Advertisement

May 24, 2013

Termination of Credit Shelter Trusts

As discussed in a previous article, due to higher estate tax exemption, certain trusts previously established for purposes of avoiding estate taxes under the estate plan of a predeceased spouse may no longer be necessary in light of the new federal estate tax law.

The 2012 Tax Relief Act provides an exemption from federal estate tax of $5,250,000. This exemption of $5,250,000 results in a great number of credit shelter trusts (CSTs) no longer being necessary to avoid federal estate tax on the death of the surviving spouse. These credit shelter trusts are often called the Family Trust, Credit Shelter Trust or By Pass Trust. Historically on the death of the first spouse, it was  common to establish a CST for the surviving spouse and perhaps also for other members of the family equal to the estate tax exclusion amount which we have included in the chart below.

Year of Death​ ​Estate Tax
Exclusion Amount
1977​ $120,667
​1978 $134,000
​1979 $147,333
​1980 $161,563
​1981 $175,625
​1982 ​​$225,000
​1983 ​​$275,000
​1984 ​$325,000
​1985 ​$400,000
​1986 ​$500,000
​1987 - 1997 ​$600,000
​1998 ​$625,000
​1999 ​$650,000
​2000 & 2001 ​$675,000
​2002 & 2003 ​$1 million
2004  & 2005​ ​$1.5 million
​2006 - 2008 ​$2 million
​2009 ​$3.5 million
​2010 ​$5 million
​2011 ​$5 million
​2012 ​$5.12 million
​2013 ​$5.25 million

  

The CST would utilize the estate tax exclusion amount of the first spouse to die and would not be subject to estate tax on the death of the surviving spouse.  As stated above, a surviving spouse is entitled to an exemption in 2013 of $5,250,000.  If the assets owned by the surviving spouse plus the surviving spouse’s share of the assets of the CST are less than $5,250,000 at the death of the surviving spouse, the CST is no longer necessary to avoid estate taxes on the death of the surviving spouse, although there may be other valid reasons to keep such a trust in effect.

North Carolina law allows a CST to be terminated.  The court may terminate a CST upon consent of all the beneficiaries of the CST if it is determined that the continuation of the CST is not necessary to achieve its original purpose. If one or more beneficiaries do not agree with the proposed  termination, the court may still terminate the CST if the termination of the trust will adequately protect the non-consenting beneficiary. 

For example, the husband passed away in 1987 and his estate planning documents established a CST equal to the estate tax exclusion amount in 1987 of $600,000  for the benefit of his wife for her lifetime and remainder at her death to their children in equal shares. The CST now has a value of $1,000,000. The wife has assets in her individual name of $1,500,000. The wife is eighty years of age.  The CST may be terminated with the wife and children taking their actuarially determined shares without gift tax consequences. The wife’s share of the CST would be $93,650 and the children’s share of the CST would be the balance of $906,350. The value of the wife’s estate for estate tax purposes would be $1,593,650 ($1,500,000 + $93,650) that is well below her estate tax exclusion amount of $5,250,000. Also termination of the CST eliminates future Trustee fees, trust administration expenses, accountings and income tax returns. 

In summary, a CST may now be terminated.  If the surviving spouse’s share of the CST and his or her individual assets will not exceed $5,250,000 at the time of the surviving spouse’s death, the CST is no longer necessary to save estate taxes in the estate.

© 2013 Poyner Spruill LLP. All rights reserved.

About the Author

Partner

Bill practices in the areas of estate planning, estate administration, elder law, taxation and business transactions. He has substantial experience in a variety of trust and estate matters including estate planning, administration and will contests, tax planning for individuals and closely held businesses, and organizing and advising charitable organizations.  He is also a frequent speaker on changes in the new tax law. 

Representative Experience

  • Representation of clients under audits before the Internal Revenue...
704-342-5318

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.