Welcome to the Valensi Rose PLC Blog
To contact one of our attorneys please visit VRMLAW.COM

Tuesday, January 10, 2012

What You Should Know About Title Insurance (Part 2)

In a prior blog, we introduced the two types of title insurance available in California to protect a buyer against claims related to title.   

The blog discussed the coverage provided and excluded by a standard CLTA policy.  A standard CLTA policy covers the property owner and the lender.  It does not cover a subsequent purchaser and it does not automatically cover a trust if the insured buyer transfers title to his or her family trust.  However, endorsements for such transfers are available.  Typically a title insurer is not liable to the insured if the property in question is smaller than stated in the policy so long as the boundary lines are properly described in the policy.  A standard CLTA policy insures the owner against any loss associated with the property not being vested in the name stated on the policy.  It also protects against any losses arising out of any recorded lien or encumbrance with the exception of those which were listed on the policy.  

An encumbrance refers to taxes, assessments, and all liens. Not all recorded documents, however, are encumbrances.  Thus, a CLTA policy will not cover a recorded notice by the department of building and safety of a violation of building code(s).  Such a violation affects the market value of the property, not the marketability of the property –i.e. title. The same holds true for environmental cleanup costs – title insurance does not cover the cost of removing hazardous waste material.  A CLTA policy covers losses suffered by an insured based upon the lack of a right of access to an open street or highway.  Thus, if the parcel in question is truly landlocked, the policy would cover the cost of obtaining physical access to an open street or highway.  However, that policy provision is not triggered unless the parcel is truly landlocked. If the parcel has access to an open street or highway which would be impractical, difficult or expensive to create, the coverage is not triggered since access must be entirely lacking.   

Standard CLTA policies expressly exclude coverage for laws, ordinances and governmental regulations (including building and zoning laws).  A recorded notice of a building code violation might be covered if it was not listed as an exclusion in the policy.  In addition, there is no coverage for losses resulting from title defects, liens or encumbrance created, assumed or agreed to by the insured, unrecorded but known to the insured at time of purchase and not disclosed in writing to the insurer, losses caused by title defects, liens or encumbrances created after the date of the policy or disclosed by the seller to the buyer such as unrecorded easements claimed by adjoining parcel owners which are not disclosed in the public records, nor are conflicts in boundaries or any such facts that a correct survey would disclose covered.  The insured can buy extended coverage (an ALTA policy) at generally twice the premium which will be discussed in a later blog.

Wednesday, January 4, 2012

What You Should Know About Title Insurance (Part 1)

When you buy real property it is customary for the purchase agreement to require that a seller also provide  (as a condition for sale) a policy insuring title.  What exactly is covered however by the policy that the seller provides the buyer?  And, more importantly, why should you, the buyer care?  There are generally two kinds of policies that cover buyers of California real estate.  The first is called a California Land Title Association Policy (referred to as a CLTA Policy).  The second is an American Land Title Association Policy (referred to as an ALTA Policy).   

The CLTA policy is more restrictive than the ALTA policy which typically includes a survey of the property's boundaries, is more expensive and takes longer to obtain.  The basic difference between the two polities is that the CLTA policy primarily insures the buyer against title defects discoverable only through an examination of the public records.  
An ALTA on the other hand policy extends to certain off-record title defects.  These off-record title defects can include building permit violations, post–policy encroachments and forgeries.  Generally a title policy will insure against defects which affect the marketability of title.  Marketability of title coverage does not typically include defects which affect the market value of property.  Marketability of title and market value of property two distinct concepts which buyers must understand when acquiring title insurance.   In subsequent blogs, we will address these concepts as well as standard endorsements and exclusions in CLTA and ALTA policies.

Contact Laurie Murphy at mlm@vrmlaw.com

Monday, December 5, 2011

California Creates Two New Business Entities


Governor Brown recently signed two new laws which have the effect of creating two new classes of corporations in California.  These laws give for-profit corporations the ability, in certain circumstances, to engage in activities that have been traditionally reserved for non-profit organizations.  These new corporations are called the flexible purpose corporation and the benefit corporation.

The Flexible Purpose Corporation (SB201)
A flexible purpose corporation is a corporation that designates in its articles of incorporation a special purpose, which may include charitable and other public purpose activities traditionally undertaken by nonprofit public benefit corporations.

A flexible purpose corporation permits its shareholders to designate its special purpose.  The special purpose designation allows the board of directors to consider not only the best interest of the corporation and the shareholders, but also whether the corporation's actions will further its special purpose.  The flexible purpose corporation is required to prepare an annual report which measures its success in carrying out its special purpose and report all material actions taken to carry out the special purpose.  It must also prepare a current report on expenditures made in pursuit of the special purpose if the expenditures will have a material adverse impact on the flexible purpose corporation's profits.  Current reports and portions of the annual report must be made publicly available on the corporation's website.  An existing corporation or other business entity may convert to a flexible purpose corporation by a two-thirds vote, subject to dissenters' rights.

The Benefit Corporation (AB361)
A benefit corporation must adopt the purpose of creating a general public benefit, which is defined as a material positive impact on society and the environment.  A benefit corporation may also adopt a specific public benefit from a list of seven categories identified in the law.  In carrying out their fiduciary duties, directors are permitted to consider the best interest of the benefit corporation, which is deemed to include the impact on employees, customers, shareholders, the community and society, and the environment.  In making its assessment, a benefit corporation must use a third-party standard selected by the boards of directors.  This corporation type must also prepare an annual benefit report explaining, among other things, whether the corporation pursued a general public benefit, the ways in which it pursued that public benefit, and the extent to which those benefits were created, as measured by the third-party standard.  The corporation's annual benefit report must be made publicly available through its website.  Existing corporations and other business entities may convert to a benefit corporation by a two-thirds vote, subject to dissenters' rights.

Whether or not there is an advantage to using either of these new corporations will have to be determined over time.  Both laws are very detailed additions to the Corporations Code and should be thoroughly reviewed.
  
SB201 relates to the Flexible Purpose Corporation and AB361 relates to the Benefit Corporation.  Both laws go into effect on January 1, 2012.  For more information or to evaluate the pros and cons of these new corporate structure, please contact me arg@vrmlaw.com

Friday, November 18, 2011

Estate Planning Alert: Potential Changes from the Congressional Super Committee


Geoff WegThe Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (the "Super Committee"), a 12 member bipartisan Congressional committee, is scheduled to announce its proposals on Wednesday, November 23rd for reducing the national deficit by at least $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years. While the Super Committee's proposals are technically secret until November 23rd, rumors have begun to circulate among tax and financial advisors about possible changes to the current estate, gift and generation-skipping transfer tax laws, including a proposed early reduction of the $5 million estate, gift, and generation-skipping transfer tax exemption.  The exemption is currently set at $5 million through December 31, 2012, after which it will revert to $1 million barring further congressional action. Other rumored changes include a return to higher estate, gift, and generation-skipping transfer tax rates, imposing minimum terms on grantor-retained annuity trusts, and limiting or eliminating valuation discounts for minority interests in entities. It is possible that the Super Committee may recommend these changes to become effective as early as November 23, 2011.

Although rumors of an immediate reduction in the Federal gift tax exemption are unsubstantiated and information on specific proposals of the Super Committee is not yet available, the possibility of such a reduction has been widely discussed by practitioners around the country. Therefore, we wanted to share this information with you in the event you or your clients are considering utilizing your $5 million Federal gift tax exemption. If you or your clients are considering making any gifts in 2011, it may be advisable to complete these gifts prior to November 23rd, if possible. Additionally, you may want to consider accelerating gifts that you otherwise planned to make in 2012 to avoid any potential impact from any Super Committee proposals.

Until Congress enacts a long-term extension or reformation of the current estate and gift tax system, the rumors and speculation will persist. Rather than add to the speculation about what might happen, we note the following points and opportunities that indicate now is a good time to take advantage of the current $5 million gift tax exemption:
  •  Even without any legislative action, under current law the current $5 million exemption and 35% rate will revert at the end of 2012 to a $1 million exemption and a 55% rate.
  •  In recent years, the Treasury Department has consistently recommended changes to substantially reduce the effectiveness of certain widely used planning techniques, including a significant reduction in the availability of valuation discounts applicable to transfers of limited partnership interests and other minority interests in family controlled entities, and an increase in the minimum term of grantor retained annuity trusts ("GRATs') from two to ten years.
  • The benchmark interest rates that are required to be used in many estate planning transactions are at historically low levels. For example, the November rate used for GRATs is 1.4%, while the November rate for annual interest paid on a short term private loans is 0.19%.
  • The current volatility in the financial markets may create favorable valuations of interests in closely-held entities for transfer tax purposes.
Many observers consider a sudden adverse change in legislation unlikely.  However it would be wise to remember that the legislation implementing the current favorable structure was enacted suddenly last December without any significant public discussion, and was not anticipated by many observers.  With the current emphasis on deficit reduction, it is plausible that Congress could very quickly enact legislation that would have substantial adverse impacts on the estate and gift taxes applicable to standard wealth-transfer techniques.

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

Geoffrey Weg to Speak at Cal Poly Pomona Inaugural Tax Institute Seminar On October 28

Geoffrey A. Weg is a tax attorney with the law firm where he practices tax and estate planning, tax controversy, and general corporate law. He is currently on the Executive Committee of the California State Bar Taxation Section, and also the current Chair of the Taxation Section of the Beverly Hills Bar Association. He has received an LL.M. in Taxation at Loyola Law School, graduating with Distinction.

Cal Poly Pomona Inaugural Tax Institute
Date: October 28, 2011
Time: 7:30am – 5:00pm
Location: Sheraton Fairplex Hotel and Conference Center
601 West McKinley Avenue Pomona, California, 91768
To register logon to Cal Poly Pomona Inaugural Tax Institute
Or call the Accounting Department at (909) 869-2327 Mon-Fri, 9 a.m.- 4:30 p.m.
or email nsmiller@csupomona.edu

Friday, October 21, 2011

Business Alert: SB 459 Imposes New Substantial Penalties For Miscategorizing Independent Contractors

Many businesses seek to cut costs by categorizing employees as independent contractors. By doing so, they avoid additional employment costs such as benefits, worker's compensation and unemployment. Governor Brown recently Senate Bill 459 into law (among other employment bills) which makes employers liable for civil penalties of $5,000 to $15,000 for each violation of “willful misclassification” of employees as independent contractors. In addition, if it is found that the employer has a pattern and practice of misclassifying independent contractors, the penalties can increase to a minimum of $10,000 to $25,000 per violation. The new law adds Sections 226.8 and 2753 to the Labor Code. 
In addition to the substantial civil penalties, employers who violate the law are also required to post a notice on their website, or if the employer does not have a website they must post it in an area available to employees and the general public, for one year about the violation.
The new law also
  • Prohibits the willful misclassification of workers as independent contractors to avoid properly classifying them as employees.
  • Prohibits charging misclassified workers any fees or making deductions from their compensation where those acts would have violated the law if the individuals had not been mischaracterized.
  • Gives the Labor and Workforce Development Agency authority to assess penalties and take other action against violators, and requires it to report violators who are licensed contractors to the Contractors' State License Board; further it requires the Contractors' State License Board, once notified, to bring an action against the contractor.
  • Subjects non-lawyers who advise an employer to misclassify a worker to joint and several liability with the employer.
This new law makes it of paramount importance that employers exercise caution when characterizing workers as independent contractors.

Thursday, October 6, 2011

Gregory G. Gorman Joins the Litigation Group

We are pleased to announce that Gregory G. Gorman has joined the firm. Mr. Gorman is a commercial, real estate and employment law trial lawyer who for 25 years has successfully represented numerous clients in high profile cases and multi-million dollar claims.
“I’m thrilled to be joining a team of such talented and accomplished lawyers,” said Mr. Gorman. “They’re truly a group of outstanding attorneys that not only inspire me, but most importantly, motivate me to continue to excel at law.”
Mr. Gorman has been retained as trial counsel in numerous commercial real estate and employment law cases. He uses his litigation expertise as a tool to obtain efficient results for his clients. His high-profile cases include: A jury awarded his client more than $8 million for fraud; he defeated a claim for negligent misrepresentation and breach of contract even though his client did not disclose all of the problems challenging a shopping mall; and he defeated a wrongful termination claim in which the plaintiff and defendant were having an affair.
Mr. Gorman’s business and strategic acumen is polished from years of practical experience as managing counsel of a Fortune 400 company and general counsel to several start-up and mid-sized companies. Mr. Gorman recently assisted a client through two workforce reductions and the termination of underperforming employees within the scope of the ADA, FMLA and ADEA – all without a lawsuit. He has represented both plaintiffs and defendants in wage and hour class actions.
Mr. Gorman teaches executive legal and ethical decision making, business modeling and business law in an organizational consulting doctoral program at Phillips Graduate Institute. He has been hired to train boards regarding their responsibilities and turnaround strategies.
He was recognized as a "Super Lawyer" for his work in real estate and litigation before becoming managing counsel in charge of development for Yum Brands, which owns the Taco Bell, Kentucky Fried Chicken and Pizza Hut brands, among others.
Mr. Gorman earned a Juris Doctorate from the Northwestern University School of Law in 1987 and a bachelor’s degree in journalism from Northwestern’s Medill School of Journalism in 1984.