Do you have an Estate Plan?

What You Should Know About Revocable Living Trusts
by Tom Bouman

1. What is a Revocable Living Trust?

A Revocable Living Trust is a popular alternative to the traditional Will as the main component of an estate plan. The Revocable Living Trust is best known as a probate avoidance tool. Assets titled in the name of a Revocable Living Trust bypass the court-supervised probate process upon the death of their owner.

A fully-funded Revocable Living Trust has other potential benefits including (1) comprehensive incapacity protection; (2) better coordination of assets with life insurance and retirement accounts; (3) ability to bifurcate ownership from management; (4) heightened privacy; and (5) opportunity for alternative dispute resolution.

There are many types of trusts. A revocable trust can be changed, or even cancelled, as opposed to an irrevocable trust that cannot. A living trust is established during the owner’s lifetime, as opposed to a testamentary trust established after the owner’s death.

2. How does a Revocable Living Trust work?

A trust is established with at least one Trustor, Trustee, and Beneficiary. The Trustor is the person who establishes the trust. The Trustee manages the assets of the trust for benefit of the Beneficiary. Most Revocable Living Trusts will initially name the Trustor as both Trustee and Beneficiary.

A Revocable Living Trust is like a bowl of candy. If you establish a trust, you are choosing to hold your candy (assets) in a bowl, rather than in your hand. If you become incapacitated or resign as Trustee, your bowl will be given to the successor Trustee, who will distribute the candy to you as needed. After your death, the successor Trustee will take enough candy from the bowl to pay debts and expenses, and then distribute the remaining candy to the persons or charities named in the trust document.

A Revocable Living Trust must be fully-funded to achieve its objectives. This means that you will need to re-title ownership of your personal assets (e.g., real estate, CDs, bonds, brokerage accounts) into the name of your trust.

The Revocable Living Trust is tax neutral during the lifetime of the Trustor. Any taxable income earned by assets of the trust is reported on the Trustor’s personal 1041 tax return.

3. Who should have a Revocable Living Trust?

Many people mistakenly assume that the Revocable Living Trust is only for the very wealthy. However, in Arizona, a probate action is required whenever someone dies with more than $75,000 of equity in real estate or more than $50,000 in personal property. Anyone with assets titled in personal name valued higher than these amounts should consider the potential benefits of a Revocable Living Trust versus the costs of establishing one.

The best candidates for a Revocable Living Trust are:

· Persons owning real property in more than one state.
· Persons wishing to disinherit a potential beneficiary, or when privacy is important.
· Small business owners, especially if operations would continue after the owner’s death.
· Married persons with children from a prior relationship.

4. How is a Revocable Living Trust superior to a Financial Power of Attorney?

If a Trustor has an extended incapacity, a fully-funded Revocable Living Trust is more reliable than a Financial Power of Attorney. When incapacity strikes, the “disability trustee” can quickly take control of the trust assets without any court involvement. The same sense of confidence cannot be placed in a Financial Power of Attorney because third parties are often reluctant to rely on them. Financial institutions may assert that the Power of Attorney is “stale” or refuse to accept any document that was not pre-approved or unique to that institution. As many would attest from experience, even an attorney’s form is not always honored. A well-drafted trust document will provide clear provisions establishing the standard under which a successor Trustee can act on behalf of a trust.

5. How much does a Revocable Living Trust cost?

A Trust-based estate plan is usually two or three times more expensive than a Will-based estate plan, due to the increased value and benefits it provides. Estate planning attorneys in Arizona typically charge $1,500 to $4,000 for a Trust-based estate plan. The exact amount will depend on many factors, including whether the estate plan incorporates estate tax savings and inheritance protection features.


About the Author
Thomas J. Bouman provides legal counsel in the areas of estate planning, estate settlement, and asset protection. He brings a highly systematic approach to the practice of law, which is critically important when wading through the complex, and often bizarre, legal requirements associated with estate and trust law. Mr. Bouman is author of the Arizona Estate Administration Answer Book and a prominent member of Wealth Counsel, LLC, the nation’s premiere organization of estate planning attorneys.

---

Thomas J. Bouman
Attorney - Author - Speaker

www.TomBoumanLaw.com
Book an Appointment online 24/7
or call during business hours

(520) 546-3558

"You do not become wealthy on the money you work for. It is the money that works for you that makes the difference."

Wrongful Discharge?

In a right to work state like Arizona, can an employee ever be successful in bringing a claim for wrongful termination? I often receive inquiries from people who believe they were wronfully fired for "blowing the whistle" for things like perceived HIPAA and workplace safety violations.

Unless otherwise limited (usually by way of an employment contract), an employee may be discharged at any time for any reason-or no reason at all.

The Arizona Employment Protection Act (AEPA) is the only remedy for private sector employees against wrongful termination. The statute protects employees from discharges that are contrary to public policy, including retaliation against whistleblowers.

Here's a link to a very helpful website that explains more: Arizona Whistleblower Protections.

Visit my website for more information about contacting me for your Arizona Employment Lawyer needs.

Unpaid Wage Claims

Met today with two clients regarding unpaid wage claims. Employers--be careful to follow the AZ statute, 3X damages if you don't.

www.sbantalaw.com

New Supreme Court Religious Freedom Ruling

In an employment discrimination case the Supreme Court ruled that "the authority to select and control who will minister to the faithful is the church's alone." That would seem obvious to most reasonable people but the Court's ruling was a reversal of a 6th Circuit opinion. Read the opinion here:

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-553.pdf

If you have an employment or business related question, go to my website or call me at 480-707-2835.

At Will...or Not?

If you are an employer, you probably think that your employees work for you on an "at will" basis. In other words, either you or the employee can terminate the relationship for any lawful reason or for no reason at all.

Careless language in your employee handbook, however, can change the "at will" relationship and prove very costly for you. In Roberson v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 202 Ariz. 286, 44 P.3d 164 (Ariz. App., 2002) the court held the following (all citations omitted):

¶ 15 Generally, an employment contract of indefinite duration is terminable at will. As such, either party may terminate the contract at any time for good cause or no cause without incurring any liability. Id. at 375, 710 P.2d at 1030. It is undisputed that Roberson was not hired for a specific term, thus giving rise to a rebuttable presumption that his employment was terminable at will. See id. at 381, 710 P.2d at 1036.

¶ 16 Because an at-will employment relationship is contractual, however, "the parties are free to create a different relationship beyond one at will `and define the parameters of that relationship, based upon the totality of their statements and actions.'" Limitations on the right of the employer or employee to terminate the employment relationship can be either express or implied. An implied-in-fact contract term is one that is inferred from the statements or conduct of the parties and becomes as enforceable as an express term.

¶ 17 In Arizona, implied-in-fact terms may be found in an employer's policy statements regarding job security or employee disciplinary procedures, such as those contained in personnel manuals or memoranda. Whether there is a promise of job security or certain disciplinary procedures implied-in-fact by an employer through its personnel manual or otherwise is a question of fact. ("Evidence relevant to this factual decision includes the language used in the personnel manual as well as the employer's course of conduct and oral representations regarding it.")

¶ 18 Not all employer policy statements, however, create contractual promises. "A statement is contractual only if it discloses `a promissory intent or [is] one that the employee could reasonably conclude constituted a commitment by the employer.'" "An implied-in-fact contract term is formed when `a reasonable person could conclude that both parties intended that the employer's (or the employee's) right to terminate the employment relationship at-will had been limited.'" Disclaimers in personnel manuals that clearly and conspicuously tell employees that the manual is not part of the employment contract and that their jobs are terminable at will "instill no reasonable expectations of job security and do not give employees any reason to rely on representations in the manual."

¶ 19 The inclusion of disclaiming language in a personnel manual, however, may not always insulate the employer from liability. For example, contrary oral or written assurances made at a hiring interview or during employment may constitute an implied contract, altering the at-will relationship. ("Unless an employee handbook specifically negates any intention on the part of the employer to have it become a part of the employment contract, a court may conclude from a review of the employee handbook that a question of fact is created regarding whether the handbook was intended by the parties to impliedly express a term of the employment agreement.").

If you'd like a review of your employee handbooks to ensure that they do not unwittingly create an implied contract of employment, visit my website at www.sbantalaw.com, or call me at 480-707-2835.

Non-Compete Agreements

To be enforceable under Arizona law, a non-compete agreement must have both a time and geographical limitation. Both limitations must be reasonable. For time this means no longer than necessary to protect an employer's legitimate business interests. Visit my website at www.sbantalaw.com and contact me to learn how to craft non-compete agreements and other restrictive covenants that courts will enforce. Follow me on Twitter at @AZBizAtty