Pennsylvania Trusts and Estates Blog

So you're getting married? Did you invite the IRS to the wedding? On the list of things to do from hiring the hall, choosing the caterer, and mailing the invitations, don't forget a visit to your tax advisor.

The first thing you will learn about is the marriage penalty. The marriage penalty is a holdover from an earlier era when single income families were the norm. Since the tax code was written to tax household income instead of individual income; a married couple, both with similar earnings, pays more tax than the total tax of two single taxpayers with the same incomes as the married couple. This higher tax is what is referred to as the "marriage penalty."

The penalty manifests in two ways: 1) the standard deduction for a married filing jointly return is less than twice the single standard deduction; and 2) the combined income can push the couple higher into the tax brackets. Often the first tax return a couple files after marriage results in a big tax due because of under-withholding or underpayment of estimates. Even if you get married on the last day of the year, for tax purposes you are considered married for the entire year.

The marriage penalty does not apply to all married couples, it depends on the husband's and wife's respective incomes. Tax laws in more recent years have actually eliminated the marriage penalty for tax payers in lower tax brackets. So here's the good news: there's no marriage penalty built into the tax rate schedules in the 10% and 15% tax brackets.

Having decided to combine their lives, newly weds now combine their income. The decision as how to report this combined income on tax returns should be a topic of discussion with the tax advisor. Many credits and deductions are based on the total income reported on the return. When two taxpayers get married, their combined income may now be too high for certain tax credits. For example, a single mom qualifies for the Earned Income Credit. She marries a man making a good salary, and now their combined income on a joint return is too high for the Earned Income Credit.

Worse, the woman has a low amount withheld on her earnings because she expects to get the Earned Income Credit. After the marriage, she finds out the amount withheld is not enough to cover her share of the tax.

A single person can deduct up to $3,000 in excess capital losses against ordinary income, but the amount doesn't double to $6,000 for a married couple - it remains $3,000.

A single person who actively participates in renting out real estate can deduct up to $25,000 of losses against his or her earned income if his or her modified adjusted gross income is $100,000 or less. This deduction is the same for a married couple as it is for a single person.

While filing a joint return results in a lower tax for most couples, they don't have to file joint returns. They can file as "married filing separately." Married filing separately is not like filing two single returns. In our example, the earned income credit can't be claimed at all on a married filing separate return. Some other credits and deductions , such as the Child and Dependent Care deductions, American Opportunity and Lifetime Learning credits, the student loan interest deduction and the up to $25,000 of rental real estate losses are not allowed on a married filing separate return.

On the plus side, newly married couples may have increased limits for tax-deductible IRA contributions. If the couple's income meets certain limits, they could qualify for more of a deduction. In some scenarios, one spouse also may "borrow" from the other's earnings to meet the limits.

Likewise, if a spouse claims medical expenses or other itemized deductions that are limited by their adjusted gross income, filing separately may be the way to go because the single income produces a lower limit. However, if the spouse wants to claim credits or deduct his or her IRA contribution, the couple probably needs to file jointly.

Sometimes only after the wedding, you find our that your spouse has debts, back child support, defaulted student loans, unpaid income taxes, you name it. All of these things can be offset against taxpayer refunds. You might find your tax refunded scooped to pay your spouse's debts. This can be a nasty surprise. There is a procedure, the Injured Spouse Allocation, whereby the debt-free spouse can get his or her share of the refund, but it takes months to actually get the money.

Everyone's situation is different, so it is important to consult with a tax professional before making any important decisions, especially the decision to marry.

The income tax, property tax, estate tax and asset protection planning advantages of Florida domicile make Florida the ideal place to live, whether you are still working or are retired. Florida obviously wants to be considered a tax-favorable haven for its residents and wants to attract new residents - both retirees and working people.

Florida's homestead exemption which provides an exemption from a forced sale is among the most protective in the United States. It provides no limit to the value of homestead real property that can be protected from creditors. This is how O. J. Simpson can own an expensive home in Florida despite a huge unpaid civil judgment against him. Various World.com and Enron executives bought lavish homes in Florida.

Florida has no individual income tax. (It does have a corporate income tax.) Florida has no estate or inheritance tax. (Since the Florida estate tax "picks up the federal state death tax credit and that credit has been eliminated from the federal estate tax; Florida estate tax is zero. Unless there is a change, the state death tax credit and Florida's estate tax will be back. in 2010.) It has a 6% state sales tax. Some counties charge an additional sales tax.

Florida did have an intangibles tax but that was repealed in 2006. The intangibles tax applied to stocks, bonds (excluding Florida municipal bonds), mutual funds, and notes receivable. Retirement accounts, life insurance or annuities were exempt. The rate was .5 mills, and there was a $250,000 exemption per resident. ($500,000 per couple).

In 2007 the Florida legislature passed a Reform Bill that proposed to create a new "super-homestead" exemption. After a legal battle, a Constitutional Amendment appeared on the ballot to increase the exemption from the tax and "portability" of the Save Our Homes exemption. The amendment passed on January 29, 2008. This tax savings is available only to Florida residents.

The Amendment increases the homestead exemption from $25,000 to 50,000 but only for taxes other than school taxes and just for homes valued at more than $50,000.

Since 1995, Florida has had a property tax law that capped the increase in assessment value of residents' property at 3% per year. The actual value of the properties often far outstripped the 3% per year growth. The gap between the assessed value and the actual fair market value of the home is called the Save-Our-Homes (SOH) differential. Many residents fear moving from their homes because they don't want to lose the tax advantage of paying taxes on their much lower assessed value. The new constitutional amendment allows up to $500,000 of value from the gap between the assessed amount and the fair market value to be applied towards the tax base of .any new home purchased in Florida within two years. In other words, the SOH differential is "portable." This benefit is available only to residents.

For snowbirds who have a principal residence in a northern state and also a home in Florida, the new Florida Constitutional Amendment may be bad news. Not only do they not qualify for the 3% cap or the portable SOH benefit, but the gap in the real estate taxes they are paying compared to their homesteaded neighbor is likely to increase. The taxing authorities whose budgets are reduced because of the new tax breaks for homesteaders will need revenue. A likely source is to increase the tax rate on non-residents. This will probably lead to more northerners deciding to change their domicile to Florida.

In the meantime, what is the State of Florida doing for revenue? Reduction of property taxes benefits homeowners, but hurts education. Empty-nesters are moving in, but families are moving out. Instead of an anticipated increase of 30,000 pupils, the state has seen virtually no increase. Non-residents can pay twice the property tax of their resident neighbor with the same house. Attorney Jerome Lanning of Birmingham, Alabama, is suing to seek relief from the disparity, and when the case reaches the U.S. Supreme Court, things might well change.

Writing your will is not a do-it-yourself project. Words are important. The words that are not in your will can be as important as those that are. That is one of the reasons you should not try to write your own will. Even pre-printed forms and computer programs can lead to problems. Take the case of Mr. Tate, recently decided in Somerset County.

Mr. Tate dies leaving an estate consisting of $700 in household goods. He also owned certificates of deposit, a checking account, money market account, life insurance policy dividend and cable refund with a total value of $39,300.

Mr. Tate died leaving a will that was apparently prepared by a local notary (practicing law without a license) who used a pre-printed form and filled in the blanks. Mr. Tate's will said: "I give, devise and bequeath all my personal property, jewelry and furniture, to my niece, Valarie Nichols." . . . "I give, devise and bequeath all the remainder of my estate, which I may own at the time of my death or to which I may thereafter become entitled, to my friend, Janet Geisel."

So what's the problem? The question is who gets the $39,300 - Valarie Nichols or Janet Geisel? Why is this a question? Because personal property, as understood in the law, means any kind of property other than real property. Thus, bank accounts, certificates of deposit and other cash items are personal property.

The will says all personal property goes to niece Valerie Nichols - which would mean she would get all of the assets - bank accounts, certificates of deposit, etc. Janet Geisel, the other beneficiary disagreed. She said that since the decedent had no real estate she would get nothing and that what the decedent meant was tangible personal property should go to niece Valarie and everything else should go to friend Janet.

Had the will included one more word, "tangible," there would have been no dispute. "Tangible personal property" is a well defined class of property under the law.

The first point I want to make is that if there has to be a lawsuit over a $39,000 estate, how much do you think is going to be left for any beneficiary? If writing your own will means you need a court to interpret what you meant, you have made a serious mistake.

What do you think? What did Mr. Tate intend? And how do we know? We can't ask him.

In this case, the court applied a doctrine of construction called "ejusdem generis" to reach its holding. "Ejusdem generis" is Latin for "of the same kind." As applied to Mr. Tate's will, this phrase means that "where general words follow enumerations of particular classes or persons or things, the general words shall be construed as applicable only to persons or things of the same general nature or kind as those enumerated." In other words, since the will said "all my personal property, jewelry and furniture" the general words "personal property" should be interpreted to mean property of the same type as jewelry and furniture.

So Janet Geisel gets the $39,300. . . . minus the costs of the lawsuit. It reminds me of the plumbers fees: $50 per hour; $75 per hour if you help; $100 per hour if you try to fix it yourself first. This is only one of innumerable such stories. In my experience, almost every self-written will contains at least one ambiguity or problem that must be interpreted (by a judge) when the estate is being administered.

Have you ever noticed that wills written by attorneys are often much longer than those from "kits?" That is because the attorney adds many clauses and definitions that are added to clarify and protect the testator's intent. Do-it-yourselfers are usually thinking about what they want to put into a will and are not focused on important words, phrases, and clauses they may be omitting.

Moral of the story: Writing wills is not for amateurs. You may think you are being clear, covering all the possibilities, and complying with all the legal requirements. And maybe you are - but there is no way you can know for sure that what you have written will accomplish what you want or create a dispute.