Sponsored By

How Withdrawal Rates Affect Estate PlanningHow Withdrawal Rates Affect Estate Planning

In the current environment, most clients want to ensure they don’t outlive their money.

Martin M. Shenkman

May 14, 2019

4 Min Read
calendar money clock

Deciding on an appropriate withdrawal rate in retirement could have a profound impact on a client's estate plan, especially in the current environment.

Focus for Wealthier Clients

For wealthier clients, the application might be different. Instead of worrying about running out of money in later years, their focus is on what estate planning might be appropriate for them. In the current environment of high temporary estate tax exemptions, clients of wealth should be endeavoring to use as much of their estate tax exemption before it expires. Under current law, the $10 million inflation-adjusted exemption declines by half in 2026. If the so-called Blue Wave continues from the 2018 midterm elections into the 2020 general election, a Democratic administration in Washington could significantly curtail estate planning. Senator Bernie Sanders (D-Vt.) has already proposed legislation to reduce the gift exemption to $1 million and the estate tax exemption to $3.5 million. So, those of even moderate wealth (relative to the current exemptions) may be best advised to plan now to use exemptions before they decline. But critical to the use of exemptions is assuring clients have adequate resources for their remaining years and needs. That determination requires a budget, financial plan and forecast. While access can be provided to funds transferred by making a spouse a beneficiary, perhaps by giving a spousal beneficiary a power to appoint back to the settlor/donor spouse, or using some variation of a domestic asset protection trust, a key point of the analysis is what will clients contemplating a large transfer need to live on.

In simplistic terms, if a client has a $20 million estate and spends $400,000/year, the client could transfer $10 million now to use exemptions and withdraw $400,000/year on the $10 million of retained assets and maintain her lifestyle in perpetuity. But if the above suggestion is correct and a 3% “rule of thumb” should replace the old 4% rule of thumb, then the client would require $13.33 million of retained funds, thereby lowering the amount that might be suitable to transfer to irrevocable trusts.

Influence on Planning

If this is correct, it has a profound influence on planning, the use of dynasty trusts and more. If a practitioner projects funds required to be retained by the client so that the unneeded funds can be moved outside of the estate and, perhaps, depending on the technique selected, outside of the client’s reach, then there could be transfers to dynastic trusts that the client wouldn’t have access to. If forecasts are completed to determine whether life insurance should be purchased to insure the premature death of a spouse with respect to a non-reciprocal spousal lifetime access trust (SLAT) plan, a lower feasible withdrawal rate will affect the amount of life insurance that might be advisable. In fact, if a 3% withdrawal rate is correct (and there are other articles suggesting more complex and potentially higher distribution rates), perhaps every client’s estate, financial and insurance plan should be revisited. Certainly, a lower withdrawal rate might be used in sensitivity analysis for forecasts.

A more complex aspect of planning analysis is what amount of funds should be retained if the transfers are made to SLATs or self-settled trusts that the clients can access. Is it still feasible to transfer the $10 million in the above example even if a 3% withdrawal rate is determined to be appropriate to use?

Another consideration is whether a higher withdrawal rate should be used if the goal is to shift as much as feasible out of the client’s estate because the client fears that a new administration may reduce the reduction and make other harsh changes. What impact might the selection of a higher withdrawal rate than some would view as appropriate have as a negative implication to the characterization of the transfer as a fraudulent conveyance? Might the Internal Revenue Service challenge the analysis on the basis that an inappropriately high withdrawal rate suggests that it was more likely that there would have to have been an implied agreement with the trustee for distributions?

Understanding the client’s spending pattern, likely changes in that pattern, asset allocation and how all of that might impact a long-term withdrawal rate can have important implications to planning, especially in an environment in which moderate-wealth clients should be using their current high temporary exemptions.

About the Author

Martin M. Shenkman

www.shenkmanlaw.com

www.laweasy.com

Martin M. Shenkman, CPA, MBA, PFS, AEP (distinguished), JD, is an attorney in private practice in Fort Lee, New Jersey and New York City. His practice concentrates on estate and tax planning, planning for closely held businesses, estate administration.  


A widely quoted expert on tax matters, Mr. Shenkman is a regular source for numerous financial and business publications, including The Wall Street Journal, Fortune, Money, The New York Times, and others. He has appeared as a tax expert on numerous public and cable television shows including The Today Show, CNN, NBC Evening News, CNBC, MSNBC, CNN-FN, and others. He is a frequent guest on radio talk shows throughout the country and has a regular weekly radio show on Money Matters Financial Network.

Mr. Shenkman is a prolific author, having published 42 books and more than 1,000 articles.

Mr. Shenkman is an editorial board member of CCH (Wolter’s Kluwer) Co-Chair of Professional Advisory Board, CPA Journal, and the Matrimonial Strategist. He has previously served on the editorial board of many other tax, estate and real estate publications.

Mr. Shenkman has received numerous awards, including: The 1994 Probate and Property Excellence in Writing Award; The Alfred C. Clapp Award presented in 2007 by the New Jersey Bar Association and the Institute for Continuing Legal Education for excellence in continuing legal education; Worth Magazine’s Top 100 Attorneys (2008); CPA Magazine Top 50 IRS Tax Practitioners (April/May 2008); The “Editors Choice Award” in 2008 from Practical Estate Planning Magazine for his article “Estate Planning for Clients with Parkinson’s;”  The 2008 “The Best Articles Published by the ABA” award for his article “Integrating Religious Considerations into Estate and Real Estate Planning;” New Jersey Super Lawyers, (2010-16); 2012 recipient of the AICPA Sidney Kess Award for Excellence in Continuing Education for CPAs; 2013 Accredited Estate Planners (Distinguished) award from the National Association of Estate Planning Counsels; Financial Planning Magazine 2012 Pro-Bono Financial Planner of the Year for efforts on behalf of those living with chronic illness and disability;

Mr. Shenkman's book, Estate Planning for People with a Chronic Condition or Disability, was nominated for the 2009 Foreword Magazine Book of the Year Award. He was named the lead of Investment Adviser Magazine's “all-star lineup of tax experts” on its April 2013 cover. On June 2015, he delivered the Hess Memorial Lecture for the New York City Bar Association.

Mr. Shenkman is active in many charitable and community causes and organizations. He founded ChronicIllnessPlanning.org which educates professional advisers on planning for clients with chronic illness and disability and which has been the subject of more than a score of articles. He has written books for the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research, the National Multiple Sclerosis Society and the COPD Foundation. He has also presented more than 60 lectures around the country on this topic for professional organizations, charities and others. More than 50 of the articles he has published have addressed planning for those facing the challenges of chronic illness and disability. Additionally, he is a member of the American Brain Foundation Board, Strategic Planning Committee, and Investment Committee.

Mr. Shenkman received his Bachelor of Science degree from Wharton School, with a concentration in accounting and economics. He received a Masters degree in Business Administration from the University of Michigan, with a concentration in tax and finance. He received his law degree from Fordham University School of Law, and is admitted to the bar in New York, New Jersey and Washington, D.C. He is a Certified Public Accountant in New Jersey, Michigan and New York. He is a registered Investment Adviser in New York and New Jersey.

You May Also Like