Something is perking in Washington that could end up costing many people a lot of money that they weren’t expecting to spend. If you own assets that have appreciated in value, this could be you.
As I write this article news outlets are running stories regarding changes to capital gains that will affect “the wealthy” (see this in the Wall Street Journal or this at CNN as examples). As I will explain, this will have an impact on many of my clients who do not consider themselves at all wealthy.
First, either tell yourself you know about the tax basis rules and how they relate to capital gains taxes. If you can’t do that, take a few minutes to go back and read my article on capital gains basics.
Sen. Chris Van Hollen is circulating for comment a bill that would cause immediate capital gains taxation upon gifting and at death. Rep. Bill Pascrell has introduced a very similar bill in the House. The Biden administration backs the proposals. Both bills incorporate ideas that have been tossed around for years. The Senate version is called the “Sensible Taxation and Equity Act of 2021” or “STEP Act.”
The Senate version would be retroactively effective and apply to transfers made on or after January 1, 2021. The House version would apply to transfers after December 31, 2021.
If a variation is enacted, the 100-year-old stepped-up basis rules will be history. Although both bills are being promoted to ensure “the rich pay their fair share” more than the rich will pay. Read this to find out if you could be affected.
Background
As I discussed earlier, the US tax system has historically not taxed appreciation in property until the property has been sold. Further, taxable appreciation of property is completely wiped out upon an owner’s death.
Example #1
As shown in my earlier post, if Edith and Ralph Flimster bought a 100 acre farm in 1972 for $50,000, and later sold it for $220,000, they would have $170,000 taxable capital gain.
If they gift the farm to the children, Jimmy John (“Sammich”) Flimpster and Janey Ack Flimpster-Cellar (“Janiac”), they will also receive their parents’ tax basis along with the farm. If they turned around and sold it for $220,000 they would have $170,000 capital gains.
If Sammich and Janiac inherited the farm (either directly from Edith and Ralph or through a trust upon the death of Edith and Ralph) their basis would be the fair market value on the date of the death that triggered the inheritance. If Edith and Ralph died immediately, Sammich’s and Janiac’s basis would be $220,000. If they immediately sold the inherited property for $220,000 they would have ZERO capital gain.
That is what President Biden and Senators Van Hollen and Pascrell want to stop. They say it is directed to “the rich” but if enacted it will have an impact on many not-so-rich.
How the Bills Work
Capital gains would be subject to immediate tax any time property is transferred, whether by gift or at death, unless an exception applies (transfers between spouses) or a dollar exemption applies (discussed below).
The rates for most of us will stay the same (0% if taxable income – including any capital gains – is less than $40,000 for an individual; 15% if total taxable income is less than $445,851; 20% over that amount). The Biden administration proposes to raise the rate to 39.6% on incomes over $1 million (but remember that includes capital gains).
Dollar Exemptions
The STEP Act will give all taxpayers a $100,000 lifetime exemption and allow a $1MM exemption at death (MINUS any of the $100,000 lifetime exemption used earlier).
Basis in New Hands
Once a transfer has been made and subjected to the tax (or an exemption), the basis in the hands of the transferee is the value of the asset used for calculating the tax.
Example #2
As shown above, if Edith and Ralph Flimster bought a 100 acre farm in 1972 for $50,000, and later sold it for $220,000, they would have $170,000 taxable capital gain. Those rules haven’t changed.
But if they gift the farm to Sammich and Janiac, Edith and Ralph will have $170,000 taxable gain. However, each of them has a $100,000 lifetime exclusion. The statute isn’t explicit, but my guess is regulations would sort this out as follows: Each of Edith and Ralph would contribute $85,000 of their $100,000 exclusion to wipe out any tax due (85,000 x 2 = 170,000). That leaves each of them with $15,000 lifetime exclusion and Janiac and Sammich with a $220,000 basis going forward.
Example #3
The following year they gift the kids stock worth $80,000 that they purchased years earlier for $10,000. The gain recognized will be $70,000. Each of Edith and Ralph use up their remaining $15,000 exclusion ($30,000 total), leaving $40,000 taxable. Their federal taxes alone will be $6,000 (assuming a 15% rate). If North Carolina elects to dovetail with the federal scheme, there could be another $2,100 state tax due (at 5.25%). The kids’ basis in the stock will be $80,000.
Example #4
The following year Ralph dies. His will leaves everything to Edith. Spousal transfers, recall, are exempt from gain recognition. Edith inherits the existing basis in all the assets.
The following year, Edith dies and leaves everything to the kids. Because it is the year of her death, she has an exemption of $1,000,000 LESS the $100,000 lifetime exemption she used. Her estate consists of Flimpster Carpet Cleaning Solutions, Inc. (10 employees and a manager) that Ralph started in 1967. Arnold Abacus, the accountant says the fair market value is $1,500,000 and the basis is $150,000. That’s $1,350,000 built-in capital gain. There is also the family residence purchased in 1972 for $35,000 and now worth $250,000. That’s another $215,000 built-in capital gain. A total capital gain of $1,565,000.
After subtracting the $900,000 of the available exemption amount, the capital gains subject to taxation at Edith’s death will be $ $665,000. Sammich and Janiac will need to come up with $99,750 to cover the federal capital gains tax on $665,000. That’s the bad news. The good news is that the STEP Act would allow them to finance it with the IRS over 10 years.
Trusts
How the STEP Act treats trusts depends upon what kind of trust is under review. In my practice, I use both “grantor trusts” (trusts that for income tax purposes are treated the same as the person who set it up – everything goes on the Form 1040 of the person who set up the trust) and “nongrantor trusts” (trusts treated as separate tax entities. There are advantages and disadvantages to both. Either, if properly drafted, can do a good job of protecting assets (say, from nursing home costs).
The STEP Act says a transfer to a nongrantor trust will trigger tax. A transfer to a grantor trust will NOT trigger the tax.
Example #5
After Ralph’s death, Edith panics and transfers the residence to the kids “for safe keeping in case I need to go to a nursing home.” At the time she owns very few other assets. Recall, they bought the home for $35,000 and it is now worth $250,000. If Edith still has her entire $100,000 lifetime exemption, she’ll have gain of $115,000 (250,000 – 35,000 – 100,000). The federal bite will be $17,250, due immediately!
A Better Way
Instead of panicking Edith looks for good legal and tax advice. To protect the residence for Medicaid purposes, Edith should transfer the residence to an irrevocable trust. If the trust is carefully drafted as a “grantor trust” there will be no taxes due on the initial transfer.
If Edith dies later when the residence is worth $275,000, there’ll be capital gain of $140,000 (275,000 – 35,000). HOWEVER, because this is the year of her death, there’ll be an exemption of $1,000,000 to apply and there will be NO (ZERO) tax due.
Conclusion
The STEP Act, if enacted, will upend century-old rules regarding capital gains taxation. Contrary to political rhetoric, the Act will affect many more than “the wealthy” because people of ordinary means will pay for transfers of family property.
Stay tuned.
Mark DeJaco says
Thanks, Bob. Just finished both of the articles. Very easy to understand. Thank you.
Kyle Rice says
Great article. I’m confused about Example 4. I don’t see the $1,000,00 – $100,000 being applied. Wouldn’t the taxable gain be $1,165,000 – $900,000 remaining exemption?
bob mason says
Good catch! I’ve updated the facts and conclusion. I bumped up the value of the company a bit to illustrate my point (and the value I bumped to isn’t that unusual for a successful small business — I had a client with a gangbusters carwash worth more than that).
Kyle Rice says
thank you, again, great article and examples. Is there an indication in the bills of how charities, CRTs, and/or Foundations would be impacted? Also, since a grantor trust technically lives in perpetuity, does that allow a trust to make payments over time to heirs thereby managing the tax impact?
bob mason says
Yes, no gain on contribution to charities and partial (and usual) exclusions for gifts to split interest trusts such as CRTs. As those are techniques used by the wealthy for estate tax purposes, I didn’t get into them in this series of articles. Not mentioned here are the estate tax changes being passed around Congress. The truly wealthy could have an estate tax ON TOP OF a capital gains recognition.
I stay out of politics, especially here. But I am concerned by (i) the level of spending, and (ii) the impact of the taxes being proposed.
bob mason says
Oh . . . also . . . a grantor trust doesn’t live in perpetuity. It ceases status as a grantor trust upon the death of the grantor. Under these proposals, gain would be recognized on the death of the grantor.
Kyle Rice says
Also, in Example 5, I wonder what will happen if Edith enters a nursing home within 5 years of the transfer and has expenses exceeding her savings and value of the home. In that case would Medicaid still be able to claw back the value of the home even though the children had to pay a capital gains tax on it at the point of transfer? If that is true, and the law is retroactive, there are going to be some really unhappy gift recipients…
bob mason says
Edith/kids will not be happy campers. Medicaid doesn’t “claw back” anything — the program simply calculates a period (in months) of benefits ineligibility based on the value of the transfer and will not pay the nursing home during that time. That would add insult to injury after they have paid a capital gains tax. And, yes, if the enacted version is retroactive to January 1, 2021, that will affect transfers after that date. Fortunately, that will not affect any of my current clients because I always advise against doing that (outright gifts to kids). That’s why I suggest transferring the residence to a grantor trust, getting the home immediately out of the parent’s name, and postponing the capital gains until death where there would be a $1MM exemption available.
Kyle Rice says
Thank you, again. This is great information.
Jim Blase says
Are you certain about this? “A transfer to a grantor trust will NOT trigger the tax.” See Section 1261(b)(1)(C),
bob mason says
Yes, I am. Section 1261(b)(1)(A) generally exempts transfers to grantor trusts from the tax imposed by Section 1261(a). Section 1261(b)(1)(C) is an ‘exception to the exception’ and would impose the tax if the transfer was to a grantor trust that would not be includible in the transferor’s gross estate for estate tax purposes. Most grantor trusts end up being includible in the grantor’s estate unless very carefully drafted so as not to be (incidentally, ALL grantor trusts would become includible in the grantor’s estate under the Sanders/Whitehouse Senate for the 99.5 Percent Act).
Jennell says
How will the step act affect transfers-made before 2021 to children where the parent retains a life estate . Upon the parents death would the children not have a stepped up value?
bob mason says
Sorry, but no. The more I look at the Step Act, the less I like it. It’ll put the squeeze on a lot of “un-wealthy” people. Do keep an eye on the Mason Law newsletter because I am tracking this thing and will keep folks posted.
Jennell says
So am I understanding this correctly, if a parent transfers property and retains a life estate and it has been more than 5 years and the parent dies, then does the remainderman not have a step up value even if the house is only worth say 300,000. Not even allowing for the 100,000 lifetime allowance
bob mason says
No. Because of the $1 million death exemption the remaindermen gets a full step up. By the way, the 5 year rule is a Medicaid concept and has nothing whatever to do with tax. In any event, I have no idea what is happening in DC right now. I’m jsut watching and waiting to see what happens.