Close Menu

Family Law Newsletter

Tax Consequences When a Marital Settlement Agreement Requires Life Insurance

Many marital settlement agreements require one party to maintain a life insurance policy on his or her life naming the former spouse as the primary beneficiary. While this provides some financial security for the former spouse, it may also result in an adverse unintended tax consequence for the insured spouse’s estate.

For example, if the ex-husband is required to maintain a $1 million life insurance policy on his life, naming his ex-wife as beneficiary, on the ex-husband’s death his ex-wife will receive the $1 million face amount of the policy directly from the life insurance company. If the ex-husband was the owner of the life insurance policy and paid the premiums on the policy, the IRS will include the $1 million face amount of the policy in the ex-husband’s estate for the purposes of calculating the amount of estate tax owed by the ex-husband’s estate. If the ex-husband died in 2013 with a taxable estate of $5.25 million plus the $1 million in life insurance, the inclusion of the life insurance proceeds would result in a $400,000 increase in the estate tax owed.

The foregoing result may be avoided through the use of a tax-sensitive marital settlement agreement and an irrevocable life insurance trust. The ex-husband may still be required to maintain a $1 million life insurance policy with his ex-wife as beneficiary, but the life insurance policy would be owned by the trustee of the irrevocable life insurance trust. The ex-husband may transfer money to the trust for the payment of the premiums. Since the payments are required pursuant to a court order, the payments are not considered taxable gifts. Since the irrevocable life insurance trust, not the ex-husband, is the owner of the policy, the $1 million life insurance policy will not be included in the ex-husband’s estate for the purpose of calculating the estate tax owed.

  • Awarding Visitation to Grandparents
    All 50 states have laws authorizing certain nonparent parties, typically grandparents, to seek child visitation rights. These statutes are controversial, and parents often argue that the laws interfere with their fundamental... Read more.
  • Divorce and Hidden Assets
    Decisions regarding the division of marital assets upon divorce may be made either by the divorcing spouses themselves or by a judge. State law governs how marital and separate property is divided in the property distribution.... Read more.
  • Supreme Court Decision Invalidates Alimony Statute
    A landmark U.S. Supreme Court case, decided in 1967, declared certain Alabama alimony statutes unconstitutional because they required men, and not women, to pay alimony. Background In February 1974, a... Read more.
  • Taxes, Filing Returns and Married Couples
    For federal income tax purposes, there are five tax “statuses:” single; head of household; married filing jointly; married filing separately; and qualifying widow(er) with dependent child. Status affects tax credits and... Read more.
Law Commentary Legal News
Share This Page:
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn