By Doug White
Of all the charitable planning tools, the charitable lead trust (CLT)
is one of the more beneficial types of gifts. But, because of its complexity,
it is also one of the least utilized planned gifts.
The current economic environment is uniquely ideal for lead trusts, with
equity markets improving while interest rates remain relatively flat.
Taking that into account, donors can make a gift that will immediately
generate income to one or more charitable organizations at relatively
little cost to the family because of estate and gift tax savings.
At the end of the trust's term, its remaining assets are distributed
to family members. Although the trust document must specify the payout
amount, the donor does not have outright control over income distributions,
but can only make suggestions about which organizations will receive the
trust payments each year.
A lead trust established during lifetime can be set up as either a grantor
or nongrantor trust for income tax purposes. Most lead trusts are of the
nongrantor type.
If estate planning goals are not paramount, a grantor lead trust may
be established, and thus the grantor would be subject to income taxes
because of the retained reversion.
In other cases, the trust may be a grantor trust because of retained
powers that cause the grantor to be taxed for income tax purposes but
do not cause the assets to be pulled back into the grantor's estate for
estate tax purposes.
The grantor lead trust is useful for someone who has unusually high income
in the current year and wishes to accelerate charitable deductions for
future charitable gifts into the current year.
A charitable lead trust is not exempt from income taxes. Whatever income
is not paid to a charitable organization and any realized capital gains
in a given year (other than gains realized on satisfaction of the payment
obligation with appreciated property) are taxed at trust rates. The remainder
value, the amount a donor is permitted to deduct when setting up a remainder
trust, is, in a lead trust, the amount considered a taxable gift to the
remainder beneficiaries when the lead trust is established.
While, at the outset, a tax may be due on a fraction of the trust's value
if the donor has exhausted his or her applicable credit, by the end of
its term whatever value the trust has grown to is not taxed.
When the assets are transferred to a noncharitable remainderman, usually
children or grandchildren, the transfer takes place tax free (although
the generation-skipping tax may apply when a grandchild is a remainder
beneficiary). This is because a snapshot of the asset's value is taken
at the time the trust is established and the value of the remainder, determined
by an IRS calculation, is considered a gift for gift tax purposes.
Assume that a person establishes a charitable lead annuity trust for a
20-year term with $1 million worth of stock, and that the trust pays an
annuity to one or more charitable organizations totaling 5 percent per
year. The equation to calculate the trust's income and remainder values
depends on several factors: what goes into the trust, how much is paid
out, how frequently payments are made and for how long. Plus, there is
an additional important element: the IRS discount rate, which changes
monthly. Over the past few years this number has dropped to historic lows,
meaning the remainder of a trust established now is valued low. In July
2003, for example, the number was 3 percent, lower than it had ever been
in the past.
Reminder: In the case of a charitable lead trust, as with other transfers
involving a charitable gift, the donor can value interests using the IRS
discount rate for the month of the transfer or for either of the two months
preceding the month of transfer.
For this example, let's use a rate of 3.2 percent. Even though that was
the rate in mid-summer 2003, it will give us a general idea of how it
affects lead trust planning. The annuity value for the $1 million trust
equals $730,000, and the remainder value equals $270,000. This means that
of the $1 million, $730,000 is subtracted from the amount that is subject
to tax.
For illustration purposes, without regard for state estate taxes, assume
the donor is in a 40 percent transfer tax bracket, and assume the lifetime
credit is completely used up. He or she pays $108,000 in gift taxes.
Contrast that to an IRS discount rate of a more historically typical
6 percent. The remainder value, all other factors being the same, is $426,500;
income value is $573,500.v
By using a 40 percent transfer tax assumption, the tax would be $170,600.
That is a tax increase of $62,600 for a trust with a 6 percent discount
rate, even though nothing has changed other than the discount rate. The
two examples cited are for a charitable lead annuity trust.
A lead trust can also be a unitrust, which pays a fluctuating percent
each year based on the value of the trust's assets. The calculation to
determine the remainder and income values for a unitrust is fundamentally
different from that used to determine the same values for the annuity
trust, and the results differ markedly. The discount rate has more of
an impact on the annuity trust.
Remainder and income values for charitable lead remainder trusts with
terms of 20 years and payouts of 5 percent, but with different IRS discount
rates. The tax is calculated using a 40 percent transfer tax bracket.

As is clear, the lower the IRS discount rate, the lower the amount of
remainder transfer subject to tax. While this is true for the annuity
trust and the unitrust, the effect, as noted in the boxed example above,
is much more dramatic with the annuity trust. The difference in remainder
values for the annuity trust, for discount rates of 3.2 percent and 8
percent, is almost $240,000—nearly double. This shows how important
the discount rate is in a charitable lead annuity trust. The difference
between two lead unitrusts using 3.2 percent and 8 percent discount rates
is far less, only a little more than $17,000.
Paying any tax at all may seem like a stiff penalty for being charitable,
but because the asset's value is frozen at the moment it is transferred
to the trust—at which time the tax is calculated—the potential
benefit is real, and can be substantial.
Any growth in the trust's value by the time the asset is transferred
to the noncharitable remainderman will go untaxed. This can also represent
quite a benefit.
If the annuity trust grows to $2 million over the years, after the annual
$50,000 payments to the charitable organization, the donor (should he
or she still be alive) or the donor's estate (should he or she be deceased)
will not pay any taxes on the transfer.
If applying a 40 percent transfer tax, the tax at that time would be
$800,000. This is far more than the $108,000 tax paid at the time the
trust is established.
If the $800,000 is discounted 5 percent per year, to take inflation or
declining purchasing power into account over the 20-year period, then
the resulting number would be about $301,000, still about two and one-half
times the tax that would be due today.
There is no question that a lead trust generates the potential to make
a sizable gift to a charitable organization at relatively little cost
to heirs.
As for the growth outside a lead trust, it is true that assets without
a payout obligation will grow faster. The assets in this case, if they
were to grow at 7 percent per year for 20 years, would be valued at almost
$4 million at the end of that time. This means the transfer tax, at the
40 percent rate, would be approximately $1.6 million, leaving the heirs
$2.4 million after taxes The difference in the actual amount transferred
to heirs is $500,000, but then we must subtract the tax difference as
well, which, even at an inflation-adjusted value, is still more than $200,000.
But, as can be seen, far less tax is paid to the government and far more
money is donated to the charitable organization. Over 20 years, the charitable
organization receives $1 million.
A common goal of donors and practitioners is to get the value of the remainder
amount to as low a number as possible while still planning for growth
within the trust. While it is possible to generate a low number in other
economic environments, a higher discount rate forces the donor to lengthen
the number of years or agree to pay more to the charitable organization
each year. Both actions have the effect of providing less for the noncharitable
remaindermen.
One reason the nongrantor trust is more popular than the grantor trust
is that the donor pays the tax on any income or realized gain in the grantor
trust. The donor of a grantor trust, however, is able to take an income
tax deduction for the income value deemed to pass to the charitable organization
over the trust's term, a benefit not permitted to the nongrantor trust
donor.
The main reason, however, for the popularity of the nongrantor lead trust
is that it has more powerful estate planning potential than the grantor
trust.
Unlike remainder trusts, lead trusts can pay less than remainder trusts
and go for a longer period, as long as they do not conflict with state
laws prohibiting trusts from existing in perpetuity.
Also, charitable distributions from a lead trust are not subject to the
normal ceiling limitations. That is, the 30 percent and 50 percent limitations
each year on what a donor may deduct for charitable contributions do not
apply to distributions from a nongrantor lead trust. Although the donor
does not get an income tax deduction for a contribution to a nongrantor
lead trust, the donor is also not taxed on the income, resulting in a
wash. It is as if the donor received all of the income and was able to
give it away to a charitable organization without worrying about percentage
limitations. Therefore, this is a good strategy for donors with percentage
limitation problems.
The most common asset used to fund a lead trust is closely held stock
in a family business that has the potential to grow over the years. Many
times, the donor does not want the asset sold. Unlike in a charitable
remainder trust, where the assets are almost always immediately sold because
there is no capital gains tax, a lead trust typically holds on to the
donated assets.
If the lead interest exceeds 60 percent of the value of the trust, the
excess business holdings rules apply and require the stock to be disposed
of by the trust within five years.
Not selling the asset is quite common. This is because many donors not
only want to later transfer value to their heirs, they also want to transfer
a specific asset. To do this, the stock must generate a dividend so that
income can be distributed to a charitable organization, or the asset must
be liquid enough so that a portion of it can be sold to make a payment
to the charitable organization. Any gain realized while satisfying the
payment requirement is deductible from the trust. Also, it is possible
to satisfy the payment obligation with the stock itself. In that case,
the charitable organization usually sells the stock back to the company,
which then retires it. In any event, the best funding asset for a charitable
lead trust is one that is expected to appreciate in value over the years.
Whatever the asset, though, if it is not sold during the term of the
trust, the asset maintains its original cost basis when it is distributed
to the noncharitable remaindermen. For example, say a lead trust is funded
with an asset valued at $1 million; it grows to $2 million by the trust
term's end, but it had a zero cost basis. If the heirs wanted to sell
the asset, they would pay a capital gains tax on the entire $2 million.
Market conditions favor a new look at charitable lead trusts. Despite
interest rates remaining relatively steady at historically low levels,
an improving equities market makes it a good time for charitable lead
trusts.
Douglas White consults with nonprofits on various aspects of philanthropy.
He has served in leading roles with planned gift investment firms, as
the development director at a secondary school and as trustee at several
charitable organizations.
Doug is the author of the award-winning book The Art of Planned Giving:
Understanding Donors and the Culture of Giving (John Wiley and Sons, 1995).
In addition, he has written many articles.
He is a past member of the board of directors of the National Committee
on Planned Giving. During his tenure at NCPG he founded the national initiative
of "Leave A Legacy."He is a past president of the Planned Giving
Group of New England and past president of the New Hampshire/ Vermont
chapter of AFP.
For more than a decade he has served as the national capital giving chair
for Phillips Exeter Academy in Exeter, N.H. In 2002, the National Capital
Gift Planning Council presented Doug with the "Distinguished Service
Award."
Doug is located in Washington, D.C.
Please contact Mary Ludwig, Development Director at 712-732-5127, for more
information.
The information on this site is not intended as
legal, tax or investment advice. For such advice, please consult an attorney,
tax professional or investment professional.
Copyright © The Stelter Company, All Right Reserved.