Tag: canada

02 Aug

Aging in Place in Canada

Nick Esterbauer Elder Law, General Interest, In the News Tags: , , , , , , , , 0 Comments

A recent survey commissioned by HomeEquity Bank suggests that the majority of older Canadians plan on staying in their homes as they age (otherwise known as aging in place) rather than downsizing and/or moving into assisted living or retirement communities.  93% of survey respondents aged 65 or older felt that it was important that they remain at their current home throughout retirement.  69% of them advised that their primary reason for wishing to remain at home was to maintain independence as they age.

The older respondents (75 years or older) advised that it was important to them that they remain in their current home to stay close to family, friends, and/or the community (51%) and that emotional attachment and memories were also contributing factors (40%).

In order to remain living at home as long as possible into retirement, advance planning in terms of finances and logistics may be necessary.  A recent article appearing in Forbes suggests that the following steps, unrelated to financial planning, may be especially useful in facilitating successful aging in place:

  • Maintaining social connections to avoid social isolation;
  • Identifying who will help, whether family members, friends, or public services;
  • Planning for the transition as needs change over time and identifying the resources and services available in the community;
  • Preparing the home to accommodate increased needs (for example, by installing grab bars and a chair in the shower);
  • Reviewing and updating the plan to age in place as may be necessary (due to a change in health, available support, or financial constraints).

Notwithstanding one’s plans to continue living at the family home, increasing longevity, a lack of liquidity, unrealistic expectations in terms of income sources after retirement, and the high cost (or local inaccessibility) of caregiving services may contribute to a decision to sell the home and relocate earlier than intended.

Thank you for reading.

Nick Esterbauer

23 Jul

Customs Requirements When Sending Money to the US from Canada

Doreen So Continuing Legal Education, Estate & Trust, Executors and Trustees, General Interest, In the News Tags: , , , , , , , 0 Comments

It is not uncommon for Canadian estate trustees to make distributions to beneficiaries living in the U.S.  In doing so, the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (the “US CBP“) could be involved in a myriad of ways.

A recent story from CBC News is an example of what can go wrong if estate trustees are not aware of their US reporting obligations.  An estate trustee in Ottawa mailed a bank draft worth $500,000.00 to a beneficiary in the U.S.  U.S. border officials seized the bank draft because it was mailed without filing the appropriate customs declaration form.  Almost a year later, the bank draft is still held at the border while the unfortunate beneficiary is sick and in need of money for his medical bills.

According to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection website, any time money exceeding $10,000.00 is sent to the U.S. from a foreign country, the sender is required to file a “Report of International Transportation of Currency or Monetary Instructions” (FinCEN Form 105) with the CBP before the money is sent.  This applies regardless of whether the sender is acting personally or on behalf of another legal entity.  This applies to money in the form of coins, currency notes, travellers checks, money orders, etc.   This also applies to money sent by mail, courier, personal delivery, etc.

However, this particular US reporting requirement does not apply where the method of transfer does not involve physically transporting money over the border, such as wire transfers through banking institutions.  If a wire transfer is used, the bank is responsible for satisfying the necessary reporting requirements.

This a US duty to report and the CBP does not collect duty on currency.  Click here for a copy of the CBP reporting Form 105.

In course of sending money worth $10,000.00 or more from Canada, there are corresponding Canadian customs requirements as well.  If money is sent by mail, be sure to visit a Canada Post location and inquire about the necessary requirements.  The applicable reporting form must be filled out and enclosed within the envelope or package and a copy of the same form must be submitted to the Canada Border Services Agency.  If money is sent by courier, the courier is responsible for filing another reporting form while the individual sender is still responsible for providing the courier with the general reporting form.

Like the US CBP, Canada Border Services Agency has the authority to seize the funds and charge penalties if the Canadian reporting obligations are not satisfied.

Thanks for reading!

Doreen So

29 Jun

Fun Facts about Canada’s Founding Conference

James Jacuta Estate & Trust, Estate Planning, Uncategorized Tags: , 0 Comments

36 representatives met at 3 conferences in Charlottetown, Quebec and London between 1864 and 1867 to discuss uniting New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and the Province of Canada, which was composed of Canada East and Canada West (which would later become Quebec and Ontario). The Dominion of Canada was born on July 1, 1867.  An important date for Canada is March 8, 1867. On this day the British House of Lords gave final reading to the British North America Act, and Royal Assent was given on March 22 and proclaimed March 29, to be effective on July 1, 1867.

By the numbers Canada was founded by: 

19 lawyers: Adams George Archibald, Alexander Campbell, George-Étienne Cartier, Edward Barron Chandler, James Cockburn, Robert Barry Dickey, Charles Fisher, John Hamilton Gray, Thomas Heath Haviland, William Alexander Henry, Hector-Louis Langevin, John A. Macdonald, Jonathan McCully, Peter Mitchell, Oliver Mowat, Edward Palmer, William Henry Pope, John William Ritchie, Frederic Bowker Terrington Carter.

9 businessmen: Jean-Charles Chapais, George Coles, Alexander Tilloch Galt, William Pearce Howland, John Mercer Johnson, Andrew Archibald Macdonald, Ambrose Shea, William Henry Steeves, Robert Duncan Wilmot.

4 journalists: George Brown, William McDougall, Thomas D’Arcy McGee, Edward Whelan.

2 doctors: Étienne-Paschal Taché, Charles Tupper.

1 pharmacist: Samuel Leonard Tilley.

1 military officer: John Hamilton Gray.

72 resolutions established to provide Canada with a template for unification.

50 of them were written by John A. Macdonald according to Thomas D’Arcy McGee.

Happy Canada Day!
James Jacuta

15 May

Alberta’s Approach to Digital Assets

Nick Esterbauer Estate Planning, Executors and Trustees, Power of Attorney, Trustees Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 0 Comments

Our firm has previously blogged and podcasted at length about digital assets and estate planning, and the issue of fiduciary access to digital assets during incapacity and after death.

While digital assets constitute “property” in the sense appearing within provincial legislation, the rights of fiduciaries in respect of these assets are less clear than those relating to tangible assets.  For example, in Ontario, the Substitute Decisions Act, 1992, and Estates Administration Act provide that attorneys or guardians of property and estate trustees, respectively, are authorized to manage the property of an incapable person or estate, but these pieces of legislation do not explicitly refer to digital assets.

As we have previously reported, although the Uniform Law Conference of Canada introduced the Uniform Access to Digital Assets by Fiduciaries Act in August 2016, the uniform legislation has yet to be adopted by the provinces of Canada.  However, recent legislative amendment in one of Ontario’s neighbours to the west has recently enhanced the ability of estate trustees to access and administer digital assets.

In Alberta, legislation has been updated to clarify that the authority of an estate trustee extends to digital assets.  Alberta’s Estate Administration Act makes specific reference to “online accounts” within the context of an estate trustee’s duty to identify estate assets and liabilities, providing clarification that digital assets are intended to be included within the scope of estate assets that a trustee is authorized to administer.

In other Canadian provinces, fiduciaries continue to face barriers in attempting to access digital assets.  Until the law is updated to reflect the prevalence of technology and value, whether financial or sentimental, of information stored electronically, it may be prudent for drafting solicitors whose clients possess such assets to include specific provisions within Powers of Attorney for Property and Wills to clarify the authority of fiduciaries to deal with digital assets.

Thank you for reading.

Nick Esterbauer

 

Other blog posts that may be of interest:

07 Mar

5 reasons why it’s good to live in Canada

Suzana Popovic-Montag Estate & Trust, Estate Planning, Health / Medical Tags: , 0 Comments

There’s no shortage of bad news, and 2018 is starting off much the same. So how about focusing on some of the positives? There’s a lot of research showing that a focus on the things we’re grateful for is a key to greater happiness. Even the Harvard Medical School agrees.

So, let’s focus on the big picture, as Canadians. What are we grateful for? Here are five things you may want to ponder – and I’m sure there are many more:

  1. Democracy: We have to put this as number one. We are not beholden to a dictator or total state control. We vote in fair elections and we choose our leaders and lawmakers. Millions of people don’t enjoy this privilege. Whatever your political leanings, let’s be grateful for the ability to express our views freely.
  2. Water and energy: We have some droughts and some floods, and there are many legitimate environmental concerns, but we can drink from our taps and plug in our devices, and know that both water and energy are plentiful. So many in the world can’t say the same.
  3. Health care: It’s not a perfect system, but Canada delivers high quality, affordable health care to all. Good health is key to a good life. Our health care system helps deliver it, to rich and poor alike.
  4. Proximity to the United States: Yeah, I know, a bit of a controversial topic right now. But it’s kind of nice living beside the world’s largest and most innovative economy. Don’t let the political climate blind you to the fact that we benefit a huge amount by our trading relationship with our neighbour. Of course, it’s actual “weather” climate helps too – January in Palm Springs or Miami is awfully nice for those who can travel there.
  5. No inheritance tax: Hey, this is an estates blog after all. Okay, this may not be a “top 5” gratitude item, but as estates professionals, this is one we’re grateful for. You can discuss the political merits of inheriting wealth, but inheritance taxes only serve to promote aggressive planning to avoid them. Our efforts are better spent building wealth rather than finding ways to protect it. Pay some capital gains taxes, fair game. But let’s pass on the wealth and put it to good use!

And if you want a slightly more light-hearted look at the benefits of being Canadian, CNN has 10 that you may want to consider.

Thank you for reading … have a great day,
Suzana Popovic-Montag

01 Mar

Impact of Physician-Assisted Death on Estate and Insurance Planning

Nick Esterbauer Beneficiary Designations, Elder Law Insurance Issues, Estate Planning, Ethical Issues, Health / Medical, RRSPs/Insurance Policies Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , 0 Comments

For many Canadians, one or more life insurance policies represent an important component of an estate plan.  If a policy cannot be honoured as a result of the cause of the insured’s death, this may completely frustrate his or her testamentary wishes.

The terms of life insurance policies typically address the issue of whether a beneficiary will be entitled to the insurance proceeds in the event that an individual commits suicide.  Policy terms typically include a restriction as to the payout of the policy if the insured dies by his or her own hands within a certain of number of years from the date on which the policy is taken out (most often two years).

With the decriminalization of physician-assisted death, there was initially some concern regarding whether medical assistance in dying would be distinguished from suicide for the purposes of life insurance.  The preamble to the related federal legislation, however, distinguishes between the act of suicide and obtaining medical assistance in dying.

As mentioned by Suzana Popovic-Montag in a recent blog entry, the Canadian Life and Health Insurance Association suggested in 2016 that, if a Canadian follows the legislated process for obtaining medial assistance in dying, life insurance providers will pay out on policies that are less than two years old.  Since then, the Medical Assistance in Dying Statute Law Amendment Act, 2017 has come into force to provide protection and clarity for Ontario patients and their families.  This legislation has resulted in amendments to various provincial legislation, including the Excellent Care for All Act, 2010, a new section of which now reads as follows:

…the fact that a person received medical assistance in dying may not be invoked as a reason to deny a right or refuse a benefit or any other sum which would otherwise be provided under a contract or statute…unless an express contrary intention appears in the statute.

The amendments provided for within the legislation introduced by the Ontario government represent an important step in the recognition of physician-assisted death as a right that is distinguishable from the act of suicide.  They also confirm the right of individuals who access medical assistance in dying to benefit their survivors with life insurance policies or other benefits.

Thank you for reading,

Nick Esterbauer

 

Other blog posts that may be of interest:

22 Aug

Hull on Estates #527 – Expert Witnesses and the Gatekeeper Role of the Trial Judge

76admin Hull on Estate and Succession Planning, Hull on Estates, Podcasts, PODCASTS / TRANSCRIBED, Show Notes, Show Notes Tags: , , , , , , , , , , 0 Comments

Today on Hull on Estates, Paul Trudelle and Doreen So discuss expert witnesses and the gatekeeper role of the trial judge in the Court of Appeal decision in Bruff-Murphy v. Gunawardena, 2017 ONCA 502.

 Should you have any questions, please email us at webmaster@hullandhull.com or leave a comment on our blog.
19 Jul

A Tale of Two Countries – Trusts in the U.S. and Canada

Suzana Popovic-Montag Beneficiary Designations, Estate & Trust, Estate Planning, Hull on Estates, In the News, Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , 0 Comments

They love football, we love hockey. Their zee is our zed – and their Trump is our Trudeau. While we share a common border with the U.S., there are many differences between our two nations – and the reasons for setting up a trust can differ significantly by country as well.

The U.S. has a high estate tax for wealthy individuals – up to 40% on assets, with the first $5.5 million or so exempt. Not surprisingly, trusts are used aggressively in many situations to reduce estate values and minimize this estate tax as much as possible.

In Canada, there is no estate tax per se – although there is an estate administration tax (probate fee) in some provinces and there are often taxes payable on capital gains. But with no capital gains taxes on principal residences, the need for trusts as part of U.S.-style estate planning simply isn’t there.

This doesn’t mean that trusts aren’t a valuable planning tool in Canada. They can still be used to shift income from higher-taxed family members to those in lower tax brackets, or to provide dedicated funding for dependants, such as a disabled spouse or child, or as means of creditor protection amongst many other reasons. But there’s a kinder, gentler push behind trust planning in Canada, owing to the less punitive (in most cases) taxation of estates here.

This Globe and Mail article provides a good overview of the many potential uses of trusts in Canada today, and why a more aggressive approach isn’t needed here: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/personal-finance/a-tax-tool-thats-not-just-for-trust-fund-babies/article22996097/

The complexities of cross-border beneficiaries

Trust issues can be clean and tidy in Canada and the U.S. when everything about a trust stays fully north or south of the border. But what happens when trust worlds collide?

In short, it can get complicated, and specialized planning is often needed to avoid additional taxation. While avoiding a cross-border trust arrangement is one way around these issues, avoidance isn’t always possible, such as when a Canadian trust is settled with a Canadian beneficiary, but that individual moves permanently to the U.S. and becomes subject to U.S. tax laws.

This Collins Barrow advisory offers a more detailed discussion of some of the cross-border issues relating to Canadian/U.S. trusts: http://www.collinsbarrow.com/en/cbn/publications/u.s.-citizens-and-canadian-trusts.

Thank you for reading … Have a great day!
Suzana Popovic-Montag

18 Apr

Hull on Estates #515 – Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets

76admin Hull on Estate and Succession Planning, Hull on Estates, Podcasts, PODCASTS / TRANSCRIBED, Show Notes, Show Notes, Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , , 0 Comments

This week on Hull on Estates, Paul Trudelle and Nick Esterbauer discuss the state of the law in Canada regarding fiduciary access to digital access, as well as the potential for the Uniform Access to Digital Assets by Fiduciaries Act to provide clarity in respect of the authority of estate trustees and guardians/attorneys of property.

 Should you have any questions, please email us at webmaster@hullandhull.com or leave a comment on our blog.
07 Apr

Why should we care about fiduciary access to digital assets?

Nick Esterbauer Estate & Trust, General Interest, Power of Attorney, Wills Tags: , , , , , , , 0 Comments

My other two blog posts this week have focused on the utility of model legislation that has been introduced in Canada and the United States to address the issue of fiduciary access to digital assets, and some of the primary differences between the uniform acts of these two jurisdictions.

Today, I take the opportunity to highlight the prevalence of digital assets through the use of some interesting (and somewhat surprising) statistics:

  • 99% of North Americans use at least one personal online tool;
  • A 2013 study by McAfee suggests that Canadians value their digital assets at an average of more than $32,000.00.  Since 2013, the prevalence of digital assets has increased significantly;
  • Worldwide, Bitcoins are valued at almost $22 billion, with over $2 million in Bitcoins exchanged every day;
  • As many of our readers already know, many Canadians (estimated to be more than 60%) do not have a Last Will and Testament.  Of those who do have a Will, 57% of North Americans aged 45 and older have not included provisions that address access to digital assets as part of their formal estate plan.  Such provisions may be required in order for an estate trustee to gain access to digital assets, absent the enactment of legislation permitting same or a court order granting access.

Our blog has previously covered some of the common issues resulting from the inattention to digital estate planning, which can arise regardless of the financial value of the assets in dispute.

Have a great weekend,

Nick Esterbauer

 

Other blog posts that you may enjoy reading:

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR BLOG

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.
 

CONNECT WITH US

CATEGORIES

ARCHIVES

TWITTER WIDGET