How can you protect what you have (house, IRAs) if you need to go into assisted living or nursing home? I would like my kids get this than the state. Thanks for any input.
Your profile says you are caring for someone...so is your question related to your aunt, and your desire for her money to be passed to heirs? Or are you asking about your spouse who may need NH in the future? If it’s your spouse, he can qualify for Medicaid while you still retain many of your assets as a “community spouse “. At least in the short term, since Medicaid may come calling for payback after your deaths.
But if it’s your aunt, I’m afraid your question has hit a nerve with people on this forum, since “the state” who would be paying for her care...is us. I would see an elder law attorney who is familiar with Medicaid law and the 5 year lookback to see if anything can be legally shielded, or if that ship has sailed.
Sorry some of us are so blunt. You have touched a sore spot.
My Mom died with $184 in her bank acct after a NH and Medicaid took what she had left. Which is as it should be. But do you really want to be in NH on Medicaid in ur final days. My Mom was moved from a 2 person room to a 4 once Medicaid kicked in. Medicaid doesn't usually pay for Assisted Living. In my state, u have to pay privately for 2 yrs at least. Then there is no guarantee that the AL will not have met the % of Medicaid residents they allow. Average AL costs 5 to 7k a month depending on the care needed. That's 60k or more a year. I would rather an AL than a NH anytime.
There are caregivers on this sight who would love to be able to have Medicaid pay for parents care. But they live in places where the waiting list is long. Or parents make more than the Medicaid cap but not enough for an AL. Medicaid is not automatic. Criteria has to be met. Not everyone can afford lawyers to help with the red tape.
An elder care lawyer is ur best bet if u want advise.
There is a misconception about protecting assets, people don't generally set up asset protection so they can commit fraud against the taxpayers. They set up asset protection so greedy sue happy lazy money grubbing people can't take everything they have worked hard all their lives for, so they can afford to pay their own way if they find themselves in need of care as they age.
If you have children and grandchildren, your fraud will effect them and their future offspring, taxes will have to be raised so the welfare coffers don't run dry. It's one thing to actually need assistance and something entirely different when you hide your money to get assistance.
I personally find this behavior and thinking reprehensible, it is selfish and self serving, obviously anyone that believes this is okay has never seen a truly needy person in a position that they are on a waiting list to get help because greedy, selfish, self serving individuals who could pay are robbing the system. Maybe filial laws should be rewritten and enforced so people stop with this disgusting behavior.
If you don't want to pay for your care, then refuse care and deal with the consequences. The state isn't taking anyones money, quite the opposite, they are giving taxpayers money to needy people so they can be in a facility, being cared for and not on the street, dying in a gutter. That they front the money with the intention of being paid back is no different than the mortgage company fronting the money so someone can buy a home and then pay it back. This idea that you are entitled to care at other people's expense while your kids get a windfall from you is WRONG!
You tell them. In time people who come here will learn all that caregiver involves including the financial burdens and that their loved one is better off if there is money for their care.
What you are really asking is how to defraud the tax payers.
why should tax payers pay for your care (Medicaid) when you no long have the financial ability to do so if you actually do have the money but figured out to not pay your own way but hide the money for your family.
Hermacj, there isn't any way to protect your house, savings, stocks, etc. when you need State assistance to help with your care when the time comes where you need a village to help.
Plus it wouldn't be fair, as other writers had mentioned, for us taxpayers to pay for one's care knowing that person has assets to use to pay directly for that care.
If there was such a thing, then Medicaid would quickly go into bankruptcy because it would be difficult to raise taxes high enough to cover for everyone's care.
If you need assisted living or a nursing home, who do you think should pay for it?
I dislike inheritance taxes. I personally think it wrong that the state, any state, should be entitled to help itself to private individuals' wealth when one member of a family dies.
But you're not talking about that. You are talking about needing care, asking the state to pay for the care, and meanwhile locking up assets for your children's benefit. You're not protecting your assets from state predation, you're protecting them from your own need to spend money on care. To me, that smells fraudulent - even if there are legitimised vehicles for doing it.
First part of my answer..See a Lawyer that is well versed in Elder Law this will include Trusts.
Now for the second part of my response...and probably not a popular one. You begin working and saving when you are young. You save for a car then a house and then you start saving for your retirement. This is money that you will use to help you maintain the lifestyle that you have had while you are working. (Social Security is meant to be a supplement to what you have saved NOT your retirement income) So now that you have this saved why would you not want to use it for the intended purpose? Why would you not want to either hire caregivers to take care of you or select a quality facility to care for you or your loved one where you will be comfortable and in a place of YOUR choosing rather than letting the State dictate the facility that you can go to if you are on Medicaid? And since Medicaid is funded by tax dollars how do you feel about paying for someone's care when they have the resources to pay for their own care? And when it comes you your turn how do you think others feel about paying for your care when you have money "protected" and could pay for your own care. And lastly ...the kids don't want the "family house" they don't want the old furniture, they don't want the "valuable" Precious Moments Nativity Set that you collected nor any of the other "tchotchkes" collecting dust What they want is for you to go through stuff now and get rid of stuff so they don't have to do it later. They want you to plan and pay for the funeral you want.
But if it’s your aunt, I’m afraid your question has hit a nerve with people on this forum, since “the state” who would be paying for her care...is us. I would see an elder law attorney who is familiar with Medicaid law and the 5 year lookback to see if anything can be legally shielded, or if that ship has sailed.
My Mom died with $184 in her bank acct after a NH and Medicaid took what she had left. Which is as it should be. But do you really want to be in NH on Medicaid in ur final days. My Mom was moved from a 2 person room to a 4 once Medicaid kicked in. Medicaid doesn't usually pay for Assisted Living. In my state, u have to pay privately for 2 yrs at least. Then there is no guarantee that the AL will not have met the % of Medicaid residents they allow. Average AL costs 5 to 7k a month depending on the care needed. That's 60k or more a year. I would rather an AL than a NH anytime.
There are caregivers on this sight who would love to be able to have Medicaid pay for parents care. But they live in places where the waiting list is long. Or parents make more than the Medicaid cap but not enough for an AL. Medicaid is not automatic. Criteria has to be met. Not everyone can afford lawyers to help with the red tape.
An elder care lawyer is ur best bet if u want advise.
If you have children and grandchildren, your fraud will effect them and their future offspring, taxes will have to be raised so the welfare coffers don't run dry. It's one thing to actually need assistance and something entirely different when you hide your money to get assistance.
I personally find this behavior and thinking reprehensible, it is selfish and self serving, obviously anyone that believes this is okay has never seen a truly needy person in a position that they are on a waiting list to get help because greedy, selfish, self serving individuals who could pay are robbing the system. Maybe filial laws should be rewritten and enforced so people stop with this disgusting behavior.
If you don't want to pay for your care, then refuse care and deal with the consequences. The state isn't taking anyones money, quite the opposite, they are giving taxpayers money to needy people so they can be in a facility, being cared for and not on the street, dying in a gutter. That they front the money with the intention of being paid back is no different than the mortgage company fronting the money so someone can buy a home and then pay it back. This idea that you are entitled to care at other people's expense while your kids get a windfall from you is WRONG!
why should tax payers pay for your care (Medicaid) when you no long have the financial ability to do so if you actually do have the money but figured out to not pay your own way but hide the money for your family.
thats fraud.
lets call it what it is.
Plus it wouldn't be fair, as other writers had mentioned, for us taxpayers to pay for one's care knowing that person has assets to use to pay directly for that care.
If there was such a thing, then Medicaid would quickly go into bankruptcy because it would be difficult to raise taxes high enough to cover for everyone's care.
I dislike inheritance taxes. I personally think it wrong that the state, any state, should be entitled to help itself to private individuals' wealth when one member of a family dies.
But you're not talking about that. You are talking about needing care, asking the state to pay for the care, and meanwhile locking up assets for your children's benefit. You're not protecting your assets from state predation, you're protecting them from your own need to spend money on care. To me, that smells fraudulent - even if there are legitimised vehicles for doing it.
Now for the second part of my response...and probably not a popular one.
You begin working and saving when you are young. You save for a car then a house and then you start saving for your retirement. This is money that you will use to help you maintain the lifestyle that you have had while you are working. (Social Security is meant to be a supplement to what you have saved NOT your retirement income)
So now that you have this saved why would you not want to use it for the intended purpose? Why would you not want to either hire caregivers to take care of you or select a quality facility to care for you or your loved one where you will be comfortable and in a place of YOUR choosing rather than letting the State dictate the facility that you can go to if you are on Medicaid?
And since Medicaid is funded by tax dollars how do you feel about paying for someone's care when they have the resources to pay for their own care? And when it comes you your turn how do you think others feel about paying for your care when you have money "protected" and could pay for your own care.
And lastly ...the kids don't want the "family house" they don't want the old furniture, they don't want the "valuable" Precious Moments Nativity Set that you collected nor any of the other "tchotchkes" collecting dust
What they want is for you to go through stuff now and get rid of stuff so they don't have to do it later. They want you to plan and pay for the funeral you want.