I’ve heard it a lot over the years when meeting with client families: “I did not read the boilerplate”; or “that’s not important, it’s just boilerplate”. The general feeling tends to be that boilerplate is a pain and really does not accomplish anything. The truth may surprise you.
What really is “boilerplate”? The definition is “standardized pieces of text for use as clauses in contracts or as part of a computer program”. Contrary to what many may believe, the “boilerplate” can make or break your estate plan. You see, it is impossible to predict what will happen in your life, your family and with the laws that affect your estate plan. At least in documents I draft, the boilerplate is there to cover all the situations I can think of that may come up. I do not draft it thinking it will happen; I draft it knowing that I want your plan to work how you want even IF it does happen.
We had a case recently where the boilerplate was critical to carrying out my client’s wishes after passing. A disgruntled beneficiary brought a suit to have my client’s trust declared invalid. We won. Then, we petitioned the court to have her removed as a beneficiary. How could we do that? Because the “boilerplate” of the document stated that if a beneficiary challenged the validity of the document, they would no longer be considered a beneficiary of the trust. It was very important to my client that his wishes be carried out. He had several friends, family and charities he wanted to benefit from his hard work and he did not want a beneficiary’s lawsuit to upend that plan or lessen the amount his chosen beneficiaries would receive. The “boilerplate” included a “no contest clause”, which was the key to minimizing the impact of the lawsuit on the other beneficiaries.
So, next time you review your estate plan documents, take some extra time to read through the “boilerplate”. And if you have any questions about why a particular provision is there, just ask me. I expect there is a good reason it’s there.
Attorney disclaimer out of the way, what does it take to qualify for Medicaid. Generally speaking, an unmarried person is able to have no more than $2,000 in countable assets and less monthly income than is needed to cover the monthly private pay rate at the nursing home. These numbers apply to “countable” assets – a term I talked through briefly in my last post. A married couple is generally allowed to keep a maximum of $120,900 (2017) in countable assets for the benefit of the “community” spouse (the spouse not in the nursing home). This amount is adjusted each year for inflation. In both cases, there is a penalty applied if the applicant or the applicant’s spouse transferred any assets for less than market value within the 60-month period preceding the Medicaid application. That is a key thing to remember. I really can’t remember the last time I met with an individual or couple for Medicaid qualification and they had not given their kids, grandkids or someone else who they cared about some amount of money or an asset (e.g., car, etc.) within 60 months of applying for Medicaid. That can lead to a penalty. Which leads nicely into the topic of Medicaid planning.
That question really says it all. A big question to many families, and one I hear a lot as a
that the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) will count when adding up the value of your assets. Or, said another way, it is all assets of any kind that are not excluded assets (e.g., non-countable assets). Very generally speaking, the only non-countable assets are: your homestead, household and personal goods, a vehicle, a very small amount of life insurance (this one requires a very detailed review of the policy itself), and certain types of burial and funeral arrangements (not all such arrangements are excluded).
When you hear the word “dower”, what do you think of? Many will say it reminds them of “dowery”. Well, it is not really dowery. We are not talking about a sum of money or property that a father gives to a future son-in-law when he marries the father’s daughter. Dower is a holdover law from a LONG, long time ago (but not necessarily in a galaxy far, far away). In short, dower was a right that a married woman had in the real estate owned by her husband. To be exact (and to cause you a headache), it is technically “the use during her natural life, of 1/3 part of all the lands whereof her husband was seized of an estate of inheritance, at any time during the marriage, unless she is lawfully barred thereof.” It was initially instituted as a way to make sure a wife was not left destitute if her husband disinherited her and passed away. Interestingly, Michigan had no equivalent law for men. And Michigan is one of the last holdouts for dower – one of only 7 states that still have a dower right in their law.
Dower was an important legal component back when Michigan had no “forced share” law for a spouse to inherit by. Based on Michigan law allowing a spouse the right to a certain amount of his/her deceased spouse’s assets, it seems a good time to bid adieu to dower. This is a positive change for Michigan law and updates it in light of current inheritance law.
ATF rule 41f will change the requirements for purchasing Title II NFA items (silencers, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, and full auto). As noted above, 41f was previously known as 41p. Although I still do not support the rule, the final rule ended up being much better than the proposed rule was. Here is a quick list of the effects:
So, knowing that 
The ABLE Act recognizes that there are additional financial strains faced by individuals with disabilities and their families, including those in the Grand Rapids, Michigan area. In short, the ABLE Act allows for individuals to utilize a tax-free, state-based private savings account, referred to as an ABLE account, for the care of people with disabilities. This ABLE account can be used to supplement government benefits for “qualified disability expenses” such as medical and dental care, education, employment training, housing, and transportation, while not disqualifying a disabled individual from governmental benefits. As a result of the ABLE Act, eligible individuals and families are now allowed to establish ABLE savings accounts that will not affect their eligibility for Supplemental Security Income, Medicaid and other public benefits.