Skip To Content

Making Sense of Connelly

Making Sense Of Connelly

Buy-Sell Planning For Business Owners And Their Advisors After The Connelly Decision

by Eric Eklund, Esq., CEPA

Read the Official Court Ruling

Overview

On June 6, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in Connelly v. United States. The case addresses a split between Federal Circuit courts on whether a redemption obligation offsets the proceeds from a life insurance contract when calculating the value of the business and a decedent shareholder’s federal estate tax liability.

Background

 

In the case of Connelly v. United States, No. 23-146, the United States Supreme Court addressed the valuation of a decedent’s shares in a closely held corporation for federal estate tax purposes. Michael and Thomas Connelly, the sole shareholders of Crown C Supply, had an agreement to purchase the deceased brother’s shares, funded by life insurance policies worth $3.5 million each. Upon Michael’s death, Crown redeemed his shares using $3 million from the life insurance proceeds. The IRS included these proceeds in the corporation’s value, leading to a higher estate tax assessment.

Legal Issues
The core issue was whether the corporation’s obligation to redeem shares at fair market value should offset the value of life insurance proceeds when calculating estate tax.

Supreme Court Decision
The Supreme Court unanimously held that the fair market value of a decedent’s shares must reflect the full market value of the corporation, including life insurance proceeds. The Court ruled that a corporation’s contractual obligation to redeem shares does not necessarily reduce the corporation’s value for estate tax purposes. The fair market value principle dictates that life insurance proceeds are an asset that increases the corporation’s overall value, impacting the valuation for estate tax purposes.

Victorian Scales

Key Takeaways

 

It Ain’t Necessarily So…

The Supreme Court’s Decision

  • Life insurance proceeds used to redeem a deceased shareholder’s stock must be included in the valuation of a closely held corporation for estate tax purposes.
  • A contractual obligation to redeem a decedent shareholder’s shares does “not necessarily” reduce a corporation’s value for federal estate tax purposes.

The Impact on Buy-Sell Agreements

  • Entity purchase/stock redemption agreements are directly affected, potentially increasing estate taxes where life insurance, disability insurance, or other side funds are owned by the company.
  • Cross-purchase agreements may offer a more tax-efficient alternative.
  • Going forward, redemption agreements may require a legal opinion or IRS Private Letter Rulings to provide comfort that a redemption obligation will result in a valuation discount.
  • A special purpose Buy-Sell Insurance Entity (BSIE) may offer a more tax-friendly and administratively efficient alternative.

The Need for Proactive Planning

  • Business owners, estate planners, financial advisors, and attorneys must reassess and potentially revise buy-sell agreements and estate plans to align with the new legal framework.
  • Life insurance professionals should analyze the ownership and beneficiary of any key person or buy-sell life or disability insurance policies.

 

Hand with feather pen

Types of Buy-Sell Agreements

 

Cross-Purchase Agreements

  • Each owner holds life insurance policies on the other owners. Upon an owner’s death, the surviving owners use the insurance proceeds to buy the deceased owner’s shares.
  • Proceeds are paid directly to the surviving owners, avoiding inclusion in the corporation’s value and thus not increasing the estate’s taxable value.

Entity Purchase Agreements

  • The business entity holds life insurance policies for each owner. Upon an owner’s death, the entity uses the insurance proceeds to buy back the deceased owner’s shares.
  • Before Connelly, there was consensus that life insurance proceeds should be included in the corporation’s value but that a properly structured redemption obligation created an offsetting liability.
  • The Connelly decision clarifies that these proceeds must be included, increasing the estate’s taxable value, and that an offsetting liability is “not necessarily” created by a redemption obligation.

Hybrid Agreements

  • Combine elements of both cross-purchase and entity-purchase agreements.
  • Allow flexibility depending on the circumstances, such as who has the funds available or which method is most tax-efficient.

 

Traditional Buy-Sell Planning Prior to Connelly: A buy-sell agreement is a legally binding contract outlining how an owner’s share of a business may be reassigned if that owner dies or leaves the business. This agreement helps ensure the smooth continuation of the business by stipulating the terms and conditions under which ownership changes hands.”
Eric Eklund, Esq., CEPA
Founding Partner, Chief Operating Officer at The Ridgeback Group

Business Continuity

  • Ensure the smooth transition of ownership and control, preventing disruptions that could occur if a partner leaves unexpectedly.
  • Help maintain stability and operational continuity by outlining clear procedures for ownership transfer.

Share Valuation

  • Establish a method for valuing the departing owner’s interest of the departing owner; critical for determining the buyout price.
  • Common valuation methods include fixed price, formula-based, or appraisal-based approaches.

Funding Mechanisms

  • Specify how the buyout will be funded, often using life insurance and disability insurance policies, company funds, or a payment plan.
  • Life insurance and disability insurance are commonly used to ensure that funds are readily available to purchase the departing partner’s shares.

Protection for Remaining Owners

  • Prevent unwanted parties, such as the heirs of a deceased partner or an external buyer, from gaining control of the business.
  • Ensure that remaining partners retain control and decision-making authority.

Tax Considerations

  • Address the tax implications of the buyout, including potential estate tax impacts and funding mechanisms.
  • Proper structuring can help minimize adverse tax consequences for both the departing partner’s estate and the remaining owners.

Buy-Sell Agreement Direction for Business Owners and Their Advisors

  • The agreement should be carefully drafted by legal and financial professionals to ensure it meets the specific needs of the business and its owners.
  • Regularly reviewing and updating the agreement is crucial to reflect changes in the business, ownership structure, and applicable laws.

A BSIE is an innovative structure that can mitigate some of the tax impacts highlighted by the Connelly decision.

Formation
Create a separate LLC for holding life insurance policies and executing buy-sell agreements.

Ownership
The LLC, generally owned by the business owners, holds the life insurance policies.

Execution
Upon an owner’s death, the LLC uses the insurance proceeds to purchase the deceased owner’s shares from their estate.

Tax Impact
This structure can potentially exclude life insurance proceeds from the valuation of the operating company, as the proceeds are utilized by the LLC rather than the operating entity itself.

Formation
Establish a special purpose LLC with the primary function of holding life insurance policies.

Policy Transfer
Analyze the transfer for value impact of transferring existing life insurance policies and transfer existing life insurance policies to the LLC.

Operating Agreement
Draft an operating agreement that outlines the buy-sell procedures and the use of life insurance proceeds.

For more information contact your Ridgeback firm or reach out directly to The Ridgeback Group Advanced Concepts team:

 

advanced@theridgebackgroup.com