|

by Barlow T. Mann
In
recent years, studies published in the U.S. and elsewhere have revealed trends
in the profiles of those who intend to include charitable contributions as part
of their estate plans. A national survey sponsored by the National Committee on
Planned Giving in 2000 revealed, among other things, that 8% of the population
claims to have included charitable bequest provisions in their estate plans.
This represents a 60% increase over the results of the NCPG’s earlier study in
1992. Other surveys have indicated that upwards of 50% of affluent Americans
intend to include charitable provisions in their estate plans.
These and other surveys contain
helpful information about the charitable intentions of Americans as they relate
to their estate plans. However, as intentions do not always become reality, it
can also be useful to examine the fulfilled actions of a portion of America’s
decedent population over a period of years.
One source of such information is
the Internal Revenue Service. The most comprehensive published figures available
are included periodically in the IRS’s Statistics of Income Bulletin. Recent
reports feature in-depth analyses of the estate tax returns of individuals who
died between 1995 and 2000. The data, projections, and estimates from the
Internal Revenue Service can provide a wealth of information about planned
giving donors and prospects (see www.irs.gov).
Crunching the numbers
Among those who filed estate tax
returns in 1998, the average female decedent passed away at 81.4 years, almost
five years later than the male decedent’s 76.6 years. Both lived slightly
longer than the general population. Those who had entered into planned gifts
lived even longer.
The composition of estates reveals
that stocks and bonds made up the bulk of the assets in the estates of both male
and female decedents. Cash amounted to only about 11% of combined assets.
The marital deduction and charitable
deduction are the two most popular estate tax deductions. For 1998, the
charitable deduction was claimed in 16.9% of the federal estate tax returns
filed, which falls within the normal 15-20% observed in other years. As 80% or
more of wealthy persons do not yet make gifts that result in charitable
deductions from estate taxes, there may be tremendous opportunities for growth
in gifts via estates. Meanwhile, NCPG figures indicate that there has been a
dramatic increase in planned giving donors among the general population of
ordinary Americans.
Gross contributions claimed on
estate tax returns exceeded $13.6 billion in 1998. The IRS study reveals that
charitable bequests in estates on average amounted to 28.7% of the estate net
worth.
Factors affecting charitable gifts
Gender. Without a doubt,
gender plays a role in giving patterns. Women are significantly more likely to
include charitable provisions in their estates than are men. Overall, 13.4% of
male decedents left $7.2 billion and 21.0% of female decedents left charitable
bequests of $7.7 billion. This difference may be explained by the fact that
women tend to live longer than men, and as a result wives often outlive their
husbands. The first spouse to die in a married couple would likely take
advantage of the unlimited marital deduction by leaving all assets to the
surviving spouse. In these cases, the second spouse to die, in most cases women,
would naturally attend to the ultimate charitable disposition of the couple’s
accumulated assets.
While women were more likely to
leave bequest gifts, note that men actually contributed more per capita.
Marital status. Single
(defined as never married) females and males were the most likely to include
charitable bequests in their wills. Almost half of all single females studied,
and roughly one-third of all single males, included charitable provisions in
their estate plans, compared with roughly 25% of widowed men and women and fewer
than 10% of married decedents. Single decedents also contributed a larger
percentage of their net worth than married or widowed contributors. In total
numbers, widows and widowers tend to constitute the largest source of charitable
bequests. Again, the impact of the unlimited marital deduction and the need for
a surviving spouse to have access to the entire marital estate for the remainder
of life would largely explain the fact that married decedents were far less
likely than their widowed and single counterparts to include a charitable
bequest in their plans.
Age. In 1995, those persons
over the age of 80 at the time of death represented almost three-quarters of all
charitable contributors from estates. Over 90% of bequest money came from those
who died after the age of 70. Interestingly, while the largest percentage of net
worth was given by decedents who were between the ages of 50 and 60 at the time
of death, only 440 estate tax returns for persons under 60 contained charitable
provisions. Again, this reflects the fact that most younger decedents fall into
the category of married men, who are the least likely to leave a bequest to
charity through their will or other plans.

Looking ahead
Published IRS data should provide
encouragement for all persons involved in the gift planning process. They
provide solid evidence that the growing transfer of wealth is becoming a source
of increased charitable giving and can be expected to grow in the future.
Evidence of the increasing size of
estates is shown by the rise in the number of federal estate tax returns filed
between 1987 and 2000 (see chart below).

As part of the 2001 Tax Act, the
filing level increases to $1 million in 2002, $1.5 million in 2004, $2 million
in 2006, $3.5 million in 2009, the tax is repealed in 2010, and, unless Congress
acts to make the estate tax cuts permanent, is scheduled to return to $1 million
in 2011. While the actual impact of the estate tax cuts remains to be seen, one
could reasonably assume that many, if not most, of those persons that fit the
charitable bequest profile (older, single, childless, widowed, etc.) will
continue to include charities in their estate plans. Such was the case after the
1981 tax act eventually eliminated estate taxes for most decedents through the
introduction of the unlimited marital deduction and the original $600,000
exemption equivalent. See below for the IRS’s projected estate tax returns for
2001-2008.
Marketing efforts pay off
While
surveys have indicated that up to 50% of affluent
persons intend to include charities in their
estates, the NCPG study shows that only 8% of
Americans overall have actually included charitable
dispositions in their estates. As noted earlier, IRS
statistics indicate that less than 20% of the
affluent actually take this step. It therefore
appears that there is considerable room and promise
for donor education and motivational activities on
the topic of charitable bequests and other
testamentary gifts to help bring stated intentions
in line with reality.
Given
these statistics, one might reasonably assume that
an organization could enjoy significant growth in
this source of gift income simply by encouraging
those who have charitable intentions to follow
through! One effective way to turn prospective
donors into committed supporters is to send them
appropriate and timely marketing materials (see page
3). The 2000 NCPG study supports this idea as it
indicates that the number one way donors learn about
making charitable bequests is through charities’
marketing efforts.
Ongoing
and effective communications with your constituency
may well be the key to helping your donors turn
their charitable intentions into a reality. It is
both the duty and privilege of gift planners to help
donors leave a lasting legacy for the future.
1 “Planned Giving in the United States 2000: A
Survey of Donors”
2 U.S. Trust Survey of Affluent Americans
3
Eller, Martha Britton. “Charitable Bequests:
Evidence from Federal Estate Tax Returns.”
Statistics of Income Bulletin. Spring 2001:
174-190.
4
Johnson, Barry W. and Jacob M. Mikow. “Federal
Estate Tax Returns:1998-2000.” Statistics of
Income Bulletin. Spring 2002: 133-186.
5
Framinan, Javier. “Projections of Returns to Be
Filed in Calendar Years 2001-2008.” Statistics of
Income Bulletin. Winter 2001-2002: 174-177.
|