April 2010 Archives

April 28, 2010

Limited Liability Companies, a Staple of any Asset Protection Plan Involving Real Property

I know that many Michigan asset protection planning attorneys mistakenly take for granted that what I am about to say is common knowledge, but utilizing limited liability companies to hold commercial real estate and residential rental properties is an invaluable tool to protect your assets. I spoke with a prospective new client recently and was surprised to see that this sophisticated businessman who owns more than 100 commercial and residential rental properties throughout Michigan holds all of these properties in his sole name.

Continue reading "Limited Liability Companies, a Staple of any Asset Protection Plan Involving Real Property" »

Bookmark and Share
April 20, 2010

The Charging Order...Asset Protection Lawyers Overrate Its Power

Michigan Asset Protection Lawyers constantly extol the protection that Michigan limited liability companies provide debtors as a result of the charging order remedy. As the story line goes, a creditor with a judgment against an LLC member of a multimember LLC cannot reach LLC assets directly. Instead, it obtains a charging order and distributions otherwise payable to the debtor member must now be paid directly to the creditor. Since the debtor often has influence over whether distributions are made, this gives the debtor a negotiating opportunity with his creditors. However, in the real world the charging order may not be as powerful as advertised.

In dealing with the IRS, you frequently see the government attempting to collect debts owed by members of LLC's by levying directly on the assets of the Michigan LLC. How can the government do this you ask. Isn't the government bound by the charging order rules under Michigan law? Indeed the government has acknowledged in published notices that in the case of multimember LLC's it will honor the charging order rules...so what gives?

Continue reading "The Charging Order...Asset Protection Lawyers Overrate Its Power" »

Bookmark and Share
April 7, 2010

Asset Protection Planning Using Special Needs Trusts

A client in financial distress is often searching for any possible opportunity for protecting assets from her creditors. Having been advised of the applicability of the Fraudulent Transfer Act, the client understands that gifts to family members or sales at below market prices are likely to be challenged as fraudulent transfers. In general, a fraudulent transfer is one made with the intent to hinder, delay or defraud a creditor. However, intent can be also be found where the debtor transfers assets without receiving reasonably equivalent value and intends to incur debts beyond her ability to pay. In addition, a transfer is fraudulent if the debtor transfers assets without receiving reasonably equivalent value and is insolvent at the time or becomes insolvent as a result of the transfer. If a transfer is found to be fraudulent, the creditor has a number of remedies including avoidance of the transfer or attaching the transferred property.

Many traditional asset protection planning opportunities available to persons not in financial distress cannot be used by distressed debtors because of the Fraudulent Transfer Act. Sometimes, however, a family's unique situation can justify a transfer that otherwise might have been considered fraudulent. We occasionally encounter distressed debtors with children or are suffering from chronic physical or mental disabilities...autism, cystic fibrosis, muscular dystrophy and so forth. It is not unusual for a parent or grandparent, as part of his or her estate planning, to set up a Special Needs Trust for such child. This type of trust can be funded at death or inter vivos (during life). This author submits that if a distressed debtor funds a Special Needs Trust with the intent to further the interests of the child and to insure adequate funds exist for such child's needs beyond those provided by governmental benefits, and not with the intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditors, such transfer may be permissible.

Continue reading "Asset Protection Planning Using Special Needs Trusts" »

Bookmark and Share