San Diego Elder Law Center E-NewsServing the legal needs of San Diego's elder and disabled communities, their families and caregivers |
|||
In This Issue |
San Diego's PREMIER Law Firm for the legal needs of our
|
||
We invite you to come and visit us at the Successful Aging Expo on February 11 - 12, 2012 at the Town & Country Resort & Convention Center in Mission Valley, San Diego, 92108. Phiilip Lindsley and staff will be there to share more about San Diego Elder Law Center and the services we provide. Economists Say That Tightening Medicaid Rules Would Barely Increase Demand for Private InsuranceIt is sometimes claimed that reducing the amount of assets an individual can keep while qualifying for Medicaid would increase the purchase of private long-term care insurance coverage. Now, two professors of economics have estimated that tightening Medicaid asset rules would do little to encourage the purchase of long-term care insurance policies. Although Medicaid recipients may keep only about $2,000 in assets in most states, their spouses may retain between $22,728 and $113,640, depending on their particular state. The minimum and maximum are determined by federal law but individual states’ limits may set their own limits within these parameters. In an article published in the Fall 2011 issue of theJournal of Economic Perspectives, Jeffrey R. Brown of the University of Illinois and Amy Finkelstein of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology estimate that a $10,000 decrease in the level of assets an individual and their spouse can keep while qualifying for Medicaid would increase private long-term care insurance coverage by 1.1 percentage points. “To put this in perspective,” they write, “if every state in the country moved from their current Medicaid asset eligibility requirements to the most stringent Medicaid eligibility requirements allowed by federal law, this would decrease average household assets protected from Medicaid by about $25,000. This, in turn, would increase the demand for private long-term care insurance by only 2.7 percentage points. While this represents a large increase in insurance coverage relative to the baseline ownership rate, the vast majority of households would still find it unattractive to purchase private insurance.” Overall, Brown and Finkelstein are pessimistic about the prospects for encouraging more Americans to buy long-term care insurance unless Medicaid is completely restructured or done away with altogether. They note that long-term care insurance is a poor deal, particularly for men, who get back only about 33 cents on the premium dollar they spend, and that for a 65-year-old man of average wealth, 60 percent of the private insurance benefits would have been paid by Medicaid. But the authors say that even if the implicit Medicaid “tax” on long-term care insurance were eliminated, “other factors could still prevent the market for long-term care insurance from developing.” These factors include the availability of informal insurance provided by family members, the liquid assets in the home serving as a “buffer stock of assets,” and the difficulty many individuals have in “making decisions about long-term, probabilistic outcomes.” To read the article, “Insuring Long-Term Care inSave the United States,” click here. For a commentary on the article inForbes magazine, click here. Giving Your Home to Your Children Can Have Tax ConsequencesMany people wonder if it is a good idea to give their home to their children. While it is possible to do this, giving away a house can have major tax consequences, among other results. When you give anyone property valued at more than $13,000 in any one year, you have to file a gift tax form. Also, under current law you can gift a total of $5 million over your lifetime without incurring a gift tax. If your residence is worth less than $5 million, you likely won't have to pay any gift taxes, but you will still have to file a gift tax form. (And Congress may change the gift tax exemption, which is now scheduled to revert to $1 million at the end of 2012 unless Congress acts.) While you may not have to pay gift taxes on the gift, if your children sell the house right away, they may be facing steep taxes. The reason is that when you give away your property, the tax basis (or the original cost) of the property for the giver becomes the tax basis for the recipient. For example, suppose you bought the house years ago for $150,000 and it is now worth $350,000. If you give your house to your children, the tax basis will be $150,000. If the children sell the house, they will have to pay capital gains taxes on the difference between $150,000 and the selling price. The only way for your children to avoid the taxes is for them to live in the house for at least two years before selling it. In that case, they can exclude up to $250,000 ($500,000 for a couple) of their capital gains from taxes. Inherited property does not face the same taxes as gifted property. If the children were to inherit the property, the property’s tax basis would be "stepped up," which means the basis would be the current value of the property. However, the home will remain in your estate, which may have estate tax consequences. Beyond the tax consequences, gifting a house to children can affect your eligibility for Medicaid coverage of long-term care. There are other options for giving your house to your children, including putting it in a trust or selling it to them. Before you give away your home, consult an elder law attorney who can advise you on the best method for passing on your home. |
|||
|
You received this email because you made your email address publicly available for the purpose of receiving communications regarding business services. This email is a business communication or advertisement. Not interested any more? |
|||

Philip P. Lindsley, CELA*, CLS**
*Certified Elder Law Attorney
**Certified Legal Specialist, Estate Planning, Trust and Probate
The State Bar of California
Board of Legal Specialization
4364 Bonita Road, PMB 461
Bonita, California 91902
(619) 235-4357



