The New Super-Charged PAT (Power of Appointment Trust)

Wendy C. Gerzog
{"title":"The New Super-Charged PAT (Power of Appointment Trust)","authors":"Wendy C. Gerzog","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1831699","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article proposes to repeal the QTIP provisions in order to collect revenue now for transfers that are essentially transfers to third parties and not to the decedent's spouse. Because there are advantages of increased flexibility attendant to a QTIP as opposed to a PAT, this article proposes to take those repealed QTIP benefits and attach them to the PAT, which would greatly enhance that marital deduction trust form. A super-charged PAT would thereby be able to preserve the decedent's GST tax exemption (like a reverse QTIP), create a decedent's by-pass trust by allowing a PAT (or a partial PAT) \"election-out,\" and create a decedent's state-only PAT marital deduction. The super-charged PAT would provide for much desired post-mortem tax planning without the complex and strict requirements of a disclaimer. Moreover, the new PAT would eliminate conflicts of interest and fiduciary problems inherent in the QTIP form of the marital deduction. Lastly, by repealing the QTIP provisions and by super-charging the PAT, the marital deduction would truly be a marital deduction and not a third party beneficiary tax deferral device. I have criticized the QTIP trust on the basis that the QTIP provisions are both illogical and sexist. The QTIP provisions are illogical because they conflict with their stated public policy goal of taxing marital property when it leaves the marital unit and passes to other beneficiaries. Because the goal of the marital deduction is to tax property when it leaves the marital unit and because the QTIP expressly endorses passing the property to third parties at the first spouse’s death, the QTIP undermines the fundamental rationale for the marital deduction. Likewise, the QTIP provisions are sexist. They treat women as the invisible spouse and they equate giving an income interest to women with giving them the corpus. With the QTIP, the first spouse to die controls the disposition of the corpus and he selects the decision maker who will make the QTIP election. The QTIP provisions implicitly equate giving an income interest to women with giving them the property itself because unlike the other exceptions to the terminable interest rule in which the widow is given a rough equivalent to outright ownership of the corpus, the QTIP provisions allow a marital deduction for the full value of the property at the husband's death even though the surviving spouse, the other half of the marital unit, receives only the income interest in that property. A PAT provides the surviving spouse with both an income interest and a power to appoint the property to herself or to her estate; it is considered an equivalent to ownership although this article recommends that the PAT require that the surviving spouse be entitled to both an inter vivos and a testamentary power of appointment over the trust property. The PAT, however, has all but disappeared as a marital transfer because of the popularity of the QTIP. This article proposes to repeal the QTIP provisions but recognizes that repeal is virtually impossible because of certain well-liked features of the QTIP that have nothing to do with the decedent’s desire for dead hand control, but which provide advantages of increased flexibility in estate planning. Therefore, this article proposes to take those repealed QTIP “flexibility” benefits and attach them to the PAT to create a “super-charged” PAT to take the place of the QTIP trust.","PeriodicalId":183243,"journal":{"name":"Elder Law Studies eJournal","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Elder Law Studies eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1831699","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article proposes to repeal the QTIP provisions in order to collect revenue now for transfers that are essentially transfers to third parties and not to the decedent's spouse. Because there are advantages of increased flexibility attendant to a QTIP as opposed to a PAT, this article proposes to take those repealed QTIP benefits and attach them to the PAT, which would greatly enhance that marital deduction trust form. A super-charged PAT would thereby be able to preserve the decedent's GST tax exemption (like a reverse QTIP), create a decedent's by-pass trust by allowing a PAT (or a partial PAT) "election-out," and create a decedent's state-only PAT marital deduction. The super-charged PAT would provide for much desired post-mortem tax planning without the complex and strict requirements of a disclaimer. Moreover, the new PAT would eliminate conflicts of interest and fiduciary problems inherent in the QTIP form of the marital deduction. Lastly, by repealing the QTIP provisions and by super-charging the PAT, the marital deduction would truly be a marital deduction and not a third party beneficiary tax deferral device. I have criticized the QTIP trust on the basis that the QTIP provisions are both illogical and sexist. The QTIP provisions are illogical because they conflict with their stated public policy goal of taxing marital property when it leaves the marital unit and passes to other beneficiaries. Because the goal of the marital deduction is to tax property when it leaves the marital unit and because the QTIP expressly endorses passing the property to third parties at the first spouse’s death, the QTIP undermines the fundamental rationale for the marital deduction. Likewise, the QTIP provisions are sexist. They treat women as the invisible spouse and they equate giving an income interest to women with giving them the corpus. With the QTIP, the first spouse to die controls the disposition of the corpus and he selects the decision maker who will make the QTIP election. The QTIP provisions implicitly equate giving an income interest to women with giving them the property itself because unlike the other exceptions to the terminable interest rule in which the widow is given a rough equivalent to outright ownership of the corpus, the QTIP provisions allow a marital deduction for the full value of the property at the husband's death even though the surviving spouse, the other half of the marital unit, receives only the income interest in that property. A PAT provides the surviving spouse with both an income interest and a power to appoint the property to herself or to her estate; it is considered an equivalent to ownership although this article recommends that the PAT require that the surviving spouse be entitled to both an inter vivos and a testamentary power of appointment over the trust property. The PAT, however, has all but disappeared as a marital transfer because of the popularity of the QTIP. This article proposes to repeal the QTIP provisions but recognizes that repeal is virtually impossible because of certain well-liked features of the QTIP that have nothing to do with the decedent’s desire for dead hand control, but which provide advantages of increased flexibility in estate planning. Therefore, this article proposes to take those repealed QTIP “flexibility” benefits and attach them to the PAT to create a “super-charged” PAT to take the place of the QTIP trust.
新的委任权信托基金(PAT)
本文建议废除QTIP条款,以便现在为转移征收收入,这些转移基本上是转移给第三方,而不是转移给死者的配偶。由于与PAT相比,QTIP具有增加灵活性的优点,因此本文建议将那些已废除的QTIP好处附加到PAT中,这将极大地增强婚姻扣除信托形式。因此,增收的PAT将能够保留被继承人的商品及服务税豁免(如反向QTIP),通过允许PAT(或部分PAT)创建被继承人的旁路信托。“选举出局”,并创建一个仅适用于死者的PAT婚姻扣除。增压的PAT将提供非常理想的事后税务规划,而无需复杂而严格的免责要求。此外,新的PAT将消除QTIP形式的婚姻扣除所固有的利益冲突和信托问题。最后,通过废除QTIP条款和提高PAT税率,婚姻扣除额将真正成为婚姻扣除额,而不是第三方受益人的税收递延工具。我批评了QTIP信托的基础上,QTIP的规定是不合逻辑的和性别歧视。QTIP的规定是不合逻辑的,因为它们与他们宣称的公共政策目标相冲突,即当婚姻财产离开婚姻单位并转移给其他受益人时,对其征税。由于婚姻抵扣的目标是在财产离开婚姻单位时对其征税,而且由于QTIP明确支持在第一方配偶死亡时将财产转让给第三方,因此QTIP破坏了婚姻抵扣的根本理由。同样,QTIP条款也是性别歧视。他们把妇女当作看不见的配偶,把给予妇女收入利息等同于给予她们主体。在QTIP中,第一个死亡的配偶控制着语料库的处置,并选择将进行QTIP选举的决策者。QTIP条款含蓄地将给予妇女收入权益等同于给予她们财产本身,因为与可终止权益规则的其他例外不同,在可终止权益规则中,寡妇获得大致相当于财产的完全所有权,QTIP条款允许在丈夫死亡时扣除财产的全部价值,即使未亡配偶,即婚姻单位的另一半,只获得该财产的收入权益。PAT为未亡配偶提供入息利息和将该财产指定给自己或其遗产的权力;它被认为相当于所有权,尽管本文建议PAT要求未亡配偶有权对信托财产享有生前委任权和遗嘱委任权。然而,由于QTIP的普及,PAT几乎已经作为婚姻转让而消失了。本文建议废除QTIP条款,但认识到废除QTIP实际上是不可能的,因为QTIP的某些广受欢迎的特征与被继承人对死手控制的愿望无关,但这些特征提供了增加遗产规划灵活性的优势。因此,本文建议将这些被废除的QTIP“灵活性”好处附加到PAT上,以创建一个“增压”PAT来取代QTIP信任。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信