  There are various types of trusts that can be employed depending on the individual’s circumstances, and each type of trust has its advantages and disadvantages.

For example, the law will allow a disabled person to keep his or her accumulated wealth to allow for a higher quality of life and to still obtain Medicaid benefits.  [Such opportunity is separate and distinct from the benefit under the Affordable Care Act which allows non-disabled people with low incomes to obtain Medicaid health insurance.  Moreover, this long-standing opportunity afforded to disabled persons likely will persist even if the President and Congress were to repeal the Affordable Care Act as they have threatened to do.] Continue reading “Sheltering Assets to Maintain Housing Benefits” →

Trustee’s Liability for Contractor’s Work

On: By: Bill Gatesman

Whether you are a Trustee of a trust that owns real property, a Personal Representative of a decedent’s estate that holds real property, or simply a homeowner, it is important for you to know your potential liability when you engage a contractor to perform work on the property if an employee of the contractor gets hurt on the job.

Many home service contractors do not carry worker’s compensation insurance coverage for their employees.  This is especially notable with tree service contractors.  The same men who climb trees with powerful chain saws to cut limbs and tree trunks while hanging from a rope around their waists in one of the most dangerous home service professions often find it prohibitively expensive to pay the premiums for worker’s compensation insurance, and therefore do not obtain such coverage.

The problem with that is, if one of the workers is injured on the job, even if that person is an employee of the contractor, then the law may treat such injured worker as your employee for liability purposes.  And, unless you, as Trustee or homeowner, have worker’s compensation insurance to cover this particular type of worker – and obtaining such coverage for the once in a blue moon tree cutter or other home service contractor likely is not possible – then the potential liability is unlimited. Continue reading “Trustee’s Liability for Contractor’s Work” →

Medicaid Updates Transfer Penalty Rule

On: By: Bill Gatesman

If one applies for Medicaid to pay for long term care in a nursing home, the state will look to see if the applicant made any gifts in the five years preceding the Medicaid application. If so, then (with some exceptions addressed in various articles on this website) a period of Medicaid ineligibility will be imposed.

For many years before 2014, the period of ineligibility was determined by dividing the amount of the gift by $6,800, which amount was supposed to be the average monthly cost of care in a nursing home. In July, 2014, that number was changed to $7,940. Medicaid has again updated the divisor to take into account Nursing Home care cost inflation.

Effective July 1, 2016, the divisor to determine the number of months of Medicaid ineligibility for gift transfers is $8,684, which means that one would be ineligible for one month for every $8,684 in gifts made during the five years preceding the Medicaid application. Please be aware that this number is revised from time to time. Please contact us to find out the current divisor amount.

Bear in mind that the term “gift” means any transfer of resources with respect to which the transferor did not receive full value. Thus, if a person sold her house for less than it’s fair market value (Medicaid uses assessed value or an appraisal to determine fair market value), then Medicaid will treat the difference between the sales price and the deemed fair market value to be a gift transfer even if such sale was made to a third party in a bona fide arms length transaction.

We at the Gatesman Law Office endeavor to stay at the cutting edge of new developments in Medicaid law and policy.

Should you have any questions as to how this new policy might affect you or a loved one, please contact us by clicking the Contact link on this website.

Bill Gatesman

New Procedure to Obtain Estate Tax Return Closing Letter

On: By: Bill Gatesman

The Internal Revenue Service will no longer routinely issue estate tax closing letters when it finishes satisfactorily processing an estate tax return. In an online Notice published -HERE-, the IRS states that “estate tax closing letters will be issued only upon request by the taxpayer.” That Notice sets forth the procedure whereby a taxpayer or tax preparer may obtain a Transcript in lieu of a closing letter to ascertain that an estate tax return has been accepted by the IRS.