December 16, 2024 • 29 mins
Discover the intricate world of estate and gift tax exemptions with Todd Whatley, the Elder Law Coach. What could the re-election of President Trump mean for your financial future? As Todd guides us through the potential shifts in estate planning, he delves into the looming reduction of the estate tax exemption from $13.61 million per individual to a potentially game-changing $5 million by 2026. With Congress's role unclear, Todd sheds light on the strategies you might need to adopt and the political dynamics at play as this fiscal transformation unfolds.
In this episode, Todd also illuminates the nuances of gift tax exclusions, which have risen to $18,000 per person per year in 2024. Understanding this component is critical as it ties into the lifetime exemption and could significantly influence your estate planning strategy. As practitioners and clients brace for these changes, Todd equips you with essential insights to navigate the complexities ahead. Whether you're an established attorney or a budding lawyer, mastering this knowledge could transform how you approach elder law and estate planning in these uncertain times.
Links:
https://www.kiplinger.com/taxes/changes-to-estate-tax-are-coming-congress-options
https://www.kff.org/quick-take/what-trumps-2024-victory-means-for-medicaid
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/politico-pulse/2024/11/18/states-rush-medicaid-requests-before-trump-return-00190062
Check out our new website www.TheElderLawCoach.com.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:19):
Thank you.
Specialized experience, Whetheryou're an established attorney
looking to refine your expertiseor an emerging lawyer seeking a
successful foray into elder law, this is your masterclass.
Now let's get started with theluminary in the field.
Here's Todd Whatley.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
That's right.
This is the Elder Law Coach andI am Todd Whatley, and thank
you for joining us and, asalways, please subscribe, please
like and share, share withpeople.
And today I want to talk aboutI'm recording this the middle of
(01:00):
December 2024, and so there's alot of things going on right
now, and I thought this would bea good chance to kind of look
at what changes are coming.
Okay, president Trump formerPresident Trump has been elected
again and will start in January20th, and I think there's going
to be some major changes.
Okay, there's going to be somesignificant changes.
(01:21):
We don't know exactly what, andtoday is a little bit of may
return to this a year from nowand think, well, that was really
(01:51):
wrong, but it is something thatI think we should talk about
and it's a few things I want youto think about, okay, so one
thing that we know is going tohappen is the estate tax
exemption is well, probablygoing to change If nothing
(02:18):
happens, if Congress doesn't getexcited and do.
Of 2017, it increased theestate tax exemption to what is
now is $13.61 million perindividual for 2024.
And this, under the TCJA, isgoing to revert back to $5
(02:44):
million, adjusted for inflation,after December 31st 2025.
So basically January 1st 2026,it's going to be a $5 million
exemption and that's going to bea significant change in how we
practice, because I think I haveone client right now, over the
(03:04):
last you know memory, that has ataxable estate.
I typically don't work with toomany clients that have taxable
estates and so this has neverbeen a thing.
But at $5 million andparticularly with the way the
stock market's done and here inNorthwest Arkansas and a lot of
places in the country, realestate has gone up substantially
(03:27):
and so you've got some couplesthat are looking at either now
being at over $10 million or, ifthe economy continues to do
what it's done, they're going tohave a taxable estate, and that
changes a lot of your estateplanning, a lot of the way that
(03:48):
you do things, and if thatcontinues to go, you need to
make some changes and you needto be very aware of this in your
practice.
Now, based on a Kiplinger reportthat I have seen, that seems to
be the most honest assessmentis that the proposed changes are
(04:09):
President Trump aims to makethe heightened exemption
permanent.
Okay that he passed this.
This passed during his term andI think it is his desire that
this stay permanent.
And since you do haveRepublicans in both houses and
(04:29):
now the presidency, I thinkpossibly that's going to occur.
And one of the cynical thingsthat I've heard and it seems to
make sense is don't be surprisedif Congress you know they're
going to have a lot of things toaddress in 2025.
Ok, they're going to be busy,they're going to be doing things
(04:50):
and plus we're, you know, in2026, there's going to be
elections the midterm electionsfor a third of the senators in
the entire House.
I would not be surprised if, forsome reason, they did not
address this and they let thatreduction occur and people kind
(05:14):
of panic and think, wait asecond, this is terrible, we've
got to do something.
And one third of the senatorsin the entire House, you know,
campaign on oh, we need to fixthis, you need to put me back
into office or I need to go intooffice so I can fix this.
So it would not surprise me ifthey let it go bad so they could
(05:35):
fix it.
I know that's very cynical, butin this political environment,
I would not be surprised if thatdid happen.
But this is something that youneed to.
You know, if Trump comes in andimmediately recommends it.
It is going to take an act ofCongress literally to do that.
To you know, keep it at thecurrent level because it's set
(05:59):
to expire, subject tocongressional action, all right.
So number two, kind of in thesame line, is the gift tax
exclusions, and so this has beengoing up every year and it is
currently at or in 2024, it's18,000 per person per year that
you can give away, and that istied to your lifetime exemption.
(06:24):
Anything over that, if you giveaway more than $18,000 per
person per year, anything abovethat comes off of your lifetime
gift exemption, which is thesame as your estate tax
exemption, which is $13.61million.
Again, that is supposed to godown, and the proposal is that
(06:48):
Trump is going to keep that13.61 million in place.
All right, I think both ofthose are very much tied
together and I think if onechanges, the other will change
also.
So for 2025, that's a hugepotential, you know.
So for 2025, that's a hugepotential way for people to get
(07:11):
a substantial amount of theirassets outside of their estate
without causing gift tax orestate tax problems, and so I
know a lot of financial advisorsare advising their clients.
This is a good opportunity toset up charitable remainder
trust and irrevocable trust sothat you can get a large portion
of the estate out from yourclient and to the kids, taking
(07:33):
advantage of that $13.61 millionthis year and in 2025.
Ok, so you know, I thinkclients need to be made aware of
that and this is a goodopportunity for you to get
(07:55):
people in and to work withfinancial advisors to say, hey,
let's do an irrevocable trust,let's get this outside of the
estate, utilizing this year'sexemption, because it may not be
here next year.
Ok, all right, so let's get toMedicaid funding.
I think that is always on thechopping block, and when I say
it, I'm talking about Medicaidin general.
As elder law attorneys, wetypically, you know, our focus
(08:21):
tends to be the aging.
Our focus tends to be the aging, the aged and disabled Medicaid
, which is way different thanyounger people, and they're
going to cut waste and fraud,which it's rampant, and I think
(09:08):
they're going to cut theMedicaid payments for clients
who can possibly go to work, whojust may not be going to work
because the current rules don'tencourage it.
You may not like this statement, but it is absolutely true.
There are people out there whocould work and they don't and
have benefits.
It's true, I mean, you may notlike it, but there are people on
Medicaid right now who couldwork and they just choose not to
(09:31):
, and so I think that's alwayssubject to being amended or
looked at or whatever.
And you know, I think, going asfar back as Bill Clinton, bill
Clinton obviously was a Democratand one of the things he he
(09:52):
addressed was um welfareMedicaid and he made people work
to get benefits, and that'sgoing to be fought by a lot of
people and the Democrats inCongress will fight that.
That, I think, is up for afight and we, as other law
attorneys, are not so muchworried about that as we are
(10:15):
with aging funding.
The reason I bring that up is,you know, I don't think aging
funding.
The reason I bring that up is Idon't think aging funding.
The long-term care funding ofMedicaid is going to be adjusted
much.
We're pushing 20 years and Ican't believe this because I
remember watching TV in 2006,february the 9th 2006, when
(10:37):
Congress passed the hugeMedicaid reforms that we now
live under, and I remember Isaid, man, this is going to
change stuff a lot.
I had been in it for about fiveyears at that point and I was
like this is going to change,and so that seems like yesterday
to me, and so that seems likeyesterday to me.
(10:59):
But it's been 20 years.
In 2026, it'll be 20 years, andso I think there may be some
changes there.
And that is a large part ofwhere the Medicaid money goes.
And if they want to save moneyon Medicaid, that's one thing
that they might need to look at.
But these are people who trulycan't work.
(11:21):
I mean, this is the trulydisabled, this is the truly poor
people who can't work, and sothat's why I bring up if they're
wanting to cut the Medicaidbudget, I want to think they're
going to cut it with people whocan work and make it more
difficult to get benefits if youcan work and you simply choose
(11:43):
not to.
All right, I know I may offenda few people with that, but just
bear with me.
Just realize that is a fact andit is going to change.
Or if to save money, that'swhere the change will occur, not
with the other people.
All right, changes to healthcare programs.
(12:15):
And I think he learned hislesson in his last being
president.
In the past, I think he said hewanted to get rid of Obamacare
or that program, and he facedvery substantial issues with
(12:40):
that and I don't think he'sgoing to make that mistake again
.
I will tell you that theappointment of Dr Oz.
Dr Oz, of TV fame, is going tolead the Centers for Medicare
and Medicaid Services and he ranfor the Senate, I think, in
Massachusetts, and lost toFetterman, but I think he is
(13:06):
going to be.
He's going to lead the Centersfor Medicare and Medicaid
Services and that indicates afocus on reducing waste and
fraud and may substantiallychange some of the policy
reforms.
Okay, I think the wholeDepartment of Government
(13:28):
Efficiency DOGE, as they'recalling it run by Elon Musk and
Vivek, they're going to makesome changes.
Okay, vivek, they're going tomake some changes.
Okay, they're going to go inand cut out a lot of waste in
government, and I think thecenters for Medicare and
Medicaid services is subject tothose actions as well as anyone,
(13:55):
and so I think there probablywill be some changes in health
care, for the good, for theworse, I don't know, but I think
we can always address fraud.
There's a lot of fraud, butwhen you do that, it is going to
make it more difficult and, youknow, cause some problems and
some hurt feelings and issues,and so it's going to be
(14:19):
interesting.
But you know, again, we dealwith a segment of the population
that has to have medical careUnder Medicare.
I don't think anything's goingto change for Medicare
substantially.
You know it's going to be there, the Medicare for All.
I don't know that that's youknow.
I think that's off the radarfor now.
(14:41):
Which, had that been passed,had we gone to Medicare for All,
I think a lot of our Medicaidpractices would have diminished.
I don't think it'll everdisappear, because people always
need attorneys to help navigatethrough government appear
(15:02):
because people always needattorneys to help navigate
through government, but I thinkit would have changed our
practice significantly and Idon't see that as being an issue
anymore.
All right, let's talk about andI pulled this list up and in my
research this kept coming up asone of the things that I want
(15:23):
to talk about and again, thistends to be political.
I'm trying my best not to bepolitical in this, I'm just
stating facts.
Okay, so Project 2025, I knowduring the campaign that was
being thrown at Trump as he wasfollowing this, he was part of
(15:44):
that.
You know he was going toimplement 2025, and that is
incorrect.
He has constantly distancedhimself from Project 2025.
That was created by theHeritage Foundation, which is a
conservative think tank, and itwas created by them.
I'm sure they hope Trumpcarries some of these things out
(16:06):
, but it was not a Trump project.
Okay, now, that being said, Ithink Project 2025 is going to
play a part.
There's going to be pressureinto Congress to implement some
of these things, and one of theProject 2025 plans was to
(16:31):
restructure the federal healthcare programs, including
potential cuts to Medicaid andchanges to the Department of
Health and Human Services.
So 2025 looked at this, and youknow, this conservative think
tank looked at the governmentand said one of the things we
want to implement is torestructure federal health care.
(16:54):
We spent a tremendous amount ofmoney, a tremendous amount of
money and again, you can't lookat this system and say it's
(17:16):
perfect that there they do anultrasound and it's a 15 minute
20 at most, it's probably morelike 15 minutes.
It's not invasive, it's anultrasound.
They're just looking at stuffand it's over $3,000 for that 15
(17:37):
minutes and it's like come on,there is no way that that can
cost $3,000.
And that's to private insurance.
I'm sure their charge toMedicare is probably that or
even higher, and you have tounderstand there is so much
(17:57):
loaded billing.
You know there's things goingon there that can be addressed
and I think you know, looking atthat objectively, we as
attorneys, we have to get ourchecks from our clients, and so
we have to check pricing, checkthings and convince people it's
worth it to hire us for them towrite us a check, and that is
(18:20):
not the case in healthcare.
And I think that's one of thebiggest issues is, if you could
shop around and if you had someincentive to save money as a
participant in this, I think wewould.
And I'm not saying I'm againstthat Project 2025 initiative.
(18:42):
I think everything should belooked at.
I think there are ways to dothis, but I bring this up as you
need to familiarize yourselfwith the project's proposals,
because, even though it's not aTrump thing, I think Trump is
going to have some pressure fromothers to implement some of
those things, and so I thinkit's a good idea to at least
(19:05):
peruse that and be familiar withit and, from a non-political
standpoint, understand it's notTrump's thing, it's outside of
Trump, but he may be faced toaddress that.
He may be faced to address that.
(19:28):
I think one of the things wesee with this incoming president
is states' rights.
Okay, I think he is pushingthings down to the states, which
I love.
Okay, I'm not a big federalgovernment guy because federal
government is so out of reach.
You have to travel to DC tomeet with the people making
federal decisions.
They don't care about us.
(19:50):
They're all in this littlehallway of influence where
they're all together and theyall come together and they
honestly don't care about us.
And for us to have anyinfluence, you have to call your
national representative andthey're busy and they have a
bazillion phone calls and abazillion things going on and,
(20:14):
honestly, they're going to talkto the person who's standing in
front of them, which islobbyists standing in front of
them, which is lobbyists, whichare each other, which are
influences from within thatlittle small sphere of influence
.
When you push things down tothe states and let the states
decide.
Now I just have to drive to mylocal capital of my state to
(20:39):
make my voice heard.
I can.
You know, my local staterepresentative is not as busy.
They don't have as manyconstituents and you can truly
find them somewhere, whereverthey live or work or whatever
you can get to them and stand infront of them and make your
voice heard so much easier thantrying to do it in the federal
(21:01):
standpoint.
And you know, we're allattorneys, we all understand
this.
With the Commerce Clause, somany things have been brought
under the federal governmentthat it's difficult to make any
changes, even if yourrepresentative, if your
congressman or your senatoragree with you.
It's difficult for them to makechanges to agencies, because
(21:25):
that's under the president andit's basically the fourth branch
of government that they canmake rules.
They can do things withoutCongress supervision, without
Congress approval.
It's just gotten completely outof hand.
And so I'm a huge fan ofbringing things down to the
state level and saying, hey, Iwant this controlled in the
(21:48):
state, and that's one thingTrump is a fan of is he wants to
bring things to the state, morelocal to you, and so I invite
you, if you're not a Trump fan,to think about it that way, to
think how would this bedifferent?
How much better would it be forme to deal with my state and
(22:10):
the state that I live in be whatI want it to be, rather than
trying to change the entirecountry?
Let's deal with the state and,to be honest, that's how the
Constitution was written.
Let's deal with the state and,to be honest, that's how the
Constitution was written was forthe states.
It's the United States ofAmerica.
They wanted the states to beindependent, small governments
(22:30):
held together by this USgovernment, and the Commerce
Clause stripped power from thestates, gave it to the federal
government, and I think that'sbeen a huge issue with a lot of
our problems, and the states arenow going to excuse me, are now
(22:54):
going to the federal government, to, you know, seek waivers, to
try, to, you know, to influencewhat they think is coming.
And it's essential for you, asan elder law attorney, to stay
up to date with what your stateis doing.
Yes, there are some federalchanges, but states still, under
the Medicaid rules, can submitwaivers, change their waivers,
(23:18):
do things, and so it's importantthat you know what your state's
doing and be influential inthat, as an elder law attorney,
you can be influential.
Your local representativeshould appreciate your input on
that.
Say, hey, look, here's what Ido as a living, here's what I do
(23:41):
for clients and here's how thisproposal is going to change
your constituents across thestate.
And I encourage you to stayinvolved, get involved with your
local representative, call themand say, hey, if you ever have
questions on long-term care oryou know things like this, this
(24:01):
is what I do and I would love totalk to you.
Okay, again, people are allfreaked out about Trump.
If you don't like Trump, thenyou're like, oh, he's going to
do all this stuff.
Well, he's just the president,okay, and I do mean that.
(24:23):
I mean, so many things have tobe done through Congress and so
Trump's not going to come inhere and you know, outlaw
abortion and, you know, do allof this stuff.
He can't do that, okay, and Ithink we as attorneys should not
fall under that mindset as muchas non-attorneys.
(24:45):
But I see some of my attorneyfriends are just totally
freaking out.
It's like, oh, my God, trump'sgoing to be president and all of
this stuff's going to happenand all these things are going
to get changed.
It's like, remember, congresshas to act.
So, you know, significant cutsto Medicaid may face public
resistance.
It's going to face publicresistance.
(25:06):
You know, congress, you know,particularly the House of
Representatives gets voted onevery two years.
They have to be very close tothe public.
They have to be very, you know,open to what the public is
saying and you know, or elsethey're not going to win
re-election, the senators.
Thankfully, they are a littlemore pushed out from that and I
(25:31):
think one thing that I think youshould know this but a lot of
people don't know this is, ifyou remember, under the
Constitution this is a rabbittrail that I'm just going down,
but I think is important.
If you remember from theconstitution, senators were
elected by the states, not bypopular vote, which I thought
(25:51):
was genius, so that you have thehouse of representatives.
You know people, you know ahouse of 439 that represent
people in a section of the state.
Okay, it's their constituents.
And then you have senators whoare elected every six years and
(26:14):
were not elected by the popularvote.
Okay, they were not subject,they were not so much listening
to the public, they werelistening to the states, because
the state legislature electedthe senators, so they had to
work with the states and do whatthe states said.
But still, in Congress, thingswere created by the House, went
(26:35):
to the Senate, or created in theSenate, went to the House.
They still had to agree, butthey brought very, very
different perspectives toapproving laws or approving
bills and creating laws.
There was one that was veryclose to the public and listened
(26:56):
to the public, and then therewas the other House that was
listening more to the states,you know, in a bigger frame, to
make sure the states wereprotected and the states could
stay their little entity ofgovernment.
Well, that got changed.
Okay, the senators were thenelected by the public and so you
now have two houses elected bythe public, and I think that
(27:20):
kind of defeats a big intentionof the Constitution.
But it's how it is and I don'tever see it going back.
I kind of wish it would, but itprobably never will.
However, being elected everysix years kind of removes them
from the current issues.
You know, not being electedevery two years allows them to
(27:43):
kind of step away a little bitand look at the bigger picture
and say, okay, well, I'm goingto be here for six years and so
therefore, I can look at thismore globally rather than very
specific, subject to the whim ofthe people.
So, understand, yes, I thinkthere are going to be some
challenges and I think Trump isgoing to be faced.
(28:05):
Even though both houses arebarely a conservative majority,
it's so close that I think anywaiver by any Republican that
doesn't agree will have verysubstantial influence over this
and can side with the Democratsand cause bills not to be passed
.
So I still think there's thebalance of government.
(28:27):
The checks and balances arestill there and you know, major
wild changes are simply notgoing to happen quickly or
easily, if at all.
All right.
So I hope you're still myfriend.
I hope you'll still listen tome.
(28:47):
I would you know I am open todiscussion on anything.
If you think I was gettingpolitical, you know I try to do
this as much non-political aspossible, but I thought this was
a good way to, I think thoughtthis was a good opportunity to
talk to y'all and let you knowkind of what's coming and to
encourage you to get involved orstay involved and know what's
(29:10):
going on and let's continue toprovide great services to our
clients.
Let's do this well andhopefully you will be back with
me next time.
Thank you all very much andwe'll see you.
Speaker 1 (29:28):
Thank you for joining this episode of the Elder Law
Coach podcast.
For those eager to take theirelder law practice to new
heights and are interested inTodd's acclaimed coaching
program, visitwwwtheelderlawcoachcom.
With Todd Whatley by your side,the journey to becoming an
elder law authority has neverbeen more achievable.
(29:48):
Until next time, keep learning,keep growing and stay
passionate about elder law.
Thank you.
Specialized experience, Whetheryou're an established attorney
looking to refine your expertiseor an emerging lawyer seeking a
successful foray into elder law, this is your masterclass.
Now let's get started with theluminary in the field.
Here's Todd Whatley.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
That's right.
This is the Elder Law Coach andI am Todd Whatley, and thank
you for joining us and, asalways, please subscribe, please
like and share, share withpeople.
And today I want to talk aboutI'm recording this the middle of
(01:00):
December 2024, and so there's alot of things going on right
now, and I thought this would bea good chance to kind of look
at what changes are coming.
Okay, president Trump formerPresident Trump has been elected
again and will start in January20th, and I think there's going
to be some major changes.
Okay, there's going to be somesignificant changes.
(01:21):
We don't know exactly what, andtoday is a little bit of may
return to this a year from nowand think, well, that was really
(01:51):
wrong, but it is something thatI think we should talk about
and it's a few things I want youto think about, okay, so one
thing that we know is going tohappen is the estate tax
exemption is well, probablygoing to change If nothing
(02:18):
happens, if Congress doesn't getexcited and do.
Of 2017, it increased theestate tax exemption to what is
now is $13.61 million perindividual for 2024.
And this, under the TCJA, isgoing to revert back to $5
(02:44):
million, adjusted for inflation,after December 31st 2025.
So basically January 1st 2026,it's going to be a $5 million
exemption and that's going to bea significant change in how we
practice, because I think I haveone client right now, over the
(03:04):
last you know memory, that has ataxable estate.
I typically don't work with toomany clients that have taxable
estates and so this has neverbeen a thing.
But at $5 million andparticularly with the way the
stock market's done and here inNorthwest Arkansas and a lot of
places in the country, realestate has gone up substantially
(03:27):
and so you've got some couplesthat are looking at either now
being at over $10 million or, ifthe economy continues to do
what it's done, they're going tohave a taxable estate, and that
changes a lot of your estateplanning, a lot of the way that
(03:48):
you do things, and if thatcontinues to go, you need to
make some changes and you needto be very aware of this in your
practice.
Now, based on a Kiplinger reportthat I have seen, that seems to
be the most honest assessmentis that the proposed changes are
(04:09):
President Trump aims to makethe heightened exemption
permanent.
Okay that he passed this.
This passed during his term andI think it is his desire that
this stay permanent.
And since you do haveRepublicans in both houses and
(04:29):
now the presidency, I thinkpossibly that's going to occur.
And one of the cynical thingsthat I've heard and it seems to
make sense is don't be surprisedif Congress you know they're
going to have a lot of things toaddress in 2025.
Ok, they're going to be busy,they're going to be doing things
(04:50):
and plus we're, you know, in2026, there's going to be
elections the midterm electionsfor a third of the senators in
the entire House.
I would not be surprised if, forsome reason, they did not
address this and they let thatreduction occur and people kind
(05:14):
of panic and think, wait asecond, this is terrible, we've
got to do something.
And one third of the senatorsin the entire House, you know,
campaign on oh, we need to fixthis, you need to put me back
into office or I need to go intooffice so I can fix this.
So it would not surprise me ifthey let it go bad so they could
(05:35):
fix it.
I know that's very cynical, butin this political environment,
I would not be surprised if thatdid happen.
But this is something that youneed to.
You know, if Trump comes in andimmediately recommends it.
It is going to take an act ofCongress literally to do that.
To you know, keep it at thecurrent level because it's set
(05:59):
to expire, subject tocongressional action, all right.
So number two, kind of in thesame line, is the gift tax
exclusions, and so this has beengoing up every year and it is
currently at or in 2024, it's18,000 per person per year that
you can give away, and that istied to your lifetime exemption.
(06:24):
Anything over that, if you giveaway more than $18,000 per
person per year, anything abovethat comes off of your lifetime
gift exemption, which is thesame as your estate tax
exemption, which is $13.61million.
Again, that is supposed to godown, and the proposal is that
(06:48):
Trump is going to keep that13.61 million in place.
All right, I think both ofthose are very much tied
together and I think if onechanges, the other will change
also.
So for 2025, that's a hugepotential, you know.
So for 2025, that's a hugepotential way for people to get
(07:11):
a substantial amount of theirassets outside of their estate
without causing gift tax orestate tax problems, and so I
know a lot of financial advisorsare advising their clients.
This is a good opportunity toset up charitable remainder
trust and irrevocable trust sothat you can get a large portion
of the estate out from yourclient and to the kids, taking
(07:33):
advantage of that $13.61 millionthis year and in 2025.
Ok, so you know, I thinkclients need to be made aware of
that and this is a goodopportunity for you to get
(07:55):
people in and to work withfinancial advisors to say, hey,
let's do an irrevocable trust,let's get this outside of the
estate, utilizing this year'sexemption, because it may not be
here next year.
Ok, all right, so let's get toMedicaid funding.
I think that is always on thechopping block, and when I say
it, I'm talking about Medicaidin general.
As elder law attorneys, wetypically, you know, our focus
(08:21):
tends to be the aging.
Our focus tends to be the aging, the aged and disabled Medicaid
, which is way different thanyounger people, and they're
going to cut waste and fraud,which it's rampant, and I think
(09:08):
they're going to cut theMedicaid payments for clients
who can possibly go to work, whojust may not be going to work
because the current rules don'tencourage it.
You may not like this statement, but it is absolutely true.
There are people out there whocould work and they don't and
have benefits.
It's true, I mean, you may notlike it, but there are people on
Medicaid right now who couldwork and they just choose not to
(09:31):
, and so I think that's alwayssubject to being amended or
looked at or whatever.
And you know, I think, going asfar back as Bill Clinton, bill
Clinton obviously was a Democratand one of the things he he
(09:52):
addressed was um welfareMedicaid and he made people work
to get benefits, and that'sgoing to be fought by a lot of
people and the Democrats inCongress will fight that.
That, I think, is up for afight and we, as other law
attorneys, are not so muchworried about that as we are
(10:15):
with aging funding.
The reason I bring that up is,you know, I don't think aging
funding.
The reason I bring that up is Idon't think aging funding.
The long-term care funding ofMedicaid is going to be adjusted
much.
We're pushing 20 years and Ican't believe this because I
remember watching TV in 2006,february the 9th 2006, when
(10:37):
Congress passed the hugeMedicaid reforms that we now
live under, and I remember Isaid, man, this is going to
change stuff a lot.
I had been in it for about fiveyears at that point and I was
like this is going to change,and so that seems like yesterday
to me, and so that seems likeyesterday to me.
(10:59):
But it's been 20 years.
In 2026, it'll be 20 years, andso I think there may be some
changes there.
And that is a large part ofwhere the Medicaid money goes.
And if they want to save moneyon Medicaid, that's one thing
that they might need to look at.
But these are people who trulycan't work.
(11:21):
I mean, this is the trulydisabled, this is the truly poor
people who can't work, and sothat's why I bring up if they're
wanting to cut the Medicaidbudget, I want to think they're
going to cut it with people whocan work and make it more
difficult to get benefits if youcan work and you simply choose
(11:43):
not to.
All right, I know I may offenda few people with that, but just
bear with me.
Just realize that is a fact andit is going to change.
Or if to save money, that'swhere the change will occur, not
with the other people.
All right, changes to healthcare programs.
(12:15):
And I think he learned hislesson in his last being
president.
In the past, I think he said hewanted to get rid of Obamacare
or that program, and he facedvery substantial issues with
(12:40):
that and I don't think he'sgoing to make that mistake again
.
I will tell you that theappointment of Dr Oz.
Dr Oz, of TV fame, is going tolead the Centers for Medicare
and Medicaid Services and he ranfor the Senate, I think, in
Massachusetts, and lost toFetterman, but I think he is
(13:06):
going to be.
He's going to lead the Centersfor Medicare and Medicaid
Services and that indicates afocus on reducing waste and
fraud and may substantiallychange some of the policy
reforms.
Okay, I think the wholeDepartment of Government
(13:28):
Efficiency DOGE, as they'recalling it run by Elon Musk and
Vivek, they're going to makesome changes.
Okay, vivek, they're going tomake some changes.
Okay, they're going to go inand cut out a lot of waste in
government, and I think thecenters for Medicare and
Medicaid services is subject tothose actions as well as anyone,
(13:55):
and so I think there probablywill be some changes in health
care, for the good, for theworse, I don't know, but I think
we can always address fraud.
There's a lot of fraud, butwhen you do that, it is going to
make it more difficult and, youknow, cause some problems and
some hurt feelings and issues,and so it's going to be
(14:19):
interesting.
But you know, again, we dealwith a segment of the population
that has to have medical careUnder Medicare.
I don't think anything's goingto change for Medicare
substantially.
You know it's going to be there, the Medicare for All.
I don't know that that's youknow.
I think that's off the radarfor now.
(14:41):
Which, had that been passed,had we gone to Medicare for All,
I think a lot of our Medicaidpractices would have diminished.
I don't think it'll everdisappear, because people always
need attorneys to help navigatethrough government appear
(15:02):
because people always needattorneys to help navigate
through government, but I thinkit would have changed our
practice significantly and Idon't see that as being an issue
anymore.
All right, let's talk about andI pulled this list up and in my
research this kept coming up asone of the things that I want
(15:23):
to talk about and again, thistends to be political.
I'm trying my best not to bepolitical in this, I'm just
stating facts.
Okay, so Project 2025, I knowduring the campaign that was
being thrown at Trump as he wasfollowing this, he was part of
(15:44):
that.
You know he was going toimplement 2025, and that is
incorrect.
He has constantly distancedhimself from Project 2025.
That was created by theHeritage Foundation, which is a
conservative think tank, and itwas created by them.
I'm sure they hope Trumpcarries some of these things out
(16:06):
, but it was not a Trump project.
Okay, now, that being said, Ithink Project 2025 is going to
play a part.
There's going to be pressureinto Congress to implement some
of these things, and one of theProject 2025 plans was to
(16:31):
restructure the federal healthcare programs, including
potential cuts to Medicaid andchanges to the Department of
Health and Human Services.
So 2025 looked at this, and youknow, this conservative think
tank looked at the governmentand said one of the things we
want to implement is torestructure federal health care.
(16:54):
We spent a tremendous amount ofmoney, a tremendous amount of
money and again, you can't lookat this system and say it's
(17:16):
perfect that there they do anultrasound and it's a 15 minute
20 at most, it's probably morelike 15 minutes.
It's not invasive, it's anultrasound.
They're just looking at stuffand it's over $3,000 for that 15
(17:37):
minutes and it's like come on,there is no way that that can
cost $3,000.
And that's to private insurance.
I'm sure their charge toMedicare is probably that or
even higher, and you have tounderstand there is so much
(17:57):
loaded billing.
You know there's things goingon there that can be addressed
and I think you know, looking atthat objectively, we as
attorneys, we have to get ourchecks from our clients, and so
we have to check pricing, checkthings and convince people it's
worth it to hire us for them towrite us a check, and that is
(18:20):
not the case in healthcare.
And I think that's one of thebiggest issues is, if you could
shop around and if you had someincentive to save money as a
participant in this, I think wewould.
And I'm not saying I'm againstthat Project 2025 initiative.
(18:42):
I think everything should belooked at.
I think there are ways to dothis, but I bring this up as you
need to familiarize yourselfwith the project's proposals,
because, even though it's not aTrump thing, I think Trump is
going to have some pressure fromothers to implement some of
those things, and so I thinkit's a good idea to at least
(19:05):
peruse that and be familiar withit and, from a non-political
standpoint, understand it's notTrump's thing, it's outside of
Trump, but he may be faced toaddress that.
He may be faced to address that.
(19:28):
I think one of the things wesee with this incoming president
is states' rights.
Okay, I think he is pushingthings down to the states, which
I love.
Okay, I'm not a big federalgovernment guy because federal
government is so out of reach.
You have to travel to DC tomeet with the people making
federal decisions.
They don't care about us.
(19:50):
They're all in this littlehallway of influence where
they're all together and theyall come together and they
honestly don't care about us.
And for us to have anyinfluence, you have to call your
national representative andthey're busy and they have a
bazillion phone calls and abazillion things going on and,
(20:14):
honestly, they're going to talkto the person who's standing in
front of them, which islobbyists standing in front of
them, which is lobbyists, whichare each other, which are
influences from within thatlittle small sphere of influence
.
When you push things down tothe states and let the states
decide.
Now I just have to drive to mylocal capital of my state to
(20:39):
make my voice heard.
I can.
You know, my local staterepresentative is not as busy.
They don't have as manyconstituents and you can truly
find them somewhere, whereverthey live or work or whatever
you can get to them and stand infront of them and make your
voice heard so much easier thantrying to do it in the federal
(21:01):
standpoint.
And you know, we're allattorneys, we all understand
this.
With the Commerce Clause, somany things have been brought
under the federal governmentthat it's difficult to make any
changes, even if yourrepresentative, if your
congressman or your senatoragree with you.
It's difficult for them to makechanges to agencies, because
(21:25):
that's under the president andit's basically the fourth branch
of government that they canmake rules.
They can do things withoutCongress supervision, without
Congress approval.
It's just gotten completely outof hand.
And so I'm a huge fan ofbringing things down to the
state level and saying, hey, Iwant this controlled in the
(21:48):
state, and that's one thingTrump is a fan of is he wants to
bring things to the state, morelocal to you, and so I invite
you, if you're not a Trump fan,to think about it that way, to
think how would this bedifferent?
How much better would it be forme to deal with my state and
(22:10):
the state that I live in be whatI want it to be, rather than
trying to change the entirecountry?
Let's deal with the state and,to be honest, that's how the
Constitution was written.
Let's deal with the state and,to be honest, that's how the
Constitution was written was forthe states.
It's the United States ofAmerica.
They wanted the states to beindependent, small governments
(22:30):
held together by this USgovernment, and the Commerce
Clause stripped power from thestates, gave it to the federal
government, and I think that'sbeen a huge issue with a lot of
our problems, and the states arenow going to excuse me, are now
(22:54):
going to the federal government, to, you know, seek waivers, to
try, to, you know, to influencewhat they think is coming.
And it's essential for you, asan elder law attorney, to stay
up to date with what your stateis doing.
Yes, there are some federalchanges, but states still, under
the Medicaid rules, can submitwaivers, change their waivers,
(23:18):
do things, and so it's importantthat you know what your state's
doing and be influential inthat, as an elder law attorney,
you can be influential.
Your local representativeshould appreciate your input on
that.
Say, hey, look, here's what Ido as a living, here's what I do
(23:41):
for clients and here's how thisproposal is going to change
your constituents across thestate.
And I encourage you to stayinvolved, get involved with your
local representative, call themand say, hey, if you ever have
questions on long-term care oryou know things like this, this
(24:01):
is what I do and I would love totalk to you.
Okay, again, people are allfreaked out about Trump.
If you don't like Trump, thenyou're like, oh, he's going to
do all this stuff.
Well, he's just the president,okay, and I do mean that.
(24:23):
I mean, so many things have tobe done through Congress and so
Trump's not going to come inhere and you know, outlaw
abortion and, you know, do allof this stuff.
He can't do that, okay, and Ithink we as attorneys should not
fall under that mindset as muchas non-attorneys.
(24:45):
But I see some of my attorneyfriends are just totally
freaking out.
It's like, oh, my God, trump'sgoing to be president and all of
this stuff's going to happenand all these things are going
to get changed.
It's like, remember, congresshas to act.
So, you know, significant cutsto Medicaid may face public
resistance.
It's going to face publicresistance.
(25:06):
You know, congress, you know,particularly the House of
Representatives gets voted onevery two years.
They have to be very close tothe public.
They have to be very, you know,open to what the public is
saying and you know, or elsethey're not going to win
re-election, the senators.
Thankfully, they are a littlemore pushed out from that and I
(25:31):
think one thing that I think youshould know this but a lot of
people don't know this is, ifyou remember, under the
Constitution this is a rabbittrail that I'm just going down,
but I think is important.
If you remember from theconstitution, senators were
elected by the states, not bypopular vote, which I thought
(25:51):
was genius, so that you have thehouse of representatives.
You know people, you know ahouse of 439 that represent
people in a section of the state.
Okay, it's their constituents.
And then you have senators whoare elected every six years and
(26:14):
were not elected by the popularvote.
Okay, they were not subject,they were not so much listening
to the public, they werelistening to the states, because
the state legislature electedthe senators, so they had to
work with the states and do whatthe states said.
But still, in Congress, thingswere created by the House, went
(26:35):
to the Senate, or created in theSenate, went to the House.
They still had to agree, butthey brought very, very
different perspectives toapproving laws or approving
bills and creating laws.
There was one that was veryclose to the public and listened
(26:56):
to the public, and then therewas the other House that was
listening more to the states,you know, in a bigger frame, to
make sure the states wereprotected and the states could
stay their little entity ofgovernment.
Well, that got changed.
Okay, the senators were thenelected by the public and so you
now have two houses elected bythe public, and I think that
(27:20):
kind of defeats a big intentionof the Constitution.
But it's how it is and I don'tever see it going back.
I kind of wish it would, but itprobably never will.
However, being elected everysix years kind of removes them
from the current issues.
You know, not being electedevery two years allows them to
(27:43):
kind of step away a little bitand look at the bigger picture
and say, okay, well, I'm goingto be here for six years and so
therefore, I can look at thismore globally rather than very
specific, subject to the whim ofthe people.
So, understand, yes, I thinkthere are going to be some
challenges and I think Trump isgoing to be faced.
(28:05):
Even though both houses arebarely a conservative majority,
it's so close that I think anywaiver by any Republican that
doesn't agree will have verysubstantial influence over this
and can side with the Democratsand cause bills not to be passed
.
So I still think there's thebalance of government.
(28:27):
The checks and balances arestill there and you know, major
wild changes are simply notgoing to happen quickly or
easily, if at all.
All right.
So I hope you're still myfriend.
I hope you'll still listen tome.
(28:47):
I would you know I am open todiscussion on anything.
If you think I was gettingpolitical, you know I try to do
this as much non-political aspossible, but I thought this was
a good way to, I think thoughtthis was a good opportunity to
talk to y'all and let you knowkind of what's coming and to
encourage you to get involved orstay involved and know what's
(29:10):
going on and let's continue toprovide great services to our
clients.
Let's do this well andhopefully you will be back with
me next time.
Thank you all very much andwe'll see you.
Speaker 1 (29:28):
Thank you for joining this episode of the Elder Law
Coach podcast.
For those eager to take theirelder law practice to new
heights and are interested inTodd's acclaimed coaching
program, visitwwwtheelderlawcoachcom.
With Todd Whatley by your side,the journey to becoming an
elder law authority has neverbeen more achievable.
(29:48):
Until next time, keep learning,keep growing and stay
passionate about elder law.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.