by SAMUEL B. LEDWITZ, J.D., LL.M. | Last updated Feb 22, 2023 | I.R.S., Living Trusts, Samuel B. Ledwitz, Taxes, Trusts
In their never-ending pursuit with finding new ways to scare and defraud honest taxpayers, criminals are now employing a new scam. This one involves reaching out to citizens (either by telephone or via the internet), identifying themselves as I.R.S. agents, and making baseless criminal allegations demanding immediate payment of taxes owed. Once more, many scammers have been able to modify Caller I.D. readouts and in using the official federal agency’s logo embedded within their fraudulent emails in order to pull off this deception. This trick is currently being carried out across the United States, and has needlessly stressed out and swindled a large number of middle class families and retirees. According to the Internal Revenue Service, agents do not initially contact taxpayers either by phone or by email regarding a tax matter. Instead, residents are first notified by regular mail. Only after someone has been formally contacted by traditional methods do they confer electronically. If you or a loved one receives any type of phone call or email like this, the first step in taking action is to contact your local I.R.S. field office. Their number can be found in the white pages, or online. Second, you can notify the U.S. Treasury Inspectors at (800) 366-4484 and provide them with as much relevant information as you can. Another option to take in fighting back is to simply email: phishing@irs.gov and copy/paste the suspect email message. Lastly, the I.R.S. recommends that you also contact the Federal Trade Commission and activate a consumer complaint by filing an “I.R.S. telephone scam” report. Their main website is:... by SAMUEL B. LEDWITZ, J.D., LL.M. | Last updated Feb 22, 2023 | Estate Planning, Same Sex Estate Planning
DOMA: Perry Doesn’t Address State Law Concerns As discussed in previous posts by this blog and numerous other commentators, the landmark Supreme Court case United States v. Windsor resulted in the Defense of Marriage Act (commonly abbreviated as “DOMA”) being ruled unconstitutional, causing same-sex married couples to be federally recognized. What many people do not know is that another case, Hollingsworth v. Perry, was not decided by the Court due to procedural reasons. The Perry case could have had the same effect on state law as Windsor had on federal law—invalidating state laws that did not recognize same-sex marriages. The Court’s refusal to rule on the merits of Perry allows state courts to have the ultimate decision about whether state laws that ban or fail to acknowledge same-sex marriage are constitutional. Because the states have no federal precedent to obey, considerable uncertainty exists about how same-sex couples are treated within individual borders. The lack of uniformity means that despite being recognized for federal purposes, a same-sex married couple can be disregarded within a state depending on local law. This is a highly variable situation, as Paul Ferrara, Senior VP of Wealth Management at US Trust, aptly describes in the following scenario: “Imagine a same-sex married couple travels by train from Boston to Washington, DC. The train made stops in Providence, New Haven, New York, Newark, NJ, Philadelphia, Wilmington, Baltimore and then Washington. If the couple disembarked the train in Providence, New Haven, New York, Baltimore and then Washington, their marriage would be recognized. However, if they disembarked in Newark, Philadelphia or Wilmington, the marriage would not be recognized. The...