Posts Tagged ‘personal injury settlement’

Arizona Restricts Use of “Self-Settled” Special Needs Trusts

JANUARY 12, 2004 VOLUME 11, NUMBER 28

Last week Elder Law Issues described how a “Special Needs” trust can be used to protect the beneficiary’s access to public benefits programs like Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Medicaid (in Arizona, AHCCCS or ALTCS). There is one glaring problem with Special Needs trusts just now in Arizona, however—the Arizona Long Term Care System (ALTCS) has aggressively attacked the use of Special Needs trust planning.

It is important to clarify at the outset that ALTCS’ scrutiny of Special Needs trusts has been limited to those funded with personal injury settlements or other funds once belonging to the beneficiary. So far, at least, ALTCS seems to understand that trusts established by parents with their own money for the benefit of children with disabilities should not be challenged.

What are often called “self-settled” Special Needs trusts, though, have come under increasingly intense attack by the ALTCS administration. The government challenges range from demands that the trusts be amended each year, to insistence that the trustee predict exact expenditures for a year in advance, to registering objections to payments for the benefit of the trust’s beneficiary.

ALTCS takes the position that they are not constrained by the straightforward language of federal law on self-settled Special Needs trusts. Although the State will be entitled to receive most, if not all, of the trust assets on the death of the beneficiary, the administrators’ approach seems to be calculated to make the use of Special Needs trusts as unattractive as possible.

Although federal law clearly contemplates that personal injury settlement money, for example, could be used to purchase a home for the beneficiary or pay for caretakers in addition to the care provided through the Medicaid benefit, Arizona imposes severe limitations on both types of expenditures. The State’s demand for an annual budget and its insistence on no deviation without 45 days’ advance notice makes it difficult (if not impossible) to employ the flexibility necessary in administration of the care provided to most disabled beneficiaries.

The practical effect of Arizona’s assault on self-settled Special Needs trusts has been to substantially increase the cost of administration of such trusts and to reduce the benefit to beneficiaries. It would be incorrect to say that Special Needs trusts are no longer useful for Arizona residents, but the ALTCS position makes it imperative that any proposal to establish a Special Needs trust be reviewed by an experienced attorney.

Share

Special Needs Trust Can Protect Benefits After Personal Injury

JANUARY 5, 2004 VOLUME 11, NUMBER 27

Joseph is eighteen years old and requires total care. He has been in his current condition, unable to speak or move and unresponsive to most stimuli, for five years. His family believes his condition is a result of improper treatment he received during a hospital stay, and lawyers negotiated a substantial settlement of a claim made against the hospital at the time.

Bridget and Diane have similar stories, except that their injuries both occurred prior to or during birth. Both require full-time care that is both expensive and exhausting to arrange and manage. Both live with family members, who provide most of that care.

Each of these three individuals (whose names, and some facts, have been changed to protect their privacy) receives care that would cost over $100,000 per year if paid for privately. Each received a substantial settlement as a result of a lawsuit filed by family members years ago—but each would have used up all their settlement proceeds within less than ten years if they had been required to pay for all their care privately.

Joseph, Bridget and Diane are not alone. There are dozens of individuals with catastrophic injuries and substantial, but inadequate, personal injury settlements in our community, and thousands more around the country. Their settlements may have been insufficient because the facts were ambiguous, or the defendants inadequately insured, or the families emotionally ill-equipped to sustain the rigors of protracted litigation. But they all need services they can not afford.

These three individuals have benefited from a 1993 federal law permitting establishment of “special needs” trusts with their personal injury settlements. Although the requirements are stringent and the rules tend to shift, the trusts established for Joseph, Bridget and Diane can pay for transportation, supplemental therapy, supplies and housing, while each remains eligible for federal, state and school programs providing much of the care they require. In this manner, their personal injury settlements can be stretched to provide real benefits long past the time they would otherwise run out.

Establishment of a special needs trust to hold a personal injury settlement can be both a positive and a frustrating experience. Involvement of experienced and knowledgeable legal counsel is essential to successful implementation. There are often less expensive yet equally efficient alternatives available, and qualified counsel can help sort through the options.

Next week: Arizona attacks special needs trusts.

Share
©2012 Fleming & Curti, PLC