Prop 58 Loans

Prop 58 Loans

Prop 58 Loans and Loans to Equalize Trusts

It has been an interesting piece of California history, concerning people who have been  involved in the struggle for, or against, Proposition 19 in 2009–2010 which was not voted into law… as well as the next version of Proposition 19 in 2020, which was voted into law, just barely.

Moreover, Proposition 19, 2020 was promoted in a rather deceptive and  confusing manner, along with a measure called Proposition 15, which did not pass or, as you know – commercial property owners in California would no longer be able to avoid property tax reassessment.

As you also probably know, Proposition 19, 2020 managed to revise certain property tax breaks within Proposition 58, such as the “Parent to Child Exclusion, or, as tax attorneys like to call it, the “Parent to Child Exemption”.

At any rate, there was far too much focus on the recreational use of marijuana surfacing during the 2009–2010 version of CA Proposition 19. This battle descended into a petty conflict involving decade-old personal bias and social prejudice characterizing marijuana as a “socially destructive, addictive drug” (which it apparently is not, according to pharmacological experts) and placed in the same class as crack cocaine or meth-amphetamine, which are indeed socially and personally destructive drugs.

It does seem that the real purpose of Proposition 19 in the 2010 version, away from the grey area of “recreational use of marijuana” which the debate became mired in – was to try to generate $1.5 billion or more for state violent crime fighting needs.  Due to a great deal of personal bias, this never happened. Which is unfortunate, as the state could have used the extra money for legitimately battling violent crime associated with genuinely harmful drugs; as opposed to rather benign couch-potato pot smoking. 

Everyone who owns property in California regarded Proposition 58, voted into law Nov 4 of 1986, as untouchable, sacrosanct, a political third rail not to be touched. It has served to protect homeowners whose debt is at or exceeds $8,500 in additional property taxes, while settling financial affairs after a parent, who has left property to heirs, has passed away.  Proposition 58 also protects a property tax benefit called a “Parent to Child Exclusion” or Exemption, as we have mentioned… allowing beneficiaries inheriting property to avoid property tax reassessment at current market rates.

Moreover, Proposition 58 allows beneficiaries who wish to keep inherited property in their family to buyout co-beneficiaries’ property shares, through a trust loan, and helps those looking to keep their inherited home also retain a Proposition 13 protected low property tax base that their parents paid.

With the advent of Proposition 19, after a long rather disingenuous marketing campaign, middle class families woke up to realize that some of the benefits they thought were fully protected have been watered down; that you will need to move into the house you inherit from parents within a year, as a primary residence, or lose your Parent-to-Child Exclusion.  So it’s still there… but you have to keep an eye on the calendar to avoid losing the tax break altogether. 

So all of a sudden, after both Prop 15 and Prop 19 were proposed… California property owners began to worry, for the first time in decades, about possibly losing the right to keep parents property taxes for themselves, at a nice low rate…It is unthinkable, as expensive as California is, with income tax and other taxes as high as they are – to even consider that we might ever lose our right to a property tax transfer from parents, at low Prop 13 rates; or transfer of property between siblings.  Fortunately for California, this did not occur.

After Proposition 19 was passed, Californians were extremely relieved to see that they would be still have the right to get a loan to an irrevocable trust, in conjunction with Proposition 58; to be able to buyout property shares from co-beneficiaries, as the same simple transfer of property between siblings – known as “buying out siblings’ property shares” or a “sibling to sibling property transfer”, when co-beneficiaries decide to sell their inherited property to an outside buyer.

It was most likely due to notable professionals who supported property tax relief and Prop 58, that Proposition 19 was prevented from going too far. This can be verified at fact-based property tax  blogs like this one, Property Tax Transfer,  and the new Op-Ed oriented micro-site, Loan To A Trust, specifically addressing issues, opinions and fact-based information on Proposition 13 and Prop 58 at Websites belonging to real estate attorneys supporting CA property tax relief, such as property tax specialists. And certainly thanks to Prop 58 experts and trust lenders with applications for a trust loan, for transfer of property between siblings… that look something like this:
It goes to show us that with some stiff opposition to unreasonable tax measures looking to squash property tax relief in California – even with millions of dollars from the California Legislature and organizations supporting special interests like realtors, such as the CA Association of Realtors (C.A.R.), conspiring tax measure that  attempt to unravel Proposition 58 and/or Proposition 13 can be stopped.  Perhaps not completely; yet at least to a good degree.

PART TWO: 100% Secure Trust Loan Distribution Equalizing Solution

Lender for Irrevocable Trusts

Lending to Irrevocable Trusts in California

Improving Your Family’s Security With Low Property Taxes

When families in California are going through an estate and/or probate scenario, are inheriting property, and are unfortunately  experiencing conflicts between beneficiaries who wish to retain their inherited property, and siblings who want to sell their property shares – frequently, a loan to an irrevocable trust, and a trust lender you can depend on to be reliable and affordable is the answer.

Many property owners can also be qualified to apply and keep a significantly lower tax rate to a secondary dwelling as well, if over 55 and retaining the initial inherited property for 2 years or longer.

Steps, rules & regs for the trust loan process – in conjunction with California Proposition 58 – are typically as follows:

1. Determination of who will keep the property
2. Determination of the loan amount
3. Loan to trust/estate is implemented
4. Trust lender equalizes cash distribution to beneficiary or beneficiaries
5. Property is transferred into the acquiring beneficiaries name
6. Parent child exclusion is filed, avoiding property tax reassessment
7. Five to seven day funding turnaround
8. The trust loan is repaid, concluding a win-win family arrangement
9. No Up-Front Costs
10. No Hidden Fees

An Alternative Financial Solution for Beneficiaries:

The Miller family in Southern California urgently needed a $320,000  trust loan to equalize distribution involving an inherited house valued at $615,000. They were very concerned about tax savings as well as keeping the home they have been living in for the past 10 years. Their family attorney referred the Millers, totaling four siblings, to the Newport Beach trust lender Commercial Loan Corporation.

Their inherited home was valued at $615,000, and the two beneficiaries who were interested in selling the property to an outside buyer were to be bought out to the tune of $205,000 each with the cash from a trust loan, instead of selling to a buyer, with the other two siblings losing the beloved home the family was attached to for sentimental reasons.

If the property was to be sold to a third party buyer and their property taxes reassessed normally, their estimated property taxes at current value (1.1%) would have been $6,765. If the one beneficiary was bought out by the trust loan, allowing the other three siblings to retain the home, estimated taxes were to be $4,164. An estimated property tax savings of $2,601 per year. Looking at this realistically, their income before income tax would be somewhat higher than that figure, to come up with $4,164 in cash every year to pay off those property taxes. It would have been a significant sum for a normal middle class family.

The situation was apparently very difficult in terms of getting everyone on the same page, agreeing to all the numbers. Sibling squabbling had gotten heated over the months they had spent dealing with house issues, and the in-fighting became so
intense that both beneficiaries looking to sell out actually hired separate attorneys to represent their interests. It got to the point where the family spent more time arguing on a daily basis, than doing anything else.

According to an account rep who is particularly experienced with loans to irrevocable trusts, Miss Alonso, the family arguments began to dominate all of their time together. It seemed impossible for them to agree on anything. There was also conflict between the two beneficiaries looking to keep the property. Both agreed to the process of transferring property and buying out beneficiary shares, however disagreed on what values to use. Each thought the other was attempting to trick or fool the other.

It began to look unworkable. Some of the siblings even threatened to take the matter to court of there could be no agreement on the numbers involved.

Yet, in the final analysis, the one issue that prompted the call to a trust lender that furnishes loans to irrevocable trusts, Commercial Loan Corp, and bound a thread between them all was their genuine desire to continue living in the home they had resided in prior to their parents’ passing away. In the end, this particular desire to stay on in the house was even more important to this family than the numbers and interest in saving on property taxes!

It took some time to finally normalize the situation and get all these family members on board with numbers they could all agree upon. However, the account rep, Miss Alonso, was able to eventually get everyone to the table, and to agree on the final numbers.

Everyone ended up happy with the deal, and with their tax savings looking ahead towards their projected property tax realities. Bottom line, it would have cost $36,900 to go through with a sale of the property in question. And only cost $11,919 if the family decided to simply retain the property as is.

Additionally, the trust received an extra $24, 981 in cash by keeping the property, and agreeing not to sell. All the way around, their decision to enlist the help of a firm experienced with loans to irrevocable trusts, and to keep the home of their beloved parents for sentimental reasons, ended up, ironically, being a far more sensible decision for the entire family group financially.

To reach Commercial Loan Corporation regarding assistance with a loan to an irrevocable trust, call 877-464-1066.