Things to Remember at Tax Time

Tax time is rapidly approaching.  You want to file all the proper forms and take all deductions you're entitled to. Following are some things to keep in mind as you prepare your tax form.

• Gifts. Did you give away any money this year? The gift tax can be very confusing. If you gave away more than $13,000 in 2009, you will have to file a Form 709, the gift tax return. This does not necessarily mean you will owe taxes on the money, however, and most folks making gifts will owe no tax. Click here for more information.
• Medical Expenses. Many types of medical expenses are tax deductible, from hospital stays to hearing aids. To claim the deduction, your medical expenses have to be more than 7.5 percent of your adjusted gross income. This includes all out-of-pocket costs for prescriptions (including deductibles and co-pays) and Medicare Part B and Part C and Part D premiums. (Medicare Part B premiums are usually deducted out of your Social Security benefits, so be sure to check your 1099 for the amount.) You can only deduct medical expenses you paid during the year, regardless of when the services were provided, and medical expenses are not deductible if they are reimbursable by insurance. Click here for more information.

Carryover Basis Complicates Planning / Settlement

I have been asked a lot of questions about the new carryover basis rules and what this means for someone who inherits property in 2010. Simply put, repeal of the federal estate tax that has taken effect in 2010 means that the stepped up basis that the inheritor would have received in 2009 and prior years is officially gone.

The good news is, that for most smaller estates, the practical effect of the change is non-existent. Moderate and larger estates, however, will now find additional taxes, and complications.

A stepped up basis means that the recipient of an inherited asset gets to increase the income tax basis of the asset to its date of death fair market value, which in turn is the basis used for calculating capital gains taxes when the inherited asset is sold. But not so now - instead for deaths occurring in 2010 an heir will receive the decedent's original basis in the inherited asset, which can be adjusted by the executor or personal representative using the new modified carryover basis rules. The personal representative call allocate additional basis to the property received by the beneficiary, in order to reduce the capital gain.

In 2009 and years prior, for example, if a beneficiary inherited a house that cost the decedent $500,000 but

No Estate Tax in 2010 - Good and Bad News

There is currently no tax on the estates of those dying during 2010.   Although it is possible that Congress could reinstate the tax retroactively in 2010, the possibility is uncertain, at best.  If Congress fails to act, however, although a few wealthy families will benefit, many families with smaller estates will pay capital gains on inherited assets.  Moreover, executors and successor trustees must contend with new, and what may prove to be significant, administrative burdens.

Under the provisions of a Bush-era tax-cut bill enacted in 2001, the value of estates exempt from the tax has increased over the past eight years while the tax rate on estates has been reduced, so that in 2009 only an individual estate worth $3.5 million or more is taxed, at a rate of 45 percent. For the year 2010, according to the 2001 law, the estate tax disappears entirely, only to be restored in 2011 at a rate of 55 percent on estates of $1 million or more.

For persons with larger estates, their estate plans will need to reviewed and reconciled with the lack of

Strange Suit Against Michael Jackson's Estate

After reading that a taxpayer had sued the Michael Jackson estate to recover money spent for his memorial, I suspected that there would be other cases.  Of course, a quick google search revealed an interesting case, reported by TMZ.   TMZ reported last week that "[a] woman who claims to have spent 2,000 hours analyzing the extended family of Michael Jackson -- including children, birth mother(s), sperm donor claims ... and on and on ... wants more than $2 million from Michael Jackson's estate." 


According to TMZ, "Claire McMillan says she's a 'homeschool expert' who did 'a thorough analysis' of Jackson's complete extended family, to determine ... well, it's not clear why she was doing it.  Whatever ... she concluded that Katherine Jackson is doing 'a poor job outside of the home, related to - grooming, age, and psyc (sic) appropriate activities, same-sex, academic & soc interactions w/ non-extended family children .... ' oh, what's the use? It makes no sense." 

TMZ reports that McMillan claims she also inquired as to whether Dr. Arnold Klein would be interested in obtaining guardianship of the children with McMillan and her husband.  McMillan claims that her time is worth $1,000 an hour, and she wants $2,002,000 for her efforts.  Wow!

Howard Weitzman, lawyer for the Michael Jackson estate, reportedly told TMZ that, "[t]o the best of our knowledge, Ms. McMillan never did anything for the estate and the estate owes her nothing."  TMZ goes so far as to characterize the suit as a "Crazy Creditor's Claim."  No clarification if TMZ is saying the claim is crazy, the creditor is crazy, or both.

You can read more here.

Michael Jackson's Estate Sued Over Memorial

The Michael Jackson memorial in Los Angeles last July reportedly cost the cash-strapped city millions of dollars in police overtime and sanitation expenses, and now one  resident wants  Michael Jackson's family to pay the bill. According to the Associated Press, Jose F. Vallejo is seeking $3.3 million from Jackson’s estate.  The lawsuit, typically called a taxpayer's suit, is brought under a California law which permits taxpayers to sue in order to recover money on behalf of a governmental entity to which the taxpayer pays taxes. The taxpayer has requested that the money be deposited into the treasury for the City of Los Angeles.  Although the taxpayer typically does not benefit directly from the action, there are typically attorney fees which may have to be paid either by the defendant or the City, depending upon the outcome of the case.  The taxpayer benefits, at least theoretically, indirectly by reduced need for taxation.

Ohio, too, has a statute which permits taxpayer suits in certain cases. 

While the memorial cost the city millions, it also reportedly earned $4 million for the city’s hotels, restaurants

Laddering Fixed Annuities for Cash Accumulation

The July issue of Advisor Today introduces a unique cash accumulation strategy that merits close attention: laddering fixed annuities. MassMutual has back tested the strategy against several traditional strategies, and demonstrated its strength.

The strategy is simple. In addition to a portfolio of equities and bonds, simply make an initial purchase of a life-only fixed income annuity, with additional proportional fixed annuity purchases annually. Over a twenty-seven year period, the strategy resulted in a liquid account value of more than seven times the original deposit. This compared to an account value of only five times the original deposit when invested in a traditional equities and bonds only portfolio.

While the common misconception is that the inclusion of a fixed annuity in the mix impairs the liquidity of the portfolio, the performance over the intermediate and long-terms certainly made the short term illiquidity a risk worth taking.

Consequently, a retirement plan may benefit from the use of three asset classes- equities, bonds, and fixed income annuities. Retirees can build more wealth by making incremental annuity purchases with assets transferred from mutual fund accounts, for example.

The strategy also greatly increases the safety of the portfolio. Fixed income annuities are safe. They also are, in many states better protected from creditors. One would think these benefits would only be icing on the cake, given the strategy can outperform a traditional portfolio.

But the real icing on the cake, is building for your clients the opportunity to guarantee a stream of income that your clients cannot outlive. In these years of increasing life expectancies, the real "treat" is ensuring that the client can live the reminder of his or her life without concern whether the money will run out.

In August 2007, in the articles section of the Estate Planning Information Center, I reported about a study, co-sponsored by the Wharton Financial Institutions Center at the University of Pennsylvania and New York Life Insurance Company, identifying lifetime income annuities as the most cost-effective and least risky asset class for generating guaranteed retirement income for life.

The Wharton academic study revealed that:

• 
  
  Income annuities can provide secure income for one's entire lifetime for 25-40% less money than it would cost an individual to provide a similar level of secure lifetime income through traditional means, thanks to an insurer's ability to spread risk across large numbers of people;
• 
  
  Consumers are not annuitizing enough of their portfolios even though income annuities are low-cost, available from creditworthy insurers, and provide guaranteed payments for life. Equities, fixed income and other investment products like mutual funds carry the risk of outliving one's nest egg;
• 
  
  By covering at least basic living expenses with income annuities, consumers have much greater flexibility in other areas of a retirement plan, including the ability to take more investment risk with the remaining portfolio; and
• Recent innovations in income annuities, such as annual inflation adjustments, legacy benefits and access to capital in emergencies, have helped elevate the products to a desirable asset class in retirement.

The findings are outlined in a paper entitled "Investing Your Lump Sum at Retirement," which is based on an academic study entitled "Rational Decumulation," co-authored by Professor David F. Babbel of The Wharton School and Professor Craig B. Merrill of The Marriott School of Management at Brigham Young University. The study explored financial options for retirees and compared income annuities with other asset classes in retirement.

"Living too long is fast becoming the major financial risk of the 21st century," said Professor Babbel. "Combined with the challenges facing Social Security and the decline of corporate pensions, this adds up to a 'perfect storm' for retirees who might outlive their retirement nest egg."

Only lifetime income annuities can in an efficient way protect from the risk of outliving assets. This simply cannot be duplicated by other types of investments.

Caregiving Complicated By Late-In-Life Marriages

Disputes with Step-Children Increase Risk of Guardianship and Institutionalization

Mrs. Staffler calls her step-daughters to inform them that her husband, their father, has been admitted to the hospital following a massive stroke. As they gather in the hospital, it quickly becomes clear that the eldest daughter has been selected to give Mrs. Staffler some chilling and unexpected news. "You are not making decisions for our father; as his daughters, we will decide what needs to be done for him."

Feeling betrayed and offended, Mrs. Staffler rushes home to retrieve the health care power of attorney which appoints her as attorney-in-fact to make health care decisions. Armed with what she trusts is a clear statement of her authority, she returns to the hospital to find that the step-daughter has an attorney, and a caseworker from adult protective services awaiting her. In the ensuing battle, the stepdaughter is appointed guardian for her father by the probate court, and Mrs. Staffler is forced to hire an attorney to prevent the court from appointing a guardian for her.

Although she is successful in maintaining her freedom and independence, her legal expenses exceed fifteen thousand dollars. Moreover, although Mrs. Staffler assumed that she would have access to her husband's estate to care for her in the event of her husband's death, it is now apparent that the step daughters want their to inherit from their father's estate immediatelyupon his death.

Trust Scammers Refuse to Pay Penalty; Hurl Insults at Court

James Nash reports in the Columbus Dispatch that the Ohio Supreme Court's attempts to collect more than $7 million from two companies accused of scamming senior citizens are not going well.  According to the Columbus paper, the court on Monday handed off the collection action to the office of Attorney General Richard Cordray, who employs lawyers and others to shake loose money from reluctant debtors.

Jeffrey and Stanley Norman, owners of two companies that were fined $6.4 million Oct. 14 for having non-lawyers perform legal functions as part of an alleged trust-mill scam targeting the elderly, now owe more than $7 million with penalties for non-payment.  The Normans unsuccessfully tried to get the Supreme Court to rehear the case, but "[w]hen that failed, Jeffrey Norman lashed out at the court, accusing justices of a 'disgusting abuse of power.'"

Reportedly, Norman has said he would not pay the fine, calling it unfair, and he has put his southern California home on the market for $4.9 million.  Even if the state does collect the money, the proceeds won't go directly to victims of the alleged scam. The funds, under court rules, go toward the cost of investigating allegations of unauthorized practice of law, continuing legal education and other purposes.

The Normans were principals in the American Family Prepaid Legal Corporation scheme that resulted in The Ohio Supreme Court instituting a civil penalty in excess of six million dollars.  I wrote about the Court's action last November (2009), under the blog entitled "Court Imposes $6.3 Million Civil Penalty on "Trust Mill" Companies and Owners."

BIOGRAPHY

Monty L. Donohew is an attorney concentrating his practice in estate planning, wills, trusts, succession planning, and probate, with an emphasis on strategic trust planning. His firm, Monty L. Donohew, LPA, has offices in: Green, Ohio (Akron, Canton); Beachwood, Ohio; Westlake, Ohio; Dublin, Ohio; Cincinnati, Ohio; and, Chesterfield, Missouri (St. Louis).

Monty received his Juris Doctorate from Washington University School of Law in St. Louis, Missouri, where he served on the Washington University Law Quarterly, Washington University's most prestigious law review. Monty has been admitted to practice in Ohio, Illinois and Missouri, and currently practices in Ohio and Missouri. He is a member of several local and state bar associations.

Monty graduated from Tallmadge High School in Summit County, Ohio. He received his B.A. in political science from Eastern Illinois University, where he attended on a full academic scholarship. Monty was an intercollegiate debater, and received numerous individual and team awards, including placing second at "Novice Nationals," a national tournament for freshmen debaters, and qualifying three times for the National Debate Tournament. While at Eastern Illinois, Monty was an award winner in the annual social sciences writing competition, and received a coveted appointment to the Student Legal Services Board after serving as a student legal intern.

Monty is a member of the National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys, Inc. (NAELA). He is also a member of the National Family Caregivers Association, and the National Care Planning Council.

You can learn more about Attorney Donohew, his practice, background, credentials and education at the Estate Planning Information Center, http://www.donohew.com/. You can follow his blog at http://estateplanningcenter.blogspot.com/.

Bankruptcies Hit Retirement Communities

The recession is hitting elderly people where they live, literally. Financial problems have been mounting at a number of assisted-living and continuing-care communities, forcing some facilities into bankruptcies and inflicting new worries on residents and their families who thought their life plans were comfortably set.

In recent weeks, Erickson Retirement Communities, which manages 19 continuing-care retirement communities in 11 states, declared bankruptcy. Sunrise Senior Living Inc. posted a quarterly loss of $82 million and announced plans to sell off 21 of its assisted-living communities. Nationally, smaller retirement communities are raising their prices, changing the way they operate, selling themselves off to bigger chains, or getting out of the business altogether. Many companies say they can't make a profit—or even succeed on a nonprofit basis—in an environment that combines the high cost of caring for elderly residents, restrictive Medicaid budgets, tight credit markets and fewer residents willing and able to pay top dollar for their care.

When a facility fails, it can have myriad effects on the residents. The good news is that no one gets kicked to the curb–at least not right away. "Nobody has ended up on the street, which is a primal fear when you're dealing with these places," says Jason Frank, an elder-law attorney in Baltimore. "But their fees can skyrocket, and they can become unaffordable. Then they can kick you out for nonpayment."

In some cases, residents may find that the sizeable deposits they made to get their apartments in the first place have disappeared. (Continuing-care communities like Erickson's typically charge deposits of $150,000 or more, and assure residents that they can stay on the campus for the rest of their lives regardless of how their needs change, and that the deposits will be refundable to themselves or their heirs when they leave or die. But residents typically also have to pay monthly fees for care, and those fees can continue to increase. Assisted-living facilities like Sunrise generally require no deposits but charge a monthly pay-as-you-go-plan.) That's what happened to the 170 people who lived in Covenant at South Hills in Lebanon, Pa. Their deposits went up in smoke when their facility was sold in bankruptcy to Concordia Lutheran Ministries, which did not take on that liability. Several are now suing B'nai Brith Housing, the original operator of Covenant.

Nortwestern Mutual Launches Long Term Care Calculator

With Americans living longer than ever before, having a long term perspective for individual care needs is critical.  Northwestern Mutual has launched a new Long Term Care Cost Calculator to help people better understand the financial impact of those needs.

The calculator builds on Northwestern Mutual's Cost of Care research, released earlier this year, which surveyed nearly 7,000 home health care providers, assisted living facilities and nursing homes across the U.S. and revealed stark differences in costs for long term care services in geographic locations across the country.

"It is clear that most people simply can't afford to pay for long term care by drawing on their retirement nest eggs," says Terence Holahan, Northwestern Mutual. "Planning for long term care is about protecting both your assets and your lifestyle when you are unable to care for yourself; this new calculator helps educate consumers about the potential cost of a long term care event and how it can vary by age, location and length of time the care is needed."

Happy 18th Birthday! You'll Never Guess What I'm Getting You!

What are you planning to give the teenager in your family when he or she becomes an adult? A car, money for an apartment, a trip to Europe? Those are all fine gifts, depending on what you can afford to spend. But here’s one you may not have thought of, and the benefits could be far greater. Bring your new adult (child or grandchild) to our office, introduce us and have us prepare a basic estate planning package of documents: a simple trust or will, a durable power of attorney, a medical power of attorney, a HIPAA Release and a living will.

Actually, it’s a gift for the entire family, because once the child reaches legal age, parents will no longer be able to automatically make medical and legal decisions for him or her without the appropriate legal documents authorizing them to do so. If an adult child becomes ill or injured and cannot handle his own financial affairs, no one, not even Mom or Dad, will be able to step in and conduct business (sign checks, sell assets, etc.) unless he has a trust or a durable power of attorney and has named them as his successor or agent. If he hasn’t, they will have to go through the courts.... and that will take time, cost money, and restrict them in ways you cannot imagine.

If an adult child cannot make his own medical decisions, it will be much easier for Mom, Dad or another adult to make decisions if he has a medical power of attorney that names them as his agent. And what if he is placed on life support before they can get to the hospital? Unless he has made his wishes known through a legal document, they may not be able to have life support discontinued without court approval.
Finally, if your new adult should die without a will, the court will distribute his assets according o the laws of the state in which he lived . . . regardless of what the family or he would have wanted.

Make sure your new adult understands these documents will need to be changed as life changes-as s/he accumulates more assets, and as s/he and those s/he cares about move, marry, have children, divorce, die and so on.

Helping your children or grandchildren get started with this adult responsibility at the moment when he or she becomes an adult is just one more responsibility we as parents and grandparents have. It fits right in there with how to balance a checkbook, how to manage credit, and how to buy insurance.

Chances are, it will be a long time before any of these documents will be needed, but you’ll be sending your new adult out of the newest with a full layer of protection... just in case.

Court Imposes $6.3 Million Civil Penalty on "Trust Mill" Companies and Owners

The Supreme Court of Ohio recently imposed a civil penalty of $6,387,990 against two companies and their co-owners for engaging in the unauthorized practice of law, and issued an injunction permanently barring those companies, their principals and employees from any future marketing or sale of living trusts or other estate planning documents or services to Ohio residents.


In a 7-0  decision, the Court found that American Family Prepaid Legal Corporation and Heritage Marketing and Insurance Services Inc., their co-owners, Jeffrey and Stanley Norman, and multiple employees of those firms engaged in more than 3,800 acts of unauthorized law practice by virtue of their participation in a “trust mill” operation from March 2003 through March 2005.


The Court noted that American Family, Heritage, the Normans, and employees of the two companies had been the subject of a prior unauthorized practice of law complaint and investigation by the Columbus Bar Association (CBA) in 2002 that was resolved by the signing of a March 2003 consent agreement. In that agreement, the respondents acknowledged that providing estate planning advice and marketing and preparing trust agreements and other estate planning documents constitutes the practice of law, and promised to permanently cease and desist from such activities in Ohio.

The Court agreed with findings by its Board on the Unauthorized Practice of Law that, after signing the 2003 decree, American Family, Heritage and their owners used third-party marketing firms to send direct mail ads to lists of Ohioans 65 and older and also targeted senior citizens with magazine advertising containing exaggerated claims regarding the costs and complications of disposing of their assets through a will. Persons responding to the ads were subjected to high-pressure in-home presentations in which American Family’s non-attorney sales representatives provided them with legal advice including inflated “estimates” of the costs of probating their estates and the purported savings the customer would realize by purchasing American Family’s standardized living trust document – regardless of the size or composition of that individual’s estate or his/her existing estate planning documents.

In rejecting American Family’s claim that its actions were authorized because it had registered as the operator of a “prepaid legal services plan,” the Court wrote: “In arranging these appointments, American Family telemarketers did not refer to a prepaid legal plan and did not inform the customer that he or she would be solicited to buy a prepaid legal plan or living trust. The telemarketers did ask, however, whether the prospect already had a living trust. In sales presentations, usually occurring in a customer’s home, American Family’s agents focused on convincing a customer that he or she needed a living trust. If sold, the customer paid a $1,995 fee purportedly for an array of legal services relative to landlord/tenant law, businesses, domestic relations, bankruptcy, and other legal fields, at discounted fees, from a number of listed Ohio attorneys. Almost exclusively, however, the only legal service that the plan members received was the preparation of a living-trust document and related estate-planning instruments such as powers of attorney and a living will. For this reason, for the thousands of memberships sold, few if any members obtained legal assistance other than a living-trust portfolio.”

The Court noted that despite the fact that American Family used sales persons who had never been licensed as attorneys to “advise” customers about their estate planning needs and persuade them to purchase a trust, and that other non-attorneys in California actually prepared the trust documents, the company attempted to legitimize its unauthorized law practice by passing each transaction through a Columbus attorney, Edward P. Brueggeman. Brueggeman seldom spoke with the customers who were purported to be his “clients,” and was paid a flat fee by American Family for every trust document he approved.

In its decision, the Court wrote: “From the start of his employment until March 2005, Brueggeman had an office within American Family/Heritage offices on Citygate Drive in Columbus.  Brueggeman did not pay rent and used the supplies and services provided by American Family and Heritage employees to perform his role. Brueggeman did not hire or supervise the American Family sales agents. Brueggeman, after receiving the agreement, sent a form letter to the purchasers of the plans thanking them for choosing him to prepare their living trusts and their estate-planning documents. The letter also stated that the drafting process would take four to six weeks and invited the customer to call him with questions. … Brueggeman rarely, if ever, actually met an American Family plan member in person.” A formal complaint alleging that Brueggeman’s conduct violated state attorney discipline rules is currently pending before the Board Of Commissioners on Grievances & Discipline (Disciplinary Counsel v. Brueggeman, Case No. 08-090).

The Court noted that the “trust mill” operated by American Family, Heritage and the Normans was similar to other such operations that the Court has found to be illegally engaged in the unauthorized practice of law at the expense of vulnerable consumers, usually senior citizens. The Court wrote: “A living-trust package is often not needed and may even be harmful for persons who are without significant assets, who have simple estates, or whose estates may need court supervision. A basic living-trust package, such as those sold by some of the respondents, may likewise be insufficient or even completely inappropriate for those having more substantial assets and who may need specific legal advice or even tax advice to meet their needs. For this reason, we have repeatedly held that these enterprises, in which the laypersons associate with licensed practitioners in various minimally distinguishable ways as a means to superficially legitimize sales of living-trust packages, are engaged in the unauthorized practice of law. We have also repeatedly held that by facilitating such sales, licensed lawyers violate professional standards of competence and ethics, including the prohibition against aiding others in the unauthorized practice of law. Today, we reaffirm these holdings and admonish those tempted to profit by such schemes that these enterprises are unacceptable in any configuration.”

In imposing a civil penalty of $6,387,990 jointly and severally against American Family, Heritage and their co-owners, the Court noted the aggravating factors that the respondents had been advised of  and acknowledged the illegality of their involvement in the marketing and sale of trusts in the 2003 CBA consent agreement, but shortly thereafter resumed the same activities and engaged in thousands of acts of unauthorized practice that resulted in potential or actual harm to many of their customers for a period of two years. The Court also imposed civil penalties of $10,000 against American Family’s state marketing director, Paul Chiles, $7,500 against office manager Harold Miller, and $2,500 against multiple American Family and Heritage agents who continued to engage in the unauthorized practice of law after signing the 2003 consent agreement.

In its injunction, the Court permanently barred American Family, Heritage, Jeffrey and Stanley Norman, other named parties and “their successors, assigns, subsidiaries and affiliates” from marketing, selling or preparing wills, living trusts, durable powers of attorney, deed transfers or other legal products in Ohio; offering legal advice to anyone concerning estate planning or the execution of legal products; offering or selling prepaid legal plans of any kind to Ohio residents; and from engaging in a wide range of other enumerated activities.

I have had the opportunity to review the estate plans generated by American Family.  With a "one-size-fits-all" mentality, all of the trusts are virtually identical, with clients running the risk that the particularly cumbersome and sophisticated estate tax planning trust, create for them and their families unnecessary burden.  Of course, this is the essence of the attorney-client relationship.  Your attorney should represent you, and should not represent other persons whose interests are in direct conflict with your interests.  Only by having an attorney that is independent from others, and by that attorney discharging aggressively his or her obligation to provide for you specific advice and counsel based upon your specific circumstances, goals, and objectives, will your estate plan fit you.

Payments for In-home Care of Elderly Escape Tax and Information Reporting

The IRS has privately ruled that payments by a state agency to help the elderly live at home as an alternative to care in a nursing home are tax-free even though they were made to the caregivers. Because they were tax-free, no information reporting of the payments was required.

In the case, the State agency making the payments was established to advise, assist, and serve the State's growing elderly population, and to create an environment that provides choices, promotes independence, health, and well-being, and enables elderly individuals to remain in their communities and avoid nursing home placement through its various programs.

The specific legislative purpose of the Program was to encourage low-income elders to be cared for in family-type living arrangements as an alternative to nursing homes or other institutional care settings. To be eligible to participate in the Program, the elderly individual must:

1. be at least 60 years old;
2. have income not exceeding Medicaid limits for institutional care;
3. be at risk for nursing home placement, which is measured by the total number of Activities of Daily Living (personal care tasks such as bathing and eating) and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (normal, everyday tasks performed by an independent individual such as meal preparation and shopping) that the elderly individual requires help to accomplish; and
4. live with an adult caregiver who is present in the home and able to provide supervision and care for the elderly individual.

Only those elders who receive a high-risk evaluation in terms of risk of institutional placement are eligible for participation.

Currently, elders participating in the Program on average require assistance on more than 4 of the 6 Activities of Daily Living and almost all of the 8 Instrumental Activities of Daily Living. More than half of the elders participating in the Program have dementia. Commercial caregivers are not eligible to participate in the Program.

The Program provides for two types of subsidy payments, basic and special, to offset, in part, the costs of support and maintenance for elderly individuals living in the home of a capable adult caregiver, usually a spouse or other relative. The basic subsidy is a monthly payment to the caregiver to defray, in part, the basic living needs of the elderly individual, such as food, clothing, housing, medical needs, and other incidentals (not covered by Medicare, Medicaid, or other insurance). Special subsidy payments are made for additional goods and services that the case manager determines are necessary to maintain the health and well-being of the elderly person. Special subsidy payments can be made for items such as chore services, counseling, home-delivered meals, education and training for the caregiver, housing adaptations, medical therapeutic services, medical transportation, respite care, medical supplies and equipment (such as medication and wheelchairs).

The basic and special subsidies promote the health and well-being of elderly individuals by partially reimbursing the caregivers for some of the monthly living expenses of the elderly individuals, and are not a payment for caring for the elderly individuals or for any other services. Because of this subsidization of their home living costs, many elderly individuals are able to postpone nursing home care for longer periods than would otherwise be the case, or avoid institutional care altogether.

The State Department administers the Program through State's agency system for the aging, which consists of two systems. The first system (including the Taxpayer) consists of agencies that within a geographic area monitor service providers, write subsidy checks, and serve as the final appeal for client/applicant grievances. The other system consists of local agencies or community service providers that determine client eligibility and eligible subsidy amount, provide care planning and case management, annually reassess on-going eligibility, enter data to generate monthly payments, prepare reports, and maintain documentation.

Under the general welfare exclusion, payments to individuals by the government under legislatively provided social benefit programs for the promotion of the general welfare are not included in a recipient's gross income. The payments must (1) be made from a governmental fund, (2) be for the promotion of the general welfare (i.e., generally based on individual or family needs), and (3) not represent compensation for services. (See, e.g., Rev Rul 2003-12, 2003-1 CB 283 ).

Code Sec. 6041(a) provides generally that all persons engaged in a trade or business that pay another person $600 or more in any tax year of fixed or determinable income in the course of that trade or business must file an information return setting forth the amount of the payment and the recipient of the payment.

The recent ruling observes that the Taxpayer makes payments under the Program to defray a part of the costs necessary to maintain the health of frail, elderly individuals who need daily care. These payments are made from a governmental fund pursuant to a state statute, are based on economic need and health status of the elderly individuals, and are not for services rendered by the caregivers or the elderly individuals. Because the payments are intended to reimburse the caregivers' expenses of promoting the health and well-being of the elderly individuals, the interposition of the caregivers as the recipients does not bar application of the general welfare exclusion. Accordingly, the basic and special subsidy payments Taxpayer makes for the benefit of the elderly individuals under the Program are not includible in the incomes of the elderly individuals or their home caregivers. Thus, the Taxpayer is not required to file information returns for these payments for either the elderly individuals or their home caregivers.

Information is also available at the Estate Planning Information Center, from this office, or your local elder law attorney, local area agencies on aging or local county departments of job and family services.

If Your Mortgage Lender Goes Under: What To Do

On June 18th, 2008, Fremont General Corp., the Brea-based parent of the bank (and former subprime lender) Fremont Investment & Loan, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. This action follows other major banks heading to the bankruptcy court, including Middletown, Conn.-based Mortgage Lenders Network USA, in February 2007, and American Home Mortgage Company in August 2007. Other mortgage lenders are also sending out distress signals. Here's what you need to know if your mortgage lender goes out of business.

Most Importantly, keep making your payments! Regardless of what kind of trouble the mortgage company may be in, you still need to send in your payments on time. You are legally obligated by a note and mortgage to make the payments. Remember, your payments are considered an asset to the company. If a lender declares bankruptcy, those assets will just be sold to another lender. The other lender will, no doubt, hold you to your obligation.
In most cases, government-sponsored enterprises like Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or Ginnie Mae will handle the transfer. But rest assured, there will be someone who wants to get your monthly check.

But you should review your mortgage so that you know your rights. The terms of your loan should always stay the same, no matter who holds your loan. It's important that you thoroughly review the details of your mortgage agreement. The interest rate and the type of loan you get should not change. If your lender does sell your mortgage, you should receive a letter from the company within 15 days that outlines the new mailing address and payment deadline.

You should also be given a toll-free telephone number that you can call if you have any questions. You must get a grace period of 60 days to get your payments to the right place on time. If you have any complaints or issues, write a letter to your lender. The company is required to respond within two months of getting your letter.

If you have paid off your loan in full, and you want a mortgage satisfaction documents from the company when it's no longer in business, call your attorney or go to your State Attorney General's office. There you can find out the status of the company. You should be able to find out who you can contact.

You may find negotiation with the new lender more difficult. A servicer - the company you make your monthly check out to - may not think it's worth its while to negotiate with homeowners to lower monthly payments. Some servicers have to front money to the loan holders if this happens. Plus, in many other cases, there are limits to how much interest and principle can be forgiven.

In some cases servicers can negotiate payments on only 5 percent of loans. The bottom line here is - no matter who you make your monthly check out to - get on the phone if you're having trouble making payments. The sooner you bring attention to the problem, the better off you'll be.

Of course, if you have problems or questions, please see your attorney before legal action is taken against you.

A Dramatic Loss of Wealth

Seniors Scramble for Solutions

A recent study suggests that current economic woes affecting the value of real estate will strip most people of wealth, with the hardest hit being those currently poised to retire.

The Center for Economic and Policy Research extrapolated from data from the 2004 Survey of Consumer Finance to project household wealth under three alternative scenarios. The first scenario assumes that real house prices fall no further than their level as of March 2008. The second scenario assumes that real house prices fall an additional 10 percent as a 2009 average. The third scenario assumes that real house prices fall an additional 20 percent for a 2009 average.

The projections show that the vast majority of families between the ages 49-54 will have little or no wealth by 2009 in any of these scenarios and that those persons who just be approaching retirement will have very little to support them-selves in retire-ment other than their Social Security.

The projections also show that a large number of families will have little or no equity in their homes by the end of 2008. Finally, the projections show that the renters within the same wealth categories in 2004 will have more wealth in 2009 than homeowners in all three scenarios.

Seniors and their financial planners are scrambling to develop financial solutions and strategies. You should consider two obvious strategies. First, if you have debt on your home, you should eliminate it quickly. If you need a referral to an agent that will show you how you can within a few years eliminate your mortgage debt without bankruptcy, debt consolidation, or adversely affecting your credit rating, please call the office at 877-816-8670.

If your are likely to need a reverse mortgage in the future, you might consider obtaining a reverse mortgage line of credit now, before the value of your real property is further mpaired. A line of credit does not obligate that you access the funds, but the funds wll be available for the reminder of your life, if you later need them. Moreover, you ensure access to a greater amount, or at least some amount, whereas later, after the value of your home is further reduced by the market, you may not be eligible at all, or eligible for as much.

If you need a referral to a reputable reverse mortgage specialist or financial planner, please call the office at 877-816-8670.

Tax Rules Change Treatment of Gains on Sale of Vacation or Second Home

If you have a vacation or second home, there was a change in the federal income tax law as part of the 2008 Housing Act about which you should be aware.   Most homeowners are familiar with the homesale exclusion, a provision of the tax code which excludes from taxable gain as much as $500,000 of gain if they meet certain conditions. The $500,000 exemption is the maximum exclusion for a married couple filing jointly; taxpayers filing individually get an exemption of up to $250,000. To be eligible for the full exclusion, a taxpayer must have owned the home, and lived in it as his or her principal residence-for at least two of the five years prior to the sale. Because of the "principal residence" requirement, vacation or second homes normally don't qualify for the exclusion. However, in what some saw as a loophole, the law permitted taxpayers to convert their second home to their principal residence, live in it for two years, sell it, and take the full $250,000/$500,000 exclusion available for principal residences, even though portions of their gains were attributable to periods when the property was used as a vacation or second home, not a principal residence.   The new law closes that "loophole" by requiring homeowners to pay taxes on gains made from the sale of a second home to reflect the portion of time the home was not used as a principal residence (e.g, vacation or rental property). The amount taxed will be based on the portion of the time during which the taxpayer owned the home that the house was used as a vacation home or rented out. The rest of the gain remains eligible for the up-to-$500,000 exclusion, as long as the two-out-of-five year usage and ownership tests are met. The new law in effect reduces the exclusion based on the ratio of years of use as a principal residence to the total time of ownership. For example, if a taxpayer owned a vacation home for ten years, but lived in it as a principal residence only for the final two years prior to sale, the maximum available exclusion would be reduced by four-fifths. Accordingly, a $400,000 gain on the sale that would be eligible for the full exclusion under pre-Act law would be reduced by four-fifths, to $80,000. The good news for current owners of second homes is that the new law is not retroactive. The tightening applies only to sales after 2008. Plus, any periods of personal or rental use before 2009 are ignored for purposes of the provision. The new law also does not change the rule that allows homeowners to take advantage of the homesale exclusion every two years. Taxpayers can still move from one home to the other with full tax exclusion if they only own one home at a time. Moreover, the taxpayer still qualifies for capital gain treatment on the amount of gain that cannot be excluded. The tax planning opportunity available to you between now and December 31, 2008, is that if you convert your second residence into your primary residence before January 1, 2009, you will completely avoid the rule above.  You would then have up to three years to sell your old primary residence to claim the full home sale exclusion on the old primary residence. Then two years after the sale of the old primary residence you can sell the second home/ now primary residence and again claim the full home sale exclusion. The decision to move your primary residence involves more than just savings taxes on a later sale. Your primary residence has other income, property and estate tax implications, estate planning and asset protection planning implications, and financial implications that should be fully understood prior to making such an important decision.  Consult an elderlaw  attorney and accountant or tax professional as soon as possible, though; one cannot just "flip a switch" to covert a second home to a primary residence.

Ohio Partnership for Long-Term Care Insurance Offers Asset Protection

The new Ohio Partnership for Long-Term Care Insurance is an initiative between the State and private insurance com panies to encourage Ohioans to plan for their long-term care needs. The partnership established "partnership policies" which provide coverage for long-term care needs and also allows Ohioans the ability to obtain "Medicaid Asset Protection" - a benefit not available with traditional pre-existing policies sold in Ohio.

This benefit is only available to those who purchase "qualified partnership policies." Pre-existing policies, meaning those you may have now, do not qualify. Medicaid asset protection simply allows Medicaid applicants to keep more assets and still potentially qualify for Medicaid coverage. Upon application for Medicaid, the total assets a person may keep is the combined total of the Medicaid asset limit and the total amount paid by a partnership policy. In other words, the policy payments serve to protect other assets, such as your family home, even if the insurance benefits do not prove sufficient to pay the full cost of the nursing home care.

Partnership policyholders who need Medicaid to help pay for long-term care can apply at any time. Ohio's Medicaid program can help pay the difference between what the policy covers and what is owed, or provide assistance once the policy is exhausted. In both cases, the benefit of Medicaid asset protection will be provided. The more the partnership policy pays, the higher the asset protection.

A Dramatic Loss of Wealth: Seniors Scramble for Solutions

A recent study suggests that current economic woes affecting the value of real estate will strip most people of wealth, with the hardest hit being those currently poised to retire.

The Center for Economic and Policy Research extrapolated from data from the 2004 Survey of Consumer Finance to project household wealth under three alternative scenarios. The first scenario assumes that real house prices fall no further than their level as of March 2008. The second scenario assumes that real house prices fall an additional 10 percent as a 2009 average. The third scenario assumes that real house prices fall an additional 20 percent for a 2009 average.

The projections show that the vast majority of families between the ages 49-54 will have little or no wealth by 2009 in any of these scenarios and that those persons who just be approaching retirement will have very little to support them-selves in retire-ment other than their Social Security.

The projections also show that a large number of families will have little or no equity in their homes by the end of 2008. Finally, the projections show that the renters within the same wealth categories in 2004 will have more wealth in 2009 than homeowners in all three scenarios.

Bankruptcy Rising Among Elderly

Bankruptcy filings among the elderly are reaching an all-time high according to a story published by Christine Dugas, in USA TODAY. Swamped by debt and rising medical bills, elderly Americans have been seeking bankruptcy-court protection at sharply faster rates than other adults, according to a study to be released. From 1991 to 2007, the rate of personal bankruptcy filings among those ages 65 or older jumped by 150%, according to AARP, which will release the new research from the Consumer Bankruptcy Project. The most startling rise occurred among those ages 75 to 84, whose rate soared 433%.

According to the article, the study does not address the specific reasons behind the trend. But experts say medical bills have played a major role in the debt that has forced many elderly Americans into bankruptcy proceedings. "Health care is a big issue for the elderly," says George Gaberlavage, director of consumer and state affairs at the AARP Public Policy Institute, “and out-of-pocket expenses have been going up,” the article reports. During the same 1991-2007 period, bankruptcy filings by younger Americans actually declined. 

GenWorth Announces Launch of Ohio Partnership Qualified Long Term Care Insurance

Genworth Financial announced its long term care division has launched the newest addition to its portfolio of long term care planning solutions in Ohio -- Partnership Qualified Long Term Care Insurance (Partnership plans). These products, designed to augment individuals' financial security options during retirement, are the result of an alliance between states and insurers to help millions of Americans better prepare for potential long term care needs. What's more, there are no added costs for residents to participate.


"Many Americans mistakenly believe that Medicare or private health insurance will pay for their long term care needs, and that's just not true," stated Beth Ludden, Genworth's senior vice president for long term care insurance product development. "Those purchasing a Partnership plan can be assured that if and when the need for long term care arises, they will have more control over their long term care decisions, and be able to help protect their assets and resources should they ever need to access Medicaid."


Partnership plans provide dollar-for-dollar asset protection for policyholders. For every benefit dollar policyholders receive under a Partnership policy, they receive an equal dollar of asset protection under the state's Medicaid spend-down requirements. As a result, participants are able to retain assets that would otherwise have to be spent down prior to qualifying for Medicaid benefits.


Long term care is an ever-increasing challenge for millions of Americans and their families. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) 70 percent of Americans who reach their 65th birthday will have to pay for some kind of long term care services. With the average cost of care for a private nursing home room topping more than $76,460 nationally and rising for the fifth consecutive year according to Genworth's 2008 Cost of Care Survey, Ohio residents are encouraged to plan ahead for long term care events.


Ludden continued, "Genworth applauds the leadership in Ohio for empowering its residents and is proud to have played a significant role in this endeavor. We continue to work closely with state and federal regulators as well as key industry trade groups to further expand Partnership programs across the nation."

Additionally, Ohio has launched an "Own Your Future" long term care awareness and planning campaign in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Its primary goal is to educate the public about the need for long term care planning as part of their overall retirement strategy, encouraging them to begin planning for future long term care needs at an early age. As part of its program, the state offers free, in-home long-term care consultation.


Consumers interested in getting additional information about long term care planning can click here.
+

Uncovering the Many Secrets of College Financial Aid

The financial aid process is a mystery to most. If you are beginning the process of learning about financial aid, you should first consider the promises and risks in paying for financial aid advice, because you will no doubt be tempted (and solicited) by offers to “cut through the red tape” and “better guarantee your child’s chances for financial aid.” Before proceeding the route of a paid financial aid processor or locator, please review the article entitled, “Promises, Promises” publishes by the Wall Street Journal, which can be found by clicking here.

So, in order to evaluate your options, you will need to have an understanding of the process. The process begins with the Free Application for Federal Student Aid, administered by an office at the U.S. Department of Education.

You must file this form to apply for federal student aid, such as grants and loans, as well as most state and college aid. Everyone, from colleges to the government, recommends that parents get a jump on this task as soon as possible. Schools typically award aid on a rolling basis -- first come, first served.

Even if you don't think your family will qualify for need-based aid, it's worth your time to fill out the form. It may enable you to get federal loans at better rates than you could find in the private market. Besides, your student may qualify for certain grants or scholarships.

Ohio Protects Seniors from Stranger-Originated Life Insurance

The Ohio legislature has given final approval to a landmark bill that will help assure the integrity of the life insurance market and protect seniors from a growing abuse called stranger-originated life insurance (STOLI).

In a STOLI transaction, investors such as hedge funds finance a program that induces senior citizens to obtain insurance for the sole purpose of transferring the death benefits to the investors. The investors hope to profit when the seniors die, and the sooner they die, the higher the profit. Seniors caught up in these schemes can face unexpected taxes, loss of insurance capacity, loss of privacy, potential legal liability and may even render themselves ineligible to participate in government entitlement programs.

The legislation, H.B. 404, targets STOLI by reducing the economic incentive for abusive transactions and giving life insurance companies better tools to detect and deter STOLI deals before they occur.

More Retirees Retain Mortgage Debt

Mortgages Carried Later In Life a Disturbing Trend

By Tim Grant, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Owning a home free and clear has been an enduring part of the American dream, but in recent years more people are waking to the reality that they will be retiring still owing money on their mortgages.

“It's a bad trend,” said P.J. DiNuzzo, president of DiNuzzo Investment Advisors in Beaver. “One piece of advice I can give is to pay off your house and then retire.”

Rather than cutting back on debt, people approaching retirement appear to be increasing the amount of debt backed by their primary residence, a complete shift from what retirees in past generations did. The number of families headed by people 55 or older with housing debt has increased steadily from 24 percent in 1992 to 36 percent in 2004, according to the Employee Benefit Research Institute in Washington, D.C.

Income Annuities for Retirement Financial Security

Wharton Study Suggests Lifetime Income Annuities Best Asset Class for Retirement Financial Security

Reprinted from Businesswire.com. August 08, 2007 09:49 Dueling Asset Classes: Wharton Study Demonstrates That Lifetime Income Annuities Are Best Asset Class for Financial Security in Retirement

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--As Americans grapple with the challenge of potentially outliving their retirement savings, a new study, co-sponsored by the Wharton Financial Institutions Center at the University of Pennsylvania and New York Life Insurance Company, identifies lifetime income annuities as the most cost-effective and least risky asset class for generating guaranteed retirement income for life.

The Wharton academic study revealed that:

•Income annuities can provide secure income for one’s entire lifetime for 25-40% less money than it would cost an individual to provide a similar level of secure lifetime income through traditional means, thanks to an insurer’s ability to spread risk across large numbers of people;

Bailing out of Unwanted Annuities

Rising Market in Purchase of Long Term Annuities

A fast-rising secondary market for people looking to cash in annuities for a lump sum settlement is causing consumers concern. Is this the perfect escape hatch for people locked into an annuity they don't want or yet another way for brokers to take advantage of seniors in dire financial straits? Of course, as with all financial tools, there is the possibility for both in each situation.

With an annuity, the buyer pays an insurance company a sum in return for regular payouts over a defined period. With more and more people owning or inheriting annuities, you can bet more and more people find themselves in a situation where they want out. Most annuities charge "surrender" penalties of up to 20% if the owner wants to withdraw the principal before a set period has expired. The penalty generally decreases with time.

Ohio Expands Medicaid Resource Recovery

When the Medicaid estate recovery program was instituted in Ohio in 1995, only the assets in a deceased person's probate estate were subject to recovery. Ohio adopted an "augmented estate" approach to recouping Medicaid expenditures effective July 1, 2005. This approach expands the class of assets available for Medicaid estate recovery.

The law, codified in Ohio Revised Code 5162.21, applies to Ohio Medicaid recipients who died on or after September 20, 2005. For those individuals, the so-called "augmented estate" includes all real and personal property in the probate estate; any real or personal property that would have been part of the decedent's probate estate but for release of administration procedures; AND any other real or personal property in which the deceased had an interest or to which they had legal title immediately prior to death (to the extent of such interest).

The new law changed dramatically the way Ohio property law works.  Prior to the law, title of property sometimes vests automatically at the time of death to a beneficiary or heir.  Generally, once title vests in the ownership of another, the debts and liabilities of the former owner are not enforceable against the property, and the new owner can be assured that the title is free, clear, and unencumbered. The new law provides that title vesting to another is irrelevant, at least when the State of Ohio is the creditor; Ohio may pursue its claims against property after the death of the Medicaid recipient even if Ohio filed no lien, claim, mortgage, or encumbrance prior to the recipient's death.   

Consider the following example: John Smith, Medicaid recipient, owns a home, an annuity, a bank account jointly with his daughter, and a living trust that holds various investments. This example is only to show how estate recovery works with different assets, and is not a realistic depiction of a Medicaid recipient; most Medicaid recipients have no assets. Smith transfers an interest in the home to his adult daughter, and they become joint tenants with right of survivorship. Prior to the establishment of the augmented estate, the home and the joint bank account would have passed automatically to Smith's daughter on his death, and would never have been part of the probate estate. Therefore, they would not have been subject to estate recovery. 

The assets in the living trust don't "transfer", per se, but they are not administered through probate. Smith's successor trustee would distribute the trust assets to the named beneficiaries in the trust, free from resource recovery.  Similarly the annuity pays beneficiaries, outside of probate, free from resource recovery. 

Under the new law, because Smith had a legal interest in all of those assets in the moment before his death, all of the assets are included in his augmented estate for the purposes of Medicaid estate recovery, and are recoverable by the State of Ohio.

Prior to the new law, individuals could preserve assets for  their family simply by removing them from their probate estate. Under the new law, preserving assets is harder. 

The state can only attempt to recover against the estate of a Medicaid recipient after the death of their surviving spouse (if married), and when the Medicaid recipient no longer has any surviving children who are either under the age of 21 or are blind or totally disabled. (Total disability is defined by Medicaid regulations.) However, if you do not have a surviving spouse or children with qualifying disabilities, your adult children or other heirs might find assets they expected to receive claimed instead by Medicaid estate recovery.

If you are concerned about preserving assets for your family in the event that you need Medicaid assistance at some point in your life, you will need to plan to keep assets out of your augmented estate. Certain transfers are permissible to keep assets out of an augmented estate, as are other estate planning tools like supplemental needs trusts for disabled or special needs beneficiaries, and certain irrevocable trusts.  An elderlaw lawyer can help map out strategies to meet your goals and needs.  

The Legal Responsibility of Adult Children to Care for Indigent Parents

A conservative policy group has released an issue brief proposing that states begin enforcing filial responsibility laws in order to reduce long-term care costs. Thirty states, including Ohio, have filial responsibility laws that require adult children to care for their indigent parents. The National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) claims that if these statutes are enforced, adult children would have to reimburse the state programs that provided care for their indigent parents.

Filial responsibility laws have traditionally not been enforced, possibly because federal law prohibits state Medicaid programs from looking at the finances of anyone other than the applicant or the applicant's spouse for eligibility purposes.  There is, however, no such restriction in resource recovery, the statutory right of a state to recover assets after the death of a Medicaid beneficiary.

The NCPA, a group whose goal is to develop and promote private alternatives to government regulation and control, cites a 1983 report by the Health Care Financing Administration that says enforcing these statutes would have reduced Medicaid long-term care spending by $25 million, and argues that today the figure would be much higher.

Of course, the implications of enforcement of filial responsibility for seniors and their families are complex, but deserve some consideration in day-to-day estate planning.  One can easily imagine a future in which the states routinely sue children in order to recover amounts paid for their parent's long-term care, with children then being forced to apportion these costs among themselves, sometimes through legal action between and among them.  Whether these collections will and must involve the probate court, and whether avoiding probate in the first instance will discourage or prevent these actions remains to be seen.  Regardless, asset protection planning finds one more threat among those justifying and supporting such planning.  

To read the full brief, click here.

Higher Intensity Physical Therapy Improves Outcomes, Reduces SNF Stay Lengths

McKnight's recently reported the results of a study finding that physical therapy of a higher intensity results in better patient outcomes and shorter lengths of stay for some nursing home patients.

According to the article:

Researchers found that for all three types of conditions studied, residents provided with 1 to 1.5 hours of therapy a day had shorter lengths of stay than residents getting less than 1 hour per day over a seven-day period. Researchers studied nearly 5,000 patients with strokes, orthopedic and cardiovascular/pulmonary conditions in 70 different skilled-nursing facilities nationwide.  The study helps establish the minimal therapy required for optimal results at 1.75 hours per day for a 5-day model and 1.5 hours of therapy for a six-day therapy model, said the study's authors.

The findings offer caregivers and skilled-nursing providers guidelines on therapy utilization to improved patient outcomes in functional independence and reduced lengths of stay, the authors say, writing in the March issue of Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation.

Patients receiving therapy account for more than seventy percent ( 70% of total skilled costs, according to the report.

Account Management Complicated By New Banking Rules

Every Account Holder Should Be Aware of Changes

Americans write about 40 billion paper checks each year. In addition, for the first time that number recently was eclipsed by the annual number of automated transactions involving checking accounts. Checking account transactions are such a widespread part of our lives that consumers of banking services are well advised to become acquainted with major changes affecting banking laws. Federal legislation called the Check Clearing for the 21st Century Act, or "Check 21" for short, went into effect on October 28, 2004.

Check 21 will allow financial institutions to process "substitute" checks--high-quality paper reproductions created from electronic images of both sides of an original check. In time, check processing will be faster, and this is where there will be ramifications for check writers and depositors.

While it has always been prudent to have enough money in your account to cover a check the moment you write it, who has not used the lag time in check processing to make a necessary deposit? That will soon become a riskier strategy as electronic check processing becomes more prevalent. It will also be more important than ever to keep checkbooks up to date, especially bearing in mind deductions for ATM withdrawals, bank fees, and debit-card purchases.

The risk is merely financial if you unintentionally "bounce" a check from time to time. But, if you have come to rely upon the float, and particularly if you use the float from two different accounts, you may find your problem is criminal in nature. The increased speed with which banks process checks may mean more charges of check "kiting." Check kiting is among the most common, and most dangerous, forms of check fraud foisted upon financial institutions. A kite is a form of shell game using at least two accounts at separate financial institutions. The common practice of allowing depositors to have immediate use of uncollected funds facilitates the scheme. Indeed, Regulation CC mandates early access to deposited funds. In the typical scheme, an NSF check is written by on one account and then deposited into an account at another institution. A check drawn on the second account is then used to cover the resulting overdraft on the first account. Taking advantage of the float caused by normal delays in the collection system, the wrongdoer creates fictional balances in each account and uses these balances to obtain cash advances.

Asset Protection Entities Suffer New Assaults

Reverse Piercing of Corporate Veil Reaches Entity Assets

Generally, business entities such as corporations or limited partnerships are legally separate and distinct from the shareholders and members of such entities. When justice requires, however, courts have ignored the separation of the business and the individual and have allowed a creditor of the business to satisfy the debt from the assets of an individual closely connected to the business. This concept is known as "piercing the corporate veil."

A variation on the idea, called "reverse piercing of the corporate veil," allows someone to reach the assets of the business entity to satisfy a claim or judgment obtained against a corporate insider. In both instances, a court disregards the normal protections given to a business structure in order to prevent abuses of that structure.

National Groups Acknowledge Need for Guardianship Reform

Advocacy Groups Meet To Discuss Reform

 Leading advocacy groups for seniors are meeting this week to continue the process of addressing guardianship reform and implementation. Hundreds of thousands of Americans are under the care of a guardianship system in desperate need of repair, according to a report from Washington’s General Accountability Office (GAO). The National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys (NAELA), along with other national groups, will address the surprising nationwide deficiencies in the guardianship system across the United States.

NAELA, The National College of Probate Judges (NCPJ) and the National Guardianship Association (NGA) are convening a Joint Conference with a Wingspan Guardianship Implementation Session at The Broadmoor in Colorado Springs. The three groups will discuss guardianship issues during the Conference that brings together guardians, elder law attorneys, case managers, social workers, healthcare professionals and state judges from around the country.

We would all like to think that we will be protected by ethical professionals or loving family members if we are ever faced with the need for guardianship as we age. The truth is that in many states across the country little is being done to ensure the necessary funding, training, accountability and monitoring of guardians that could prevent the horrific abuse that continues to occur against our older Americans. This Conference and Session is another step towards a remedy.

Hospice Costs Medicare Less Notwithstanding that Hospice Patients Live Longer

McKnight's reports that patients enrolled in hospice care cost Medicare less, according to the study "Medicare Cost in Matched Hospice and Non-Hospice Cohorts" published in the September 2004 issue of the Journal of Pain and Symptom Management.  Medicare savings ranged from $1,115 for patients diagnosed with rectal cancer to $8,879 for patients with congestive heart failure. 

The study also revealed that the hospice patients on average live longer than similar patients who are not under hospice care. The prolonged life spans ranged from 20 days for those patients with a diagnosis of gallbladder cancer to 69 days for those with breast cancer.

Conducted to identify cost differences between patients who do and do not receive Medicare-paid hospice care, the study examined patients with 16 of the most common terminal diagnoses. The report is significant because hospice care analysis has been debated since the Medicare Hospice Benefit was introduced in 1982, according to PR Newswire. 

Almost 30 percent of Medicare payments go to patients at the end of their lives, said J. Donald Schumacher, president and CEO of the National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization, the organization that commissioned the study.