Retaining a Right to Revoke an Interest in a Charitable Plan

Transcription

1 CHARITABLE LIFE INCOME PLANS Retaining a Right to Revoke an Interest in a Charitable Plan This second part of a two-part article analyzes a donor's retention of the right to revoke another's interest in a charitable life income plan (such as a charitable remainder trust, charitable gift annuity, or pooled income fund). Author: MARY C. HESTER AND LIZBETH A. TURNER, ATTORNEYS MARY C. HESTER is a shareholder with the law firm of Liskow & Lewis in New Orleans, and is certified by the Louisiana Board of Legal Specialization as a specialist in estate planning and administration. LIZBETH A. TURNER is the Director of Planned Gifts at Tulane University in New Orleans, where she assists donors and their advisors in charitable gift planning. Both authors serve on the Charitable Trust Law Revision Subcommittee of the Louisiana State Law Institute, and both have lectured and written on estate planning and charitable giving. The first part of this two-part article analyzed the transfer tax rules applicable to charitable life income plans, including the availability of the annual exclusion and the availability of the marital deduction. 1 This second part of the article will examine the authority allowing a donor to retain the right to revoke another's interest in a charitable life income plan, the effect of retaining the right to revoke, and the advantages and disadvantages of retaining such a right. Authority for retained right to revoke The gift tax Regulations specifically provide that a gift is incomplete if the donor reserves an unrestricted power to name new beneficiaries or to change or terminate beneficiaries' interests. 2 CRTs. The Regulations applicable to charitable remainder trusts ( CRTs ) provide that the grantor may retain the power exercisable only by will to revoke or terminate the interest of any noncharitable beneficiary. 3 Retaining an inter vivos, rather than a testamentary, right to revoke would presumably disqualify the CRT. 4 The donor may avoid making a taxable gift by retaining a testamentary right to revoke a successor beneficiary's interest. The donor need not actually exercise the right its mere retention is enough to make the gift incomplete. 5 CGAs. Although commentators agree that donors may retain either an inter vivos or testamentary right to revoke an annuitant's interest in a charitable gift annuity ( CGA ), no specific reference to retaining the right to revoke exists in the Code section and Regulations setting forth the CGA requirements. 6 In contrast to specific requirements for qualification of CRTs and pooled income funds ( PIFs ), the CGA requirements appear in a Code section that excludes qualifying CGAs from treatment as acquisition indebtedness in determining unrelated business taxable income. Only the Regulations on the treatment

2 of capital gain specifically refer to the right to revoke in providing that the retention of such a right will not cause the annuity to be considered as assignable to someone other than a charity and will not prevent capital gain from being reported over the donor's life expectancy. 7 The Regulation most often cited as authority that a donor may retain either a testamentary or lifetime right to revoke is the general gift tax Regulation stating that a gift is incomplete if the donor reserves a power to name new beneficiaries or change the beneficiaries' interests. 8 Therefore, the conclusion that either a testamentary or lifetime right to revoke is permitted appears to be based on the fact that neither right is expressly prohibited. PIFs. The PIF Regulations expressly permit a donor to retain a power exercisable only by will to revoke or terminate the interest of any beneficiary other than the charity that maintains the fund. 9 A donor who reserves the right to revoke during life will not be eligible for an income or gift tax deduction for the charitable remainder interest. Even worse, since the right to revoke is addressed in the Regulations dealing with qualification of a PIF, retention of a lifetime right to revoke could possibly disqualify the entire trust as a PIF. 10 Effect of retaining the right to revoke A donor's retaining the right to revoke the interest of a successor income beneficiary will clearly make the gift incomplete when the life income plan is created. Retaining a right to revoke does not affect the income tax charitable deduction because the charity's interest is valued assuming that the donor will not exercise that right. 11 Therefore, if the donor names herself first and then a successor as lifetime income beneficiaries, both life expectancies will be considered in calculating the charitable income tax deduction. Retaining the right to revoke may have estate tax consequences. For CRTs and PIFs, if the donor retains the testamentary right to revoke until death or within three years of death, and the successor beneficiary survives the donor, then the value of the entire trust or PIF units will be included in the donor's taxable estate. 12 (In the case of CRTs, the trust assets will also be included if the donor retains the power to change or designate the charitable beneficiary.) 13 For CRTs, the charitable estate tax deduction will be available for the charitable remainder interest in the donor's estate. For PIFs, if the successor beneficiary is a nonspouse, the charitable deduction will also be available for the remainder interest; for a spouse, the QTIP election is available for the entire value of the PIF units, and the charitable deduction will be available for the remainder in the donee spouse's estate. 14 If a donor dies without exercising a right to revoke a CGA interest, the present value of the successor annuity interest will be included in the donor's estate. Unlike CRTs and PIFs, there is no charitable remainder to include in the estate. If the donor revokes the successor annuity interest by will, then the right to future annuity payments ends with the donor's death and nothing should be includable in the estate. 15 Alternatively, the value of the annuity payments might be includable under Section 2038 but eligible for a charitable deduction under Section We believe, however, that since after revocation no value remains, nothing is included in the donor's estate. Completed gift during donor's lifetime?

3 Because the right to revoke a CRT or PIF income interest can be exercised only by will, retaining the revocation right may not make the entire gift incomplete. If the beneficiary will receive income immediately, the gift of the right to receive income during the donor's lifetime could be considered complete when the CRT or PIF agreement is funded. Some commentators suggest that the value of such a gift is measured by the actuarial value of the beneficiary's right to receive income during the donor's life expectancy. 17 Others suggest that a completed gift occurs only when each payment is actually received by the nondonor beneficiary during the donor's lifetime, rather than there being a single completed gift when the CRT or PIF is funded. If the gifts are completed only when the annual payments are received, then the annual exclusion could be applied to each year's payments. 18 This issue arises both with a single-life CRT or PIF naming a nondonor as income beneficiary and with a joint-and-survivor CRT or PIF naming nondonors or both the donor and another as income beneficiaries. The value of the single-life CRT or PIF beneficiary's irrevocable right to receive payments during the donor's life could be equal to the actuarial value of that right to receive payments during the donor's lifetime. 19 A jointand-survivor CRT or PIF funded with separately owned property results in a gift by the donor to the nondonor of a half interest in the payments during their joint lifetimes and of the survivorship interest. The right to revoke may make the gift of the survivorship interest incomplete, but the gift of payments during their joint lifetimes cannot be revoked by the testamentary right and may therefore be complete. 20 For this reason, some suggest that donors should give a nonspouse beneficiary only a successor interest and retain the right to revoke. 21 For a PIF interest, the same issue arises even for concurrent spouse beneficiaries because the spouse's interest will not qualify for a QTIP election. For CGAs, this issue does not arise if the donor retains a right to revoke during life. The issue does arise if only a testamentary right to revoke is retained, but the marital deduction is available for spouse donees. 22 The gift tax Regulations give some indication that retaining a testamentary right to revoke an interest that begins during the donor's lifetime does not make the entire gift incomplete. In describing circumstances making a gift incomplete, the Regulations include as an example a donor's retaining the unrestricted power to reduce a gift to one of less value. 23 In contrast is an example of a restricted power to reduce a life estate from a term of life to a term of five years. The Regulations conclude that the gift of the life estate for the five-year term is certain, and is to that extent complete. 24 Accordingly, the IRS might argue that a donor who retains the testamentary right to revoke a gift of an income interest that begins during the donor's lifetime has nevertheless made a completed gift for the period of the donor's actuarial life expectancy because the donor cannot reduce the gift to a period less than the donor's life expectancy. In Rev. Rul , 25 the donor named himself as lifetime income beneficiary of a CRT and retained the testamentary right to revoke his wife's successor interest. The Ruling found the gift to the spouse incomplete, specifically noting that she would not receive anything until the donor's death. This focus on the fact that the right to revoke preceded the spouse's interest suggests that the result might have been different if the spouse's interest had begun before the donor's testamentary right to revoke could terminate it. Ltr. Rul provides some support for the interpretation that, if the donor reserves the testamentary right to revoke, then each gift to the income beneficiary becomes

4 complete only in the year in which the payment is actually received, and no completed gift is made at the CRT's creation. In the letter ruling, the donor had created a charitable remainder unitrust ( CRUT ) with a 6% unitrust payment to be divided among seven beneficiaries, and had reserved the testamentary right to revoke the interest of each income beneficiary. The CRUT terminated on the earliest of (1) the end of a 15-year term, (2) the beneficiary's date of death, or (3) the donor's death if the donor exercised the testamentary right to revoke. The donor requested a ruling on the tax effects of releasing his right to revoke. The IRS ruled that the gift to the seven income beneficiaries was incomplete as long as the donor retained his right to revoke. The ruling further concluded that only the annual unitrust amounts actually paid to the beneficiaries constituted completed gifts and were eligible for the annual exclusion. If the donor relinquished the right to revoke, a gift of all future unitrust payments to the beneficiaries would be complete and taxable at its then present value. 26 Could retaining the right to revoke disqualify a life income plan? Another relevant issue is whether retaining the right to revoke could actually disqualify the plan. CRTs. The CRT Regulations initially state that the donor may retain the power exercisable only by will to revoke the interest of any noncharitable beneficiary. 27 But in the following subsection, the Regulations address the right to revoke in the context of the permitted period of the annuity or unitrust amount. The Regulations for both charitable remainder annuity trusts ( CRATs ) and CRUTs provide that the permitted payment period may be either for the life or lives of a named individual or individuals or for a term not to exceed 20 years. 28 The Regulations further provide that if an individual receives an amount for life, it must be solely for his life. 29 According to the Regulations, a term-of-years CRT may be terminated by the death of the recipient or the grantor's exercise of a testamentary right to revoke. 30 The Regulations therefore specifically approve the donor's retaining the right to revoke for a term-of-years CRT, but not for a lifetime CRT. Does this disparity mean that a donor may not retain the right to revoke a beneficiary's lifetime interest if the beneficiary's interest runs concurrently with the donor's or if the donor has no interest in the CRT? In either situation, the beneficiary's lifetime interest could terminate on the date of the donor's death, rather than on the date of the beneficiary's death. The issue does not arise when the donor retains the right to revoke a successor lifetime interest because there the beneficiary's interest does not begin until after the donor's death. If the interest were not revoked, it would begin at the donor's death and would continue for the beneficiary's lifetime without the threat of revocation. If the beneficiary's interest were revoked, it would never come into existence. Commentators concerned about this issue warn that the donor's retaining the right to revoke a beneficiary's existing lifetime interest could disqualify the trust as a CRT, resulting in the donor's loss of both the income and the gift tax charitable deductions. 31 These commentators advise against retaining a right to revoke that could terminate an existing lifetime interest and suggest that retaining the right to revoke be limited to CRTs for a term of years or CRTs in which the beneficiary's interest succeeds that of the donor rather than running concurrently with it. 32 Other commentators are less concerned, citing (1) the Regulations' general statement that the donor may retain the testamentary right to revoke the interest of noncharitable beneficiaries and (2) private letter rulings

5 approving CRTs that include a retained right to revoke the interest of a current lifetime beneficiary. 33 Ltr. Rul seems to support the broader view. There, the donor had retained the right to revoke the interest of the lifetime CRUT beneficiary. The IRS cited both the Regulations' general approval of retention of the testamentary right to revoke and the requirement that a lifetime income interest must be measured solely by the beneficiary's own life. 34 The IRS concluded that the life of the Current Beneficiary will be the measuring life in the computation of the contribution to the Remainderman and that the donor's retained right to terminate the interest by testament would not affect the qualification of the Trust as a charitable remainder unitrust. 35 Presenting the right to revoke as a qualified contingency permitted under Section 664(f)(2) has been proposed. For example, the CRT instrument could provide for termination on the first to occur of the income beneficiary's death or the donor's testamentary revocation of the beneficiary's income interest. 36 It is further suggested that the requirement that a lifetime interest be measured solely by the beneficiary's life was made obsolete by the allowance of qualified contingencies under Section 664(f). 37 Ltr. Rul supports the position that the allowance of qualified contingencies permits a beneficiary's interest to be terminated by the death of another person. The CRT at issue in this ruling provided that the successor interests of three beneficiaries would terminate at the death of a fourth successor beneficiary. Although the IRS found that the CRT was disqualified because it failed the 10% remainder requirement, the IRS specifically ruled that the termination of the unitrust payments upon the death of Y [the fourth successor beneficiary] is a qualified contingency within the meaning of 664(f). The updated sample forms for CRATs published by the IRS in 2003 do not clearly resolve this issue. The sample form for a CRAT created for two consecutive lives includes an alternate provision for retaining the testamentary right to revoke the successor beneficiary's interest. 38 The new form for a sample inter vivos CRAT for one measuring life, however, does not include such an alternate provision. 39 Is this provision omitted from the single-life CRAT form because the IRS does not approve of the donor's retaining a right that could cause the CRAT to terminate on a date other than the death of the lifetime income beneficiary? Or did the IRS simply assume that a single-life CRAT would typically be created for the donor's own benefit and thus have no need of such a provision? The annotations included with the sample form for consecutive life interests explain that the donor's retention of the testamentary right to revoke may have gift and estate tax consequences. It will affect the value of the annuity interests transferred. It may also cause a portion of the trust to be included in the donor's gross estate for federal estate tax purposes, even if it would otherwise not be includible. 40 Retaining the right to revoke a successor income interest will presumably cause the gift to be incomplete, removing any gift tax liability, and will make the gift includable in the donor's estate if the right is held through the donor's death. Thus, the meaning of the first and third of these sentences is clear. But less clear is the meaning of the statement that retention of the right will affect the value of the annuity interests transferred. If the gift is incomplete, no gift tax valuation question arises. Perhaps the IRS is referring to the fact that the beneficiary will be older at the donor's death, so that if the right is retained, the value of the annuity may then be less than when the CRT was created. The IRS sample form for a joint-and-survivor CRAT also includes in an alternate provision the donor's retained right to revoke and the same language regarding the possible

6 consequences. 41 Here, the statement that retaining the right to revoke will affect the value of the interest is consistent with a position that only the portion of the gift for the period exceeding the donor's life expectancy is made incomplete. But because the same language is included in the form for consecutive life interests, it is unclear whether any different meaning is intended. The alternate provisions for retaining the right to revoke included in both two-life CRAT forms make it clear that the donor is one of the income beneficiaries of the trust. None of the provisions, therefore, specifically imply approval of retention of the right to revoke by a donor who is not a beneficiary of the CRT. One could infer from the CRAT forms that the IRS does not object to the retention of the right to revoke if the donor is an income beneficiary, whether the interest subject to the revocation succeeds the donor's or is concurrent with it, but it has been predicted that the issue of cutting off a lifetime interest will likely still be debated. 42 If the donee's interest in a joint-and-successor CRT is viewed as a 50% interest during the donor's lifetime and a 100% interest at the donor's death, then it could be argued that it is the new 100% interest that is terminated in the revenue procedure, while others will argue the co-beneficiary's lifetime interest was obviously cut off. 43 CGAs. Little concern exists about a donor's retaining the right to revoke another's interest in a CGA, perhaps because the right to revoke is not limited to a testamentary right or because any consequences would affect the charity rather than the donor. 44 PIFs. As with CRTs, reserving the right to revoke a PIF interest when the donor is not a beneficiary could be viewed as creating an income interest potentially measured by the donor's lifetime rather than the beneficiary's. 45 The Code and Regulations do not prohibit a reservation of the right to revoke in that situation. The Regulations permit a donor to retain the power to revoke the interest of any beneficiary other than the charity that maintains the PIF. 46 Also, the IRS sample instrument of transfer for a one-life interest in a PIF specifically gives a donor the option of subjecting a beneficiary's lifetime payments to the donor's retained testamentary right to revoke. 47 It seems unlikely that the IRS could validly argue that a transfer to a PIF using its own sample revocation language disqualifies the fund or transfers to it. 48 Advantages and disadvantages of retaining the right to revoke Whether retaining the right to revoke is the right decision for a particular donor will depend on that donor's situation. It may be helpful to consider the consequences of retaining the right. If the right to revoke is retained, the gift to the noncharitable beneficiary is at least to some extent incomplete. 1. To the extent that the gift is incomplete, there is no taxable gift, and no gift tax is incurred on funding. 2. The donor may apply the annual exclusion to the payments made to the beneficiary each year as they are made. If the donor is likely to outlive the beneficiary (or the term of a CRT), this may be the best approach.

7 3. The donor will have the right to revoke the gift for nontax reasons. For example, an income interest given to a spouse could be revoked if the donor and spouse are later divorced. Similarly, unmarried partners may wish to reserve the right to revoke in case the relationship ends. For CRTs, however, divorce or other changes in circumstances may now be listed as qualified contingencies to accomplish the same result If a CRT were disqualified (which would also make the marital deduction unavailable), the beneficiary's interest could be revoked Retaining the right to revoke may be advantageous if the interest does not clearly qualify for the marital deduction. For example, the marital deduction may not be available for a CGA that makes payments first to the donor and then to the donor's spouse. Yet, a donor contributing appreciated separate property to a CGA may prefer to structure it with successive interests because it is unclear if the Regulations require a donor to be the sole primary annuitant for the transfer to be eligible for favorable capital gains treatment. 51 Both issues can be resolved by retaining the right to revoke the donee spouse's secondary interest. 6. If it is difficult or unclear how to calculate the value of a noncharitable beneficiary's income interest, it may be simpler for the donor to reserve the right to revoke and thereby defer valuing the survivorship interest until it is done for estate tax purposes. If the donor retains the right to revoke through the donor's death (or within three years of it), the value of the life income plan will be included in the donor's taxable estate. 1. For a CRT or a PIF, the value of the charity's remainder interest will be deductible, and the noncharitable beneficiary's income interest will be subject to estate tax, based on the values of these interests on the donor's date of death. For a CGA, the value of the annuity on the date of death will be subject to estate tax. 2. Under current law, the donor's $1 million lifetime exemption from gift tax will be smaller than the amount that can pass free of federal estate tax if the donor dies in any year from 2004 through If the donor wishes to preserve the gift tax exemption, or has already used it, postponing any transfer tax until death may be advantageous. If the combined taxable value of the beneficiary's interest and the rest of the donor's estate is less than the donor's remaining applicable exclusion amount, no transfer tax may be due on the interest at the donor's death. Thus, a donor could take a chance that the estate tax burden in the future would be less than the gift tax burden today. 3. The value of the CRT's assets or the PIF units will increase the total value of the donor's gross estate. Even if the donor revokes the noncharitable beneficiary's interest, the charitable remainder interest will be included in the donor's estate. This inclusion of value might necessitate filing an estate tax return when one would not otherwise be required, and could also disqualify the estate for special-use valuation under Section 2032A, stock redemptions to pay death taxes (Section 303), or installment payment of estate tax for a closely held business (Section 6166) For CGAs, if the right to revoke a survivor's annuity is not exercised, then the value of the survivor's annuity will increase the total value of the donor's gross estate, with the same potential consequences described in the preceding paragraph. If the donor exercises the right to revoke, nothing is included in the donor's estate because there is no charitable remainder to include. 53

8 5. If both the donor and the beneficiary live for a long time after the life income plan is created, the charitable deduction for a CRT or PIF included in the donor's estate could be more valuable, and the beneficiary's interest might be less valuable, than on the date that the plan is created because the beneficiary will be older. Alternatively, if the CRT or PIF assets have greatly appreciated, the income interest could be worth more. If interest rates have dropped steeply, the income interest in the life income plan could be more valuable (particularly for a CRAT or CGA) because valuation of the income interest is sensitive to a drop in interest rates. If the donor does not retain the right to revoke, the gift will be complete when the life income plan is created. 1. The value of the income interest will be subject to gift tax on funding of the life income plan. 2. If the donor is not a beneficiary, the plan and any appreciation on CRT assets or PIF units will be excluded from the donor's estate. 3. For life income plans that create a present interest, the donor may apply the annual exclusion to the value of the beneficiary's income interest. If the value is close to the current amount of the exclusion, the donor should consider not retaining the right to revoke. 4. If the donor expects estate tax to be due, it may be advantageous to pay gift tax rather than estate tax because the value subject to gift tax is tax-exclusive, whereas the value subject to estate tax is tax-inclusive. This advantage will be lost if the donor dies within three years of making the gift because the gift taxes would then be included in the donor's estate. 5. For a CRT naming only a citizen spouse (or the spouse and donor) as income beneficiary, the unlimited marital deduction will be available. A PIF naming only a citizen spouse as beneficiary will also be eligible for an unlimited marital deduction (but a PIF naming the donor as primary or as joint beneficiary will not be eligible for the marital deduction). An immediate (nondeferred) CGA solely for a citizen spouse will be eligible for the marital deduction, as will an immediate (and probably a deferred) CGA naming only the spouse and donor as joint-and-survivor annuitants. The transfer tax issues affecting life income plans are complex due to the differences in the types of plans and the many ways they can be structured. We suggest the following framework for analyzing transfer tax consequences: Is there a gift to another person? If there is a gift, is it eligible for the annual exclusion? If a spouse is given an income interest, is it eligible for the marital deduction? If there is a taxable gift, can it be avoided by retaining a right to revoke the income interest? Do the costs of retaining the right to revoke outweigh the tax and nontax benefits? In some circumstances, there will not be clear answers to all of these questions. In all cases, a careful analysis of transfer tax consequences is essential in determining whether the right to revoke should be reserved.

9 PRACTICE NOTES Retaining a right to revoke does not affect the income tax charitable deduction because the charity's interest is valued assuming that the donor will not exercise that right. 1 See Hester and Turner, Navigating the Transfer Tax Maze of Charitable Life Income Plans, 32 ETPL 32 (May 2005) Reg (c). Regs (a)(4) and (a)(4). Regs (a)(4) and (a)(4); Donaldson and Osteen, The Harvard Manual on Tax Aspects of Charitable Giving, p. 313 (8th ed., 1999), citing Ltr. Rul Regs (a)(5), (a)(5), and 1.642(c)-5(b)(2); Rev. Rul , CB 220; Rev. Rul , CB Section 514(c)(5); Reg (c)-1(e)(1). Reg (a)(4)(ii). Teitell, Deferred Giving: Explanation, Specimen Agreements, Forms, Vol. 1, 4.07[c][2] (2000) (hereinafter DG ); Minton, Charitable Gift Annuities: The Complete Resource Manual, p (2004), citing Reg (c). 9 Reg (c)-5(b)(2). 10 Toce et al., Tax Economics of Charitable Giving, 19-14, 19.04[3]. (RIA 2004/2005). 11 Section 664(f); Rev. Rul , CB 343; Ltr. Rul Section 2038(a)(1). 13 Id. 14 Sections 2056(b)(7), 2044, and 2055(a). 15 Minton, supra note 8, at pp through Finestone, Charitable Gift Annuities, 29 ACTEC J. 37, 41, (2003). 17 Charitable Giving Tax Service, 7-26 (R&R Newkirk Co., 2001) (hereinafter CGTS ); Charitable Giving and Solicitation, 23,090, 24,009 (RIA 1990) (hereinafter CGS ). 18 CGTS, supra note 17, at 7-26 (2001), 9-33 (1994); CGS, supra note 17, at 23,086 (1990). 19 Tidd, Transfer Tax Considerations in Gift Planning, Planning for Tomorrow: Eighth National Conference on Planned Giving, XXIII-11 (10/11-14/95, Anaheim, Cal.). 20 CGS, supra note 17, at 23,086 (1990). 21

10 CGS, supra note 17, at 23,090 (1990). 22 See the discussion of the marital deduction for gift annuities in Part 1 of this article, supra note Reg (c). 24 Id CB Ltr. Rul , citing Sections 2503(b) and 2513(a). 27 Regs (a)(4) and (a)(4). 28 Regs (a)(5)(i) and (a)(5)(i). 29 Id. 30 Id.; see also Ltr. Rul Teitell, DG, supra note 8, at 2.11[F] (2002); Toce, supra note 10, at 19.04[3]. 32 Teitell, DG, supra note 8, at 2.11[B][2] (2002) and 2.11[F] (2002); Toce, supra note 10, at 19.04[3]. 33 Osteen, More Than You Ever Wanted to Know About Charitable Remainder Trusts, CASE, Advanced Planned Giving Institute (3/12-14/97, San Francisco), at p. 3, citing Regs (a)(4) and (a)(4) and Ltr. Rul ; Donaldson and Osteen, supra note 4, at , citing Reg (a)(4) and Ltr. Ruls and Ltr. Rul , citing Regs (a)(4) and (a)(5). 35 Private letter rulings, of course, may not be used or cited as a precedent and are directed only to the taxpayers who have requested them. Section 6110(b)(3). 36 CGTS, supra note 17, at 7-116(a) (1995). 37 CGTS, supra note 17, at 7-116(b) (1995). 38 Rev. Proc , IRB Rev. Proc , IRB Rev. Proc , supra note 38, at section Rev. Proc , IRB Pusey, Exploring the New Model Charitable Remainder Annuity Trust Forms, Gift Planner's Digest (9/17/03). 43 Id. 44 Minton, supra note 8, at p. 2-11; Finestone, supra note 16, at p. 39,

11 Toce, supra note 10, at 19.04[3]. 46 Reg (c)-5(b)(2). 47 Rev. Proc , CB Id. See also Ltr. Rul Section 664(f); Teitell, DG, supra note 8, at 2.11[B][3] (2002). 50 Teitell, DG, supra note 8, at 2.11[B][3] (2002). 51 Reg (pertaining to the spreading of capital gain over a donor's life expectancy). 52 Teitell, DG, supra note 8, at 2.11[F] (2002), 3.20[B] (2002). 53 Minton, supra note 8, at pp through Copyright 2006 RIA. All rights reserved.