FLPs WITH BUSINESS PURPOSE MORE LIKELY TO PASS IRS MUSTER
Wealthy families thinking of establishing a family limited
partnership in order to save gift and estate taxes need to keep
one key point in mind: an FLP is more likely to pass IRS muster
if it can demonstrate a bona fide business purpose and operate
in a business-like manner.
As FLPs (and the family limited
liability company where credit protection is a concern) have
grown in popularity in recent years, taxpayers and the Internal
Revenue Service have been engaged in a tug of war over whether
an FLP is a legitimate vehicle for the reduction of gift and
estate taxes. Sometimes the IRS wins, sometimes the taxpayers
win. But out of the tussle guidelines are emerging that may
clarify the issue for taxpayers.
The intent behind most typical family
limited partnerships is straightforward, even if the FLP itself
is complex. A parent transfers assets, such as a family
business, stock, or real estate, to an FLP and then gifts most
of the shares of the FLP to the children. The parent typically
retains one or two percent ownership as general partner,
effectively controlling management of the FLP.
Because the children’s management
control and marketability of their shares are severely limited,
the value of their shares is treated as less than the shares’
proportional net asset value of the FLP. Thus, the value of the
gifted shares is discounted for tax purposes, sometimes as much
as 40 percent or more. That saves the parent potential gift
taxes, and because the assets have been moved out of the
parent’s estate, it saves potential estate taxes.
The IRS has generally lost the gift-tax
issue on appeal to tax courts, but it has had more success in
arguing that a parent never effectively relinquished control or
use of the assets, and thus the assets should be included at an
undiscounted value in the parent’s taxable estate upon the
parent’s death.
A string of recent court cases appear
to suggest some guidelines that families and their financial and
legal advisors should consider when deciding whether and how to
establish an FLP that can pass the IRS challenge for both gift
and estate taxes. The key often turns on whether the facts
suggest that the FLP is a “sham” whose intent is merely to avoid
taxes, or whether it was established for legitimate business
reasons, with a side benefit of saving taxes. Guidelines
suggested by these cases include
Is an FLP appropriate? FLPs generally
are for people likely to face gift and estate taxes. But even
they may find other tax-saving strategies more cost effective,
less complex, and less vulnerable to IRS challenge.
Have a valid business purpose. This is
still a gray area. Commentators think you’ll be on safest ground
if the FLP includes an active family business or investments
that requires active management by the FLP’s partners, such as
rental property. One recent ruling went against a taxpayer in
part because the FLP mainly held mostly marketable securities
with no apparent business purpose for holding them. But in an
another case, an appeals court ruled in favor of the taxpayer
because in addition to active management of assets, the FLP
provided such valid business purposes as protection against
creditors and a reduction of intra-family disputes that had
previously resulted in litigation.
Spell out the business purpose. The
partnership documents should spell out in detail the FLP’s
business purposes, and the family should operate it as a
business.
Don’t commingle personal property. One
of the quickest ways to draw IRS scrutiny is to stuff an FLP
with personal assets such as a primary residence or vacation
property. The taxpayer lost in one case because the primary
residence was gifted to the FLP, yet the taxpayer continued to
live in it rent free. You may make this work (such as paying
fair-market rent to the FLP), but be prepared for a challenge.
Don’t use FLP as your personal piggy
bank. It’s best to retain sufficient personal assets outside the
FLP to live on and avoid drawing on FLP assets for living
expenses.
Avoid death-bed formations of FLPs.
There have been allowable exceptions to this practice, but it
definitely invites IRS attention.
Maintain the general partner’s fiduciary responsibility. Waiving
the responsibility in the agreement raises questions about the
partnership’s validity.
|