Background Image
Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  317 / 507 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 317 / 507 Next Page
Page Background

Chapter 6: Leaving Retirement Benefits in Trust

317

E.

If the participant has already died.

Options A–D above apply during the planning stage,

while the participant is alive and is trying to choose the best type of trust to name as

beneficiary. If the participant has already died, and left the benefits outright to a disabled

beneficiary, and qualification for government benefits is a concern, the disabled

beneficiary’s guardian could seek to have the benefits transferred to a “(d)(4)(A)” trust for

the disabled beneficiary, as was done in PLR 2006-20025 (see

¶ 4.6.03 (

C)). In drafting

such a trust, qualification as a see-through trust is NOT a concern. Because the benefits

were left outright to an individual, the benefits have already qualified for the life

expectancy payout; see-through trust status is a concern only when the participant leaves

benefits to a trust, not when a beneficiary who has inherited benefits outright subsequently

transfers such benefits to a trust.

6.4.05

Planning choices: Trusts for minors

Here are the options available for a trust intended to provide for minor beneficiaries, when

qualifying for see-through trust status is an important goal

( ¶ 6.2.01 )

. In deciding which to use,

consider the donor’s objectives: Is the donor’s main goal to be sure that the “stretch” payout

method is available? Or is the money most likely to be spent during the beneficiaries’ childhood,

for their education and care, rather than conserved for the beneficiaries’ own retirement years?

Also consider the value of the benefits and other assets: Are the benefits and nonbenefit assets

each substantial enough to justify establishing separate trusts, one for the benefits and one for the

other assets? Are the benefits substantial enough to justify establishing a separate trust for each

minor beneficiary, or is the “family pot trust” approach better?

Naming a minor directly as beneficiary of a retirement plan is not recommended. This

approach may cause the plan administrator not to release the benefits to anyone other than a legal

guardian of the minor. In some states, subjecting property to legal guardianship is not only time

consuming and expensive, it restricts how the money can be spent for the minor’s benefit.

Here are ideas regarding different ways to leave retirement benefits for the benefit of minor

beneficiaries:

A.

Conduit trust (or IRT).

A conduit trust may make sense for benefits that are not intended

to be the primary support source for the minor beneficiaries, such as a grandparent’s IRA

left to grandchildren who are supported by their parents. Also consider a trusteed IRA in

this situation (

¶ 6.1.07

).

Even though a conduit trust partly defeats the purpose of leaving money in trust for a young

beneficiary, some practitioners opt for this because it is a safe harbor and because they expect that

the RMDs that would have to be passed out to the minor beneficiary (or his guardian or custodian)

would be very small because of his young age. A conduit provision “inside” another trust may also

be a good way to leave benefits to minors if the retirement benefits are not substantial enough to

justify establishing a separate trust. The benefits are left to the same trust as all the other assets,

but that trust contains “conduit” provisions requiring the trustee to pass through all retirement plan

distributions. See Form 4.8,

Appendix B .

On the other hand, if the benefits are a significant part of a trust fund that will be providing

the primary source of support and education for an orphaned family, a conduit trust may not be a

good match. The trustee would be required to distribute to one or more of the children, each year,