Pages

Showing posts with label Private Insurance. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Private Insurance. Show all posts

Thursday, September 26, 2013

IRS Filling The Pipeline With Captive Insurance Cases And Focusing On Dubious Practices




Forbes:

Jay Adkisson, Contributor
I write about asset protection.

Logo of the Internal Revenue Service
Logo of the Internal Revenue Service (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Mr. John Glover of the IRS General Counsel’s office spoke about captive insurance arrangements Friday in San Francisco at a meeting of the American Bar Association’s Tax Section, which was hosted by that Section’s Insurance Companies Committee and co-sponsored by the Business Law Section’s Committee on Captive Insurance (of which I am the current Chair).
By agreement, the program was not recorded, Mr. Glover’s remarks were not “on the record”, and what follows comes from my notes and should not be taken as anything like a transcript of his remarks.
Mr. Glover has long been instrumental in IRS rule-making with regard to captive insurance companies, and so many tax practitioners in the field hang on to his every syllable and nuance as if he were the Fed Chairman.


The IRS has concerns about risk pooling arrangements and is beginning to focus on such arrangements, stated Mr. Glover, especially in cases where there is nominal laying and assuming of risks, but in the end reconciliation there really isn’t any risk-shift because the captive or business owner will reimburse the pool for significant losses. But there is also concern where the risk pool is simply an account where money comes in, and money goes out, and it is called “insurance” when it is really anything but.
Another concern that the IRS is starting to focus on, stated Mr. Glover, are dubious risks. The example he gave was of a widget shop in Nebraska that purchases tsunami insurance. The IRS has an increased interest in the pricing of captive insurance policies for such things as terrorism, cyber-liability, etc., which may be the subject of abuse.
Notably, Mr. Glover addressed the lack of IRS enforcement in the area of captives, noting that it has taken some time to get cases into the pipeline, but making a special point that the IRS now has more cases pending in tax court against captives than ever before — and the growth of the sector means that the IRS will be tasking more resources towards abusive practices. (This is not to be read that the IRS is challenging captives generally; to the contrary, the IRS now recognizes the legitimacy of proper captive insurance arrangements, and Mr. Glover has himself drafted much of the guidance for that purpose).
Captive insurance cases currently pending before the U.S. Tax Court include:
  • Rent-A-Center, Inc. & Affiliated Subs. (Dkt. Nos. 8320-09, 6909-10 & 21627-10)
  • YRC Worldwide & Subs. (Dkt No. 6714-10)
  • Securitas Holdings, Inc. & Subs. (Dkt. No. 21206-10)
  • Dielco Crane Service (Dkt. No. 21726-10)
  • Pilgrim’s Pride (Dkt. No. 16972-10)
  • Vincent Enterprises, Inc. & Subs. (Dkt. No. 2759-10
Other cases in other courts include:
  • Proliance Surgeons (Dkt. No. 1:09-cv680) (Court of Federal Claims)
  • Salty Brine (Dkt. No. 5:10-CV-00108-C); K&T Farm Ltd. (Dkt. No. 5:10-CV-00109-C); Wasson Solid Waste Disposal System (Dkt. No. 5:10-CV-00110-C); Five Star Consolidated Companies (Dkt. No. 5:10-CV-00111-C); Thomas & Kidd Oil Production (Dkt. No. 5:10-CV-00141-C) (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas) (consolidated cases).
Mr. Glover also stated that IRS agent Steve Henson is maintaining a resource well that is available to answer questions for field agents and assist them with particular issues as they increasingly run across captive insurance arrangements.
But Mr. Glover also noted that in attempting to provide guidance for captive insurance practitioners, the IRS is hamstrung by the lack of case law as to many issues, and at this point can only set out various buoys (his term) to help practitioners stay in the safe waters and away from the shoals.
Aside from Mr. Glover’s remarks, other discussion focused on the importance of following NAIC reserving standards, which the tax court has found to be among the most persuasive evidence in whether the reserves were fair and reasonable. It is also very important for the Board of Directors of a captive to carefully review and approve an actuary’s recommendations.
There was a good deal of discussion at the meeting about so-called “Micro Captive” qualifying for special treatment under Tax Code section 831(b) and about the proliferation of promoters who sell captives as essentially a tax shelter with little or no consideration of the true insurance function of such companies.
Finally, there was a discussion of state taxes as they related to captives after the passage of Dodd-Frank, with some practitioners, notably captive tax attorney Bruce Wright, observing that there has been an significant uptick in the actions by various states to collect these taxes, particularly for businesses in California, New York and Texas. Captive tax attorney Chaz Lavelle pointed out that with rare exceptions the states often win these challenges in the state courts, and, despite there sometimes being good arguments why the taxes should not apply under the Todd Shipyards and Dow Chemical opinions, they are often more costly for captive insurance companies to fight than to just pay the taxes to begin with.
The bottom line is that the captive insurance tax world continues to evolve, and that certain dubious practices that did not merit much attention in the past are now almost certain to receive much stricter attention in the future. That somebody has gotten away with these practices in years before is essentially meaningless, or as the SEC requires in prospectuses:
“Past performance is no guarantee of future returns.”
Jay Adkisson
'via Blog this'
Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday, April 14, 2011

Self-Insured Numbers Higher Than Expected, and Growing

A new report reveals that the federal government was underestimating the number of employers that self-fund employee health benefits. Now, with healthcare reform, their numbers are set to grow.

Risk & Insurance Online
By JULIE LIEDMAN, a freelance writer who lives in Philadelphia
President Barack Obama's signature on the heal...Image via WikipediaOn March 23, the one-year anniversary of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), the U.S. Department of Labor issued its first annual report on self-insured employee health benefits plans, mandated by the legislation. …
According to the DOL report, about 12,000 health plans filing a Form 5500 for 2008--the latest year for which complete data is are available--were self-insured, and 5,000 mixed self-insurance with insurance. Self-insured plans covered 22 million people, while mixed plans covered 25 million. Health benefits plans covering private-sector employees must file the form if they cover 100 or more participants or hold assets in trust. Because many self-insured health plans do not meet the filing requirements and therefore haven't filed the form, however, the total number of self-insured plans probably is underestimated. The DOL report acknowledged this,  …
"We expect a larger interest in self-insurance than ever before when additional regulations such as exchanges, 'pay-or-play' and vouchers go into effect (by 2014)," said Mike Ferguson, chief operating officer of the Self-Insurance Institute of America.
By 2014, PPACA requires that health insurance be more affordable and easier to purchase for small businesses and individuals through statewide exchanges. Employers with 50 or more full-time employees must either provide specified minimum levels of coverage to their employees or pay an excise tax. This is referred to as "pay or play."…
Smaller employers may find it financially advantageous to pay for their own firm's risk than to be subject to the new provisions.
Health insurance premiums paid on behalf of wo...Image via WikipediaPurchasing a plan through the exchange, for instance, where premiums will be a function of the broader risk pool and subject to risk adjustment, could be costly, Ferguson said. If enough small firms with healthier enrollees opt out of a state's small-group market in 2014, that state exchange could experience adverse selection.
"Based on anecdotal feedback we've gotten from our members," said Ferguson, "they've digested the regulations currently in place, adapted to any new requirements and life goes on."
April 12, 2011
Copyright 2011© LRP Publications
Enhanced by Zemanta

Monday, February 1, 2010

Consumer misconceptions abound about funding long-term care

Life Insurance Selling
Published 12/2/2009 
…[According] to a recent Home Instead Senior Care study … conducted by the Boomer Project (www.boomerproject.com) among 166 seniors and 444 adults, revealed that both seniors and adult children would use Social Security and Medicare to pay for senior care. The truth is, neither of these options is a viable funding mechanism for long-term care. The study participants were less likely to identify those sources of funds typically used to pay for senior care such as personal savings and retirement plans. …
“The reality is the best-laid retirement plans will be wiped out by a long-term care event,” Bill Comfort, a long-term care insurance specialist, broker and trainer who owns Comfort Assurance Group in St. Louis,says. “People fail to consider the extra costs associated with a long-term care disability in retirement, and that nothing will pay for the kind of care they want except their own money.”
The idea that Medicare and Social Security will pay for senior care is rooted in the misconception that … a government entitlement program … will cover such costs. “Many people do see the government taking care of disabled seniors in nursing homes,” Comfort says. “…Medicare only covers short-term acute and rehabilitative costs. When a nursing home is needed, Medicaid — a ‘means tested’ welfare program designed to help the poor of all ages — will pay. But that’s only when a senior has exhausted almost all of his or her own resources. And Medicaid generally pays only for care where a senior least wants to go: A certified nursing home.”
Medicaid not only requires seniors to deplete their assets, but once qualified, they must pay any remaining monthly income, including Social Security or a pension check, to the nursing home. Medicaid only pays the difference between the senior’s remaining income and the nursing home’s monthly charge. …
Comfort relates a story about a client who pays for long-term care insurance for her father as a result of an experience with her stepmother. “Her step-mother needed Alzheimer’s care and she qualified immediately for Medicaid. What the family didn’t realize is that they couldn’t choose the nursing home they wanted so she was placed farther away from her home,” Comfort says. “The daughter is paying for long-term care insurance now so that her father has more options if he needs care. …”
…“Growing older, which we all hope to do, will create some need for care, and that costs money…,” Comfort says. …
Paul Hogan is co-founder and CEO of Home Instead Senior Care. Home Instead Senior Care is among the nation’s largest providers of at-home care for seniors and has served more than 400,000 clients through a network of 800 franchise offices in the U.S. and 15 other countries. Hogan and his wife, Lori, are co-authors of Stages of Senior Care: Your Step-by-Step Guide to Making the Best Decisions (November 2009/McGraw Hill).  For more information, go to http://www.stagesofseniorcare.com/.

Friday, December 12, 2008

Captives save business owners money

Special-purpose insurer ideal for pretax wealth accumulation, asset protection, other goals

InvestmentNews

By David T. Phillips October 5, 2008

Through the creation of a captive insurance company, businesses can cut their taxes and increase the value of their estate. [The] business can also use the captive for pretax wealth accumulation, to protect assets, for efficient estate planning and to retain key employees. ... The strategy works best for companies that generate at least $1 million in annual net income, making it viable for physician groups, associations, franchisees and other businesses. ...

Captives were established more than 30 years ago, and today, there are more than 6,000 captives and $100 billion in annual insurance premiums.

There are two broad ways to employ a captive.

First, a captive can replace existing insurance, such as workers' compensation, general liability, medical malpractice, auto liability, property or other conventional insurance.

Through a captive, the overall cost of insurance is reduced, and the captive owner can capture underwriting profit and investment income.

Second, the captive can purchase insurance that covers exclusions, deductibles and self-insured risk.

In the event that claims don't materialize, the captive will capture a substantial pretax nest egg that can be used for future business risks, or it can be used for distributions to owners, family members or key executives at favorable tax rates.

Moreover, under the U.S. tax code, if the captive receives less than $1.2 million in insurance premiums a year, the entire amount is received tax-free by the captive. The insured business might then deduct the $1.2 million annually, saving about $500,000 a year in taxes.

Remember that premiums paid to a captive ...can be invested in stocks, bonds, mutual funds, real estate and other investments. A captive can also hold life insurance.

Generally, these are specialized life insurance policies with a high cash surrender value to ensure that the policies qualify as a proper investment under insurance regulations. The captive can hold the life insurance directly or loan money to a life insurance trust to buy the insurance.

Also, the death benefit of the life insurance is outside the estate. This means that because of the captive, a $10 million or even $25 million death benefit is created for the estate's beneficiaries without any gift or estate tax liabilities.

David T. Phillips is the founder and chief executive of Estate Planning Specialists LLC in Chandler, Ariz., a national network of estate planners. He can be reached at david@epmez.com.