|
REPORT FROM COUNSEL
SUMMER 2002 ISSUE
ESTATE PLANNING WITH THE
FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
A "family limited
partnership," as the name implies, refers to the creation
of a partnership business entity among close-knit family
members. A family limited partnership does not necessarily
have to involve a business. For instance, it can be created
for a particular asset, such as real estate or a mutual fund.
This structure is a popular estate planning tool because it
can provide both tax and non-tax advantages.
Non-Tax Advantages
One obvious non-tax advantage
is that when a transfer restriction is made a part of the
family limited partnership arrangement, there is assurance
that the business will be kept in the family. The structure
also allows the operator of the business (presumably a parent)
to maintain control of the business assets until retirement or
death. This is accomplished by having the parent retain a
general partnership interest that includes management control
of the business. The children become limited partners. If a
particular child were to be groomed to take over the
management of the business, the parent could, over time,
transfer fractional shares of the general partnership interest
to that child.
Another important non-tax
advantage is the protection of business assets. Although the
personal assets of the general partner can be reached by
creditors of the business, the liability of the limited
partners is restricted to their interests in the partnership.
Also, the assets placed in the partnership by the donor/parent
are protected from his personal creditors. His income from the
partnership can be reached by creditors, but not the assets.
Federal Income Tax
The primary income tax
advantage to be gained from forming a family limited
partnership is the deflection of income from the parent, who
is typically taxed at higher marginal rates, to the children,
who are taxed at lower rates. Where the donor/parent retains
control as the managing partner, the strategy is to allocate
earned income to the parent at the lowest reasonable level.
The unearned income (return from capital investment) is
divided among the parent and children as partners in
proportion to their capital interests.
Estate and Gift
Taxes
An initial federal estate tax
advantage derived from the creation of a family limited
partnership is that the allocation of income among the
children will prevent the accumulation of such income in the
estate of the donor/parent. The main focus is on the savings
that can be realized on federal estate and gift taxes.
If the donor/parent transfers
limited partnership interests to family members, the value of
those interests will not be included in the parent's estate at
death. However, when partnership interests are transferred to
family members, there is potential gift tax liability, which
is calculated at the same rates as the federal estate tax.
This problem can be alleviated by taking advantage of the
annual gift tax exclusion, which for 2002 is $11,000. A
fractional interest can be transferred free of gift tax to
each donee up to the amount of $11,000 per year ($22,000 if
the donor's spouse consents to the transfer).
The two primary features by
which federal estate tax savings are achieved are the estate
freeze and the valuation discount. The object of
an estate freeze is to transfer the future appreciation of the
family business to the children. The effect is to prevent the
appreciation of the senior family members' interests in order
to minimize estate taxes.
The valuation discount feature
discounts the value of the fractional shares into which the
business is divided so that the total value of the shares will
not equal 100% of the predivision value of the business. There
are different methods that can be used to discount the value
of the shares. These discounts reduce the value of each
partner's share for federal estate tax purposes and benefit
both the donor of the partnership interests and the donees.
Recently, the IRS has taken the
offensive against valuation discounts. One Tax Court case
shows that, in order to secure the "lack of
marketability" discount, the donee must not be given
powers that would allow him to liquidate the partnership.
Another recent Tax Court case
indicates that in order to avoid inclusion of the transferred
limited partnership interests in the decedent's estate, care
should be taken to avoid the appearance of the decedent
treating the property as his own. For example, the
transferor's residence should not be transferred to the family
limited partnership unless the transferor is to pay rent.
Given that the family limited
partnership is such a powerful and complicated entity with
major business, tax, and personal consequences, anyone
considering forming such a partnership should seek qualified
legal advice.
CLICK WRAP AGREEMENTS
In the age of online commerce,
"signing on the dotted line" has for many
transactions evolved into "clicking on the 'I agree'
box." But the resulting "click wrap" agreement
may be just as enforceable in court as if the parties had
solemnly written their signatures at the end of a paper
contract. As with so many twists on conventional legal
concepts that have been ushered in with the Internet, courts
are having to adapt time-tested principles on formation of a
contract to the computer age.
In one case, a company paid
thousands of dollars for sophisticated software. The company
claimed that it was entitled not only to use the software but
also to receive perpetual upgrades and support. As evidence of
such a bargain, the company pointed to the purchase order for
the transaction. The seller of the software countered by
relying on a later click wrap license agreement in the software
itself that limited its liability to the price paid for the
software.
The court ruled that the
language in the click wrap agreement that limited the seller's
liability was binding. The buyer clearly had given its assent
by clicking "I agree," just as if its representative
had signed a standard contract. The only issue, according to
the court, was whether click wrap license agreements are an
appropriate way to form contracts, and the court held that
they are.
The court was aware of and
sympathetic to the context in which most click wrap agreements
are created. The typical consumer, having paid a substantial
sum for software, rushes it into the computer, clicks on
"install" and scrolls past the fine print in the
license agreement. Arriving at the "I agree" box,
the customer clicks on it with hardly a thought. The lesson
from this case is that the click of a mouse is the equivalent
of the stroke of a pen.
Click wrap agreements are no
less enforceable than conventional contracts, but neither will
they be recognized by courts if the basic elements of offer
and acceptance are absent. From the early common law of
England to American law today, promises become binding only
when there is a meeting of the minds. As another court faced
with a disputed click wrap agreement put it, "[a]ssent may
be registered by a signature, a handshake, or a click of a
computer mouse transmitted across the invisible ether of the
Internet."
That court had to resolve a
dispute between visitors to a website who obtained a free
software program that makes it easier to download files from
the Internet. Someone wishing to download the free program
would see at first only a "download" box but no
reference to a license agreement. Only on the second screen
was there an invitation to review and agree to a license
agreement. A click on that invitation led to an unequivocal
statement that the user must agree to the terms in the
agreement before installing the software, and another click
revealed the agreement in full. In short, visitors to the
website were not required to indicate affirmatively their
assent to the license agreement, or even to view the
agreement, before downloading the software.
Individuals who had downloaded
the software sued the provider because they believed that
using the software caused private information about their
Internet activity to be transmitted to the software provider,
which was a violation of federal law. The court ruled that
they were not bound by a clause tucked away in the license
agreement that required arbitration of disputes in a specific
location. From the user's vantage point, the software was like
a free neighborhood newspaper at a supermarket counter, there
simply for the taking. The provider of the
"newspaper" could not impose contract terms on its
taking without clearly requiring assent to the terms before a
customer could take the paper.
FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT
The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
is the source of minimum wage, overtime pay, recordkeeping,
and child labor standards affecting over 100 million private
sector and governmental workers. To be covered by the FLSA, an
enterprise must have employees whose work has at least an
indirect connection to interstate commerce. In most cases, a
firm must do at least $500,000 in business annually to be
covered, although some entities, including hospitals, schools,
and governmental agencies, are subject to the FLSA regardless
of volume of business.
The FLSA is far-reaching, but
it does have its limits. For example, it does not require pay
for vacations, holidays, severance, or sickness, nor does it
mandate meal or rest periods, holidays off, or vacations. When
an employee is fired, the FLSA does not require a discharge
notice, a reason for the discharge, or immediate payment of
final wages. Assuming the employee is at least 16 years old,
the FLSA also does not limit the number of hours in a day, or
days in a week, that an employee may be scheduled to work.
Wages and Overtime
Workers covered by the FLSA
currently are entitled to the minimum wage of $5.15 per hour
and overtime pay that is at least one and one-half times their
regular rate of pay after 40 hours of work in a workweek. Some
minimum wage exceptions apply under specific circumstances to
disabled workers, full-time students, workers under 20 in
their first 90 days of employment, tipped employees, and
student-learners. Wages required by the FLSA must be paid on
the regular payday for the covered pay period. Employers
cannot effectively reduce the wages of their employees below
amounts required for the minimum wage or for overtime pay by
making deductions from paychecks for such items as shortages,
required uniforms, and tools of the trade.
Exemptions
For the FLSA to apply, there
must be an employment relationship that is distinct from other
arrangements, such as hiring an independent contractor. Even
when it does apply, the FLSA contains many specific
exemptions. The exemptions may be from overtime pay, from both
the minimum wage and overtime pay, or from child labor
provisions. Doubts about application of an exemption generally
are resolved against the employer. Employers should scrutinize
the exact requirements for an exemption before assuming it
applies.
Some of the employees exempted
from the overtime pay requirement are commissioned sales
employees whose earnings average at least one and one-half
times the minimum wage for each hour worked and certain
computer professionals who make at least $27.63 per hour.
Examples of workers exempted from both the minimum wage and
overtime pay include employees of certain seasonal and
recreational establishments and white collar employees in
executive, administrative, professional, or outside sales
positions who are paid on a salary basis.
Child Labor
The child labor provisions in
the FLSA are meant to protect the educational opportunities of
children and to prohibit their employment in unhealthy or
dangerous jobs. The FLSA restricts hours of work for those
under 16 and lists hazardous occupations that are too
dangerous for young workers. The rules vary with the age of
the worker and the occupation. At age 18, an employee is no
longer covered by federal child labor rules.
Enforcement
For private businesses, the
main enforcer of the FLSA is the federal Department of Labor's
Wage and Hour Division. Its representatives conduct
investigations either on their own initiative or in response
to complaints. The Secretary of Labor can sue to force
compliance and to recover unpaid minimum and/or overtime
wages, plus an equal amount as liquidated damages. If such a
suit has not already been filed, an employee can bring a
private action for the same remedies, plus attorney's fees and
court costs. Willful or repeated violations of the minimum
wage or overtime requirements can result in civil money
penalties or criminal prosecution. Aiming at the fruit of
underpaid or illegal labor, the FLSA has a "hot
goods" provision that prohibits anyone from shipping,
offering to ship, or selling in interstate commerce any goods
produced in violation of the FLSA.
STARTING A BUSINESS? GET AN
EIN.
A new business must get a
nine-digit employer identification number (EIN) from the
Internal Revenue Service if it either pays wages to one or
more employees or files pension or excise tax returns. An EIN
is like a Social Security number for a business. It is used
when filing a federal tax return, as well as for
correspondence with the IRS or the Social Security
Administration.
IRS Form SS-4 is an application
for an EIN, with information on how to apply by mail or by
telephone. The IRS now has a toll-free telephone number for
getting an EIN: (866) 816-2065. Taxpayers also can download
forms from the IRS website at
www.irs.ustreas.gov.
LANDLORDS AND CREDIT CHECKS
Landlords are free to use
credit reports in evaluating prospective tenants, but they
must follow requirements set out in the Fair Credit Reporting
Act (FCRA). A new guidance has been issued that describes how
the FCRA applies to landlords and what the consequences are
for noncompliance. The guidance focuses especially on a
landlord's obligation to provide an applicant with an
"adverse action notice" when adverse action is taken
based on information in the applicant's "consumer
report."
A consumer report is a
compilation of information about a person's credit
characteristics, character, reputation, lifestyle, and rental
history. A report is covered by the FCRA only if it was
prepared by a consumer reporting agency (CRA). The major
credit bureaus are CRAs, as are many tenant-screening services
and reference-checking services. If a landlord uses its own
employees to verify personal, employment, and previous
landlord references, the FCRA does not apply.
The most obvious adverse action
that will trigger the notice requirement is outright denial of
a rental application. Something short of that can also
constitute adverse action so long as it is prompted by
information in a consumer report. For example, a notice must
be given to applicants who are required by the landlord to:
have a co-signer on the lease; pay a deposit not required for
other applicants, or an unusually large deposit; or pay rent
that is higher than for another applicant.
The essential contents of an
adverse action notice are established in the FCRA. The notice
must contain the name, address, and telephone number for the
CRA that supplied the report, a statement that the CRA did not
make the rental decision and that it cannot give the specific
reasons for that decision, and notification that the consumer
has rights to a free report and to dispute the accuracy or
completeness of information in the report. Even landlords for
whom a consumer report played only a minor role in the
decision to take an adverse action must give the notice to the
applicant. A written notice is the best proof of compliance.
Landlords are well-advised to
stay in compliance with all FCRA requirements, including
adverse action notices, as the consequences for noncompliance
can be significant. For lack of required notices, a landlord
can be sued by individuals in federal court and made to pay
compensatory damages, punitive damages if the violations are
deliberate, and attorney's fees. Federal or state agencies can
also sue landlords and get civil penalties. An isolated and
inadvertent failure to send a notice, however, will not result
in landlord liability if the landlord has reasonable
procedures in place to assure compliance with the FCRA.
CASE BY CASE
Stolen Customer
Lists
Home food service companies
sell and deliver food products and appliances to their
customers, many of whom later reorder more products. When a
home food service company bought a customer list of one of its
competitors, what might have been a competitive advantage
instead became a legal headache. The list had been stolen and
the food service company that bought it knew it was stolen.
The company whose list got into
the wrong hands sued the purchaser of the list for
misappropriation of a trade secret. Some courts have refused
to recognize customer lists as protected trade secrets when
they contain information that is readily available from public
sources. The essence of a trade secret is that it has value
because it is not easily ascertainable. The customer list for
the home food service company was protected because of the
time and effort that had been expended to identify particular
customers with particular needs or characteristics. The
defense that the list contained only information that was
easily compiled was undercut by the fact that the defendant
had paid a lot of money for it.
A state court found a violation
of the law governing trade secrets. It ruled that monetary
damages should be awarded to the plaintiff based on net
profits earned by the defendant from improper use of the list.
The court also barred the defendant from ever using the stolen
list again.
|