Worst States If You’re Caring For An Aging Parent

Via FA-Magazine  

#7 In Survey New York Stateimage.png

Some states make it harder for those caring for an aging parent, according to a new survey. 

Caring.com conducted a national survey to determine which states offer the best overall cost of living, and accessibility to senior support programs and resources for caregivers. 

While some states were praised for providing an affordable and helpful environment for caregivers, other states inevitable ended up at the bottom of the list.

“It hasn’t always been so expensive, but the cost of caring for our parents is so out of control now that it has the capacity to actually bankrupt families,” Jim Miller, a senior advocate and author of SavvySenior.org, said in the report. “I think that’s why it’s so important to consider these costs far in advance of needing to provide care so you’re prepared instead of panicked.”

These 10 states, in descending order, were deemed the most expensive for caregivers by Caring.com:

10. Maine

While the state is expensive for seniors, the availability of senior care support and services ranked 13th overall. The median cost for a home health aide was $4,500 more than the national average. Nursing home expenses were $24,00 more than the national average, according to caring.com.

 

9. New Hampshire

The state ranked 44th for cost of living. Costs for a nursing home stay for a year were over $100,000, well above the national average. The state did rank well for offering accessible senior programs and caregiver resources.

8. Delaware

For your aging parent to live in a nursing home in Delaware, expect to pay the median price of $127,750. The state ranked 28th in the survey for senior and caregiver programs and support.

 

7. New York

Earning a good rank for senior support and services, the state offers numerous resources for caregivers and seniors. While the costs for a home health aide and assisted living are competitive, the median for a nursing home is well above the national average by over $40,000.

Read More>

 

State Can Recover From Entire Value of Property in Which Medicaid Recipient Had Life Estate

MEDICAID RECOVERY

The Idaho Supreme Court rules that the state may recover Medicaid benefits from the entire value of a property that a Medicaid recipient transferred to his daughter while retaining a life estate for himself. In re Estate of Peterson (Idaho, No. 40615, Aug. 13, 2014).

Melvin Peterson deeded property to his daughter, retaining a life estate for himself. He then applied for Medicaid benefits. When he died, Mr. Peterson had received a total of $171,386.94 in Medicaid benefits.

The state filed a claim against the estate to recover the Medicaid benefits it paid for Mr. Peterson’s care. Under Idaho law, the state may recover any property that passes outside of probate, including any property that that the Medicaid recipient had a legal interest in that passes to a survivor through a life estate or “other arrangement.” The trial court ruled that the life estate remainder interest, but not the retained life estate, was an estate asset, and the appeals court affirmed. The estate appealed, arguing Mr. Peterson had no interest in the life estate at his death, so it could not be subject to recovery.

The Idaho Supreme Court affirms in part holding that both the life estate and the remainder interest were estate assets subject to Medicaid recovery. The court determines that Mr. Peterson’s life estate interest in the property was transferred to his daughter when he died, and under state law “when assets of a Medicaid recipient are conveyed to a survivor, heir or assign by the termination of a ‘life estate,’ the assets remain part of the recipient’s ‘estate'” for purposes of Medicaid recovery. In addition, the court rules that the remainder interest Mr. Peterson’s daughter received is also part of Mr. Peterson’s estate as an “other arrangement.”

For the full text of this decision, go to: http://www.isc.idaho.gov/opinions/40615.pdf

The above article is an example of why you need to understand the full spectrum of Medicaid Planning options. For more information on how we can help you protect your assets for feel free to call me at 212-268-8200 or email medicaid@RaphanLaw.com

Regards, Brian

www.RaphanLaw.com

New: Visiting Lawyer Services for Elder New Yorkers

Visiting Lawyer Services

Why should the elderly that aren’t as mobile as they used to be, or live in an assisted living facility or are even at home wheelchair bound, not have easy access to the same professional legal care as others? Well, they should. And now they do.

Visiting Lawyer Services (VLS) is now available to New Yorkers that are homebound or unable to travel to a lawyer. With VLS our lawyers come to you. There’s no longer a need to coordinate aides, transfers or transportation as you won’t need it The same practice areas of elder law firm are the same available with VLS.  Most of the services that we handle in our office can be handled at your place. For example; signing of your Will, Living Will, Health Care Proxy, revising a Will, Estate Planning, Medicaid Planning or setting up a Trust. If witnesses are needed for signing documents we also arrange them to be with us as well. Other family members or loved ones may be present as well.

Visiting Lawyer Services

You remain in the comfort of your home, apartment or nursing facility and we’ll bring all the necessary documents. This has been very helpful for elder couples–as is often the case with elders, one spouse may be healthy and agile yet the other quite limited.

‘Not being burdened by travel time or hindered by physical ability also allows seniors to focus better on their legal needs. We’ve taken our hands-on approach, compassion and legal prowess to the next level’

For more information on how our Visiting Lawyer Services can help, feel free to call me at 212-268-8200. – Brian

http://www.VisitingLawyerServices.com

info@raphanlaw.com

Understanding the Differences Between a Will and a Trust

Brian Raphan

Everyone has heard the terms “will” and “trust,” but not everyone knows the differences between the two. Both are useful estate planning devices that serve different purposes, and both can work together to create a complete estate plan.

One main difference between a will and a trust is that a will goes into effect only after you die, while a trust takes effect as soon as you create it. A will is a document that directs who will receive your property at your death and it appoints a legal representative to carry out your wishes. By contrast, a trust can be used to begin distributing property before death, at death or afterwards. A trust is a legal arrangement through which one person (or an institution, such as a bank or law firm), called a “trustee,” holds legal title to property for another person, called a “beneficiary.” A trust usually has two types of beneficiaries — one set that receives income from the trust during their lives and another set that receives whatever is left over after the first set of beneficiaries dies.

A will covers any property that is only in your name when you die. It does not cover property held in joint tenancy or in a trust. A trust, on the other hand, covers only property that has been transferred to the trust. In order for property to be included in a trust, it must be put in the name of the trust.

Another difference between a will and a trust is that a will passes through probate. That means a court oversees the administration of the will and ensures the will is valid and the property gets distributed the way the deceased wanted. A trust passes outside of probate, so a court does not need to oversee the process, which can save time and money. Unlike a will, which becomes part of the public record, a trust can remain private.

Wills and trusts each have their advantages and disadvantages. For example, a will allows you to name a guardian for children and to specify funeral arrangements, while a trust does not. On the other hand, a trust can be used to plan for disability or to provide savings on taxes. As your elder law attorney I can tell you how best to use a will and a trust in your estate plan. Feel free to email me with any questions.

Regards, Brian A. Raphan, Esq.

The Law Offices of Brian A. Raphan, P.C.

7 Penn Plaza, New York, NY 10001

Free Download: 2014 Benefits Guide for Seniors: NYC

NYC Department of Aging, senior citizens, aarp
Free download. NYC Department of Aging resources. Free benefits guide for senior citizens.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For 2014, this guide from NYY.gov  is a helpful resource for benefits available to senior citizens of New York.

Table of contents include:

Social Security 1

Supplemental Security Income 2

Veterans Benefits 3

New York Prescription Saver Card 3

Public Assistance 4

Medicare 5

Medicare Savings Program 6

Medicare Part D 7

Affordable Care Act 7

Medicaid 8

Food Stamps (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance 9 Program SNAP)

Reduced Fare 10 Senior Citizen Rent Increase Exemption (SCRIE) 11

Senior Citizen Homeowners Exemption (SCHE) 12

Real Property Tax Credit (IT-214) 13

Home Energy Assistance Program (HEAP) 14

Heating Equipment Repair or Replacement 15

Elderly Pharmaceutical Insurance Coverage (EPIC) 15

New York State School Tax Relief Program (STAR) 16 

Regards, Brian

info@raphanlaw.com

 

Court Ruling: Transfers Made Years Before Needing Care Were Not Made in Order to Qualify for Medicaid

Doing Medicaid Planning for clients, I often get asked the question: “How does medicaid determine if my gifts were made to qualify for medicaid or not?” Saavy clients have a long history of gifting to show a pattern meant for gifting not medicaid spend down. This recent decision should be of interest.

medicaid planning, appeal
http://www.raphanlaw.com

A New York appeals court holds that a Medicaid applicant who transferred funds several years before needing long-term care and kept enough resources to care for herself rebutted the presumption that the transfers were made in order to qualify for Medicaid. Safran v. Shah (N.Y. Sup. Ct., App. Div., 2nd. Dept., 2013-04373, 20166/12, July 2, 2014).

While she was living independently and didn’t require long-term care, Louise Kornhaber transferred funds to her family as gifts. Several years later, Ms. Kornhaber entered a nursing home. Due to the unexpected theft of her remaining resources, Ms. Kornhaber applied for Medicaid. The state assessed a penalty period based on the uncompensated transfers.

Ms. Kornhaber appealed, arguing that the transfers were made for a reason other than to qualify for Medicaid. The state affirmed the penalty period, and Ms. Kornhaber appealed to court.

The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, orders the state to provide Ms. Kornhaber with Medicaid benefits, holding that the penalty period was not appropriate. The court rules that because Ms. Kornhaber still had enough resources to maintain herself for years after she made the transfers, she rebutted the presumption that the transfer was made in order to qualify for Medicaid.

Medicaid Planning takes the experience and legal expertise of a qualified attorney. The detailed process of medicaid planning needs to avoid errors and mistakes that can make you ineligible of cost you possibly tens of thousands of dollars in delays or penalties. Click here to read: 8  Medicaid Mistakes to Avoid,

For the full text of this decision, go to: https://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2014/2014_04943.htm

Any questions? Send me an email: info@raphanlaw.com or call 212-268-8200 during the day for a free consultation.

Regards, Brian

Heir Liable for Reimbursement of Mother’s Medicaid Expenses

medicare denialA California appeals court rules that the heir of an estate who sold her interest in her mother’s house to her brother is liable to the state for reimbursement of her mother’s Medicaid expensesEstate of Mays (Cal. App., 3d, No. C070568, June 30, 2014).

Medi-Cal (Medicaid) recipient Merver Mays died, leaving her house as her only asset. Ms. Mays’ daughter, Betty Bedford, petitioned the court to be appointed administrator of the estate, but she was never formally appointed because she didn’t pay the surety bond. The state filed a creditor’s claim against the estate for reimbursement of Medi-Cal expenses, and the court determined the claim was valid.  A dispute arose between Ms. Bedford and her brother, Roy Flemons, over ownership of the house. After the court determined Mr. Flemons owned a one-half interest in the property, Ms. Bedford and Mr. Flemons entered into an agreement in which Mr. Flemons paid Ms. Bedford $75,000 and transferred the house to his name.

The state petitioned the court for an order requiring Ms. Bedford to account for her administration of Ms. Mays’s estate. The court determined Ms. Bedford was liable to the state for the amount she received from Mr. Flemons because although she wasn’t formally appointed administrator, she was acting as administrator. Ms. Bedford appealed.

The California Court of Appeal, 3rd Appellate District, affirms on different grounds. The court rules that Ms. Bedford cannot be held liable due to her failure as administrator of the estate because she was never formally appointed administrator. However, the court holds that Ms. Bedford is liable as an heir of the estate who received estate property. According to the court, Ms. Bedford’s settlement with Mr. Flemons was “essentially an end-run around the creditor’s claim and the estate process” and “the $75,000 payment represented proceeds of the estate that would otherwise be available to satisfy creditors’ claims.”

Planning wisely, accurate and legally is key in Medicaid Planning. Make sure you use an attorney with experience, knowledge and is extremely familiar with rules in your state. Read 8 Medicaid Planning Mistakes to Avoid by clicking here.  You can also download a FREE GUIDE to Medicaid’s Asset Transfer Rules on the right hand column of this page on my website.

If you have any questions regarding Medicaid Planning feel free to give me a call.

Regards, Brian

212-268-8200  www.RaphanLaw.com

Make Sure Your Life Insurance Is Not Taxed at Your Death

Make Sure Your Life Insurance Is Not Taxed at Your Death

[via Elder Law Answers] Although your life insurance policy may pass to your heirs income tax-free, it can affect your estate tax. If you are the owner of the insurance policy, it will become a part of your taxable estate when you die. You should make sure your life insurance policy won’t have an impact on your estate’s tax liability.

If your spouse is the beneficiary of your policy, then there is nothing to worry about. Spouses can transfer assets to each other tax-free. But if the beneficiary is anyone else (including your children), the policy will be a part of your estate for tax purposes. For example, suppose you buy a $1 million life insurance policy and name your son as the beneficiary. When you die, the life insurance policy will be included in your taxable estate. If the total amount of your taxable estate exceeds the then-current state or federal estate tax exemption, then your policy will be taxed.

In order to avoid having your life insurance policy taxed, you can either transfer the policy to someone else or put the policy into a trust. Once you transfer a policy to a trust or to someone else, you will no longer own the policy, which means you won’t be able to change the beneficiary or exert control over it. In addition, the transfer may be subject to gift tax if the cash value of your policy (the amount you would get for your policy if you cashed it in) is more than $14,000 (in 2014, this figure rises every few years with inflation). If you decide to transfer a life insurance policy, do it right away. If you die within three years of transferring the policy, the policy will still be included in your estate.

If you transfer a life insurance policy to a person, you need to make sure it is someone you trust not to cash in the policy. For example, if your spouse owns the policy and you get divorced, there will be no way for you to get it back. A better option may be to transfer the policy to a life insurance trust. In that case, the trust owns the policy and is the beneficiary. You can then dictate who the beneficiary of the trust will be. For a life insurance trust to exclude your policy from estate taxes, it must be irrevocable and you cannot act as trustee.

 

Can You Appeal If Medicare Refuses to Cover Care You Received?

Absolutely.  Sometimes Medicare will decide that a particular treatment or service is not covered and will deny a beneficiary’s claim. Many of these decisions are highly subjective and involve determining, for example, what is “medically and reasonably necessary” or what constitutes “custodial care.” If a beneficiary disagrees with a decision, there are reconsideration and appeals procedures within the Medicare program.

medicare denialWhile the federal government makes the rules about Medicare, the day-to-day administration and operation of the Medicare program are handled by private insurance companies that have contracted with the government. In the case of Medicare Part A, these insurers are called “intermediaries,” and in the case of Medicare Part B they are referred to as “carriers.” In addition, the government contracts with committees of physicians — quality improvement organizations (QIOs) — to decide the appropriateness of care received by most Medicare beneficiaries who are inpatients in hospitals.

If an intermediary, carrier or QIO decides Medicare shouldn’t pay for care you received, you will learn this when you receive your Medicare Summary Notice (MSN). The Medicare Rights Center recommends first making sure that the coverage denial isn’t simply the result of a coding mistake.  You can ask your doctor to confirm that the correct medical code as used.  If the denial is not the result of a coding error, you can appeal the denial using Medicare’s review process. Click here for details on this process.

Once Medicare’s review process has been exhausted, the matter can be taken to court if the amount of money in dispute exceeds either $1,000 or $2,000, depending on the type of claim. Medicare beneficiaries can represent themselves during these appeal proceedings, or they can be represented by a personal representative or an attorney. The Medicare Rights Center estimates that only about 2 percent of Medicare beneficiaries appeal denials of care, but 80 percent of those who appeal Part A denials and 92 percent who appeal Part B denials win more care.

 

Even if Medicare ultimately rejects a disputed claim, a beneficiary may not necessarily have to pay for the care he or she received. If a recipient did not know or could not have been expected to know that Medicare coverage would be denied for certain services, the recipient is granted a “waiver of liability” and the health care provider is the one who suffers the economic loss. In cases where this limited waiver of liability does not apply, however, the beneficiary is liable for any costs of care that Medicare does not cover. For example, a patient is financially responsible for any services normally provided under Medicare Part B if provided by a nonparticipating provider who did not “accept assignment” of the claim.

For more information email me at info@RaphanLaw.com or visit http://RaphanLaw.com. Or stay on top of these issues by subscribing to my free email Newsletters. Sample here… 

Regards, Brian

Using a No-Contest Clause to Prevent Heirs from Challenging a Will or Trust

If you are worried that disappointed heirs could contest your will or trust after you die, one option is to include a “no-contest clause” in your estate planning documents. A no-contest clause provides that if an heir challenges the will or trust and loses, then he or she will get nothing.

Last Will & TestamentA no-contest clause may be a good idea if you have a beneficiary who may be upset by the property distributed to him or her. However, no-contest clauses (also called in terrorem clauses) only work if you are willing to leave something of value to the potentially disgruntled heir. You must leave the individual enough so that a challenge is not worth the risk of losing the inheritance.

Most states allow no-contest clauses, but there may be restrictions. In many states, if the contest is based on probable cause or good faith, then the no-contest clause is unenforceable. That means that if the court determines there is a good reason for the contest, the clause won’t prevent the challenging heir from inheriting. In addition, a no-contest clause may apply to some portions of your estate plan, but not others. For example, your heirs may be able to challenge your executors without violating a no-contest clause.

Two states –Florida and Indiana — will not enforce no-contest clauses no matter what. If you write your will in a state that enforces no-contest clauses and then move to Florida or Indiana, the no-contest clause will be void.

If you include a no-contest clause in your estate plan, you need to be sure there are no mistakes. If you leave out important property or aren’t clear about property in your possession, your heirs could be completely disinherited if they try to fix any mistakes.

While a no-contest clause can be a good tool, there are other ways to discourage a will contest. To contact me about Wills or this info email: info@raphanlaw.com

To subscribe to my FREE Monthly newsletter, click here.

Regards, Brian

http://Raphanlaw.com

 

%d bloggers like this: