If you thought the so-called federal
"death tax" is dying, you're wrong. It may slowly vanish over the next
few years, but without Congressional action, the estate tax will spring
back to full force in 2011.
Here's what's happening with
the federal estate tax: Over an eight-year period the estate tax is
being gradually reduced, both by a reduction in the top tax rate and by
increasing the exemption levels. In 2004, the top federal estate tax
rate dropped from a high of 55 in 2001 to 48 percent. Also, in 2004 the
federal estate tax only applies to estates of $1.5 million or more.
Federal Estate Tax Repeal Schedule |
Year |
Tax Rate |
Exemption Level |
|
50% |
$1 million |
2003 |
49% |
$1 million |
2004 |
48% |
$1.5 million |
2005 |
47% |
$1.5 million |
2006 |
46% |
$2 million |
2007 |
45% |
$2 million |
2008 |
45% |
$2 million |
2009 |
45% |
$3.5 million |
2010 |
Tax Repealed |
Tax Repealed |
The
estate tax rate will continue to be reduced by 1 percent per year until
it reaches 45 percent in 2007. Meanwhile, the exemption levels will
also continue to increase — to $2 million in 2006, and $3.5 million in
2009.
In
2010, the estate tax will be completely repealed, but heirs will be
subject to capital gains taxes on any of their inheritance that they
sell. Furthermore, according to Joel Friedman, a senior fellow at the
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities — a Washington, D.C., think tank
— capital assets, such as property, stocks, and bonds, are currently
assessed the capital gains tax only on value gained after the assets
are inherited. Under the new system, the tax would be based on the
value gained since the original purchase.
Under the old tax
rules, if your father bought a stock for $10 and you inherited it when
it was worth $100, and sold it at $150, you'd pay capital gains taxes
on the $50 rise in value that occurred while you owned it, says
Friedman.
It wouldn't matter to the taxman how much your
father had paid for it; all that would be important was how much it had
gone up since you owned it. "However, under the new system you would
have to pay capital gains tax on the total $140 the stock had gained,"
says Friedman.
According to Friedman, this new law has the potential to make estate planning and record keeping even more complicated.
Further
muddying the waters is an exemption clause in the tax legislation.
According to Morgan Stanley Dean Witter, this change in the capital
gains tax will be partially offset by an exemption of up to $1.3
million per individual, with an additional $3 million exemption for
transfers to a spouse. Assets that qualify for these exemptions would
have their base value for tax purposes "stepped up" to the value at the
time of inheritance, as under the current system.
| "It's essentially a 'full employment act' for financial advisors. This new law makes the tax code so complicated that there's no way an individual can understand it." |
Even
if it does return, the estate tax won't be as strong as it was. The
estate tax now doesn't kick in on estates worth less than $1.5 million.
While that exemption will rise in the following years, it drops back to
$1 million in 2011. The drop in the estate tax rate, however, will
disappear completely in 2011, and inheritance will be once again taxed
at 55 percent.
The problem is that if the "death tax" stays
dead, it will make estate planning much more difficult, according to
Dennis Fitzpatrick, a director of advance planning for Northwestern
Mutual Insurance Co.
"It's essentially a 'full employment
act' for financial advisors," says Fitzpatrick. "This new law makes the
tax code so complicated that there's no way an individual can
understand it."
In a report co-authored by Friedman for the
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, an argument is made for a
permanent and simplified solution to estate taxes. "Retaining the
estate tax with a high exemption level and lower top rate, would likely
be a more effective way to stabilize long-term planning, not only
because it is a more affordable policy in the long run and thus is less
likely to be altered in subsequent years, but also because repeal
raises serious administrative issues."
It's really too early to tell. If you're wondering whether you've wasted money on a survivorship, or "second-to-die," life insurance
policy that you bought to pay estate taxes, you probably haven't.
According to Fitzpatrick, flexibility in your financial planning is
going to be the key.
"Because of the complexity of the law,
the keys to estate planning are going to be flexibility and control,"
says Fitzpatrick. "By and large, life insurance is a very flexible product."
Not
only are there still estate taxes at the state level to consider, but
depending on which year you die, the laws at that time, and the value
of your estate, your beneficiaries may need the life insurance benefit.
In these cases, according to Fitzpatrick, it's safest to keep the life
insurance policy as an added safety net.
| If you have a large or complicated estate, you may need to revise your estate planning every year. |
Furthermore,
a benefit is still a benefit, so even if your beneficiaries don't need
the survivorship policy to pay estate taxes, the death benefit still
goes to them.
"If you've bought a policy recently, the
worst you've done is get some death benefits you may not have needed,"
says Fitzpatrick.
At the same time, consider whether a new
survivorship life insurance policy is the right product for you at this
time. Survivorship life insurance policies tend to be cheaper per
thousand dollars of benefit and more easily obtained than traditional
life insurance policies. While large estates will almost certainly
still end up paying some taxes, you may want to hold off on a new
policy until the future of federal estate tax law is more certain.
According
to Fitzpatrick, precise planning will be crucial. With the laws
changing every year, and the uncertainty about what will happen in
2011, the owner of a large or complicated estate may need to revise his
or her estate plan every year, he says.
|