07.07.10
Posted in Uncategorized at 5:33 pm by Eric
Two Michigan prosecutors mull over the new law:
The statute that took effect last week (PA 2010 No. 60; MCL 257.602b) has been widely reputed to ban only texting in a moving vehicle. It appears to me, however, that the language could be interpreted more broadly than that.
Under the statute, “a person shall not read, manually type, or send a text message on a wireless 2-way communications device that is located in a person’s hand or in the person’s lap, including a wireless telephone used in cellular telephone service or personal communication service” while operating a moving motor vehicle.
Couldn’t that language be interpreted to ban dialing (typing) a number to place a cell-phone call, or reading email, in addition to texting?
and
I was quite surprised at how narrow the statute is. My first thought was no texting, but apparently people can update their Facebook pages while driving.
Permalink
04.01.10
Posted in Uncategorized at 7:04 pm by Eric
Dispatches from our internal memoranda:
1. The Supreme Court has held several times in the past that there’s no constitutional problem with a retroactive tax increase, but having said that, almost all the speakers agreed (as do I) that the more time that goes by, the less is the possibility of a retroactive tax increase for 2010 only. Those who die in 2010 will probably have no tax to pay.
2. A related, but separate, issue, is what the tax rate will be for 2011 and thereafter.The current law says that if Congress does nothing before year end 2010, then it’s just as if the Bush tax cuts never ever happened, and we’re back to the pre-Bush $1,000,000 unified credit, and the old rate schedule (and ALSO stepped up basis would be resurrected, just as if it never went away). One of the speakers shared my fear that in the current atmosphere in Washington, it’ll be impossible to get a consensus on anything, so we’ll be back to the old law by default. We’ll just have to wait to see what happens. I’m not optimistic.
3. As you may know, Sandor Levin took over from Charlie Rangel as Chairman of House Ways and Means, and he has said the the Committee will take a look at this in April. Why they have to do that is not clear to me. as I thought that the extension of the 2009 rules that the House has already passed was still valid, and we were only waiting on the Senate, but what do I know.
4. As I had suspected, while we know basically what information we’re going to have to supply on carryover basis, we don’t have the forms yet. In any event, that particular part of it wouldn’t be due to be filed until April 15, 2011.
Permalink
02.03.10
Posted in Uncategorized at 12:55 pm by Eric
I say “let ‘em surf.” It’s probably the most-useful thing they do all day: “The work computer of one regional supervisor for the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission showed more than 1,800 attempts to look up pornography in a 17-day span: ‘It was kind of distraction per se,’ he later told investigators. But he wasn’t alone. More than two dozen SEC employees and contractors over roughly the past two years have faced internal investigations after they were caught viewing pornography on their government computers. . . “. Link.
Permalink
12.22.09
Posted in Uncategorized at 1:34 pm by Eric
An email from our exalted local probate judge. Summary: Get your paws off that will . . . until the guy dies.
There have been extensive discussions among the Probate Registers as to whom may a Register disclose the existence and contents of a will filed for safekeeping with the Probate Court. Since there was a split of opinion among the Registers on how this question should be resolved, the Probate Judges decided to resolve the issue. Judge Murkowski of Kent County reviewed the matter.
His summary basically states that when a will is filed for safekeeping under Section 2515 of EPIC, the filing is NON PUBLIC. The Court receives the will in sealed form and can return the sealed will to the testator or designee during the lifetime of the testator. The will is never unsealed until the death of the testator. A court may not reveal to ANYONE whether a will is filed for safekeeping with the court, and because the will is sealed cannot reveal the contents of that will. The proper response to an inquiry whether a will is filed with the Court is “no public record exists.” A conservator cannot view a will filed for safekeeping. A conservator may examine a protected person’s will from a source other than a will deposited with the Probate Court. When a designee presents to the court the notarized authorization to retrieve the sealed will from safekeeping, the designee should produce picture ID that is photocopied, attached to the authorization form and retained by the court.
Once a testator has died and the Probate Court has proof of the death, the will can be unsealed and photocopies given to anyone for a fee.
Permalink
11.21.09
Posted in Uncategorized at 1:45 pm by Eric
I’ve often wondered: With seven minor children, what’s the maximum amount my family would receive from Social Security if I died? The bad news is, I don’t get any credit for children four through seven. Benefits max out at three children. The good news is, based on my Average Indexed Monthly Earnings, my family would receive $4,424 per month. This would continue for about ten years (total pay-out: over $500,000), at which point my fifth child would reach age 19 and the monthly payment would start to decrease. When my youngest child reaches age 19 (fifteen years from now), it would end.
Permalink
11.12.09
Posted in Uncategorized at 1:07 am by Eric
Answer to a question we field occasionally: An IRS tax lien is good for ten years from the date of the IRS assessment. If you signed a waiver, the lien might be good for even longer.
Permalink
11.11.09
Posted in Uncategorized at 1:51 pm by Eric
If you’re a creditor of a corporation and you’re not getting paid, don’t forget that many corporations have included a compromise provision in their articles of incorporation. The following provision has been a part of the State of Michigan pre-printed form for decades, and although it’s perfectly permissible for corporations to cross it off before filing the form, the vast majority of corporations leave it in, and therefore the provision is binding on the corporation and people dealing with the corporation:
When a compromise or arrangement or a plan of reorganization of this corporation is proposed between this corporation and its creditors or any class of them or between this corporation and its shareholders or any class of them, a court of equity jurisdiction within the state, on application of this corporation or of a creditor or shareholder thereof, or on application of a receiver appointed for the corporation, may order a meeting of the creditors or class of creditors or of the shareholders or class of shareholders to be affected by the proposed compromise or arrangement or reorganization, to be summoned in such manner as the court directs. If a majority in number representing 3/4 in value of the creditors or class of creditors, or of the shareholders or class of shareholders to be affected by the proposed compromise or arrangement or a reorganization, agree to a compromise or arrangement or a reorganization of this corporation as a consequence of the compromise or arrangement, the compromise or arrangement and the reorganization, if sanctioned by the court to which the application has been made, shall be binding on all the creditors or class of creditors, or on all the shareholders or class of shareholders, and also on this corporation.
It might offer you an avenue that’s not often considered.
Permalink
11.02.09
Posted in Uncategorized at 12:12 pm by Eric
Health Savings Accounts are neat vehicles. If you’re covered by a high-deductible health insurance plan, you can deposit money into a health savings account and receive a tax deduction for the contribution. If you later take a distribution from the HSA to reimburse or pay medical expenses (dental, optical, prescriptions, whatever), you don’t have to recognize the distribution as income. If you have family coverage, you can deposit $5,950 annually into the HSA. Because many families don’t burn through that much in medical expenses, the unused portion accumulates and earns income.
And that’s where the money-making opportunity comes in. Someone manages those funds. Places like UnitedHealth Group earn money doing it, but the previous arrangements weren’t profitable enough for them, so they took advantage of regulatory changes last January and tripled the annual fees . . . to the detriment of their customers:
UnitedHealth Group controls roughly 15% of the market for HSAs, which it offers through OptumHealth Bank, a wholly owned subsidiary. Until late last year its HSA clients had 11 mutual fund choices from Vanguard Group. Annual fees ranged from 18 cents to 35 cents per $100 invested.
By late 2008 Optum had yanked the Vanguard options for new customers. Funds on the menu now hail from firms like Munder and Thornburg; fees range from 76 cents to $1.37 per $100.
Why the switch? No coincidence, perhaps, that regulatory changes this January enabled entities like OptumHealth and their consultants to start pocketing a cut of fund management fees. Nor, perhaps, is it purely random that many fund firms popping up in HSAs these days kick back fees to plan managers. Vanguard does not pay kickbacks.
Link.
Permalink
10.30.09
Posted in Uncategorized at 3:50 pm by Eric
Have you ever heard of “ToD” or its brother, “PoD”? They mean “Transfer on Death” and “Payable on Death.” They’re basically beneficiary designations that you can attach to all sorts of investment properties. You, for instance, can set up your savings account the following way: “Your Name, PoD Your Daughter.” Upon your death, your daughter would receive the savings account, as though she were a joint owner (read: without probate), but while you’re alive, she has no rights over it (which has many benefits: prevents fraud, precludes estranged spouses from trying to claim it in a divorce, no bankruptcy problems if the daughter files Chapter 7, etc.).
The procedure has one major drawback: It doesn’t apply to real estate. Therefore, the only way to avoid probate with real estate is to put your offspring on the real estate title as a joint owner (which has many risks) or put the real estate into a trust.
But that’s changing. Effective July 1, 2009, Indiana enacted legislation that allows people to transfer real estate into a ToD designation, as long as you follow the statutory requirements. If you do so, your heir will receive the real estate without the need for probate.
This a huge development for Indiana estate planning. Michigan is supposedly considering similar legislation. We’ll keep you posted.
Permalink
10.26.09
Posted in Uncategorized at 2:08 pm by Eric
Happy one-year anniversary to this blawg. We’re averaging two posts a week, which is double the initial goal (update at least once a week). We hope everyone is enjoying it.
Permalink
« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »
