Wills, Trusts & Estates Prof Blog

Corporate Transparency Act Update -- Stay is Back On!!

Earlier today (o1/23/25), the United States Supreme Court stayed the injunction against the Corporate Transparency Act. Here is the key language from the Court's opinion:

The application for stay presented to JUSTICE ALITO and by him referred to the Court is granted. The December 5, 2024 amended order of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, case No. 4:24–cv–478, is stayed pending the disposition of the appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari, if such a writ is timely sought. Should certiorari be denied, this stay shall terminate automatically. In the event certiorari is granted, the stay shall terminate upon the sending down of the judgment of this Court.

Generation-Skipping Transfer Tax Planning Opportunities: Planning to Last Many Lifetimes

Generation-skipping transfer (GST) tax planning is vital to preserving taxpayer assets from being subject to multiple levels of tax. The GST tax is a flat 40 percent rate on certain nonexempt assets and distributions and is similar, but imposed in addition, to the federal estate tax. The cumulative effect of federal estate, GST, and potentially state estate or inheritance taxes may greatly diminish family resources for successive generations.

During this period of double unified credit through 2025 under the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (2017 TCJA), the opportunity to protect larger amounts of taxpayer assets from additional levels of future taxes is significant. Even if the taxpayer has engaged in considerable estate planning, high engagement should be maintained in this advisory area throughout the taxpayer’s lifetime and even post-mortem, as many planning strategies are available after the exemption is exhausted.

For more information see Abigail Marie Everist, Ha T Dao, and John Nuckolls "Generation-Skipping Transfer Tax Planning Opportunities: Planning to Last Many Lifetimes", ABA Probate and Property Journal Jan/Feb 2025.

Article: Succession Law: Essential Guide to Draft a Valid Will

Jo Yin Moy (Independent) recently published, Succession Law: Essential Guide to Draft a Valid Will, 2024. Provided below is an Abstract:

Disputes over wills are common in Malaysia, particularly when the validity of a will was challenged. These disputes often lead to lengthy and costly court proceedings, putting the parties' relationships and financial legacies at risk. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the basics legal requirements and formalities involved in creating a valid will to ensure the testator's wishes are honoured and to avoid disputes and complications in estate distribution.

This Article aims to provide an overview of the fundamental principles of will drafting in Malaysia, including the necessary formalities for a legally enforceable will. By shedding light on the key elements of a valid will, this Article seeks to equip individuals with the knowledge to safeguard their assets and minimize the potential for family disputes.

Bribing a Survivor to Protect Your Cadaver—Part 1

Body disposition methods in the United States have evolved from traditional burial and cremation to include unconventional and sometimes controversial options. Burial has historically been the predominant choice due to religious and cultural influences, but fire cremation has gained popularity, recently surpassing burial because of its lower cost and perceived environmental benefits. Newer methods like alkaline hydrolysis, also known as aquamation, and human composting are becoming more accepted and legal in various states, offering eco-friendly alternatives. These options, however, have sparked debates over their moral and ethical implications, particularly among religious groups and policymakers.

Innovative practices such as composting remains into soil, turning cremains into fireworks, and donating cadavers for medical or scientific purposes introduce additional ethical concerns. Other methods, including sky burials or green burials, emphasize environmental sustainability but may conflict with societal norms or personal values surrounding dignity. Misuse of these approaches, such as ignoring a decedent’s wishes or engaging in disrespectful practices, underscores the importance of intentional planning and decision-making regarding body disposition.

To address these challenges, estate planners and individuals are encouraged to focus on respectful and deliberate arrangements for remains. Incorporating financial incentives or explicit instructions into estate plans can help ensure that a person’s wishes are honored, even as innovative disposal methods continue to emerge. Staying informed about these options and their associated risks enables individuals and their advisors to navigate the sensitive topic of end-of-life arrangements more effectively.

For more information see William A Drennan "Bribing a Survivor to Protect Your Cadaver—Part 1" ABA Probate and Property Journal, Jan/Feb 2025. 

My Lady Jane, A King’s Will, and the Undue Influence on a Testamentary Instrument that Took England to the Brink of Civil War

Lady Jane Grey's brief reign, known as the "Nine Days' Queen," stemmed from a contested succession crisis in 1553. Her ascent was orchestrated by John Dudley, Duke of Northumberland, who heavily influenced the dying King Edward VI to amend his Devise for the Succession. This document bypassed Edward's Catholic half-sister Mary and named Jane Grey as heir to ensure Protestant continuity. Dudley's efforts to secure Jane's position, including her marriage to his son Guildford, have drawn comparisons to modern estate law disputes, particularly regarding undue influence and testator capacity. The scenario offers a striking parallel to contemporary legal principles surrounding will contests.

King Edward VI’s frailty, exacerbated by tuberculosis, made him highly susceptible to Dudley's manipulations. Edward's original Devise favored male heirs of the Grey family, but as his death loomed, it was hastily altered to name Jane Grey directly. Historical evidence suggests Dudley exploited Edward's vulnerability and his role as Lord President of the Privy Council to secure his family's power. Despite garnering some noble support for the amended Devise, its legitimacy was widely questioned, lacking popular and political backing. Jane's reign was swiftly overthrown by Mary, who claimed the throne with broad public support, underscoring the fragility of Dudley's plan.

Under modern undue influence laws, Dudley’s actions would likely face severe scrutiny. Edward’s weakened health and young age could classify him as a susceptible testator. Dudley’s proximity to the king, his personal motivations, and the dramatic amendments to the Devise all suggest undue influence. While Dudley's manipulations momentarily succeeded in placing Jane on the throne, they ultimately resulted in his execution for treason and the rapid reinstatement of the Tudor succession under Mary I. The saga illustrates the timeless complexities of power, influence, and legal disputes over succession.

For more information see William M. Kelleher and Christina Smith "My Lady Jane, A King’s Will, and the Undue Influence on a Testamentary Instrument that Took England to the Brink of Civil War," ABA Probate and Property Journal, Jan/Feb 2025. 

Clearing my father’s house after his death: ‘How do you dismantle the life of a person you love?’

Hannah Shuckburgh recounts the experience of dismantling her late father's home with her sister, highlighting the mix of grief, nostalgia, and practicality involved in deciding what to keep, donate, or discard. The task intertwines moving house with bereavement, making it a deeply personal and often overwhelming experience.

In the UK, house clearers like Debbie Thompson and Natalia Rawley offer empathetic, eco-conscious services, striving to recycle or resell items while supporting families through their loss. In contrast, the US has a more celebratory approach through estate sales, where homes are transformed into temporary stores for selling possessions.

Through her journey, Shuckburgh wrestles with the significance of material objects. While some items, like her father’s poetry books or potato peeler, evoke powerful memories, she ultimately finds that her father’s presence lives most vividly in her own mind. She concludes that memories, not possessions, are the true vessels of love and connection, allowing her to revisit the essence of her father and his home long after his belongings are gone.

For more information see Hannah Shuckburgh "Clearing my father’s house after his death: ‘How do you dismantle the life of a person you love?’", The Financial Times, January 17, 2025.

Special thanks to Joel C. Dobris (Professor of Law, UC Davis School of Law) for bringing this article to my attention.

US recovers $31 million in Social Security payments to dead people

The U.S. government reclaimed over $31 million in Social Security payments mistakenly sent to deceased individuals during a five-month pilot program, utilizing temporary access to the Social Security Administration's "Full Death Master File." This access, granted for three years by a 2021 appropriations bill, allowed the Treasury to recover funds and identify fraudulent payments. The Treasury estimates it could recover over $215 million during the access period, which runs through 2026. Fiscal Assistant Secretary David Lebryk emphasized the need for permanent access to the database to curb fraud and protect taxpayer funds.

The initiative aligns with broader government efforts to reduce waste and inefficiency, a key element of Donald Trump’s “Save America” agenda for his potential second term. Trump has proposed creating the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), led by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, to streamline federal operations. It remains unclear whether the incoming administration will support extending the Treasury’s access to the death database.

For more information see Associated Press "US recovers $31 million in Social Security payments to dead people" News 13, January 15, 2025. 

A Tax and Estate Planners Guide to the New Retirement Distribution Rules

Follow this link for more detailed information about this webinar.

Bo Jackson Relinquishes Millions In Bombshell Family Extortion Case

Bo Jackson recently resolved a legal case against his niece and nephew, Thomas Lee Anderson and Erica M. Anderson, whom he accused of attempting to extort $20 million from him through intimidation and harassment. In 2023, a Cobb County judge ruled in Jackson's favor, awarding him $21 million in damages and issuing a permanent protective order requiring the Andersons to stay 500 yards away from Jackson and his family, cease contact, and remove any defamatory social media posts. However, Jackson has since forfeited the monetary award and sought a resolution with his relatives.

The legal battle stemmed from harassment allegations that began in 2022, including threatening messages and public accusations made by the Andersons against Jackson. The court determined the allegations to be true after the Andersons and their attorneys failed to refute Jackson's claims or participate in the case following a May 2023 hearing. On January 14, 2025, both parties requested the court to dismiss the protective order and withdraw pending motions, signaling an effort to reach a mutual agreement.

On January 15, Judge Jason D. Marbutt vacated his earlier ruling at the request of Jackson and the Andersons. This development effectively ends the legal dispute, with the case’s initial ruling and protective measures now nullified. Jackson's decision to forgo the financial damages suggests a desire to move past the family conflict and settle the matter amicably.

For more information see Candace McDuffie "Bo Jackson Relinquishes Millions In Bombshell Family Extortion Case" The Root, January 16, 2025.

Special thanks to Deborah Matthews (Virginia Estate Planning Attorney) for bringing this article to my attention.

Jeffrey Epstein pals could get huge payout as estate swells back to $145M after massive tax refund, upsetting victims: ‘Morally objectionable’

Jeffrey Epstein's estate recently received a $112 million tax refund, significantly increasing its value to $145 million after being depleted by settlements, claims, and legal expenses. This windfall comes after nearly 200 of Epstein's sexual abuse victims received $164 million in damages, with additional payouts for government claims and other debts. Epstein's co-executors, Darren Indyke and Richard Khan, who have faced civil allegations of aiding and abetting his crimes, are expected to benefit financially from the remaining estate assets. Victims like Marijke Chartouni, who suffered abuse and settled with the estate, expressed outrage that anyone other than victims might profit from Epstein's fortune.

The tax refund stems from overpaid taxes in 2020 when the estate anticipated higher proceeds from asset sales, including Epstein’s Manhattan townhouse, which sold for $51 million—$37 million below its asking price. Despite legal and financial setbacks, the estate's remaining funds will eventually be transferred to a trust, the 1953 Trust, which will distribute assets to unnamed beneficiaries. Known beneficiaries include Indyke, Khan, and Epstein’s former girlfriend, Karyna Shuliak. Epstein’s brother, Mark, remains uncertain about his inclusion as a beneficiary, and the details of the trust’s recipients are shrouded in secrecy.

Epstein, who died by suicide in 2019 while awaiting trial for sex trafficking, amassed wealth exceeding $600 million through years of exploitation and abuse, often facilitated by close associates. His crimes and connections implicated numerous wealthy and powerful individuals. While Ghislaine Maxwell is serving a 20-year prison sentence for her role in Epstein’s abuses, questions persist about the full scope of his network and beneficiaries, with his estate's financial resurgence reigniting anger among victims who continue to grapple with the long-lasting effects of his crimes.

For more information see Matthew Goldstein, Jeffrey Epstein's Associates Could Reap Benefit of a Big Tax Refund, NY Times, Jan. 15, 2025.