Within the latest Personal Letter Ruling 202432004 (Aug. 8, 2024), the Inside Income Service concluded that the early termination of a charitable lead annuity belief (CLAT) by means of an accelerated distribution of the remaining annuity quantities to 2 personal foundations (PFs) wouldn’t be: (1) thought-about an act of self-dealing below Inside Income Code Part 4941; (2) thought-about a taxable expenditure below IRC Part 4945; or (3) topic to tax below IRC Part 507.
CLAT Fundamentals
A CLAT is a split-interest irrevocable belief designed to make mounted funds for a time period to a number of designated public charities or PFs exempt from earnings tax below IRC Part 501(c)(3), with the potential to move the remaining belief belongings to noncharitable beneficiaries, equivalent to relations, with out present or property taxes. The charitable curiosity portion of the belief is wholly deductible for present and property tax functions, and the noncharitable the rest curiosity is wholly taxable for present or property tax functions. The worth of the charitable curiosity is calculated as the current worth of the stream of funds to the charity over the charitable time period. The worth of the taxable the rest curiosity is the distinction between the belief’s preliminary worth and the worth of the charitable curiosity.
If the belief is a grantor belief, the grantor additionally receives a direct charitable earnings tax deduction for the current worth of the combination funds to be made to the tax-exempt entity, topic to the adjusted gross earnings limitations relevant to charitable donations. If it’s structured as a nongrantor belief, a separate taxpaying belief is created, permitting a vast charitable earnings tax deduction for the earnings paid to charity.
CLAT Handled as PF
Within the info of the ruling, a CLAT was created to supply a assured annuity that might qualify for a present tax charitable deduction below IRC Part 2522. As a split-interest belief, the CLAT was handled as a PF for sure functions. The CLAT belief settlement required the trustees to pay a 20-year mounted annuity to every of two PFs handled as tax-exempt organizations described in Part 501(c)(3) and labeled as PFs below Part 509(a). After the ultimate annuity funds had been made, the CLAT settlement supplied that half of the belief property must be paid out to every of two household trusts, supplied sure situations had been met.
The PFs requested the CLAT trustees to distribute the remaining two annuity quantities earlier than the top of the 20 years so they might commit the funds to their respective charitable missions. The CLAT represented that its trustees had been prepared to distribute the quantities if the CLAT obtained a good ruling from the IRS and if the trustees of the household trusts both executed a nonjudicial settlement settlement or consented to a court docket order approving the distribution, which the trustees of the household trusts agreed to do.
No Self Dealing
The IRS concluded that fee of the accelerated annuity funds from the CLAT to the PFs (with out making use of any current worth low cost) wouldn’t represent an act of self-dealing below IRC Part 4941 as a result of the PFs had been excluded from the definition of “disqualified individuals” as tax-exempt organizations described in Part 501(c)(3) and labeled as PFs below Part 509(a). The self-dealing guidelines usually prohibit any direct or oblique monetary transaction between a PF and nearly all individuals carefully associated to the PF (generally known as “disqualified individuals”).
No Taxable Expenditure
The IRS additionally concluded that the accelerated annuity funds (once more, with out making use of any current worth low cost) from the CLAT to the PFs wouldn’t be handled as a taxable expenditure topic to an excise tax below Part 4945(a). This was as a result of the time period “taxable expenditures” excludes quantities paid or incurred by a PF (for instance, the CLAT) for a objective laid out in Part 170(c)(2)(B) (for instance, non secular, charitable, scientific, literary or instructional objective), and the funds to the PFs certified for this exclusion.
No Termination Tax
Counting on Treasury Regulation Part 53.4947-1(e)(1), the IRS concluded that the CLAT wouldn’t be topic to the Part 507 “termination tax” imposed on any PF that notifies the IRS of its intention to terminate its standing as a PF. This regulation supplies, partially, that the provisions of Part 507 shall not apply to a split-interest belief by purpose of any fee to a beneficiary that’s directed by the phrases of the governing instrument of the belief and isn’t discretionary with the trustee. This exception utilized to the CLAT as a result of the CLAT, by its phrases, was required to make annuity funds to the PFs, and the CLAT’s trustees didn’t have the discretion of whether or not to pay the annuity quantities.
Win-Win?
This PLR could present the trustees of a CLAT with vital belongings over the quantity wanted to fulfill the overall charitable element with a stage of assurance in making a lump-sum fee to the tax-exempt entity and terminating the belief earlier than the expiration of the annuity fee time period. The accelerated fee of the undiscounted annuity quantities could also be a win-win for each the tax-exempt entity, which may apply the fee to perform its charitable functions sooner than anticipated, and the belief beneficiaries, who acquire faster entry to the remaining belief principal for his or her private and monetary use. Be aware that if the CLAT tried to pay the current worth of the charitable portion to the PFs, the proposed transaction would have violated the rules of Income Ruling 88-27, which concluded a CLAT settlement couldn’t allow commutation of the charitable portion primarily based on current worth calculations. Moreover, think about whether or not a state’s lawyer basic must be consulted concerning the termination.