The median cost of a private nursing home room in the United States increased to $100,375 a year in 2018, up 3 percent from 2017, according to Genworth's Cost of Care survey, which the insurer conducts annually.  Massachusetts came in with a state median cost for a private room at a nursing home at $12,775 a month or $153,000 a year. 

At the same time, Genworth reports that the median cost of a semi-private room in a nursing home is $89,297, up 4 percent from 2017. While significant, the rise in prices is not quite as steep as the 5.5 percent and 4.4 percent gains, respectively, in 2017.

But the median cost of assisted living facilities jumped 6.7 percent, to $4,000 a month. The national median rate for the services of a home health aide is $22 an hour, and the cost of adult day care, which provides support services in a protective setting during part of the day, rose from $70 to $72 a day.

Alaska continues to be the costliest state for nursing home care by far, with the median annual cost of a private nursing home room totaling $330,873. Oklahoma again was found to be the most affordable state, with a median annual cost of a private room of $63,510.

The 2018 survey, conducted by CareScout for the fifteenth straight year, was based on responses from more than 15,500 nursing homes, assisted living facilities, adult day health facilities and home care providers.  Survey respondents were contacted by phone during May and June 2018.

As the survey indicates, nursing home care is growing ever more expensive. Contact us today to learn how you can protect some or all of your family's assets.
​
For more on Genworth’s 2018 Cost of Care Survey, including costs for your state, click here.

A recent case involving basketball star Caldwell Jones demonstrates the danger in having only one spouse's name on a reverse mortgage. A federal appeals court has ruled that an insurance company may foreclose on a reverse mortgage after the death of the borrower, Mr. Jones, even though Mr. Jones’ widow is still living in the house. While there are protections in place for non-borrowing spouses, many spouses are still facing foreclosure and eviction.

A reverse mortgage allows homeowners to use the equity in their home to take out a loan, but borrowers must be 62 years or older to qualify for this type of mortgage. If one spouse is under age 62, the younger spouse has to be left off the loan in order for the couple to qualify for a reverse mortgage. Some lenders have actually encouraged couples to put only the older spouse on the mortgage because the couple could borrow more money that way. But couples often did this without realizing the potentially catastrophic implications. If only one spouse's name was on the mortgage and that spouse died, the surviving spouse would be required to either repay the loan in full or face eviction.

In order to protect non-borrowing spouses, the federal government revised its guidelines for reverse mortgages taken out after August 4, 2014 to allow spouses to stay in the house as long as they meet certain criteria, including proving ownership within 90 days of the borrowers death. In 2015, the federal government allowed lenders to defer foreclosure on a widow or widower and assign the mortgage to the federal government. Advocacy groups looking at reverse mortgage foreclosures have found that despite these new regulations, lenders are still foreclosing on non-borrowing spouses. Of the 591 non-borrowing spouses who have sought help to avoid foreclosure, only 317 received assistance.

These regulations did not help Mr. Jones' wife, Vanessa. Mr. Jones, who blocked more than 2,200 shots during his 17-year professional basketball career, obtained a reverse mortgage in 2014 on the Georgia home he lived in with his wife. The contract defined the "borrower" to be "Caldwell Jones, Jr., a married man." Ms. Jones did not put her name on the reverse mortgage because she was under age 62 at the time of the mortgage. Mr. Jones died later that year, and when Ms. Jones did not repay the loan, the insurer began foreclosure proceedings.

Ms. Jones sued the insurer in federal court to prevent the foreclosure, arguing that federal law prohibited the insurer from foreclosing on the house while she lived in it. Under a provision in federal law, the federal government "may not insure" a reverse mortgage unless the "homeowner" does not have to repay the loan until the homeowner either dies or sells the mortgaged property and defines "homeowner" to include the borrower’s spouse.

On appeal, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals (Estate of Caldwell Jones, Jr. v. Live Well Financial (U.S. Ct. App., 11th Cir., No. 17-14677, Sept. 5, 2018)) ruled that the federal law in question only covers what the federal government can insure and does not govern the insurer's right to foreclose. The court agrees with Ms. Jones that the law is intended to safeguard widows and implies that the federal government should not have insured the loan in the first place, but finds that federal law does not cover the insurer's private right to demand immediate payment and pursue foreclosure.
​
When purchasing a reverse mortgage, it is always safer to put both spouse's names on the mortgage. If one spouse is underage when the mortgage is originally taken out, that spouse can be added to the mortgage when he or she reaches age 65. If you have a reverse mortgage with only one spouse on it, contact us to find out the best way to protect the non-borrowing spouse. 

The Social Security Administration has announced a 2.8 percent increase in benefits in 2019, the largest increase since 2012.  The change will put an additional $468 annually in the pocket of the average retired beneficiary.

Cost of living increases are tied to the consumer price index, and an upturn in inflation rates and gas prices means recipients get a boost in 2019. The 2.8 percent increase is higher than last year’s 2 percent rise and the .3 percent increase in 2017. The average monthly benefit of $1,422 in 2018 will increase by $39 a month to $1,461 a month for an individual beneficiary, or $468 yearly. The cost of living change also affects the maximum amount of earnings subject to the Social Security tax, which will grow from $128,700 to $132,900.

And there is more good news: Unlike last year's increase, the additional income should not be entirely eaten up by higher Medicare Part B premiums. The standard monthly premium for Medicare Part B enrollees will increase only $1.50 to $135.50.

For 2019, the monthly federal Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payment standard will be $771 for an individual and $1,157 for a couple.

Most beneficiaries will be able to find out their cost of living adjustment online by logging on to my Social Security in December 2018. While you will still receive your increase notice by mail, in the future you will be able to choose whether to receive your notice online instead of on paper.
​
For more on the 2019 Social Security benefit levels, click here.

On November 5, 2018 the Real Estate Bar Association for Massachusetts (REBA) adopted Attorney Herbst's proposal to modify Title Standard No. 3 which addresses federal estate tax liens on real estate after someone passes away.  On small estates the Personal Representative can simply sign an affidavit indicating that the gross estate is less than the federal exemption and the recorded affidavit clears the title for this issue.

However, if the size of the estate exceeds the federal exemption you previously would either need a closing letter or lien release from the IRS which frequently can take 18 to 24 months to process (after the filing of a return).  Recognizing that this was an unacceptably long time to wait before one could sell real estate, the IRS issued Notice 2017-12 telling everyone that they should rely on a transcript when such transcript reports that the examination of the return is closed.  In a recent filing for an estate our office was able to obtain such a transcript from the IRS just 32 days after filing the return, a much shorter time period than 18 to 24 months.

Therefore last year Attorney Herbst submitted a request to the REBA Standards Committee requesting that Title Standard No. 3 be amended to recognize the new option available in IRS Notice 2017-12.  Just this week the committee approved the modification and we now have one more option – a hopefully much quicker option – to clear real estate titles from the impact of the federal estate tax lien.

Two big thank you’s are owed to Attorney Lisa Delaney and Plymouth County Register of Probate Matt McDonough.  Attorney Delaney sits on the standards committee and guided the amendment process taking it from initial thoughts, making sure the supporting documents the committee needed were there, and seeing it through to final vote.  Register McDonough assisted in figuring out what could and could not be filed in the probate court’s file to create the record that the committee wanted to rely on.

Whenever you have real estate in a probate estate it is important to identify the title clearing steps necessary as early on as possible as many steps can take a long time to complete.  By starting the process earlier you’ll have a less difficult time later when you go to sell the property.  

 
The older you get, the harder it is to qualify for long-term care insurance. If you are interested in buying this insurance, it is better to act sooner rather than later.
 
Many people put off purchasing long-term care insurance until they need it, but by then, it may be too late. Not only do premiums increase as you age, you also may not even qualify for insurance due to your health. The older you are, the more likely you are to have a pre-existing health condition that will disqualify you from getting long-term care insurance.
 
According to a recent study by the American Association for Long-Term Care Insurance, 44 percent of applicants who were age 70 or older had their applications denied due to health reasons. And those are the applicants who completed applications. Insurance agents frequently discourage unhealthy applicants from applying in the first place.
 
In contrast to older applicants, only 22 percent of applicants who are between 50 and 59 years old and 30 percent of applicants between 60 and 69 years old had their applications declined. Generally, the best (and cheapest) time to buy long-term care insurance is when you are in your 50s.
 
Long-term care insurance is not the best option for everyone, but if you are thinking about it, don't put off the purchase until it is too late. To find out if a long-term care insurance policy fits into your long-term care plan, contact us today.

According to court documents, legendary singer Aretha Franklin did not have a will when she died, opening up her estate to public scrutiny and potential problems. Failing to create an estate plan can cause lots of headaches for heirs, in addition to unnecessary costs.
 
Franklin, who died August 16, 2018, at age 76, left behind four sons, but no guidance on how to distribute her reported $80 million estate. According to The New York Times, her sons filed paperwork in Oakland County, Michigan, indicating that she died intestate -- that is, without a will. The sons nominated Franklin’s niece to serve as the personal representative of the estate. When someone dies without a will, the estate is divided according to state law. Under Michigan law, an unmarried decedent's estate is distributed to his or her children. (Franklin had been married twice but long since divorced.)
 
Even if the "Queen of Soul" had wanted her estate to go solely to her children, by not having a will or trust, her estate will have to go through a long public probate process, which will likely cost her estate considerable money. If Franklin, who was quite private in life, had created an estate plan that included a will and a trust, she could have avoided probate and kept the details of her financial circumstances private.  Her eldest son reportedly has special needs, which presents other potential complications.  In addition, by not having a will, Franklin has opened her estate up to potential challenges that could drag out the probate process. Without a will to clearly state the decedent's intent, litigation resulting from family conflicts often eats into estates.
 
Also, because Franklin did not plan her estate, the estate will be subject to unnecessary estate taxation. Although she may not have been able to avoid estate tax entirely, there are steps she could have taken to reduce the amount her estate will have to pay.
 
"I was after her for a number of years to do a trust," attorney Don Wilson, who represented Franklin in entertainment matters for the past 28 years, told the Detroit Free Press. "It would have expedited things and kept them out of probate, and kept things private."
 
Estate planning is important even if you don't have Aretha Franklin's assets. It allows you, while you are still living, to ensure that your property will go to the people you want, in the way you want, and when you want. It permits you to save as much as possible on taxes, court costs, and attorneys' fees; and it affords the comfort that your loved ones can mourn your loss without being simultaneously burdened with unnecessary red tape and financial confusion.
 
Schedule an initial meeting with us today to find out how easy it is to put together an estate plan..  

The rules establish an asset limit, a look-back period, and asset transfer penalties for claimants applying for VA pension benefits that require a showing of financial need. The principal such benefit for those needing long-term care is Aid and Attendance.
 
The VA offers Aid and Attendance to low-income veterans (or their spouses) who are in nursing homes or who need help at home with everyday tasks like dressing or bathing. Aid and Attendance provides money to those who need assistance.
 
Currently, to be eligible for Aid and Attendance a veteran (or the veteran's surviving spouse) must meet certain income and asset limits. The asset limits aren't specified, but $80,000 is the amount usually used. However, unlike with the MassHealth program, there historically have been no penalties if an applicant divests him- or herself of assets before applying. That is, before now you could transfer assets over the VA’s limit before applying for benefits and the transfers would not affect eligibility.
 
Not so anymore. The new regulations set a net worth limit of $123,600, which is the current maximum amount of assets (in 2018) that a MassHealth applicant's spouse is allowed to retain. But in the case of the VA, this number will include both the applicant's assets and income. It will be indexed to inflation in the same way that Social Security increases. An applicant's house (up to a two-acre lot) will not count as an asset even if the applicant is currently living in a nursing home. Applicants will also be able to deduct medical expenses -- now including payments to assisted living facilities, as a result of the new rules -- from their income.
 
The regulations also establish a three-year look-back provision. Applicants will have to disclose all financial transactions they were involved in for three years before the application. Applicants who transferred assets to put themselves below the net worth limit within three years of applying for benefits will be subject to a penalty period that can last as long as five years. This penalty is a period of time during which the person who transferred assets is not eligible for VA benefits. There are exceptions to the penalty period for fraudulent transfers and for transfers to a trust for a child who is unable to "self-support."
 
Under the new rules, the VA will determine a penalty period in months by dividing the amount transferred that would have put the applicant over the net worth limit by the maximum annual pension rate (MAPR) for a veteran with one dependent in need of aid and attendance. For example, assume the net worth limit is $123,600 and an applicant has a net worth of $115,000. The applicant transferred $30,000 to a friend during the look-back period. If the applicant had not transferred the $30,000, his net worth would have been $145,000, which exceeds the net worth limit by $21,400. The penalty period will be calculated based on $21,400, the amount the applicant transferred that put his assets over the net worth limit (145,000-123,600).
 
The new rules go into effect on October 18, 2018. The VA will disregard asset transfers made before that date. Applicants may still have time to get through the process before the rules are in place.
 
Veterans or their spouses who think they may be affected by the new rules should contact their attorney immediately.
 
To schedule a meeting to review whether you should consider transferring assets before the rule change, click here.  

If you have it to give, you certainly can, but there may be consequences should you apply for MassHealth long-term care coverage within five years after each gift.
 
The $15,000 figure is the amount of the current gift tax exclusion (for 2018), meaning that any person who gives away $15,000 or less to any one individual in one particular year does not have to report the gift to the IRS, and you can give this amount to as many people as you like.  If you give away more than $15,000 to any one person in a single year (other than your spouse), you will have to file a gift tax return. However, this does not necessarily mean you’ll pay a gift tax.  You’ll have to pay a tax only if your reportable gifts total more than $11.18 million (2018 figure) during your lifetime.
 
Many people believe that if they give away an amount equal to the current $15,000 annual gift tax exclusion, this gift will be exempted from MassHealth’s five-year look-back at transfers that could trigger a waiting period for benefits.  Nothing could be further from the truth.
 
The gift tax exclusion is an IRS rule, and this IRS rule has nothing to do with MassHealth’s asset transfer rules. While the $15,000 that you gave to your grandchild this year will be exempt from any gift tax, MassHealth will still count it as a transfer that could make you ineligible for nursing home benefits for a certain amount of time should you apply for them within the next five years.  You may be able to argue that the gift was not made to qualify you for MassHealth, but proving that is an uphill battle.
 
If you think there is a chance you will need MassHealth coverage of long-term care in the foreseeable future, you should review with us your particular situation before starting a gifting plan.