Editor's
note: The December 27, 1999 issue of Forbes magazine
featured a story on charitable gift planning entitled, "Trust
Me." The article featured comments by Robert Sharpe, Jr.,
including an example of the creative use of a charitable remainder
FLIP trust by a younger couple to fund college educational expenses
for a young child. Many readers have since requested further
details regarding this plan. In this article Mr. Sharpe shares
additional information regarding this exciting planning opportunity.
In early December 1998,
the Internal Revenue Service released long-awaited final regulations
that ushered in new planning opportunities utilizing the charitable
remainder unitrust. In these regulations, the IRS approved the
use of what had come to be known among charitable gift planners
as the "FLIP unitrust."
Under the terms of a
FLIP trust, a charitable remainder unitrust may be established
as a net income trust that pays a specified percentage of the
trust assets as valued annually, or the net income of the trust,
whichever is less. Upon the occurrence of a specified event
or at a particular time, the trust "flips" and becomes
a straight unitrust that from that point forward pays the specified
percentage of the asset value, regardless of the earnings of
the trust.
FLIP trusts had traditionally
been employed when trusts were funded with real estate or other
assets that were not readily marketable, in order to give the
trustee sufficient time to sell the assets before being called
upon to generate income.
The 1998 regulations
broadened the conditions under which a net income trust may
flip and become a straight unitrust to include other "trigger"
events in addition to the sale of property, including births,
marriage, the expiration of a time period, among other occurrences
outside the donor's direct control. As in the case of other
charitable remainder trusts, a FLIP trust may be created to
exist for one or more lifetimes or for a specific period of
time, not to exceed 20 years.
Educational planning
Among a variety of other uses, the FLIP trust for a term
of years opens up interesting educational expense planning opportunities.
For example, assume
that Mr. and Mrs. Martin, both age 38, have a two-year-old daughter
and are interested in setting aside funds for higher education.
They are also interested in participating in the endowment component
of a campaign being conducted by one of their charitable interests.
The Martins own stock
worth $100,000 in a high-tech company. The stock has a cost
basis of $25,000 and pays no dividends. They believe the stock
may have peaked in value, but are reluctant to sell it and generate
$15,000 in capital gains taxes.
They might consider
using the stock to establish a 10% net income FLIP unitrust
for the benefit of their daughter for a term of 20 years. The
trust is structured so that it will become a straight payout
trust at the end of 16 years. It is anticipated that the trust
will be invested for growth and thus generate little income
for the first 16 years. In year 17, the trust begins paying
10% of the value of the trust to the daughter for the remainder
of its 20-year term.
During
the final four years of the trust, the daughter will be aged
18 to 22 and presumably pursuing higher education. If the trust
grows at an annual rate of 8% during the first 16 years, it
can be expected to contain assets worth approximately $342,000
at the end of that period of time. (See chart at left.)
Under the terms of the
trust, in the seventeenth year the trust becomes a straight
unitrust and pays 10% of the value of the trust to the daughter.
Under these assumptions, the daughter and the charitable remainder
can be expected to receive the following amounts:
At the end of the 20-year
term, the trust will terminate and distribute the balance of
the trust, over $320,000 given the above assumptions, to the
charitable beneficiary named at the outset. The donors could
retain the right to change the ultimate beneficiary if they
so desired.

Note that in addition
to avoidance of $15,000 in capital gains taxes in the year they
fund the trust, the Martins will be entitled to a charitable
income tax deduction of some $13,400, well within the 10% minimum
deduction requirements to qualify for favorable tax treatment.
The remaining $86,600 will be considered a gift to their daughter
for gift tax purposes. This amount could be offset against the
$1,350,000 the Martins can between them give to their daughter
tax free during their lifetime or at their deaths. The amount
of the unified credit used in conjunction with the gift to their
daughter will, in effect, be replaced by scheduled increases
in the unified credit equivalent amount in coming years.
Conclusion
Through carefully planning
their gift utilizing IRS-approved planning techniques, the Martins
have used an asset worth $100,000 to make a gift commitment
that could after tax-free buildup within the trust be worth
over $320,000 when received by their charitable interest, while
enjoying beneficial tax savings and assuring a generous flow
of income for educational purposes at a time when it could be
a very valuable supplement to their daughter's income.
Note also that this
gift, by virtue of its termination at the conclusion of a term
of years, is not dependent on the age of the donor but rather
the donors' wealth and life circumstances. A trust for a term
of 20 years created by a 38-year-old couple will be expected
to be received in the same time frame as a similar trust for
the lifetime of a 68-year-old couple. Planning strategies such
as the one described above can be expected to be of immense
value as a younger generation replaces its parents and grandparents
as the primary source of major funding for charitable organizations
and institutions in America.