New Extended Deadlines for Portability Election Filing
On June 9, the IRS issued Rev. Proc. 2017-34, 2017-26 IRB, which provides a more liberal timeframe for certain estates to make the federal estate tax portability election.
July 03, 2017 at 05:39 PM
12 minute read
On June 9, the IRS issued Rev. Proc. 2017-34, 2017-26 IRB, which provides a more liberal timeframe for certain estates to make the federal estate tax portability election. The additional time is only available for estates that are not otherwise required to file a federal estate tax return because the value of the gross estate is below a decedent's remaining federal estate tax exemption. For 2017, the federal estate tax exemption amount is $5.49 million (and is indexed for inflation each year). This exemption represents the amount that an individual can transfer to the objects of his or her bounty free of federal estate and gift tax. Estates with gross asset values below the exemption amount are not required to file federal estate tax returns, except to the extent that a portability election is desired.
The portability election is a relatively new feature of the federal estate and gift tax regime that came into effect under the 2013 American Taxpayer Relief Act (ATRA), and, to a large degree, replaces the prior “use it or lose it” structure of the federal estate tax exemption rules. The portability election enables a surviving spouse to essentially “inherit” the decedent's unused federal estate tax exemption amount and, thus, treat both exemptions (the surviving spouse's exemption along with the exemption of the first spouse to die) as available to the marital unit. Thus, to the extent that the first deceased spouse does not make full use of his or her available federal estate tax exemption, an election can be made to add (or “port”) the decedent's unused exemption to the surviving spouse's exemption.
For example, if a husband dies in 2017 and leaves all of his assets outright to his wife, if he had not used any portion of his $5.49 million exemption for gifts during his lifetime, the entire $5.49 million of available exemption may be ported to the wife. When the wife later dies, if she remains eligible to benefit from the portability regime, she will have $10.98 million in available exemption (i.e., her husband's unused $5.49 million exemption plus her own $5.49 million exemption), which her estate can then allocate to her assets remaining at death. The amount of the exemption ported to the surviving spouse is called the deceased spousal unused exclusion, or “DSUE” amount.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPennsylvania Modernizes Trust Administration With New Directed Trust Statute
8 minute readFalling Back in Love With Certain Estate Planning Strategies in a Falling Interest Rate Environment
9 minute readKey to Transferring the Garden: Review of NY's 2024 Transfer-on-Death Deed Law Provides Model for Pa., NJ
10 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250