Philip Seymour Hoffman, famous actor and director, died in February 2014 at the age of 46. A copy of his will was recently released.
There are a few interesting aspects of Hoffman’s will.
Hoffman was survived by three children under the age of 12. His will gives everything to his partner/long-time girlfriend, Marianne O’Donnell, who is also the mother of his three children. The media seems to be suggesting that he slighted his kids by doing so. However, Hoffman has been quoted as saying that he did not want his children to become trust fund kids. Also, the media has glossed over the fact that the will directs that anything O’Donnell disclaims passes to a trust for their son. Accordingly, there is a chance that the trust for their son would be funded, although it is entirely up to O’Donnell whether she disclaims.
Hoffman’s will was executed in 2004 before his youngest two children were born. The will refers to Hoffman’s oldest child by name and does not have any language regarding after-born children. If the will was governed by Colorado law (instead of New York law), the after-born children would be included and would receive a share equal to that of Hoffman’s oldest child under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 15-11-302. This issue may not come up since there is no indication that O’Donnell plans to disclaim any of the property, which is the only circumstance under which the children would receive something.
Hoffman’s estate is estimated to be worth $35 million and a large portion of that will be paid to the IRS for federal estate tax (an estimated $15 million). If Hoffman and O’Donnell had been married, the entire amount would have passed to her free of estate tax under the unlimited marital deduction. While some couples choose not to get married for various reasons, marriage would have provided a significant tax advantage in an estate of this size.
Finally, the will states that it is Hoffman’s strong desire, and not direction, that his son be raised and reside in or near Manhattan, Chicago or San Francisco. The will goes on to state that if his son cannot reside in any of these cities, he requests that his son visit these cities at least twice a year. The purpose of this request is so that his son would be exposed to culture, arts and architecture. While clauses like this may not be legally enforceable, they do provide insight into the testator’s intent.