Neal Eckhardt <neckhardt@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
news:s4he04lpk1es1v1s31g9md4l6e62kof4mm@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:38:53 -0700, Les Albert <lalbert1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> wrote:
>
>>It's not complicated, and when you're dead it won't matter to you. We
>>have no children, but we have a house, assets of stocks, bonds and
>>mutual funds, and a lot of nice stuff. We have wills that specify
>>each of us as the other's beneficiary, and that specify where
>>everything goes if we depart this life together. In your
>>cir***stances and mine, I don't understand the need for a trust.
>
> One of the benefits of the trust is if you are married with children
> (HA HA!). My parents set up a trust with my brother and I as the
> beneficiaries, but my mother could draw from it as necessary. The
> benefit is that when my mother died, the assets of the trust passed to
> us kids with no tax consequence. If a normal will was used giving
> everything to my mother, tax would have been paid in my fathers death,
> then again on my mothers death. It allows you to pass assets to the
> next generation paying the taxes once instead of twice, but provides
> funds for the surviving spouse.
>
You can save a certain amount of estate tax with trusts, but not all of
it. Most of the time what you're saving is probate costs. In 2008 you
wouldn't pay any Federal estate tax til the estate exceeded $2M, trust
or no.
--
Dover
|
