🍰 Giving It Away, But Keeping It Close
Here is the reality in January 2026: The "Tax Cuts and Jobs Act" has sunset. The Estate Tax exemption has effectively been cut in half (approx. $7.1 Million per person). You have $10 Million. Your assets are now officially "taxable" upon death.
Your accountant advises: "We need to move this money out of your estate NOW before it grows to $15 Million and creates a massive tax bill!" But you hesitate. "What if I lose my job? What if the market crashes? I might need access to that capital!"
This fear paralyzes most people. But the smartest 0.1% use a Spousal Lifetime Access Trust (SLAT). Instead of giving the money to your kids (losing access), you gift it to an irrevocable trust for your Spouse. The assets are removed from your taxable estate, but your spouse can still withdraw funds to buy you dinner, pay for vacations, or maintain your lifestyle.
A SLAT is an irrevocable trust created by one spouse (the Donor) for the benefit of the other spouse (the Beneficiary).
The Magic Trick (Asset Freezing)
1. You transfer $5M into the SLAT today.
2. You use your remaining Lifetime Gift Exemption.
3. Any future growth on that $5M (e.g., when it doubles to $10M) happens outside your taxable estate.
4. BUT, the Trustee can distribute money to your Spouse for health, education, maintenance, and support (HEMS).
5. Indirectly, you benefit from that money because you share a household with the beneficiary.
| The 'Have Your Cake and Eat It Too' Trust. |
The "Community Property" Trap (CA, TX, WA)
If you live in a Community Property state (California, Texas, Washington, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, Louisiana, Idaho, Wisconsin), STOP.
You cannot gift "joint" money to your spouse. Since you both own the money 50/50, the IRS may argue that your spouse effectively funded their own trust, which destroys the asset protection.
👉 The Fix: You must sign a "Transmutation Agreement" (Post-Nuptial Agreement) to legally separate the assets into "Separate Property" before funding the SLAT.
The Risks (Divorce and Death)
It sounds perfect, but there are two massive risks you must understand.
⚠️ What Could Go Wrong?
-
1. The "Divorce" Risk
If you divorce, your ex-spouse generally remains the beneficiary. They walk away with the trust money, and you lose access.
Solution: Expert attorneys draft a "Floating Spouse" clause. It defines the beneficiary not by name (e.g., "Mary"), but as "My current legal spouse." If you divorce and remarry, the new spouse becomes the beneficiary. -
2. The "Mortality" Risk
If your spouse dies before you, your indirect access to the money ends. The money usually flows to the children.
Solution: Do not put 100% of your assets in a SLAT. Keep enough outside (in your name) to support yourself independently.
The "Reciprocal Trust" Trap
Couples often say: "Great! I'll set up a SLAT for my wife, and she will set up a SLAT for me. We are both protected!"
STOP! This triggers the IRS "Reciprocal Trust Doctrine."
If two trusts are created at similar times, for similar amounts, with mirroring terms, the IRS will "uncross" them. They will treat it as if you created a trust for yourself. The asset protection fails, and the estate tax benefits vanish.
To avoid this, the trusts must be substantively different:
• Create them in different tax years (e.g., one in Jan 2026, one in Jan 2027).
• Use different assets or amounts (e.g., $2M vs $5M).
• Use different trustees or distribution standards.
🛡️ Chief Editor’s Verdict
The SLAT remains the MVP of 2026 estate planning, even with the lower exemption limits.
- Freeze It Now: The exemption has already dropped. Your goal now is to freeze your assets at today's value so that future appreciation (e.g., stock market gains) occurs outside your taxable estate.
- Grantor Trust Status: Usually, a SLAT is a "Grantor Trust," meaning YOU pay the income tax on the trust's earnings. This is actually a feature, not a bug—it allows the trust assets to grow tax-free (compounding faster) while reducing your taxable estate further.
Secure your legacy before the tax bill grows any larger.
0 Comments