• The Collaborative Process
    ▼
    • Overview
    • The Professional Team
    • FAQs
  • Find a Professional
    ▼
    • Divorce Professionals
    • Professional Resource Members
  • Divorce Options
    ▼
    • Upcoming Workshops
    • About Divorce Options
  • CDSOC Membership
    ▼
    • Member Benefits
    • Join
    • Member Resources
  • About Us
    ▼
    • About Us Overview
    • Our Mission
    • CDSOC Leadership
  • Events Calendar
  • Blogs
  • Contact
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

CDSOC

Collaborative Divorce Solutions of Orange County

Connect With A Professional Today:
(949) 266-0660

  • The Collaborative Process
    • Overview
    • The Professional Team
    • FAQs
  • Find a Professional
    • Divorce Professionals
    • Professional Resource Members
  • Divorce Options
    • Upcoming Workshops
    • About Divorce Options
  • CDSOC Membership
    • Member Benefits
    • Join
    • Member Resources
  • About Us
    • About Us Overview
    • Our Mission
    • CDSOC Leadership
  • Events Calendar
  • Blogs
  • Contact

Divorce and Taxes

Creative Divorce Solutions: Thinking Outside The Box

January 8, 2021 By CDSOC

By Jennifer Webb Gordon, CFLS

“Why divorcing couples should consider creative solutions in their divorce”

 

If you are contemplating divorce you probably want to know “what you are legally  entitled to.”  This is the most common question asked by new clients, who often tell me “I just want what I’m entitled to.”

It is natural to want information to help with divorce planning and to set expectations.

Since divorce is a legal process, people turn to “legal entitlements” as a measuring stick.

What most couples contemplating divorce don’t realize is the restrictive range of outcomes available through the court system. Judges are limited by the laws that exist at the time you arrive in court.  Laws change, and what is true today may not apply next year or next month. One recent example is the tax deductibility of spousal support (alimony) payments.  Up until January 2019, spousal support payments were tax deductible to the party paying and taxable to the recipient.  Today, the payment of spousal support is no longer deductible on federal returns.  Similarly, the spouse who receives spousal support is no longer required to claim the amount as income on their federal tax return.  This is just one example of how the landscape of the law is subject to change.  While understanding your legal rights is important, engaging in creative problem solving will often result in better outcomes for both parties, and the entire family.

Creative solutions can apply to parenting plans as well as allocation of income and apportioning assets and liabilities. Below are just a few examples of creative solutions that worked for other couples which a court would not have been able to order without their prior agreement.

 

Creative Parenting Plans – Nesting

The typical custody orders handed down by the court provides for the children to alternate time with each parent in that parent’s home based on a standard time share schedule.  Sometimes parents alternate weekly or have a 2/2/3 alternating time share.

Some co-parents are choosing innovative arrangements to keep their children from feeling some of the effects of divorce and the disruption caused by having to transition back and forth between two homes.  A nesting arrangement means the children stay in the family home after the divorce.  It’s the parents who take turns living with the children; the adults shuffle back and forth.   This type of arrangement is typically for a limited period of time and allows everyone to adjust and prepare for a new family structure in 2 households.

Nesting isn’t for every family.  It takes a great deal of cooperation between co-parents to make this arrangement work, and sometimes the cost of maintaining separate homes precludes many from exploring this option at all.  But for parents who have good communication skills and are able to resolve conflicts productively, it can be a win for the children.  This is not an arrangement that can be ordered by the court, however, parents can plan creatively to meet the needs of their children during a divorce.

 

Using Retirement Funds Creatively

Transferring retirement funds earned during marriage from one party to another is commonly done as part of the dissolution process without incurring taxes or penalties to either party.  Employer sponsored plans such as 401(k) plans require a special court order called a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO).  However, this means the funds stay in pre-tax retirement accounts and are not available, for example, to satisfy consumer credit debt or for use as a down payment on a home.

Couples who have ample retirement but are cash strapped and want to use  retirement funds for these or other purposes, may find relief in Internal Revenue Code §72(t)(2)( c) which exempts early distributions from the 10% additional tax if those withdrawals are made as a result of a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO). It can become a  key issue because the interests of participants in employer-sponsored retirement plans are often one of their largest assets next to equity in their home.

Take for example the recent situation where each party had $125,000 in an employer sponsored retirement plan which they had earned during marriage.  Typically, each party would retain his/her own plan since the plans were of similar value.  In this case, however, the parties had  incurred substantial consumer debt, with each party assuming over $45,000 in debt as part of the divorce.  Both parties wanted to eliminate the high monthly payments so they could better provide for their children’s needs after the divorce.

Utilizing IRC §72(t)(2)( c), each party was awarded a portion of the others retirement plan, divided through a QDRO.  Each party withdrew the portion awarded to them from the other’s retirement and used those funds to satisfy the debt, giving each a fresh start.

You should always discuss cashing out retirement funds with your CPA or Tax Attorney as it may not be the right solution for everyone.

 

Medical Insurance – Delaying Termination of Marital Status to Extend Health Benefits

Many couples worry about the loss of health insurance after divorce when they are covered under their spouses health plan. Once a dissolution is entered and the parties are restored to the status of single persons, the former spouse will not be eligible to be covered on the former spouse’s plan. The cost of obtaining individual health plans can be daunting. Even when coverage is available, the plan benefits may be inferior.

Couples utilizing a Collaborative process or Mediation are sometimes able and willing to structure the termination of their marriage in order to afford the other party time to obtain insurance.   This doesn’t require delay in filing the final agreement in your case.  Once you have reached an agreement, if you both concur, you can have all the other provisions of the agreement signed by the court and still provide that you will remain legally married for a period of time after the agreement is filed in the court.

In one case, the cost of providing health insurance was taken into consideration in the negotiations and the wife agreed to delay termination of the status of the marriage for a period of 7 months after the Judgment was entered.

Although individual insurers have different rules about covering a spouse from whom you are physically separated, most allow coverage until the status of the marriage itself is terminated.

 

Creative Solutions for your Family

The above represent just a few of the many creative solutions available.   Out of court processes such as Collaborative Divorce and/or Mediation encourage parties to design unique solutions that best fit their own situation.  With the assistance of trained professionals, the parties engage in brainstorming creative approaches to restructuring their family. This allows for the ability to “Think Outside the Box”, to be creative in determining the financial arrangements and parenting plans that work for your family.

Filed Under: Creative Divorce Solutions Tagged With: Divorce and Taxes, Planning, Problem Solving, Retirement Benefits

Do I need a financial specialist as well as a lawyer for my divorce?

April 19, 2019 By CDSOC

By Cathleen Collinsworth, CDFA®, MAFF®
www.cccfda.com
949.262.3692

 

Do I need a financial specialist as well as a lawyer for my divorce?  Won’t I be paying twice the money for two professionals to be doing the same work?  As in all questions relating to divorce, the answer is, “It depends.”  If the marital estate consists of assets such as a residence, retirement accounts, investments, and or credit card debts, you should consider hiring someone to assist you in fully understanding all the financial issues relating to the marital estate.

Misinformation and misconceptions about the divorce process can be detrimental.  Many have false expectations that they will be able to secure a divorce settlement allowing them to continue with their accustomed style of living.  Financial divorce analysis helps to ensure a good, stable economic future and prevents long-term regret with financial decisions made during the divorce process.

The financial work provided by a lawyer is not the same as that provided by a trained financial professional specializing in the divorce process.  In addition, being a CPA or a CFP does not mean that individual has specific training in family law financial matters.

As you go through the divorce process, finding the right professional to help you can become challenging.  Do your homework.

  • Find a financial analyst who has experience in family law.
  • Find someone who knows that there can be significant tax implications when the parties divorce.

A Certified Divorce Financial Analyst (CDFA®) is someone trained in finances who has also taken financial courses specifically designed for the knowledge relating to divorcing couples.

 

Remember Assets Are Not Equal

Example 1:

Swapping a $50,000 interest in a joint savings account is not the same as receiving a $50,000 interest in a 401(k) plan.

There are no tax consequences to withdrawing the money from the savings account.

There will be current tax consequences as a result of withdrawing money from the 401(k) plan: You will pay ordinary income taxes on the amount withdrawn and, depending on the circumstances, you can pay a combined 12% penalty.

Example 2:

Swapping the family residence with $100,000 of equity with a stock account that currently has a $100,000 capital gain is not equal.  If the family residence is sold there could be no capital gains tax owed because there is a $250,000 ($500,000 if married) capital gain exclusion relating to the sale of the family residence.

Stock with a cost of $100,000 is sold for $200,000.  Gain of $100,000 could be taxed as high as 23.8% for the Federal Government or $23,800 thus leaving cash available of $76,200.

As you navigate through the divorce process you can make better decisions when you are fully informed of the impact of your financial decisions going forward.  The decisions you make now can impact your future financial status.

As you can see, not hiring the right financial professional can be costly.  Don’t roll the dice and hope for a good outcome.

Please do not hesitate to call if you have further questions, comments or would like additional information.

 

© 2018 Cathleen Collinsworth, CDFA®, MAFF® Cathleen Collinsworth is a CDFA®, Certified Divorce Financial Analyst, and a MAFF®, Master Analyst in Financial Forensics, who has been practicing as a sole practitioner in Irvine since 2000.  She has been retained as a forensic accountant and expert witness to provide services in family law for 20+ years.  As a member of Collaborative Divorce Solutions of Orange County (CDSOC) since 2007 she has provided services as a Neutral Financial Specialist and team facilitator.  Cathleen has served on the Board of Directors of CDSOC and served as the President for 2016-2017.  She has extensive training in mediation and the interdisciplinary team model of collaborative practice and frequently mentors’ collaborative practitioners.  She has authored articles, presented seminars, been a guest speaker and has prepared instructional videos in the field of finances and family law during the last 20 years.  She currently serves on the Collaborative Divorce Education Institute’s Leadership and Training team and is a frequent trainer at the annual conferences of Collaborative Practice California, the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals, the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, and other professional conferences throughout California.  In 2015 Collaborative Practice California (CP Cal) awarded Cathleen the Eureka Award, which recognizes those who have made significant contributions and demonstrated an abiding dedication to establishing and sustaining Collaborative Practice in California.  Cathleen also serves as a CP Cal Delegate and is a member of the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals (IACP).  A detailed list of her training can be found at https://www.collaborativepractice.com/members/2328.  For additional information, please visit her website at www.cccdfa.com.

Filed Under: Divorce and Money, Financial Tagged With: Assets, Divorce and Stocks, Divorce and Taxes, Divorce Financial Professional

The Effect of California Propositions 60 and 90 on Your Divorce

October 10, 2016 By CDSOC

by Diana L. Martinez Collaborative Lawyer and Mediator, Law and Mediation Office of Diana L. Martinez

When you are trying to navigate a divorce, there are many issues you need to address. If you own property in California, your decisions about your real estate can be among the most challenging, and perilous, if you are not fully informed.

One area often overlooked when making decisions about real property are the tax consequences. The tax implications can end up making a significant impact on your financial well-being, especially if you are part of the current wave of “gray divorces” among adults 55 years and older.

Many older couples who own property qualify for a lower property tax rate under California’s original Proposition 13. At the discretion of each county in California, Proposition 60 and Proposition 90 allow qualifying sellers to carry their Proposition 13 tax base on their original property with them towards the purchase of a new property of equal or lesser value. (Prop 60 governs real estate sales and purchases in the same county; Prop 90 governs real estates sales and purchases between two California counties).

Proposition 13 protects longtime homeowners against escalating property taxes as the value of their property increase. Base year values cannot go up by more than two percent per year, keeping the tax increase at a manageable level. Unless there is a change of ownership, or new construction, the base year value does not change. Unfortunately, this discouraged many people from selling property as their family circumstances changed.

Consider the following example:

Jason, 56, and Julia, 53, want to sell their five bedroom home on a large lot since their children are now grown and have homes of their own. They have lived in their current home for many years. The Proposition 13 base year value of $40,000 from 1975 grew to $66,000 by 2002. Their property tax bill is approximately $700 per year. Their current home assessment value is $400,000. Jason and Julia have found a two-bedroom townhouse for $370,000. But they are unwilling to move because this change of ownership will establish a new tax assessment for the townhouse based primarily on their purchase price, and their tax bill will jump from $700 to approximately $3,700 per year. They are on a fixed income and cannot afford the additional $3,000 per year in taxes.

To resolve this problem, Propositions 60 and 90 permit people over age 55 to sell one home and buy another of equal or lesser value within two years and take the Proposition 13 base value with them. Using the above example, Jason and Julia could move to the townhouse and still pay $700 per year in property taxes (tax rate and fees may make the total bill smaller or larger), plus the future increase of no greater than two percent. There are many requirements to qualify for the tax base transfer, and it can be used only once.

Why is this important in a divorce situation? It can only be used once and it cannot be divided between the spouses. This is the real kicker: family courts do not have this issue on their list of items requiring resolution. In all of my years of practice, I have never heard a judge ask about the tax base transfer.

In recent years, California has seen a sharp increase in gray divorces. Many of these couples are retired or near retirement age. This issue rarely came up in early years since most divorcing couples did not meet the age qualification.

We live in a different world today. What happens if this issue is not resolved or even addressed in your contested, mediated, or Collaborative divorce? The first person to apply for the transfer will get the transfer.

Real Estate Agent Julaine Wagonner of ReMax College Park Realty says often the ex-spouse won’t know his or her ex filed the application first until as late as the end of the year or until they receive their own rejection notice. It can take several months before the county updates the tax records to reflect a reduced/carried over tax base.

This is just one of several financial risks often missed during a divorce. Others include how to allocate any capital gains tax, for example. It is easy for even the most experienced family law attorney to overlook these issues. Confer with a financial professional who can assess your personal circumstances and work with your family law attorney to address and resolve these issues before you sign any judgment or make any requests for orders of the judge related to your real estate. Get the information from the expert to make sure your decisions are as complete as they can be, to set yourself on a path for a successful future.

Filed Under: Collaborative Divorce, Divorce and Money, Divorce and The Law, Financial Tagged With: California, Capital Gains, Diana Martinez, Divorce, Divorce and Real Estate, Divorce and Retirement, Divorce and Taxes, Gray Divorce

Dividing Stock Options and Restricted Stock In Divorce

September 1, 2016 By CDSOC

by Thea Glazer, CFP®, CDFA™, MS Accounting
Glazer Financial Advisors, Laguna Hills, California

Stock options and restricted stock may be part of the marital estate. And they are some of the more complex assets. This brief overview provides a basic understanding of the factors you need to take into consideration. It does not go into all the many tax and technical issues that are aspects of equity compensation. Seeking professional guidance for your specific circumstances is always a good idea.

Many companies grant their employees equity compensation in addition to their salaries, commissions and cash bonuses. Equity compensation is non-cash compensation representing a form of ownership interest in a company. Among the most common are employee stock options and restricted stock or restricted stock units. In divorce, stock options and restricted stock are property to be divided. The employee’s separate shares are often also considered as income in the calculations of support.

Thea Glazer
Thea Glazer

Employee Stock Options (ESOs)

An employee stock option is the right given by an employee to purchase a specified number of shares of the employer’s stock for a specified price and for a specified time. There are two types of ESOs, Incentive Stock Options (ISOs) and Nonqualified Stock Options (NQs). The primary difference is that ISOs have an advantageous tax treatment explained below.

Stock options have a Grant Date, Exercise Price, Vesting Schedule and Expiration date. Example: Company ABC grants John Smith 3,000 non-qualified options on January 4, 2015 at a grant price of $10.50, a four-year annual vesting schedule and an expiration date of January 4, 2025. That means that John can exercise (buy) the 750 shares of stock annually on January 4 from 2016 through 2019. He does not have to exercise any shares until January 3, 2025. If he doesn’t exercise by the date of expiration, they will expire and be worthless.

Taxation of Stock Options Nonqualified stock options are taxed at the time of exercise as ordinary income. The amount taxed is the difference between the grant price and the fair market price. Most companies sell enough shares to cover the withholding tax and release the net shares or proceeds if the shares were simultaneously sold. If the shares are held once exercised and sold later, there may be capital gains tax as well. Unless shares are about to expire, most people exercise and sell simultaneously.

Incentive stock options are not taxed when they are exercised. If the shares are held for at least one year from exercise and two years from grant date, the gain is taxed at the advantageous long term capital gains rate.

Restricted Stock (RS) and Restricted Stock Units (RSUs)

Unlike stock options, restricted stock and restricted stock units are actual stock. There is usually no purchase price and, if there is, it is very, very nominal (one cent). Holders of restricted stock have voting rights while holders of restricted stock units do not. Restricted stock units cannot be “underwater” which happens to options when the grant price exceeds the fair market price so they are much less risky. Grants of restricted stock usually have about one-third as many shares as do options. Restricted stock grants have a grant date and vesting schedule. There is no expiration date and usually no grant price.

Taxation of Restricted Stock

Once a share of restricted stock vests, it is released. Upon release, the fair market value less any purchase price is taxed as ordinary income. Most companies sell enough shares to cover the withholding taxes and release the net shares. There is no decision making needed by the employee like there is regarding when to exercise options. Once restricted stock vests, it is automatically released. Many employees continue to hold the net shares until a time they need the cash, feel the stock has reached a good selling price or want to diversify their portfolios.

Transferability of Stock Options and Restricted Stock

Some plans allow NQs to be transferred to the former spouse of the employee, but the majority do not. It is very rare to see ISOs transferable. If they are transferred, they may lose their status as ISOs and fall under the tax rules for NQs.

RS and RSUs are not transferrable.

For non-transferable shares of options or restricted stock, the employee holds the shares on behalf of the non-employee spouse and exercises on his/her behalf or transfers released shares. There are IRS acceptable ways to allocate the taxation so the non-employee spouse is taxed at his/her rate rather than that of the employee.

Division of Equity Compensation in Divorce

Both stock options and restricted stock shares are divided by formulas. The most commonly used ones are Nelson and Hug.

The Nelson formula is: Date of grant to date of separation ÷

Date of grant to date of exercise or release

The Hug formula is:     Date of hire to date of separation ÷

Date of hire to date of exercise or release

The reason the grants were awarded determines which formula is applicable.

Valuation of Stock Options and Restricted Stock

It is rare to value the options rather than to divide the shares. That is because the value is constantly changing so it is imprecise at best. In order to correctly value the options, the following factors are in the variables of a complex formula, the Black-Scholes formula that is used in valuing stock options:

  • Grant price
  • Grant date
  • Date of expiration
  • Vesting schedule
  • Current stock price
  • Volatility of the stock price

Sometimes valuing the options is the only way to effectuate the property division by offsetting another asset. However, dividing the shares divides both the risk and reward to both spouses. I believe it is preferable when possible.

Collaborative Divorce Offers Flexibility

In Collaborative or mediated divorce cases, there is far more flexibility in dividing assets. Unequal divisions are also acceptable if the parties agree and have reasons to do so. In court, such flexibility is not nearly as possible. This is another great reason to consider alternative dispute resolution such as Collaborative Divorce to allow you to make the best decision possible for your circumstances, rather than a decision forced upon you by a judge.

Filed Under: Collaborative Divorce, Divorce and Emotions, Divorce and Money, Financial Tagged With: Assets, Divorce and Stocks, Divorce and Taxes, Divorce Financial Professional, Equal Division, Financial Agreement, Laguna Beach Divorce

Primary Sidebar

Blog Categories

Categories

  • Awards and Honors
  • Blog
  • Child Custody
  • Child Specialist
  • Child Support
  • Children's Mental Health
  • Co-Parenting
  • Coaching
  • Collaborative Divorce
  • Collaborative Practice
  • COVID-19
  • Creative Divorce Solutions
  • Delayed Divorce
  • Divorce and Emotions
  • Divorce and Military
  • Divorce and Money
  • Divorce and The Law
  • Divorce Horror Stories
  • Divorce Options
  • Events and Training
  • Family Issues
  • Financial
  • General Divorce
  • Legal
  • Mediation
  • Mental Health
  • Self Help Divorce
  • Self-Representation
  • Spousal Support
  • Tips & Resources

Footer

CDSOC

Copyright © 2023 | All Rights Reserved | Website Design by The Crouch Group | Log in