Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Gift Giving in 2010 Can Mean Smart Estate Planning

It’s the season of giving, and because the estate tax repeal is still in place in 2010, you can gift your loved ones lower estate taxes. The current tax rules mean that no estate taxes will be applied to people who die in 2010. The estate tax laws that were passed in 2001 are still in place in 2010, but those will expire at the end of this year. No one knows what the new tax rates are going to be next year. While you may not be able to predict what will happen in 2011, you can make cash gifts to your grandchildren and great-grandchildren this year to reduce the size of your estate and taxes.

For instance, you can gift your grandchildren up to $13,000. These can be gifted to a number of people, and the gift is not taxable. However, you can gift only up to $13,000 to one person.

2010 is also the right time to gift real estate. For instance, there is now an exemption of $1 million in place. You can use the exemption to gift property to your grandchildren or other heirs right now, rather than letting it pass on to them after you. The real estate gift will still be eligible for a 35% gift tax. However, consider that the gift tax rate could possibly jump to 55% in 2011. In any case, California estate planning attorneys don't expect your gift tax rate to drop below 35% next year.

Obviously, there's no way to accurately predict what the federal government will do in 2011. It's very important to consider your options, and speak to a California estate planning lawyer before you make decisions about your estate. About one thing there is no doubt - 2010 is a very good year for estate planning purposes, and you must take full advantage of this.

Monday, November 29, 2010

Jury Awards Victims Family $12 Million in Novartis Jawbone Damage Lawsuit


A jury in North Carolina has found that pharmaceutical giant Novartis must pay $12.8 million to the family of a woman, who suffered jawbone damage after taking the medications Zometa and Aredia. The jury found that Novartis failed to warn users about the risks of the Zometa and Aredia bone-strengthening medications.

The woman, Rita Fussman, developed jawbone damage while she was suffering breast-cancer last year. Fussman began taking Zometa in 2001. She had to have a tooth extracted while she was taking the drug, which is when the bone damage began. According to her oncologist, who testified at the trial, he was unaware of any side effects involving jaw damage from the use of Zometa and Aredia.

This is the third jawbone damage-related lawsuit to proceed against Novartis. Last month, Novartis gained a small victory when a similar claim by a New Jersey woman was rejected by a jury in that state. Another verdict, however, went against the company. Also last October, a jury in Montana awarded $3.2 million in damages to a cancer patient, who also developed jawbone damage. Two other cases are expected to go before a jury in South Carolina by the end of 2011.

In all, Novartis faces approximately 700 lawsuits that claim that victims suffered jawbone damage from using Zometa and Aredia. Both these medications contain biphosphonates, and are prescribed for the treatment of pain in bone cancer patients. Doctors also prescribe these medications to strengthen bones during treatment.

In 2005, Novartis began the process of informing doctors, warning them the drugs could cause jawbone damage. However, attorneys have alleged that Novartis was aware of the problems involving jawbone damage since the 1980s, but failed to warn consumers. It's a tactic that California pharmaceutical liability lawyers often find drugmakers indulging in, as they try to protect their bottom line.

Tuesday, November 9, 2010

What Does the New Congress Mean for the Estate Tax?

To put it crudely, 2010 was the most favorable year for people to die. This year, the estate tax issue continues to remain in limbo, after having been allowed to lapse by Congress. Now with a markedly different face to Congress after the midterms, Los Angeles estate planning attorneys will wonder which way this issue will turn going forward.

The estate tax was repealed at the end of 2009, and is scheduled to return in 2011. If Congress fails to change the law and the estate tax returns, it will return to the previously unfavorable rates that were in place in 2001. Among other things, persons who inherit assets will have to calculate the value of the assets at the time of purchase of the assets, and not the value at the time of the decedent’s death. This will make it exorbitantly expensive for heirs to pay estate tax.

Among all the things that Republicans and Democrats are arguing over, none are bigger than tax cuts for the wealthy. The Republicans therefore want to make the 2010 estate tax rules permanent. That would eliminate estate tax. The Obama administration however wants to make the 2009 estate rates and tax exemptions permanent. Doing nothing would result in going back to the 2001 exemption and rates, a consequence unfavorable to many taxpayers. Most estate planning attorneys however expect that Congress will go back to the system that it applied in 2009. Retroactive taxes therefore, are highly likely.

So, what does all this mean for you? It's important to remember that estate taxes tend to apply to larger high-value estates. However, with all this focus on taxes, it’s definitely a sign that you should begin taking estate planning more seriously. Check that all your documents and papers are in order and that you have made it easy for your assets to be transferred to the persons or charities that you intend to leave them too.

Tuesday, November 2, 2010

Plane Crash Traced to Croc on the Loose

A plane crash in Africa last year, which was initially blamed on a shortage of fuel, might have had a completely bizarre cause. According to the sole survivor of the crash, the plane crashed after passengers aboard panicked when a crocodile that had been snuck onto the plane, managed to break free from its bag.

It's a bizarre story, and investigators have no idea what to make of it. According to the survivor of the crash, the reptile had been brought on board inside a sports bag by a person who probably intended to sell it later. The plane was a Let-410, and was on its way from Kinshasa, capital of the Democratic Republic of Congo, to an airport at Bandundu. As the plane was preparing for a descent, the crocodile escaped from the carrier bag. It managed to frighten a flight attendant who scurried off into the cockpit. She was followed by other passengers who spotted the crocodile and panicked. According to the only passenger who survived, crewmembers tried desperately to get everybody to stay in their seats, but failed.

Nineteen passengers running amok on a small plane caused a loss in balance, leading to the plane plummeting down to the ground. Everybody on board was killed, except the sole passenger who survived. The crocodile was killed later by rescuers who were sifting through the wreckage.

California plane crash lawyers and aviation investigators say they don't know whether to believe the crocodile story, but wouldn't rule it out completely either. Meanwhile, a friend of the pilot Chris Wilson, a Briton, has come out to say that his friend had been concerned about the state of the jet that crashed. According to the friend, Wilson had confided in him that the airplane had been blacklisted by the licensing authority. That should provide investigators other leads to probe.
 
Add to Technorati Favorites