The Tom Clancy Estate has been valued, based on probate court filings, at $82 million. It includes a $65 million ownership stake in the Baltimore Orioles, a rare, working World War II tank, a $7 million mansion overlooking the Chesapeake Bay, and more than $10 million in business interests based on his works.Click here to read the rest of this interesting article.
Clancy left his mansion and another property to Alexandra, along with a Ritz-Carlton condo owned jointly by the married couple -- plus any other joint bank or investment accounts (which do not pass through probate and would not be public record).
The famed author wanted the rest of his estate divided between a series of trusts he created. His will specifies that one-third go to a trust for his wife, another one-third to a family trust (benefiting his wife and all of his children), and a final set of trusts for the four adult children from his first marriage, as well as grandchildren.
He also left a portion of the residue of his estate (it's unclear how much) to the Hopkins's Wilmer Eye Institute, which was founded based on a $2 million donation Clancy made in 2005, and where Clancy was treated for an eye disease.
Seems like he had his estate well planned, right? Unfortunately, his estate planning was not as thorough or well-thought-out as his meticulously-detailed novels.
The blog reports information of interest to seniors, their families, and caregivers. Recurrent themes are asset and decision-making protection, and aging-in-place planning.
Wednesday, October 8, 2014
Tom Clancy Estate In Family Fight Due To Poor Estate Planning
The following is an excerpt from an article entitled, " Tom Clancy Estate In Family Fight Due To Poor Estate Planning," published at the Probate Lawyer Blog:
Tuesday, October 7, 2014
Elderly Couple May Be Responsible for Adult Son's Unpaid Medical Bills
An elderly Pennsylvania husband and wife are being asked to pay their deceased adult son's medical bills under a law making family members responsible for a loved one's unpaid bills. The case is a reminder that such “filial responsibility” laws may go both ways – requiring parents to pay the debts of adult children as well as the children to pay for their parents'. For those involved in estate and retirement planning, the case underscores just how clueless policymakers are to the challenges of proper planning. The financial risk of filial responsibility debt adds yet another layer of uncertainty, and non-quantifiable risk to planning considerations. For the well-informed senior, asset protection planning is the order of the day, since only asset protection planning will mute the blow of unexpected financial filial responsibility. But, the vast majority of ill-informed seniors will continue to accept too much risk for too long in their retirement plans in order to reach an ever receding horizon represented by the amount of money necessary to live comfortably safe from risk. This species of planning has brought current financial and retirement planning to the crisis point at which most seniors find themselves today.
Alternately, seniors and their children, recognizing the seemingly insurmountable hurdles of these risks will simply eschew savings and financial planning- living month-to-month, year-to-year as best they can, relying upon the harsh and dangerous hand of government benefits as their safety net. Many will find the benefits they imagined to be illusory. Others will find that the benefits come at a cost- sacrifice of independence, quality of care, quality of life, and control. Never before in history have so many risked so much for so little.
Peg and Bob Mohn's son died at age 47, leaving unpaid medical bills. Now according to an article in The Morning Call, debt collectors are trying to dun the Mohns using an archaic state law that was not enforced until recently. Pennsylvania is one of at least twenty-eight (28) states that currently have filial responsibility laws. These laws usually make adult children responsible for their parents’ care if their parents can't afford to take care of themselves, but some of the laws also make parents responsible for their childrens' care. Filial responsibility is the law in the State of Ohio, although like Pennsylvania a few years ago, the law was rarely enforced.
Filial responsibility laws, which originated before the advent of the modern public support system, have been rarely enforced since these public support systems were enacted. States and health care providers have been clamoring for states to begin enforcing the laws in order to recover medical expenses, including Medicaid payments. In May 2012, a Pennsylvania court found an adult son liable for his mother's $93,000 nursing home bill under the state's filial responsibility law.
According to attorney Stanley Vasiliadis who is quoted in the Morning Call article, these laws provide additional incentive for people to plan their estates. Without proper planning, children could be on the hook for their parents' nursing home bills, and vice versa.
States with filial responsibility laws include: Alaska, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, and West Virginia. Two states, Idaho and New Hampshire, recently repealed their filial responsibility laws, but elder law attorneys in Pennsylvania haven’t made much headway in convincing their legislators to repeal.
These laws differ from state to state. If you live in a state that still has such a law on the books, check with your attorney to find out how you can protect yourself from a child or parent’s debts.
For more information on filial responsibility laws, go here.
Monday, October 6, 2014
Annual Exclusion Gifts Are Counted When Determining Medicaid Eligibility
Many people believe that if they give away an amount equal to the annual gift tax exclusion – currently $14,000 to any one individual – this gift will be exempted from Medicaid’s five-year look-back at transfers that could trigger a waiting period for benefits. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The gift tax exclusion is an IRS rule. Any person who gives away $14,000 (in 2014) or less to any one individual does not have to report the gift or gifts to the IRS. If you give away more than $14,000 to any one person (other than your spouse), you will have to file a gift tax return. However, this does not necessarily mean you’ll pay a gift tax. You’ll only have to pay a tax if your reportable gifts total more than $5.34 million (2014 figure) during your lifetime.
This IRS rule has nothing to do with Medicaid’s asset transfer rules. While the $14,000 that you gave to your grandchild this year will be exempt from any gift tax, Medicaid will still count it as a transfer that could make you ineligible for nursing home benefits for a certain amount of time should you apply for them within the next five years. You may be able to argue that the gift was not made to qualify you for Medicaid, but proving that is an uphill battle.
If there is a chance you will need Medicaid coverage of long-term care in the foreseeable future, see your elder law attorney before starting a gifting plan.
Wednesday, October 1, 2014
Marriage of Couple in Their Mid-90s Is Challenged by Wife's Co-Guardian
Many people are aware that, in many states, a guardian can file for dissolution of a marriage of a ward from the spouse's ward. See, e.g., Illinois Permits Guardian Authority to Petition for Termination of a Ward's Marriage. It seems that the guardian's authority includes contesting a marriage each persona voluntarily entered into. Edith Hill and Eddie Harrison married after being companions for 10 years, but the marriage is being questioned because Hill had been declared incompetent several years ago.
Hill, who is 96, and Harrison, who is 95, met in line for lottery tickets more than 10 years ago and married earlier this year, according to the Associated Press. The marriage has been challenged, however, because Hill is under guardianship. Hill's daughter, Rebecca Wright, serves as Hill's co-guardian along with another daughter, Patricia Barber. Wright supports the marriage and supposedly allowed it to take place without Barber's knowledge.
After ruling that the marriage may not be legally binding, a Virginia judge ordered an investigation. The judge removed Wright and Barber as guardians and appointed an independent lawyer to determine whether the marriage is in Hill's best interest. Barber is concerned that the marriage may affect the distribution of Hill's estate, which totals $475,000. One possible solution being discussed is a postnuptial agreement preventing Harrison from inheriting Hill's estate.
For more information about the couple’s possibly invalid marriage, click here.
Sunday, September 28, 2014
Achieving a Better Life Experience (ABLE) Act Would Create Tax-free Accounts for the Disabled
![]() |
| Sara Wolff (center) is calling on Congress to allow disabled Americans to save and still receive benefits like Social Security Disability Insurance payments and Medicaid. |
Many families struggle with planning for the future of a child with severe disabilities. While they are able to save for the educational needs of their other children through “529” college tuition plans, these plans do not fit well the needs of a child with severe disabilities. The disabled child may, now, or in adulthood, need the long term services and supports of the Medicaid program and/or the income assistance of the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program. Since the child may live for many decades beyond the ability of the parents to supplement the services they receive through Medicaid, most parents recognize the need for saving and securing funds for the child. Others want to ensure the financial security of a disabled child who has a level of disability required for Medicaid eligibility, but for now, is managing to function without the use of those benefits. Still others want to ensure that their family member can exercise control over the funds in the account without endangering the Medicaid and SSI benefits on which they may rely.
Although Supplemental Needs Trusts and/or Wholly Discretionary Trusts for Special Needs offer a savings solution, many families have found it too expensive to establish a trust which meets the requirements of the Medicaid and SSI programs. While many attorneys will prepare these for reduced fees for those in need, it is not uncommon to pay five to ten thousand dollars for these solutions. The ABLE Act (S.313 / H.R.647) would give individuals with disabilities and their families access to accounts that would allow individual choice and control while protecting eligibility for Medicaid, SSI, and other important federal benefits for people with disabilities.
The Senate Finance subcommittee on taxation and IRS oversight may have never heard testimony from someone quite like Sara Wolff. Ms. Wolff, 31, was born with Down syndrome, but that hasn’t stopped her from becoming involved in politics. She testified before the subcommittee on the Achieving a Better Life Experience (ABLE) Act, which would create tax-free savings accounts for those with disabilities. Earlier this year, she wrote a change.org petition calling on Congress to pass the ABLE Act. The petition garnered more than 250,000 online signatures.
“Just because I have Down syndrome, that shouldn’t hold me back from achieving my full potential in life,” Ms. Wolff of Moscow, Pa., said in a statement. “I can work a full-time job, be a productive member of society, and pay taxes – but because of outdated laws placed on individuals with disabilities, we hold people like me back in life.”
Ms Wolf is also a board member of the National Down Syndrome Society (NDSS), which is championing the bipartisan legislation. The Senate bill is sponsored by Sen. Robert Casey, Pennsylvania Democrat, and Sen. Richard Burr, North Carolina Republican. Support for the House bill is being led by Rep. Ander Crenshaw, Florida Republican; Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Washington Republican; Rep. Pete Sessions, Texas Republican; and Rep. Chris Van Hollen, Maryland Democrat.
“The bill aims to ease financial strains faced by individuals with disabilities by making tax-free savings accounts available to cover qualified expenses such as education, housing and transportation,” said an NDSS statement.
Ms. McMorris Rodgers, whose seven-year-old son Cole has Down syndrome, called on Congress to “advance this crucial legislation.” “As the mom of a son with Down syndrome, I see firsthand how federal policies limit—not expand— opportunities for those with disabilities. And the ABLE Act will change that,” said Ms. McMorris Rodgers in a statement. “It will make sure that Cole — and the millions like him who have special needs — will be able to save for their futures and reach their full potential.”
The ABLE Act has 74 Senate co-sponsors, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and GOP Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. “Passing this landmark legislation will go a long way to help people with Down syndrome and other disabilities realize and achieve their own hopes, dreams and aspirations,” NDSS Vice President of Advocacy and Affiliate Relations Sara Hart Weir said in a statement.
Members of the U.S. Senate said Friday, September 26th, that they have an agreement that will allow the Achieving a Better Life Experience, or ABLE, Act to proceed to the full Congress. The bill’s chief sponsors and leaders of the Senate’s Committee on Finance said in a joint statement that they expect the legislation to be considered when Congress returns to Washington in November.
Under the measure, people with disabilities would be able to create special accounts at any financial institution where they could deposit up to $14,000 annually. The ABLE accounts could accrue up to $100,000 in savings without risking an individual’s eligibility for government benefits like Social Security. What’s more, Medicaid coverage could be retained no matter how much money is deposited in the proposed accounts.
Modeled after the popular 529 college savings plans, funds deposited in ABLE accounts could be used to pay for education, health care, transportation, housing and other expenses. Interest earned on savings within the accounts would be tax-free.
The ABLE Act has been under consideration in Congress since 2006. It is time that this proposal was enacted into law.
If you want to follow this legislation, Autism Speaks will do that for you by clicking here.
The National Disability Institute has useful information here.
You can sign Sara's petition here.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)

