We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 165

Crummey withdrawal notices recommended practices
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • September 10 2012

Under current tax law, an individual is entitled to make gifts of up to $13,000 per donee per year without being subject to gift tax


2016 Estate, Gift and GST Tax Update: What This Means for Your Current Will, Revocable Trust and Estate Plan
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • December 14 2015

As we previously reported, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (the "Act") made the following permanent: (1) the reunification of the estate and


Wealth Management Update - February 217
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • February 2 2017

The February 7520 rate for use with estate planning techniques such as CRTs, CLTs, QPRTs and GRATs is 2.6, up 0.2 from January. The February


Tax Court holds that trusteebeneficiary's power to invade trust principal for her "welfare" is limited by an ascertainable standard and trust principal not includible in her estate under IRC 2041(b)(1)(a) estate of Ann R. Chancellor, et al. v. Commiss
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • September 14 2011

Frequently, trust agreements ensure that the principal invasion power held by a trustee who is also a beneficiary is limited to distributions for the beneficiary's "health, education, maintenance and support"


Proposed Treas. Reg. 1.67-4
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • November 15 2011

Treasury has issued new proposed Regulations in connection with what costs incurred by estates or non-grantor trusts are subject to the 2 floor for miscellaneous deductions under I.R.C. 67(a


Estate of Giovacchini v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo 2013-27
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • March 8 2013

The Tax Court redetermined values for estate and gift tax purposes of a large parcel of more than 2,500 acres of land near Lake Tahoe, California


Chief Counsel Advice Memorandum 201208026 (9282011)
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • April 2 2012

In a recently released Memorandum, the IRS Office of Chief Counsel concludes that contributions made by Settlors to a discretionary trust for their descendants were taxable gifts, since (1) the Settlors had not retained any rights that would make the gifts incomplete and (2) the withdrawal powers granted to the beneficiaries were unenforceable in state court and thus illusory


Homestead exemption allowed for separated (but not divorced) taxpayer
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • December 6 2010

In Wells v. Haldeos, Fla. Dist. Ct. App., 2nd Dist., Dkt. No. 2D09-4250 (10222010), an appeal by the property appraiser of Pasco County, Florida of a final judgment in favor of the taxpayer, the Florida District Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit held that a separated (but not divorced) taxpayer was eligible to receive a homestead exemption for his property in Florida despite the fact that his wife receives a residency-based property tax exemption on a separate property in New York


IRS issues an inconsistent ruling on whether a grantor trust can hold an IRA - Priv. Ltr. Rul. 201117042 (April 29, 2011)
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • July 5 2011

In 2006, the IRS issued Private Letter Ruling 200620025 in which the IRS approved of the transfer of an Inherited IRA to a special needs trust (“SNT”) that was a grantor trust for income tax purposes


Estate not entitled to discount the value of three marital trusts for claims by ESOP members against the marital trusts’ assets Estate of Foster v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo 2011-95 (4282011)
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • July 5 2011

In Foster, the Tax Court considered the following: (1) whether an estate was entitled to discount the value of assets in three marital trusts due to the potential for litigation; and (2) whether assets in the marital trusts could be discounted for lack of control over and lack of marketability of the marital trusts’ assets