Some Social Security Beneficiaries Can Get Retroactive Payments -- But at a Cost

If you need a lot of cash on hand upon retirement, Social Security offers a lump-sum payment option that’s worth six months of benefits. However, it comes at a cost. It is important to understand the details before agreeing to the payment.

If you have waited beyond your full retirement age (66 for those born between 1943 and 1954) to begin collecting Social Security benefits, you have the option of asking for back payments. The maximum that Social Security offers is six months’ worth of retroactive payments in a lump sum. The downside is that by taking the lump sum, your retirement date and the amount of your monthly benefit are rolled back six months. 

When you delay taking retirement beyond your full retirement age, you amass “delayed retirement credits” that increase your benefits by 8 percent for every year that you wait, over and above annual inflation adjustments. By taking the lump-sum payment, you lose the delayed credits that you had accumulated over the previous six months, so your monthly benefit will be lower than if you did not take the lump sum -- forever.  So, for example, if by taking the six months of retroactive benefits your regular monthly benefit is reduced by $150 and you live another 25 years, you're foregoing $45,000 over that span.  

Whether you should take the lump sum payment depends on a number of factors, including your life expectancy, your spouse’s needs, and what you will do with the new money. Taking the lump-sum payment makes more sense if your life expectancy is shorter. In this case, the immediate cash infusion will be more beneficial than bigger monthly payments. However, if you are married and are the higher earner, you will want to consider your spouse’s needs. If you die, your spouse will receive spousal benefits equal to the monthly amount of your benefits. The higher your benefit, the more your spouse will receive. 

You also need to consider what you will do with the lump-sum payment. If you are paying off high-interest debt or investing in something with a good rate of return, the lump sum might be better than having the higher monthly payment. 

Contact us

Elise Lampert, Esq.

Law Office of Elise Lampert

9595 Wilshire Blvd. | Suite 900 | Beverly Hills , CA 90212

Phone: (818) 905-0601 / Email: elise@elampertlaw.com

https://www.eliselampert.com

 

Dynasty Trusts: A Tax-Efficient Way to Pass Wealth Down Through the Generations

If you want to pass money to future generations without having it subject to gift and estate taxes, then a dynasty trust may be right for you. A dynasty trust allows trust assets to be used for the benefit of multiple generations while keeping the assets out of the grantor’s and the beneficiaries’ taxable estates. 

The main benefit of a dynasty trust is the avoidance of estate and gift taxes over many generations. In 2022, federal estate tax exemption is $12.06 million ($24.12 million for couples). Estates valued at more than the exemption amount will pay federal estate taxes, at a rate of between 18 percent and 40 percent. The lifetime gift tax exclusion – the amount you can give away without incurring a tax – is also $12.06 million in 2022. Note that you can give any number of people up to $16,000 each per year (in 2022) without the gifts counting against the lifetime limit. In addition, the generation skipping transfer (GST) tax affects assets passed to grandchildren. The tax is imposed even when property is left in trust for a grandchild. The GST exemption is the same as the estate and gift tax exemptions. If you transfer more than the GST exemption, the tax rate is 40 percent. 

Assets transferred to a dynasty trust are subject to estate, gift ,and GST taxes only when initially transferred and only if they exceed federal exemption thresholds. While estate and gift tax exemptions are currently very high, in 2026 the exemption is set to drop to the previous exemption amount of $5.49 million (adjusted for inflation).

Another benefit of a dynasty trust is that the assets in the trust are protected from the beneficiaries’ creditors or in the event a beneficiary divorces. If the trust is properly structured, creditors cannot go after trust assets to pay the beneficiaries’ debts. 

How a dynasty trust works

A dynasty trust is an irrevocable trust, which means once it is created it cannot be changed. Funds transferred into the trust will be taxed if they exceed the lifetime gift tax exclusion. However, once funds are transferred to the trust, beneficiaries of the trust can pass assets to the next generation without those assets being subject to estate, GST, or gift taxes. In addition, the assets placed in the trust are removed from your estate and can grow outside of it. 

The trustee of the trust can be a beneficiary, but because the trust is designed to last for generations, it may make sense to have a professional fiduciary, such as a bank or other financial institution, serve as trustee. The trustee manages and distributes the assets in the way you set forth in the trust agreement. Usually, the trust provides for the beneficiaries’ support during their lifetimes. For example, it could direct the trustee to pay out income regularly, make periodic principal distributions, or make distributions contingent on the beneficiary’s need. 

The length of time the dynasty trust can continue to exist depends on state law. Some states allow trusts to run for hundreds of years or indefinitely, while others place limits on how long the trust can operate. Traditionally, the rule against perpetuities states that a trust can last 21 years past the death of the last beneficiary. However, many states have opted out of the rule, allowing trusts to continue for many generations. 

The downside of dynasty trusts is that they are inflexible. Once the trust is created, you lose access to the assets. Because dynasty trusts last for generations, they require guesswork about what will be best for your descendants. 

Dynasty trusts are complicated instruments that must be designed correctly in order to provide benefits. Contact your attorney to determine if a dynasty trust is right for you. 

Contact us

Elise Lampert, Esq.

Law Office of Elise Lampert

9595 Wilshire Blvd. | Suite 900 | Beverly Hills , CA 90212

Phone: (818) 905-0601 / Email: elise@elampertlaw.com

https://www.eliselampert.com

 

How to Deal with an Estranged Child in Your Estate Plan

Unfortunately, not all families get along. If you are having problems with one of your children, you may not want them to benefit from your estate. There are several strategies for dealing with an estranged child in your estate plan.

Depending on the level of estrangement and the reasons for the estrangement, the following are the main approaches for treating a child differently in your estate plan:

• Outright disinheritance. If you really do not want your child to receive anything from you, you can fully disinherit the child. To be safe, even if you are leaving a child nothing, you should specifically mention the child in the will and state that you are disinheriting him or her; failing to do so could make it easier for him or her to challenge the will. (You also need to specify whether you are disinheriting that child’s children, too.) 

Disinheriting a child comes with a risk: He or she may contest the will in court, which can cost your estate time and money. There are steps you can take to try preventing a will contest, including making sure your will is properly executed, writing a letter to the estranged child to explain your reasoning, and removing any appearance of undue influence. Keep in mind, however, that nothing is foolproof. 

• Smaller inheritance. If you don’t want to disinherit your child entirely or wish to make it less likely the estranged child will contest the will, you may want to leave them an inheritance that is smaller than the amount you leave to other beneficiaries. Leaving a child a reduced inheritance may prevent him or her from contesting the will, especially if you include a no-contest clause (also called an “in terrorem clause”) in the will. A no-contest clause provides that if an heir challenges the will and loses, then he or she will get nothing. You must leave the heir enough so that a challenge is not worth the risk of losing the inheritance.
   

• Put the inheritance in a trust. If the reason you do not want to leave your child an inheritance is because you are worried about how they will use the money, you can leave the child’s inheritance in a testamentary trust. You can provide instructions to the trustee on when and how the trustee should disburse the funds in the trust. For example, you can instruct the trustee to disburse the money in small increments or only if the child meets certain conditions, like staying drug- or alcohol-free or working a full-time job. 

Figuring out how to treat an estranged child in your estate plan is complicated and emotional. As Leo Tolstoy wrote in Anna Karenina, "Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way." Talk to your attorney to determine the best strategy for you. 

Contact us

Elise Lampert, Esq.

Law Office of Elise Lampert

9595 Wilshire Blvd. | Suite 900 | Beverly Hills , CA 90212

Phone: (818) 905-0601 / Email: elise@elampertlaw.com

https://www.eliselampert.com

 

Supreme Court Rules State Medicaid Programs Can Recoup a Larger Share of Injury Settlements

If you are injured due to another person’s negligence and receive Medicaid benefits to pay for care, the state has a legal right to recover the funds it spends on your care from a personal injury settlement or award. Yet in a legal case involving a Floridian teen who was catastrophically injured more than a decade ago, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that state Medicaid programs may be repaid from settlement funds reserved for future medical expenses as well. 

The decision affects anyone who receives medical care through Medicaid after suffering a disabling injury that results in a lawsuit.  

In 2008, a truck struck 13-year-old Gianinna Gallardo, leaving her in a vegetative state. The state’s Medicaid agency provided $862,688.77 in medical payments on Gallardo’s behalf. Her parents sued the parties responsible, and the case eventually settled for $800,000, of which about $35,000 represented payment for past medical expenses. The settlement also included funds for Gallardo’s future medical expenses, lost wages, and other damages. 

The state Medicaid agency claimed it was entitled to more than $300,000 in medical payments from this settlement, including money that had been specifically allocated for Gianinna’s future medical expenses. 

Gianinna’s parents then sued the agency in federal court, arguing that the state of Florida should be able to recover monies only from that portion of the settlement allocated for past medical expenses. 

When a U.S. district court ruled in favor of Gianinna, the Medicaid agency appealed. A court of appeals reversed the lower court’s decision. Ultimately, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the case in order to resolve the conflict. 

In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court agreed that the state is allowed to recover benefits for Gianinna’s past — as well as future — medical care. Justice Clarence Thomas, who wrote the majority opinion, noted that Medicaid law “distinguishes only between medical and nonmedical care, not between past (paid) medical care payments and future (un-paid) medical care payments.”  

Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Stephen Breyer dissented. They argued that accepting Medicaid shouldn’t leave a beneficiary indebted to the state for future care that may or may not be needed. 

Contact us

 

Elise Lampert, Esq.

Law Office of Elise Lampert

9595 Wilshire Blvd. | Suite 900 | Beverly Hills , CA 90212

Phone: (818) 905-0601 / Email: elise@elampertlaw.com

https://www.eliselampert.co