'Fake lawyers' with bogus degrees a problem across Canada
Christy Somos


People are posing as fake lawyers and it’s a big problem
 

NOW PLAYING
Take these important steps to be sure you have someone who is really in the business.SHARE
5K5K
TORONTO -- There is a disturbing epidemic of “fake lawyers” scamming vulnerable Canadians out of hundreds of thousands of dollars, with eight caught in B.C. earlier this month alone.
Lawyer Tanya Walker says that the practice of obtaining fake degrees, law or otherwise, is “quite common” online and worth a billion dollars worldwide.
“The most vulnerable segment of the population [to fake lawyers] are baby boomers, aging people because they may not be in tune as much with technology as the younger generation,” Walker said on CTV’s Your Morning Friday.
Walker said that new immigrants or those wishing to move to Canada are also vulnerable, as there may be a language barrier and may not know how to verify a lawyer’s credentials.
Fake lawyers can do “a lot” of damage, Walker said, as “the judgment is not automatically overturned because you are represented by a fake lawyer, you have to demonstrate that there was a miscarriage of justice.”
If the victim of a fake lawyer is unable to prove a miscarriage of justice, the original judgment can still stand, she said.
Walker said that with real, regulated and licensed lawyers, clients with an issue can report them to the law society and pursue compensation up to $500,000 – or sue the lawyer and pursue a payout from their insurer. None of those options are available with a fake lawyer.
“All a judge does for you when you win is write that you have won [against a fake lawyer], it’s up to you to collect, so if the person does not have any assets… you are out of luck,” Walker said.
Walker said that if you are in need of a lawyer, always verify the lawyer’s credentials, try to visit their office, call the law society and double check their registration number and “be suspicious if they do not have any pictures on their website or it’s too good to be true.”
Lawyers are generally only allowed to accept “around $7,500 in cash” per file, Walker said, so anyone asking for exorbitant amounts like $50,000 should “send up a red flag.”

Grandmother Conspired with State Officials to Gain Custody of Minor Grandchild in Violation of Parent's Right to Due Process (7th Cir.)
Jack and Angela Howser believed that Angela's daughter was failing to provide safe and suitable housing for Angela's minor granddaughter, E.W. The Howsers solicited the assistance of a private investigator, county prosecutor, and local law enforcement agencies to gain custody of the child. To this end, the group went to the daughter's home in the middle of the night for the purpose of arresting the daughter for issuing a $200 check to Angela with insufficient funds. Once in police custody, and without the daughter's consent to designate a custodian for E.W., the sheriff permitted the Howsers to remove the child from her home. Following lengthy custody litigation that concluded in the daughter's favor, the daughter filed suit against the Howsers, the sheriff, and county prosecutor under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for conspiring to make decisions regarding the care, custody, and control of E.W. in violation of the daughter's right to due process under the Fourteenth Amendment. The prosecutor and sheriff settled. A jury found in favor of the daughter as to her claim against the Howsers and awarded $970,000 in damages. A magistrate judge for the federal district court for the Southern District of Illinois denied the Howsers' post-trial motions.


The Howsers appealed. The Seventh Circuit affirmed. The court held: 1) there was sufficient evidence to support a finding that the Howsers conspired to take custody of the child over the daughter's objection; 2) the magistrate judge's pretrial decision to exclude unfavorable information about the daughter and her husband was not error or an abuse of discretion; and 3) the damages award was not excessive in light of the Howser's "reprehensible" conduct.

GREEN V. HOWSER, 2019 WL 5797158 (7TH CIR. NOV. 7, 2019)

​https://blog.eldercounsel.com/service-animals-airlines-new-guidance-issued-by-dot?utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=79691940&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-_O-LSYoiXJ6KkvLxfyrmWh9XS1RXkyukPeYuUvQ7nY_e1DfEvtch5a9V13Ov2aOygGJXnl5cfV5HD027MRkUFQLKw9xw&_hsmi=79691940

​Fighting Elder FraudBy Terry Savage on October 12, 2019

One of the saddest statistics of aging is the growing amount of elder financial abuse.  It’s estimated that seniors lose $37 billion a year to fraud.   Even worse, seniors are often the victims of their own adult children or caregivers.
As the huge baby boom generation ages, and lives longer, the opportunities for elder fraud increase. The FBI notes that seniors are increasingly involved in “romance scams” along with being victimized by fake calls pretending to be from the IRS, demanding money immediately.   Many seniors purchase pre-paid credit and debit cards to comply with threats, thereby losing their life savings.
Now, the financial services industry is using new tools to not only identify but prevent this kind of fraud.  The Senior Safe Act was passed in 2018, and it allowed banks and financial institutions to be exempt from privacy protections when trying to stop, or report, suspected financial elder abuse.
As a result, banks have started regular training programs for their employees, educating them about signs of potential fraud, such as large or unexpected withdrawals from accounts, or suspicious in-person bank visits for cash withdrawals.
Now, financial institutions, particularly broker dealers and investment advisors, have one more tool in the fight against elder financial fraud.  It’s called FINRA Rule 2165 and it creates a “safe harbor” allowing broker dealers and investment advisors to place a hold in disbursements for 15 days if fraud is suspected.
Trusted Contact
As part of the latest updates to Rule 4512, which applies to broker dealers and investment advisors, they are required  to make “reasonable efforts to obtain the name of and contact information for a trusted contact person upon the opening of a non-institutional customer’s account or when updating account information.”
As a result, you may be contacted by your financial institution or advisor asking you to name a “trusted contact” who can independently verify any unusual circumstances in your account to prevent possible financial exploitation.
While intended to provide protection, this can also raise issues.  Is your adult child really your most trusted contact?  Sadly, this is not the case for many seniors.  Perhaps it would be better to name someone independent of your family – the lawyer who drew up your estate plan, or a younger friend who is not a potential beneficiary after your death. That trusted person could be a fiduciary financial advisor.
Michele Kryger, head of Elder and Vulnerable Client Care at AIG the giant life & retirement insurer, notes that most senior financial abuse goes unreported.  That’s either because the senior is too embarrassed to reveal she or he has been “taken” – or because they are fearful of the family member or caregiver who abuses them.  AIG has been a leader in training the people at their call centers, as well as all U.S. employees, to look for signs of potential elder fraud.
A recent AIG study show that nearly half of seniors manage their finances – and face these threats – entirely alone.  Kryger suggests that aging seniors have not only a “trusted financial contact” but set up a dual power of attorney, and give a copy to your bank, broker, or other financial institutions.    That dual POA would require not just one person, but two trusted people, to agree on any major financial or investment changes or withdrawals. This added check could help prevent the kinds of financial fraud that impoverish seniors on a regular basis.
Elder financial fraud is a slippery concept.  It requires teaching a generation that may be lonely and alone not to respond to phone calls or emails promising romance or threatening loss of their home.  It requires a real education effort to teach everyone to avoid clicking on links in unsolicited emails, or giving out private information such as Social Security numbers over the telephone.
And even worse, for a generation that is often aging alone, it requires deciding  who in your life is truly trust-worthy so you can name a “trusted contact” and empower your bank to protect you from fraud.  Finding a trusted person — likely not a member of your family — is the toughest job of all. And that’s The Savage Truth.

How to prepare for solo retirementBy Janet Bodnar
Kiplinger's Personal Finance |


(Fotolia)Two sobering letters from readers address the challenges that single people face when they retire.
"Publications and websites talk to their readers as if they are always married," writes Vic Linares. "Never do articles address retirees who are single and how they cope." And John Scholtz observes that "you may be taking away a huge part of your social life when you retire. Keeping in touch with former workmates will endure for only one coffee off-campus."

In a study by Age Wave and Bank of America Merrill Lynch, preretirees said that what they expect to miss most when they leave work is a reliable income. But what many retirees actually miss most are their social connections.
That's not surprising, says Ken Dychtwald, CEO of Age Wave. "You're at the peak of your career, answering phone calls and email, going to meetings," he says. "Suddenly, all that stimulation is gone."
Without a spouse or other family members, it can be an even bigger shock. 
Being alone also raises financial and legal issues.
"With single folks, the most important thing is to have appropriate powers of attorney in case you become incapacitated," says Ali Hutchinson, senior vice president of private wealth management at Brown Brothers Harriman.
With no spouse or partner as backup, you're more likely to need long-term care from outside sources or to face estate-planning issues, says Hutchinson.
Retiring alone has its pros as well as cons. "You get to do what you want without having to negotiate with anyone," says Dychtwald. "There's an aloneness but also freedom."
Dychtwald predicts that more singles will form "families of friends." In the Age Wave study, single retirees said the leisure experiences they value most are with friends.
 "You're going to see women traveling together or men who play golf together," says Dychtwald.
There's no one prescription for coping with being alone. For some people, the answer is to go back to work, at least part-time. The number of older Americans in the workforce has been rising, and respondents in the Age Wave study said social connections are a key reason for working in retirement.
For others, the answer is to try something completely different. "I started taking classes in a new field purely for the pleasure of learning and ended up earning a master's degree in that field," writes reader Julia Brown.
Others wrote to me about being proactive and looking for things to do.
"What I realized is you have to make things happen," says Deb Russell. "They will not come knocking on your door."
Janet Bodnar is editor at large at Kiplinger's Personal Finance magazine. Send your questions and comments to moneypower@kiplinger.com.

IRS Releases Draft Form of New 1040 Tailored for SeniorsEasier-to-read form highlights retirement income streams and other tax benefits for citizens 65 and older.
Getty Images
By Rachel L. Sheedy, Editor 

A new Form 1040 tailored to taxpayers 65 and older is making its debut today. In mid July, the IRS released a draft form of the inaugural version of the 1040-SR, “U.S. Tax Return for Seniors.”
The new form was created by the 2018 Bipartisan Budget Act, which among its provisions called for the development of a tax return that would be easy for seniors to use and highlighted retirement income streams and other tax benefits for seniors. Those age 65 and older will be able to use this form to file their 2019 tax returns, and the IRS presented an overview of the new form at the IRS Nationwide Tax Forum in National Harbor, Md., earlier this week.
Using the new form isn’t mandatory, but seniors can choose to use it if they want to. The form is based off the regular 1040, and the IRS says it uses all the same schedules, instructions and attachments. Older taxpayers who use tax software to file are unlikely to even notice.
But for taxpayers who still file by paper, the new form will be modified for aging eyes. The font is bigger to make the text easier to read. The shading in boxes on the regular 1040 has been removed to improve the contrast and increase legibility.
AdvertisementA highlighted feature of the new form is the addition of a standard deduction chart, said Darren Hamilton, an official in the agency’s forms and publications division who presented information about the new form. The form lists the standard deduction amounts, including the extra standard deduction amount that taxpayers age 65 and older qualify for “so seniors don’t have to hunt for it,” said Hamilton at the Maryland tax forum. The chart makes it simpler for seniors to take advantage of the full standard deduction for which they are eligible, particularly for those who may not even be aware of the extra amount for which they qualify.
The form has lines for specific retirement income streams, such as Social Security benefits, IRA distributions, and pensions and annuities. “AARP supported the development of the simpler 1040 SR tax form since most seniors could not use the 1040 EZ due to their different sources of income,” says David Certner, AARP legislative counsel.
But the IRS says you don’t have to be retired to use the form. The agency says the form is appropriate for older workers to use, too.
SEE ALSO: State-by-State Guide to Taxes on RetireesYou can take a look at the draft form of the 1040-SR at IRS.gov/DraftForms. Of course, the draft form is subject to change before it is finalized later this year. Industry players, such as certified public accountants and enrolled tax agents, will get a chance to comment on it and suggest improvements. You can submit comments, too, no later than August 15 to WI.1040.Comments@IRS.gov.

The Savings GameMultiemployer pension plans need savingMultiemployer pension plans need savingThe Savings Game August 21, 2019
In this space, I have frequently written of the potential difficulties facing those preparing for retirement who do not have the advantage of a defined-benefit pension. Today I’d like to address a different crisis: the potential insolvency of pension funds that cover millions of people who have lived, worked and planned their retirement on the assumption that their pension would be there.
At particular risk are multiemployer pension plans. These cover pools of union workers working typically in the same union but for different companies. Currently, there are approximately 1,400 plans funded jointly by employers and unions. About 10 million participants are covered.
Unfortunately, about 130 of these plans are in trouble, covering more than a million employees. These plans cover truck drivers, iron workers, warehouse workers and others. These plans are failing at a high prate, and employees covered by these plans do not have very much protection. According to Karen Friedman, executive vice president of the Pension Rights Center, 12% of these plans ae expected to run out of assets within 20 years.
These plans are backstopped by the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation (PBGC), a government-sponsored enterprise that guarantees private defined-benefit pension plans. However, multiemployer plans do not have the same protection with as pension plans covered by one employer. For example, PBGC pays no more than $12,870 a year to an employee with 30 years of service if his plan fails. PBGC itself is also in danger of running out of funds.
In December 2014, Congress passed the Multiemployer Pension Reform Act (MPRA), as part of an omnibus spending bill. The law reflects suggestions made by the National Coordinating Committee on Multiemployer Plans, a coalition of employers, unions and plan trustees. A key part of the Act, which was opposed by AARP, gives trustees of certain plans that are projected to run out of money within 15 to 20 years the authority to immediately cut retirees’ pensions to 110% of the amounts guaranteed by the PBGC.
There are several reasons why so many plans are running into financial problems. Many employers have gone out of business or faced bankruptcy. The reduction of union jobs has meant that there are often way more retirees than current workers paying into the funds. Lower interest rates for many years have reduced the returns of many plans. In addition, stock market volatility has created investment losses.
Because of these factors, there is an immediate need for legislation that will provide more funds to the PBGC to assist multiemployer plans that are now running out of assets, or that expect to in the foreseeable future. A bill, the Rehabilitation for Multiemployer Pension Act (aka the Butch Lewis Act) has passed the House of Representatives in a bipartisan vote. However, the Senate has not reviewed the legislation yet, and there may be some opposition there because of the proposed cost, which is estimated at $64 billion from 2020 to 2029. The purpose of the Act is to allow failing pension plans to borrow from the PBGC in order to ensure that they meet their commitments to retirees and workers.
This legislation is important not only to the fate of multiemployer plans but also to the other pensions guaranteed by the PBGC, namely single-employer plans. Interest rates are likely to remain low, and stock market returns are likely to remain volatile. For these reasons, many pension plans will face underfunding in the future, and that will cause more plans to depend on PBGC guarantee.
I urge you to contact to your congressional representatives and point out the need to pass legislation that will stabilize the PBGC, so that a painful crisis can be averted.
(Elliot Raphaelson welcomes your questions and comments at raphelliot@gmail.com.)

I'm going back to the roots of this blog and doing a song analysis today, tying it in with estate planning, and, amazingly, hoping that this blog post in specific can bring the Word of God to some new folks.  Ready?

Ever since I was a kid, I have loved the Steve Winwood song "Higher Love" and I have always thought, throughout the years, that this song means more than a simple reading of the lyrics can accomplish.  

Here are the lyrics (credit to Steve Winwood), and a link to the music video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9olaIio3l8&feature=youtu.be

Think about it, there must be higher love
Down in the heart or hidden in the stars above
Without it, life is wasted time
Look inside your heart, I'll look inside mine

Things look so bad everywhere
In this whole world, what is fair?
We walk blind and we try to see
Falling behind in what could be

Bring me a higher love
Bring me a higher love, oh
Bring me a higher love
Where's that higher love I keep thinking of?

Worlds are turning, and we're just hanging on
Facing our fear and standing out there alone
A yearning and it's real to me
There must be someone who's feeling for me

{Hook}

Things look so bad everywhere
In this whole world, what is fair?
We walk blind and we try to see
Falling behind in what could be

Bring me a higher love
Bring me a higher love, oh
Bring me a higher love
Where's that higher love I keep thinking of?

Bring me a higher love
Bring me a higher love, oh
Bring me a higher love
A good kind of love, want a higher love

I will wait for it
I'm not too late for it
Until then, I'll sing my song
To cheer the night along

Bring it, oh

{Bridge}

I could light the night up with my soul on fire
I could make the sun shine from pure desire
Let me feel that love come over me
Let me feel how strong it could be

Oh

{Bridge }

Bring me a higher love
Bring me a higher love, oh
Bring me a higher love
Where's that higher love I keep thinking of?

Bring me a higher love
Bring me a higher love, oh bring me
Bring me a higher love, oh
Bring me a higher love

Bring me a higher love
Bring me a higher love, oh I said bring me
Bring me a higher love
Bring me a higher love

Bring me a higher love
Bring me a higher love, oh

MY THOUGHTS?

Now.  Lots of people thought this was a spiritual song, and I want to make the case that we could view Mr. Winwood's version (which won him a Grammy in 1986) was certainly an appeal to our more spiritual sensitivities.  This was obviously not at the top of my mind as an 11-year old in the mid 80s, I just liked the song and the video.  But read the lyrics!  What is the higher love?  It isnt that of a human lover, I would posit.  I think it is the love of God/Jesus Christ!  I mean, he is practically crying out for deeper meaning in his life, divine intervention, something.  We walk through this world, and there is nothing, life is wasted time, etc.  And he wants that higher purpose.  Well, there is no higher purpose than Jesus, right?  Does he realize that, or is he just blindly pleading for help?  A mystery.  Could this be considered a Christian song?  I think a lot more songs are out there in the pop world that are actually Christian songs than most people realize.  I believe this is one.  Can you picture it being sung in a church?  I can.  It helps me realize that I am not alone, in searching for more meaning in life.  God gives us meaning.  Further, look at Psalm 108:3/4 (NIV): 3I will praise you, Lord, among the nations;
I will sing of you among the peoples.
4For great is your love, higher than the heavens;
your faithfulness reaches to the skies.

Who has the highest love that we are all seeking?  God.

Nowadays, and the reason I write this blog today, there has been an updating of this song by someone other than Mr. Winwood.  Back in 1990, in Tokyo, Whitney Houston, in concert, did a cover of this song.  Here is footage from this concert.  The single was never included on any record.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbmiyLe2OnY

Evidently, this was only performed one time, and she was ill during this concert.  Notice the earring (a cross).  Notice the backing gospel-like choir.  Still think its not a Christian song?  Or at least, talking about God?

I found the above version by Ms. Houston due to my relentless searching on Sirius XM for some good music one day on my truck radio.  This "new song" came on by Whitney Houston and Kygo (evidently, a Swedish DJ) and I was hooked.  This DJ Kygo guy--hes pretty good--but Whitney Houston, who grew up in the church singing gospel music until she was discovered in the early 1980s, is the absolute star of the song.  And she finally gives this song the "weight" it deserves.  Gives it a little meaning.  Only one problem.  She's been dead for about 10 years!!!  How is this song possible?  

Thus we delve into estate planning.  Check out this article.  Its better than anything I could have written on the subject.  But before I sign off: let me just say--please consider making an estate plan today!  You never know what will happen to your intellectual or creative property after you have passed away.  In the case of Whitney Houston, the beneficiaries of her estate will benefit from her God-given talents years after her passing.  Think about those who you would leave behind.

The Murky Ethics of Posthumous MusicWith a new version of “Higher Love,” the EDM star Kygo reworks a 1990 Whitney Houston vocal into a pool-party jam both of its time and out of it.
Spencer Kornhaber
July 16, 2019

“Think about it,” Whitney Houston commands at the beginning of “Higher Love,” the single with the Norwegian DJ Kygo that’s making a splash in the songs-of-the-summer pool. Those lyrics make for a sharp, effective, dartlike opening. They also might double as an invitation to think about the song itself, which is the first instance of “new”—largely unheard by the public—Houston vocals being released since her death, in 2012. As music, “Higher Love” goes down as easily as a sweet blended cocktail, and it marks Houston’s first entry onto the Hot 100 since 2009. For anyone attuned to Houston’s career, life, and commercial afterlife, it’s a strange and telling document as well.


In its original form, recorded and co-written by Steve Winwood, “Higher Love” hit No. 1 and earned Winwood the Grammy for Record of the Year in 1986. Houston covered it at a concert in Tokyo in 1990 and recorded a version intended for her third full-length release, I’m Your Baby Tonight. It didn’t end up on the album. “When [producer] Narada Michael Walden sent me ‘Higher Love’ with the Whitney vocal, we didn’t want her being a cover artist at that time,” Clive Davis, the music exec who helped shepherd Houston’s career, told Rolling Stone. It was released only as a bonus single in Japan, and remained obscure and little-heard for decades.  
But seven years after Houston’s death from a drug-related accidental drowning, her name, image, and voice are set to stir again. In May, The New York Times reported that the executor of her estate, Houston’s sister-in-law Pat Houston, had decided that the time was right to begin marketing the late singer’s work. Plans for a Houston hologram tour had already been much publicized—in part because the CGI Houston who dueted with Christina Aguilera on The Voice in 2016 was, aesthetically, a bit freaky. “After closely viewing the performance, we decided the hologram was not ready to air,” Pat said back then. The fine-tuning process continues. “The hologram has taken precedence over everything,” she said in this year’s Times story.
Also in the works is an album of unreleased material, which may or may not end up having “Higher Love” on it. The posthumous release of Houston’s songs will be handled in large part by Primary Wave Music Publishing, which struck a $14 million deal with the estate to manage Houston’s assets in exchange for 50 percent ownership of its holdings. About the genesis of 2019’s version of “Higher Love,” a post on Primary Wave’s website says that one of the firm’s VPs, Seth Faber, “hatched the idea before the ink was dry on PW’s deal with the Houston estate.” In Rolling Stone, Pat Houston said, “The current cultural environment has been thirsty for something uplifting and inspiring. Who better to inspire than Whitney, the most exhilarating vocalist of all time?”
Read: Whitney Houston and the holographic hell to come
Houston’s vocals on “Higher Love” indeed are inspiring. Her phrasing moves from clipped haughtiness to gentle consideration; toward the end of the song, she does what she was born to do and belts. Watch the video of her performing the song in concert—her earring is in the shape of a cross and her backup vocalists sing in gospel intonations—and it becomes clear how much she picked up on the churchly implications of Winwood and the co-writer Will Jennings’s words (Jennings also co-wrote Whitney’s 1987 hit “Didn’t We Almost Have It All”). That opening line, “Think about it,” kicks off an argument worthy of theologians. Houston proceeds, “There must be higher love / Down in the heart or hidden in the stars above / Without it, life is a wasted time.”
It is, however, easy to miss such inflections of meaning in the context of the 2019 single, which is attributed to “Kygo X Whitney Houston.” Kygo is the quietly ubiquitous 27-year-old DJ who in the past five years has helped blend pulsating EDM with “tropical” influences and a whiff of Coldplay’s sentimentality. The results are the musical equivalent of an H&M pastel-floral romper, somehow both party-ready and wallpaper-like. The Houston estate reportedly selected him to rework “Higher Love” based on his remix of Marvin Gaye’s “Sexual Healing.”
Kygo’s take on “Higher Love” offers a lesson in modern pop clichés. There’s the aqueous, bubbling-up intro. There’s the way all the expected production elements—dreamy marimba tones, chipper horns, drums that crash then lope, chopped-up and pitched-down vocals—pile up for a sense of acceleration through the verse and multi-section chorus. In the post-chorus, he does the common pop-EDM move of making it feel as though the main hook is a shoe that’s tumbling around in a dryer. “Need / need / higher love,” Houston now stammers, her articles snipped out and her melody ping-ponging about. Right before the second verse, there’s a noticeably long pause—very on-trend, too—and the roller coaster starts climbing again.
If Kygo’s formula is blandly familiar, it still pops with Houston’s vocals and the proven catchiness of Winwood’s original tune. “Higher Love” has only been out for a little more than a week, and I’ve heard it on commuter radio and in Wimbledon promos and at beach bars and pool parties. It debuted at No. 63 on the Billboard Hot 100—not the most impressive placing, but Houston’s first song to debut on that chart in 10 years—and No. 2 on the Hot Dance/Electronic Songs chart, which speaks more to its intended fate.
Kygo debuted the song live at Pride in New York City, and “Higher Love” unmistakably is aiming for high-energy, thump-thumping queer mega-clubs, the playlists of which are historically testing grounds for high-energy, thump-thumping mega-clubs of all sorts. This is an environment Houston’s voice is well suited to. Pride-month dance floors were already ringing out with the likes of “I Want to Dance With Somebody” and “It’s Not Right but It’s Okay”—in many cases in remixes that place Houston’s vocals in glittering, four-on-the-floor epics. That the estate and Primary Wave chose the EDM sound for Houston’s so-called comeback single is a sign that they understand her everlasting appeal in the dance-music context.
Read: Whitney Houston and the persistent perils of the mainstream
But the choice also raises the memory of tensions that ran throughout her career. Houston always walked aesthetic tightropes, performing a balancing act involving genre, race, spirituality, and questions of creative agency. After being marketed in the ’80s as a “crossover” star—as in, palatable to white people—Houston faced backlash from some black listeners that culminated in her being booed at the 1989 Soul Train Music Awards. She then tried to push the sound of her next album, I’m Your Baby Tonight, more in the direction of R&B. The “Higher Love” cover was recorded in this period. While the Winwood original may read as consummately “white” music (though Chaka Khan, Houston’s friend, sang on it), the version Houston performed in Japan came with a hint of New Jack Swing sound. That sound has been replaced by one that, to the extent it’s affiliated with any one group, is affiliated with Scandinavians who command nightclub residencies in Las Vegas.
Does this recontextualizing of her vocals do a disservice to Houston’s legacy, or does it honor her by getting audiences dancing along to her once more? Posthumously released music typically starts in ethically murky territory—who can say how an artist wanted unfinished or unheard recordings used?—but it’s most dubious when there’s a sense that scraps are being repurposed to chase new trends. This summer’s “Higher Love” doesn’t feel too ghoulish, though, as Kygo’s work here has more the feel of a remix than a new song, and it’s resonating with audiences who do genuinely love Houston. Still, as the kickoff to the next phase of repurposing the singer’s work, it raises a question that was familiar throughout Houston’s life: Who’s in control, and what would Whitney want?
We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.


Spencer Kornhaber is a staff writer at The Atlantic, where he covers pop culture and music.

It is never too early to start thinking about the ramifications of a Presidential election and their impact on your estate plan!  I don't care who you vote for, but ignoring the election is simply not an option.  

Estate Planning Before 2020 Election: Maybe Only One Spouse Should Make Gifts
Martin Shenkman Contributor
Retirement
I write about charitable giving and estate planning ideas. 


One of the most common estate planning tools right now is the use of non-reciprocal spousal lifetime access trusts (“SLATs”). We’ll explain that common planning technique and then why the way many folks implement it might not be the best approach (i.e., maybe only one spouse should set up a trust, not both). But first some background on why you might consider this technique and the broader planning picture that is involved. The key take home lesson is just because everyone else is using a particular technique, doesn’t mean its right for you. Planning must be tailored to your unique circumstances to work best. Why are so many people considering SLATs as part of their plan? Elizabeth and Bernie!
No predictions about the 2020 election, but if the Dems win, and if they get enough control over Congress, they’ll try to pass harsh estate tax reforms. Many Dem hopefuls have spoken about increasing taxes on the wealthy to pay for health care, student loan forgiveness, and more. Whatever might be proposed may well follow the provisions in Bernie Sander’s estate tax changes he proposed earlier this year. These could reduce the gift tax exemption from $11.4 million (2019) to a mere $1 million gift exemption. The estate tax exemption might be reduced from $11.4 million to $3.5 million. A myriad of other harsh changes might emasculate many of today’s favorite planning tools. Whatever your views on all of this, and however, this all shakes out in the end, it certainly seems sensible for those of means to undertake estate tax planning now.
While most taxpayers will probably take a wait and see approach (if the Dems win and if they propose harsh changes…..then I’ll do something) that could be a loser. What might the effective date of that legislation be? Will you even have the opportunity to plan before harsh changes become effective? Is it really worth waiting? The bottom line for many taxpayers seems pretty simple. Plan now don’t wait.
Plan smart so, that regardless of what happens with the election or estate tax changes, you’ll be happy with what you’ve done. This might require that you consider three key goals:
·      Use exemption before it changes.
·      Get other benefits from the planning – asset protection, management, control, state income tax savings, etc.
·      Preserve access to the assets you’ve given away.
How can you increase the odds of being happy with planning today if the law doesn’t change after the 2020 election? Plan to achieve goals other than just estate tax minimization. Gifting assets to an irrevocable trust can provide great planning to minimize liability exposure (malpractice risks, lawsuits arising from accidents and more….think those 1-800-SUE-THEM billboards). If you get valuable asset protection, even if the estate tax laws don’t change, that’s a winner. Very important, for most wealthy folks is maintaining the ability to access assets given away. If you might possibly need to access some of the funds you give away be sure you can. What if you need additional cash flow for medical costs in your golden years? What if you find that dream vacation home?  If your planning is done cleverly you will able to access assets given away to address those unexpected costs and vacation pad. You can both plan and not harm your financial position, so you can proceed without worrying whether or not the law changes.
What this all means is being more prudent about planning then many taxpayers were in 2012.
In 2012 many feared that the gift tax exemption would drop from about $5 million to $1 million in 2013 (kinda like what we face now with the 2020 election, or the reduction in the exemption by 2026 to half without any law changes). Too many people who tried to use gift tax exemption in 2012 before the exemption was supposed to drop in 2013 gave assets outright to kids (that’s rarely wise) or to trusts for kids or grandkids. That wasn’t too swift either because they lost the ability to ever access their money. That wasn’t necessary to accomplish the intended estate tax planning results.
So, what to you do to accomplish your goals of using exemption before it drops, protecting assets, and yet still having access? Lots of options:
·      If you set up a grantor trust (a trust whose income you report on your personal return and pay income tax on) be sure to give a trustee the right to reimburse you for income taxes paid. Be careful as you might need to set up such a trust in a state where that power won’t undermine your plan.
·      Include a provision in the trust document that permits a person to loan trust money to you. If you can borrow money from a trust you made gifts to that can provide access to assets you’ve given away. If you can borrow trust money without adequate security that may cause the trust to be taxed as a grantor trust. Just be sure that is the result you want.
·      If you’re married set up a spousal lifetime access trust (“SLAT”). With your spouse as a beneficiary you may indirectly benefit from assets in the trust by the trustee making distributions to your spouse.
·      If you’re not married, or just prefer, you can instead set up a self-settled domestic asset protection trust (“DAPT”). So you can make gifts to a trust, remove those assets from your estate, have those assets protected from creditors, yet still be a beneficiary. That accomplishes all planning goals while retaining access. 19 states now permit these types of trusts, but there are still risks if you live in a state that does not permit these trusts and set up such a trust in a state that does permit it.
So with that background on pre-2020 election planning, a twist on the SLAT planning may be useful to understand. But first, a final piece of background. Traditional SLAT planning often is set up as illustrated below.
Example: Husband sets up a trust for wife and all descendants. Wife sets up a trust for husband and all descendants. Differences are baked into the trusts (set up at different times, different assets in each trust, different distribution standards, different state laws for governing and administering the trust, differ powers of appointment over trust assets, etc.). This is important so that the IRS and creditors cannot “uncross” the trusts and pierce them. If trusts are too similar they could be argued to be “reciprocal” and subject to that risk. The beauty of a properly structured SLAT plan is that assets can be moved out of the couple’s estate, perhaps protected from an Elizabeth Warren estate tax plan, protected from creditors, and the husband is a beneficiary of the wife’s trust. And the wife is a beneficiary of the husband’s trust. So, the couple can move significant wealth outside their estate yet still access 100% of that wealth as beneficiaries of each other’s trust. Do understand that many SLATs are created in trust friendly jurisdictions (the 19 states that permit DAPTs) with independent institutional trustees (not Aunt Jane or cousin Sam as trustees). So if you want a distribution from the SLAT your spouse set up for you, you’d have to ask the trust company and submit a formal request to the trust company’s distribution committee. It would be hoped that gifts to such trusts now might avoid any harsh Dem estate tax proposals if they sweep in 2020 and perhaps even the wealth tax that some candidates have suggested. None of that is certain as no one can predict the format of such proposals, but isn’t it worth trying to avoid those taxes by acting now?
So now that you understand why estate planning is so important to pursue now, some of the many fundamentals you should consider in planning, and a few of the myriad options to get there, what is wrong with the traditional SLAT plan above for some taxpayers? The answer lies in maximizing the use of exemption and preserving the most exemption if the law changes. Many wealthy people do not have nearly enough assets to be able to use all their exemptions now. So while the uber wealthy might well consider having each spouse set up a non-reciprocal SLAT (or really one of the many variations of SLATs, DAPTs or other such trusts), the merely wealth may not find that to be the optimal approach. Let’s explore why.
In 2019 and 2020, transfers might need to be quite substantial before any benefit of the temporary $11.4 million (it increases by an inflation adjustment in 2020) exemption is preserved. The reason is that, if (and when) the exemption drops to $5 million (adjusted for inflation) in 2026 (or earlier if the Dems sweep), the prior use of the exemption may not allow the new (lower) exemption to be used. 
Example: You make a taxable gift in 2019 of $5 million to a SLAT and die in 2026 when the inflation adjusted exemption will be reduced to $5 million (ignoring inflation adjustments). You would have an estate (or gift) tax exemption of zero left because your 2019 exemption used all your exemption. In other words, the gift in 2019 uses the bottom tier of your exemption not the top tier, so when the exemption is reduced in 2026 (or by Dem legislation) that top tier of exemption you did not use with the gift is just lost. So, this means that, if you want to use the part of the current exemption above $5 million you would have to make a taxable gift equal to more than what the exemption will be when it is reduced in the future. 
So, consider now the commonly touted non-reciprocal SLAT plan explained above.
Example: Husband and wife have a combined estate of $16 million and are willing to make $8 million in total gift transfers in 2019 to safeguard a portion of their temporary exemptions. If each of husband and wife transfer $4 million to a non-reciprocal spousal lifetime access trust (“SLAT”) they will have safeguarded $8 million of exemption (and any future growth on those assets) in case the law changes. In 2026 when the exemption declines by half, to $5 million each (ignoring inflation adjustments) each spouse will be left with $1 million of exemption. So if you add the $4 million each spouse used in the 2019 planning and the $1 million each has left in 2026, the couple will have preserved $10 million of exemption. Good, but they can do better.  If Elizabeth is elected in 2020 with a Dem sweep and the estate tax exemption is reduced to $3.5 million, the couple will have no further exemption left, but they’ll be hugging their estate planning for having helped them safeguard $8 million before those changes. But then the total exemption safeguarded is only $8 million. Is that optimal? Maybe. But perhaps not.
Consider having one spouse, not both, use current exemption thereby preserving more exemption for future planning.
Example: Assume the same facts as in the above example. Husband and wife have a combined estate of $16 million and are willing to make $8 million in transfers to irrevocable trusts to secure a portion of their temporary exemptions. But instead of setting up two non-reciprocal SLATs as in the above example, the wife gifts $8 million to a DAPT. Her husband and all descendants are beneficiaries of the trust. So with husband as a beneficiary, so long as he is alive and they remain married she has indirect access to the $8 million through husband. She even has her estate planner incorporate a mechanism into the trust to add her in as a beneficiary in the future just in case her husband dies prematurely or divorces, so that in those eventualities she can become a beneficiary and have access to the assets transferred. Now what happens if there is no Dem sweep but the exemption drops to $5 million in 2026 as the law currently provides. Wife used $8 million of her exemption so she’ll have none left. But, since husband did not use any of his exemption in the plan, he will still have $5 million of exemption left in 2026. So his $5 million of exemption and the $8 million of exemption the wife used in 2019 means the couple has preserved $13 million of exemption, $3 million more than had they used the non-reciprocal SLAT approach in the prior example. Now consider what happens if the Dems sweep and a $3.5 million exemption is enacted. Wife will have used and safeguarded $8 million of exemption in the 2019 plan and husband will have $3.5 million remaining so that they will have safeguarded $11.5 million. That is $3.5 million more than the SLAT plan above.
So, be sure to seriously consider planning before the 2020 election. Plan in a way that you’ll be satisfied and benefited regardless of what happens with the election, and be certain that the planning is tailored to fit your circumstances, not some hypothetical planning situation your golf buds are boasting they used.


Follow me on Twitter or LinkedIn.

Saw this report the other day.  Applicable to you?  A loved one?  Better work with me to find out how living abroad can impact your estate planning!

American "economic refugees" are increasingly retiring abroad​​By Aimee Picchi
Updated on: September 23, 2019 / 11:03 AM / MoneyWatch
Cynthia and Edd Staton are thoroughly enjoying retirement in their 3,000 square-foot penthouse apartment. They have a housekeeper, eat out frequently, never fret about health care costs, and indulge in yoga classes and visits to the gym. It's a fine way to spend their golden years — in Ecuador.
The Statons said the decision to retire outside the U.S. came in the wake of the financial crisis a decade ago, when their retirement nest egg lost value and they were faced with retiring at a lower standard of living than they had expected. More Americans have followed their lead. The number of retirees who draw Social Security outside the U.S. jumped 40%, to more than 413,000, between 2007 to 2017, according to the Social Security Administration. 
To be sure, that's a fraction of the nation's 42 million retirees. But it reflects the financial realities for a growing number of baby boomers who are hitting 65 without enough money stashed away to maintain their standard of living. The median retirement savings for people in that age group is $152,000 — the highest of any working generation — but 1 in 5 say they haven't yet recovered from the recession and never may, according to the Transamerica Center for Retirement Studies.  
"It's a slow-motion train wreck, and we are in the first car of the train," said Edd Staton, who lived in Las Vegas before moving to Cuenca, Ecuador, in 2010 and now with his wife blogs about retiring abroad. "It takes a long time to get to the caboose. There is nothing in place that will make this go away."
He believes more retirees may be living outside the U.S. than reflected in the Social Security Administration statistics because some, like him, deposit their Social Security checks in U.S. bank accounts. ATMs make it easy to withdraw cash in Ecuador, Staton noted. 
Asia, Europe, and Central and South America are proving to be popular locations for American retirees who want to bail from the U.S. The decision often boils down to such factors as cost of living, health care options and whether there's an expatriate community.
"Economic refugees"Americans who opt to retire outside the U.S. are driven by different motivations, said Dan Prescher, senior editor at International Living, a publication geared to people who want to live or retire abroad. Prescher and his wife, originally from Nebraska, now live in Mexico, where they were drawn because of the better weather.
Some are baby boomers who "now can have that great adventure they always wanted," he said. Others are what the Statons describe as "economic refugees," or Americans who are worried about managing retirement on a limited budget. 
"Their idea of what they could afford in retirement isn't matching reality," Prescher said about retirees who move abroad because of finances. "No one knows what will happen with health care in the U.S. — it's hugely uncertain."
Even though Americans who are at least 65 are covered by Medicare, out-of-pocket health costs for retirees are mounting. The typical couple will need a total of $285,000 to cover health expenses in their retirement decades, according to a Fidelity study published earlier this year. Medicare doesn't cover all health care costs — excluding most dental work and long-term care, for instance — and it can come with co-pays and other out-of-pocket expenses for doctor visits and medications.
Cheaper health care A big issue for retirees living abroad is getting health care coverage, which can typically be gained through securing residency status within a foreign country, the Statons said. They pay about $80 a month for Ecuador's national health system, although they also maintain Medicare coverage for when they return to the U.S. to visit family. 
Overall, health care costs are significantly lower in Ecuador, with the Statons noting that a dental crown costs about $200, compared with more than $1,000 in the U.S. 
Other countries have similar opt-ins for foreigners who retire within their borders. Portugal, for instance, allows legal foreign residents to take advantage of the public health care system, according to Live and Invest Overseas, another publication about expat living. 
Living on $2,000 per month Joining a national health care system in a country with lower medical prices than in the U.S. can help lighten the impact on the wallet. Overall, moving abroad can allow a form of financial arbitrage, with Americans living on Social Security and retirement savings paid in U.S. dollars, which they can spend in countries with a lower cost of living. 
The Statons have a monthly budget of about $2,000, including the roughly $700 per month they pay for their penthouse apartment. The typical rent in the U.S. stood at almost $1,500 a month in August, according to the website RentCafe. 

Of course, moving abroad isn't for everyone, given the language and cultural differences, while the idea of moving far from family and friends may not be appealing to some. But both Prescher and the Statons believe the financial challenges of retiring in the U.S. will drive more Americans abroad.
"Being an economic refugee is going to be more and more popular as things get weirder and more expensive in the U.S.," Prescher predicted. "You should move abroad because you want to try a foreign culture. The economic benefit is icing on the cake."
First published on September 20, 2019 / 1:43 PM
© 2019 CBS Interactive Inc.. All Rights Reserved.