Planning 360 Years Ahead: Dynasty Estate Planning in South Carolina After RAP Change
Great news for high-net-worth individuals and families in South Carolina: You now have the ability to direct what happens to your property for much longer after your death. Previously, long-term estate planning had an effective limit of 90 years, or about three generations. Now, South Carolina residents can create trusts to protect and manage assets for up to 360 years – roughly a dozen generations.
This change went into effect in May 2025 when Gov. McMaster signed H.3432 into law. The bill extended the “wait-and-see” vesting period for future nonvested property interests and powers of appointment from 90 years to 360 years under the state’s Rule Against Perpetuities (RAP) laws. See South Carolina Code Sections 27-6-20 and 27-6-40.
This extension makes South Carolina competitive with other trust-friendly states like Tennessee, South Dakota, and Delaware, potentially attracting more high-net-worth families and trust businesses. (This is likely why H.3432 passed both the House and the Senate unanimously.)
For high-net-worth individuals and families, this change doesn’t affect the what, just the how long of family dynasty estate planning. But planning that far into the future comes with its own challenges. Below, we’ll look at the basics and benefits of dynasty estate planning, then at three things to watch out for.
The Basics and Benefits of (Very) Long-Term, Multi-Generation Estate Planning
The Basics of the RAP: Curbing “Dead-Hand Control”
The Rule Against Perpetuities originated in 17th Century England as a way to prevent long-term “dead-hand control,” when a deceased person directs or controls what happens to his or her property from the grave through a will or trust. This helped keep land marketable and transferable while limiting the power of family dynasties.
The RAP came to the U.S. as part of the common law with the same intention. However, it’s evolved over the years, trending in favor of individual property owners. The majority of states have extended the length of time individuals can direct what happens to their property after death – South Carolina included. (You can read more about the history of the RAP in South Carolina here.)
The RAP in South Carolina
South Carolina’s Rule Against Perpetuities applies to any nonvested future interest or power of appointment, whether that’s created through a trust, will, or other legal instrument. In practice, though, the RAP primarily applies to trusts, which are the best instruments for multi-generational estate planning.
Assets in trusts may enjoy the following protections in South Carolina, depending on how the trust is drawn up:
- Avoidance of estate tax
- Avoidance of generation-skipping transfer tax (GST tax)
- Protection from creditors
- Protection from lawsuits
- Protection from divorce
- Protection from any individual owner’s bad decisions
An individual beneficiary may enjoy the advantages of the assets during the life of the trust according to its terms, such as the right to live in a property, to receive income generated by the trust’s investments, or have the trust pay for HEMS.
The 360-year clock starts ticking when a future interest or power of appointment is created, either when an irrevocable trust is funded or when a revocable trust becomes irrevocable upon the death of the grantor/settlor. By the end of the 360-year period, any nonvested property interests or powers of appointment must either vest or terminate. Any assets that then pass into the beneficiaries’ personal estates are once again subject to estate taxes, creditors, and more.
The Realities of (Very) Long-Term, Multi-Generation Estate Planning: What to Watch Out For
The benefit of the 360-year time frame is simply that the assets are protected for much longer than previously allowed under state law. But planning so far into the future presents its own potential pitfalls. Here are three considerations before drawing up a dynasty trust.
Watch Out 1: Inflexibility. Flexibility in Your Trust is a Must.
Imagine it’s the year 1666 and you’re creating a legal document to direct what will happen to your property for the next 360 years. Could you even imagine how much the world would change? Would the plans you developed in 1666 make sense in the year 2026?
That’s one of the big challenges of creating a trust that’s valid for 360 years into the future: It’s impossible to know what life will look like in 2386. For this reason, you must ensure that your trust is flexible enough to meet beneficiaries’ changing needs over the coming centuries.
This could mean provisions of the trust:
- Give future beneficiaries special powers of appointment so they can (within limits) direct which assets should go to whom
- Give the trustee(s) powers to invest, manage, or sell assets as needed to carry out the purpose of the trust
- Allow decanting, restructuring, mergers, and divisions
- Use percentages or shares to determine distributions rather than fixed currency amounts
- Address family-specific circumstances (to discuss with your estate planning attorney)
Avoid overly restrictive objectives and terms in the trust such as:
- “This trust is to preserve the family home”
- “Never sell the land”
- “Invest only in bonds rated AAA”
Restrictive terms like these seem to make sense now, or even over the next five years, but could be obsolete or counter to the purpose of the trust in 360 years.
Watch Out 2: Choice of Trustee. Trustee Succession Is Crucial.
Choice of trustee is crucial no matter the trust, as the trustee holds a great deal of power. But with a trust that could conceivably last for centuries into the future, it’s certain that the trust will someday be managed by individuals or entities that don’t yet exist. What can you do to ensure your trust stays in good hands?
This is where trustee succession comes in. Speak with an estate planning attorney with experience drafting long-term trusts on procedures, provisions, and restrictions to include in the trust that determine how and when a new trustee is appointed.
You may also want to add additional layers of protection such as a trust director or trust protector.
Read more on this topic on our blog:
Watch Out 3: Vulnerabilities. Trusts Are Not Invincible.
No matter how well-written a trust is, the assets in it are still subject to some outside forces.
A trust can protect assets from private threats like creditors, divorces, lawsuits, and the bad decisions of individuals who might squander them. But a trust cannot offer protect from public-law powers. For example, a piece of real property in a trust would still be subject to:
- Tax liens, tax deed sales, or foreclosure due to unpaid property taxes
- Claims of eminent domain
- Easements
- Adverse possession
- Zoning or use laws
- Other government rights and interests
In short: A trust is not a magical shield, not even a well-written one designed to last 360 years.
Strategic Advice and Help with Long-Term Estate Planning from Gem McDowell
Trusts bring uncertainty, as you don’t know what the future will look like. But you can help avoid problems and keep your assets protected by talking through potential scenarios with an experienced estate planning attorney like Gem McDowell. Gem has over 30 years of experience helping South Carolina individuals and businesses protect their interests and plan for the future. He and his team can help you create a custom estate plan that’s robust enough to protect your assets yet flexible enough to adapt to life’s inevitable changes.
Call Gem and his team at the Gem McDowell Law Group, with offices in Myrtle Beach and Mt. Pleasant, SC, at 843-284-1021 today to schedule a free consultation.
Did You Know? SC Estates Over $600,000 Must Be Reported to the SCDOR
After someone dies in South Carolina, one of the duties of the personal representative (aka executor) is to create an inventory of the decedent’s probate assets and fair market value, as described in South Carolina Code Section 62-3-706. This inventory and appraisement must be filed with the court and mailed to any interested party within 90 days.
From there, the probate judge must send a copy of the inventory and appraisal to the South Carolina Department of Revenue (SCDOR) for every estate with probate assets of $600,000 or more, as detailed in SC Code Section 12-16-1220.
Here is the full text of that section:
“SECTION 12-16-1220. Information to be furnished by probate judge.
“The probate judge shall send to the department by mail a copy of the inventory and appraisal of the assets of every estate the gross assets of which for probated purposes are equal to or exceed the sum of six hundred thousand dollars within thirty days after it is filed, together with a copy of any will probated with respect to the estate. In the case of a nonresident decedent, the probate judge shall furnish the department with copies of all wills filed with his office and, in the case of an ancillary administration, the probate judge shall furnish the department with copies of inventories and appraisals in all cases regardless of the value of the tangible personal property and real property having a situs in this State.”
HISTORY: 1987 Act No. 70, Section 1.
What’s the purpose of this?
The purpose was to ensure that South Carolina received all the state-level estate taxes it was owed prior to 2005.
This law was created in 1987, when the unified credit amount was changed from $500,000 to $600,000, where it remained for a decade. All estates with probate assets of $600,000 or more were subject to federal estate taxes.
Also at that time, the federal government offered a federal credit against state estate taxes. This meant that a portion of an estate’s federal estate taxes would go to the state. South Carolina (and many other states) instituted a “pickup tax” equivalent to the amount of the federal credit. (See SC Code Section 12-16-510)
The federal credit was fully phased out in 2005, and South Carolina has no separate provision for collecting state-level estate taxes. So while the laws requiring reporting estates of $600,000 or more to the SCDOR and the “pickup tax” are no longer relevant, they remain on the books.
Get Help with Estate Planning
Gem and his team at the Gem McDowell Law Group help individuals and families across South Carolina create personalized estate plans to protect your interests and give you peace of mind. Schedule your free consultation today by calling us at (843) 284-1021 today.
The One Big Beautiful Bill: Implications for Estate Planning & Running a Business
H.R.1 of the 119th Congress, better known as the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” was signed into law on July 4, 2025. This omnibus bill contains many provisions that could affect estate planning and running a business. This blog is a very brief overview highlighting some key points we believe you should be aware of.
Contact your own CPA, business attorney, and/or estate planning attorney to discuss how the bill affects you.
Implications of the OBBB for Estate Planning
The following provisions in the OBBB affect estate planning:
- $15 million applicable exclusion amount for federal estate taxes, lifetime gift taxes, and generation-skipping transfer (GST) taxes
- 1031 “Like Kind” exchanges preserved
- Step-up in basis at death is the same; it has not been repealed or capped
Check out this blog for a closer look.
Implications of the OBBB for Business Owners
OBBB affects some businesses, too.
- Expansion of Qualified Small Business Stock (QSBS) exclusion (read more about the QSBS here on our blog)
- The Qualified Business Income (QBI) deduction is now permanent (read more about the QBI deduction on the IRS website)
- Doubles available deductions under Section 179 from $1.25 million to $2.5 million
Many additional provisions in the bill have implications for yearly tax planning and managing cash flow, which you should discuss with your company’s CPA and/or tax preparer.
South Carolina Business Attorney Gem McDowell
Gem and his team at the Gem McDowell Law Group help people start, grow, and protect their businesses in South Carolina. Gem McDowell is a problem solver with over 30 years of experience in business law and commercial real estate, helping business professionals protect their interests and avoid mistakes. Call to schedule a free consultation today at (843) 284-1021.
Estate Planning After the One Big Beautiful Bill
The signing into law of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (H.R. 1 of the 119th Congress) on July 4, 2025 has a few very important implications for estate planning. Here’s a brief look at them.
Contact your own CPA and/or estate planning attorney to discuss if and how you are personally affected.
The Combined Exclusion Amount is $15 Million, Permanent and Tied to Inflation
Each individual may transfer up to $15 million, and married couples up to $30 million, tax-free during life or after death, starting in 2026. This $15 million combines exclusions for federal estate taxes, lifetime gift taxes, and generation-skipping taxes (GST) into one.
Read more about this and the history of the applicable exclusion amount / unified credit in our blog here.
1031 “Like-Kind” Exchanges Are Fully Preserved Without Limits
Individuals and real estate investors can defer capital gains taxes by exchanging one investment property for another of “like kind.” The OBBB did not include any caps or restrictions on 1031 exchanges.
Read more about 1031 “Like-Kind” Exchanges here on our blog.
Get Help with Estate Planning in South Carolina – Call Gem McDowell
If you need help with wills, trusts, or estate plans for estates large or small, call the Gem McDowell Law Group. Gem and his team help individuals and families create personalized wills and estate plans that reflect their unique circumstances and wishes. With offices in Myrtle Beach and Mt. Pleasant, SC, we’re here to help. Call us at (843) 284-1021 today to schedule a free consultation.
Applicable Exclusion Amount Now $15 Million – Its History and Future
The One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB) has set the applicable exclusion amount taxes at $15 million per individual, or $30 million per married couple, starting in 2026. This amount will be indexed for inflation starting in 2027.
Notably, the OBBB has made these changes permanent. It’s been common in recent decades for tax legislation to contain sunset provisions that mean specific provisions automatically expire after a period of time. As of now, the applicable exclusion amount can only be changed by an act of Congress.
Making the amount permanent without a looming expiration date allows individuals and families to plan ahead with more certainty. As you’ll see below, the exclusion amount/unified credit has changed frequently over the years, making estate planning challenging due to uncertainty.
But first, here’s what you should know about this combined $15 million exclusion amount.
$15 Million Exclusion Amount: What to Know
*An individual may transfer up to $15 million either during life or at death without triggering any federal estate taxes, lifetime gift taxes, or generation-skipping transfer (GST) taxes.
*This amount doubles to $30 million per married couple. Portability rules mean that any amount of the $15 million exclusion a spouse did not use before his or her death can be used by the surviving spouse.
*Transfers are taxed above the limit of $15 million per individual or $30 million per married couple.
*The exclusion does not apply to transfers from one spouse to his or her U.S.-citizen spouse. Transfers of money between spouses are unlimited under the unlimited marital deduction, as long as the spouse is a U.S. citizen.
History of the Applicable Exclusion Amount / Unified Credit
Simply because it’s interesting, let’s take a look at the historical exclusion / unified credit amounts and top tax rates over the years.
Notice 1. Historically, the amount of the exclusion / credit (adjusted for inflation to 2025 dollars) before 2018 has never been close to $15 million, and 2. How much the top tax rate has varied over the years, from just 10% in 1916 to an incredible 77% from the 40s to the 70s.
2011-Present: Applicable Exclusion Amount
Starting in 2011, the “applicable exclusion amount” amount combined exemptions for federal estate taxes, lifetime gift taxes, and GST taxes, just as it does today after the OBBB.
| Year of Death: | Applicable Exclusion Amount: | Top tax rate: |
| 2026 | $15,000,000 | 40% |
| 2025 | $13,990,00 | 40% |
| 2024 | $13,610,000 | 40% |
| 2023 | $12,920,000 | 40% |
| 2022 | $12,060,000 | 40% |
| 2021 | $11,700,000 | 40% |
| 2020 | $11,580,000 | 40% |
| 2019 | $11,400,000 | 40% |
| 2018 | $11,180,000 | 40% |
| 2017 | $5,490,000 | 40% |
| 2016 | $5,450,000 | 40% |
| 2015 | $5,430,000 | 40% |
| 2014 | $5,340,000 | 40% |
| 2013 | $5,250,000 | 40% |
| 2012 | $5,120,000 | 35% |
| 2011 | $5,000,000 | 35% |
1977-2010: Unified Credit
From 1977 to 2010, the “unified credit” was used, which was the total exemption amount for federal estate taxes and lifetime gift taxes. The GST tax was introduced in 1976 but had its own separate limits.
| Year of Death: | Unified Credit Amount | Adjusted for inflation to 2025 dollars (rounded): | Top tax rate: |
| 2010* | $5,000,000* | $7,330,000 | 35% |
| 2009 | $3,500,000 | $5,250,000 | 45% |
| 2008 | $2,000,000 | $3,000,000 | 45% |
| 2007 | $2,000,000 | $3,140,000 | 45% |
| 2006 | $2,000,000 | $3,200,000 | 46% |
| 2005 | $1,500,000 | $2,500,000 | 47% |
| 2004 | $1,500,000 | $2,570,000 | 48% |
| 2003 | $1,000,000 | $1,750,000 | 49% |
| 2002 | $1,000,000 | $1,800,000 | 50% |
| 2001 | $675,000 | $1,200,000 | 55% |
| 2000 | $675,000 | $1,270,000 | 55% |
| 1999 | $650,000 | $1,260,000 | 55% |
| 1998 | $625,000 | $1,230,000 | 55% |
| 1987-1997 | $600,000 | $1,200,000-$1,700,000 | 55% |
| 1986 | $500,000 | $1,500,000 | 55% |
| 1985 | $400,000 | $1,200,000 | 55% |
| 1984 | $325,000 | $1,000,000 | 55% |
| 1983 | $275,000 | $890,000 | 60% |
| 1982 | $225,000 | $760,000 | 65% |
| 1981 | $175,000 | $640,000 | 70% |
| 1980 | $161,000 | $660,000 | 70% |
| 1979 | $147,000 | $680,000 | 70% |
| 1978 | $134,000 | $681,000 | 70% |
| 1977 | $120,000 | $650,000 | 70% |
*2010 was unusual. For most of the year, there was no federal estate tax, as a 2001 tax law repealed it for the year 2010. In December 2010, Congress passed a law retroactively reinstating federal estate tax above the exemption amount of $5 million with a 35% top tax rate. Executors/personal representatives had a choice to opt in to the $5 million limit or opt out and use carryover basis rules.
1916-1976: Estate Tax Exemption
Prior to 1977, the federal estate tax had its own exemption amount. The gift tax was not introduced until 1932, and had its own separate exemption.
| Year of Death: | Federal Estate Tax Exemption Amount | Adjusted for inflation to 2025 dollars (rounded): | Top federal estate tax rate: |
| 1942-1976 | $60,000 | $343,800- $1,200,000 | 77% |
| 1941 | $40,000 | $900,000 | 77% |
| 1940** | $40,000 | $910,000 | 70%** |
| 1935-1939 | $40,000 | $908,000-$930,000 | 70% |
| 1934 | $50,000 | $1,200,000 | 60% |
| 1933 | $50,000 | $1,230,000 | 45% |
| 1932 | $50,000 | $1,110,000 | 45% |
| 1926-1931 | $100,000 | $1,780,000-$2,000,000 | 20% |
| 1925 | $50,000 | $918,000 | 40% |
| 1924 | $50,000 | $918,000 | 40% |
| 1918-1923 | $50,000 | $945,000- $1,135,000 | 25% |
| 1917 | $50,000 | $1,360,000 | 25% |
| 1916 | $50,000 | $1,530,000 | 10% |
**In 1940, a 10% surtax added on the total tax liability to raise funds for wartime, which increased the top rate from 70% to an effective rate of 75.4%, according to the IRS.
Data taken from the IRS Estate Taxes page, IRS publication “The Estate Tax: Ninety Years and Counting” (for years 1916-2007), and IRS publication 950 (Rev. October 2011).
In the past, many more families were affected by federal estate taxes, lifetime gift taxes, and GST taxes. Now that the exclusion amount is $15 million/$30 million, most families in America do not have to factor it into their estate planning.
Estate Planning in South Carolina
For help with wills, trusts, and more, call Gem at the Gem McDowell Law Group. Gem and his team help individuals and families in South Carolina create the customized, comprehensive estate plans they need to protect their interests and provide peace of mind. Call today to schedule your free initial consultation at (843) 284-1021.
Changing the Rules Mid-Game: What the Connelly v U.S. Decision Means for Closely Held Corporations
Updated 09/04/25
If you are a shareholder in a closely held corporation, you need to know about the June 2024 decision from the U.S. Supreme Court case Connelly v. United States (2024). This decision (find it here) could have dramatic consequences for your business and for you, personally, as a shareholder.
Here’s the central issue:
Should life insurance proceeds paid to a closely held corporation to buy out a deceased shareholder’s portion of the business be counted as a non-offsettable asset for the purposes of calculating the decedent’s federal estate taxes?
The U.S. Supreme Court says YES.
The issue is somewhat convoluted. The upshot is that this decision allows the IRS, in some circumstances, to essentially “tax” a portion of previously untaxable life insurance proceeds without directly taxing them. Instead, it’s done by counting the life insurance proceeds as a business asset that cannot be offset, thus increasing the deceased shareholder’s share of the company at time of death and increasing their taxable estate – and possibly creating a federal estate tax liability.
This is a drastic change from what has previously been done. It’s like changing the rules while you’re in the middle of the game; you were expecting to pass Go and collect $200, but now you owe $300.
Below, we’ll look at the background of Connelly and the court’s reasoning, then discuss what it could mean for you and the other shareholders in your closely held corporation.
Note that today’s blog is just an introduction to the topic. Since this decision is so new, it’s not clear how things will shake out; it will take some time for business owners and their attorneys to determine the best course of action moving forward. But for now, we wanted to put this on your radar. We recommend speaking with your own business attorney and/or estate planning attorney about the potential consequences for you if you are an owner in a closely held corporation. (And if you do not yet have a business attorney or estate planning attorney in South Carolina, call us at the Gem McDowell Law Group at 843-284-1021 to talk.)
Connelly vs United States (2024) Summary
Briefly: Michael and Thomas Connelly were brothers and together owned a building supply company, Crown C Supply (Crown). They had an agreement to ensure the business would stay in the family if either brother died. The surviving brother would have the option to purchase the shares first, and if not, then Crown would be required to purchase the deceased brother’s shares. The corporation purchased life insurance policies of $3.5 million on each brother to this end.
Michael died in 2013 owning 77.18% of the business (385.9 of 500 shares) at death, with his brother Thomas owning the remaining 22.82%. Thomas declined to buy the shares, so Crown redeemed them for $3 million, an amount agreed upon by Michael’s son and Thomas.
Michael’s federal tax return for the year of his death was audited by the IRS. As part of the audit, an accounting firm valued the business at Michael’s death at $3.86 million, with his 77.18% share amounting to approximately $3 million. The analyst followed the holding of Estate of Blount v Commissioner of Internal Revenue (2005) that stated life insurance proceeds should be deducted from the value of a corporation when the proceeds are “offset by an obligation to pay those proceeds to the estate in a stock buyout.”
But the IRS argued that Crown’s obligation to buy back the stock did not offset the life insurance proceeds. The $3 million in life insurance proceeds should be added to the assets of the business, the IRS argued, making the total value of Crown at Michael’s death $3.86 million + $3 million = $6.86 million. Michael’s 77.18% share of this larger amount would be approximately $5.3 million, and based on this, the IRS said Michael’s estate owed an additional $889,914 in taxes.
Michael’s estate paid these taxes, and Thomas, as Michael’s executor, later sued the United States for a refund. The case went before the Supreme Court in March 2024.
The Supreme Court’s Reasoning
In its decision, the court states two points that “all agree” on:
- The value of a decedent’s shares in a closely held corporation must reflect the corporation’s fair market value for the purposes of calculating federal estate tax; and
- Life insurance proceeds payable to a corporation are an asset that increase the corporation’s fair market value.
The question, then, is whether the obligation to pay out those life insurance proceeds offset the asset, effectively canceling itself out.
The Supreme Court’s answer: No.
The reasoning: “An obligation to redeem shares at fair market value does not offset the value of the life-insurance proceeds set aside for the redemption because a share redemption at fair market value does not affect any shareholder’s economic interest.” The court says that no willing buyer would treat the obligation as a factor that reduced the value of the shares.
Also, for the calculating estate taxes, the point is to assess how much an owner’s shares are worth at the time of death. In this case, it was before Crown paid out the $3 million to buy Michael’s shares. Therefore, that $3 million should be added to the value of the business’s assets and income generating potential, valued at $3.86 million.
This decision will likely affect millions of business owners and trillions of dollars. Depending on your personal and business circumstances, it could affect you, too.
What This Means for You: Federal Estate Taxes
The most important thing to know about federal estate taxes is that the laws affecting them can and do change regularly. (This is one big reason it’s important to have your estate plan reviewed regularly to ensure it’s up to date with current law. Read about the unintended consequences of an out-of-date estate plan here on our blog.)
The majority of individuals subject to U.S. taxes who die in 2024 will not be subject to federal estate taxes; only about 0.2% were expected to in 2023, according to a Tax Policy Center estimate. Currently, if an individual dies in 2024 with a taxable estate valued below $13,610,000, no federal estate tax needs to be paid. This amount doubles to $27,220,000 for married couples filing jointly.
But the “applicable exclusion amount” has not always been so high. For many years, it was just $600,000. The current amount is set to expire at the end of 2025, after which it will revert to a lower amount (expected to be around $7 million), unless Congress passes more legislation changing it first. Update: The applicable exclusion amount was set at $15 million per individual as of 2026, tied to inflation from 2027 onwards, when the One Big Beautiful Bill was enacted in July 2025. Read more about that here on our blog.
When Michael Connelly died in 2013, the applicable exclusion amount amount according to the IRS was $5,250,000. Valuing his share of the business at death at $5.3 million rather than $3 million meant he had a larger taxable estate and owed additional federal taxes.
What does this mean for you? This makes estate planning tricky. You can’t know for sure when you’ll die or what the applicable exclusion amount will be that year. Depending on the value of your business and your personal assets, your estate may owe federal estate taxes you weren’t anticipating. The bottom line: If you have a buy-sell agreement and it is funded with life insurance, have it reviewed by an attorney ASAP.
What This Means for You: Succession Planning Going Forward
It’s common for shareholders in a family-owned closely held corporation to have buy-sell agreements that would keep the business in the family should a shareholder die. (Read more about buy-sell agreements on our blog here.) To that end, life insurance policies are often taken out on the shareholders to ensure funds are available to buy out the deceased shareholder’s shares at death.
For years, many business owners have had the corporation itself buy and maintain those life insurance policies on each shareholder. The proceeds went directly to the corporation and were not taxed. Additionally, they did not increase the value of the business, and thus the value of the deceased shareholder’s portion, at the time of the shareholder’s death.
Until now.
What does this mean for you? Now that this has changed after Connelly, shareholders in a closely held corporation may reconsider having the corporation purchase and maintain life insurance policies on its owners.
One option suggested in the Connelly opinion is for the shareholders to take out life insurance policies on each other in a “cross-purchase agreement.” The court acknowledges that this comes with its own set of problems, however, including different tax consequences and the necessity for each shareholder to maintain policies on the other shareholders.
Another potential option is to set up a separate LLC to maintain life insurance policies on the shareholders. In the event of a shareholder death, the LLC – not the corporation itself – would buy out the decedent’s share. This is one possible new solution to this new problem, but it is not yet tried and tested.
Finally, shareholders may continue to have the corporation purchase and maintain life insurance policies with the knowledge that each shareholder should create an estate plan for their personal assets that helps avoid federal estate taxes.
Watch This Space
As the dust settles from this decision, we’ll keep on top of it and come back with more information and advice.
Just remember – the law is not set in stone. Congress passes new legislation and courts render decisions regularly that can affect individuals and business owners. It can be hard to keep up with all the changes, which is why it’s important to have an attorney you can rely on to help keep your estate plan current and your business thriving.
Call Gem at the Gem McDowell Law Group in Myrtle Beach and Mt. Pleasant, SC. He and his team help South Carolina individuals and families create and review estate plans to protect assets and avoid family disputes. He also helps with the creation, purchase, sale, protection, and growth of South Carolina businesses through the creation of corporate governance documents, contracts, problem solving, and more. Call 843-284-1021 today to schedule a free consultation or fill out this form. We look forward to hearing from you.
The Unintended Consequences of Bad Estate Planning
Updated 09/04/25
We always advise people to get estate planning done. If you don’t decide what will happen to your assets upon your death, the state will decide for you.
But sometimes, despite best intentions, an estate plan turns out to cause unforeseen problems. That can happen with bad planning, which is sometimes worse than no planning at all. To illustrate this point, let me tell you a story.
What John & Nancy Planned For
Imagine a man named John in the following situation. John’s wife of 50 years, Nancy, recently died. John and Nancy thought they were being smart when they got estate planning done many years ago – and they were. But it turned out to be bad planning, because it didn’t take into account the fact that laws, people, and family dynamics change over time.
When Nancy and John sat down and talked about what they wanted to happen to her estate when she died, they agreed that she would split the estate up: part of her assets would go to their children, and part would go to her husband.
First you need to know that the government allows an unlimited amount of assets to be left to a U.S. citizen spouse tax-free upon death. But the government doesn’t allow you to leave an unlimited amount tax-free to other heirs or anybody else. The amount it allows you to leave tax-free is called the “applicable exclusion amount” (formerly called the “unified credit”).
So together Nancy and John decided that they would create a trust, and into that trust would go the full amount of money up to the amount of the applicable exclusion amount, so that her children could get that money and not have to pay taxes on it. The key is that here, she didn’t specify the exact dollar amount to go into the trust, she only said that the trust was to be filled to the point of whatever the current exclusion amount was. Her husband was named as trustee to control the trust during his lifetime, and the full value of the trust would go to the children upon his death.
What was left over from her estate after the trust was “filled up” would go to John. No matter what amount that was, it would be tax-free, because they were married.
So far so good. This kind of estate planning is pretty common, and it’s a smart way to maximize the amount of money you pass on to future generations while reducing the amount of taxes paid to the government. It works out well – but not all time.
When John and Nancy made this plan, it seemed great. The applicable exclusion amount at that time was $600,000, which was the limit for many years. Her estate was worth a total of $2 million, so during the planning phase, they expected that upon her death, $600,000 would go into the trust for the children, of which John would be the trustee. The other $1.4 million would go straight to John, including her half of the house they owned together.
Had she died soon after completing the plan, it would have worked out just the way they intended. But that didn’t happen.
What John & Nancy Got Instead
By the time Nancy died in early 2015, the applicable exclusion amount was not $600,000, but $5.43 million – a much larger amount. The full value of her estate went into the trust for the children, and her husband got nothing free and clear. Not even the house.
This was not what Nancy intended. Because of bad planning, everyone is in a difficult situation. Not only are they dealing with the grief of having lost their mother and wife, the family members now have to deal with the consequences of the faulty estate planning.
As the trustee of a trust that will go to the kids upon his death, the wishes of the father are now at direct odds with the wishes of the children. John, who had no substantial assets of his own and was counting on having some of his wife’s estate when she died (which is exactly what they thought was going to happen), wants money from the trust to live on. The kids want the trust to stay as it is, so they get the full value amount upon John’s death.
John has some limited access to the assets of the trust during his lifetime. That is, he can get his hands on some of the money, but not all of it. He’s entitled to the income from that trust during his lifetime; plus a total of 5% of the value of the trust, or $5,000, whichever is greater; plus expenses related to his health, education, maintenance and support (sometimes abbreviated “HEMS”). He would ask the trustee – in this case, himself – for the money to spend on those things. If they were considered legitimate expenses, he could spend it.
But here’s the rub: whether something counts as a legitimate or not varies from person to person. The IRS determines this, and they base that on someone’s standard of living. Donald Trump’s expenses considered “legitimate” would be substantially different from those of someone who makes $30,000 per year and lives very modestly. And if the trustee (John) disagrees with the future beneficiaries (the kids) over what’s legitimate, then they have to go to court.
So if, for example, John says he needs to use money from the trust to go to France for a year because that’s necessary for his maintenance, and the children disagree, they have to sue him.
And if the father wants to sell the house to move somewhere else, he can’t do it easily because it’s not his free and clear – half of the house is in the trust. If he goes ahead and sells the house anyway, it’s likely that his children will sue him.
As you can see, the situation is very complicated and it’s begging for lawsuits.
You don’t want to be in this situation. But how can you avoid it?
Avoid This Situation With Good Estate Planning
Remember that estate planning should be based on you, your unique situation and your family. It should not be based on whatever pre-made forms an attorney has ready. It must be about you.
1. Know that you have options.
Nancy and John could have decided to do something else instead. For example, Nancy could have left everything to John, and he could have used a “disclaimer” to disclaim anything he didn’t want, and that would go into the trust for the children. That’s just one option, but there are others. The point is, you don’t have to go with the first estate planning option presented to you if it’s not what’s best for you and your family.
2. Ask a lot of questions.
You should ask yourself what you want to happen with your estate when you die, and you may include your family in those discussions if you wish. You should ask questions before choosing an attorney to help you draw up these documents. Has he done these kinds of things before? What examples can she give you of the most complicated estate planning she has done?
Ask “what if” questions about the plans you’ve created.
• What if by the time I die, the applicable exclusion amount is $20 million? What if it’s $0? What will happen to my estate and my family then? (The applicable exclusion amount will be $15 million in 2026, thereafter tied to inflation)
• What if my spouse remarries after my death? Will any of my money go to the new spouse’s children?
• What if one of my children does something I disapprove of after I die, do they still inherit a portion of my estate? Can I include something in my will to prevent that from happening?
An attorney experienced in complex estate planning will be able to answer these questions clearly and will be able to pose additional questions you hadn’t thought of.
3. Review your plan periodically with an attorney.
As you’ve seen, family dynamics can be complicated, especially when children from different marriages are in the picture, and things change. The amount excluded from estate tax is not set in stone, but is determined by Congress and therefore can change in any given year. That alone could have a huge impact on how your current estate plan will play out in the real world.
Again, ask questions.
• With the way things are now, will my original intention be honored?
• Has anything significant happened in my situation (births, deaths, estrangements with family members) to affect my original intentions?
• What changes must I make to ensure that my estate is distributed the way I want?
Learn More About Personalized Estate Planning
So what about your estate plan? Is it customized to you? Would it honor your intentions? If the answer is no, or you’re not sure, contact South Carolina attorney Gem McDowell and his associatess at 843-284-1021 to discuss your own estate planning needs.
What to Know About Estate Taxes for Estate Planning
An estate tax is levied on an estate of a certain value. Because the tax rate is so high – up to 40% – it’s smart to do what you can through estate planning to reduce or eliminate the likelihood that your estate will be taxed at your death.
If someone dies in the year 2015 and their estate is worth less than $5.34 million, it will not be subject to estate taxes. If they die and their estate is worth $5.34 or more, it may or may not be subject to estate tax.
Here are some other things to know about estate tax.
Spouses and estate tax
Estate tax usually doesn’t apply if you are passing on your estate to your spouse. This is “usually” because in some cases, if your spouse is not a U.S. citizen, different rules apply. If your spouse is not a U.S. citizen, you will want to speak to an experienced estate planning attorney like Gem McDowell.
You and your spouse can combine your separate amounts together so you can freely pass $10.68 million to your heirs. And spouses can “share” the amount so as long as the couple’s combined assets are $10.68 million or less, they will not be subject to estate tax.
Remember that this amount can change so always check for the most current value when making your estate planning documents.
An experienced tax and estate planning attorney in Mt. Pleasant
This is a very simplified overview of estate taxes. To discuss your own estate, and how to best handle it to reduce or avoid taxes, contact Gem McDowell at his Mount Pleasant, SC office at (843) 284-1021. Gem is an estate planning attorney with experience in tax law, and he can work with you to develop an estate plan to meet your goals. Call today.
