Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Biden Administration Budget 2022: Employer Sponsored Death Benefits a Forgotten Planning Tool
Part One of this article, in last month's issue, introduced the concept of the taxation of capital income, under which the donor or deceased owner of an appreciated asset would realize a capital gain at the time of the transfer. The article discussed how an Employer-Sponsored Death Benefit plan could help remove the appreciated asset from one's estate and how the assignment of such a policy to an irrevocable life insurance trust (ILIT), or insurance limited partnership (ILP) will be recognized for federal transfer tax purposes.
Part Two provides more scenarios under which the asset may be assigned, based on IRS memoranda.
Written But Unannounced Rules
In the unpublished Technical Advice Memorandum (TAM) 97-6842, dated March 1, 1997, the IRS ruled that it would ignore the existence of an ILP for estate tax valuation purposes and would view the transactions as a single testamentary transfer. Under the circumstances described in the TAM, the IRS found that the sole purpose of the ILP was to reduce the estate taxes and, alternatively, that the IRC §2703(a)(2) applied. This TAM should be reviewed by all professionals who deal with ILPs, but professionals and taxpayers may consider the TAM to be a legitimate reaction to the abuse of an ILP to avoid estate taxes.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
"Holy Fair Use, Batman": Copyright, Fair Use and the Dark Knight
The copyright for the original versions of Winnie the Pooh and Mickey Mouse have expired. Now, members of the public can create — and are busy creating — their own works based on these beloved characters. Suppose, though, we want to tell stories using Batman for which the copyright does not expire until 2035. We'll review five hypothetical works inspired by the original Batman comic and analyze them under fair use.