To provide for reconciliation pursuant to title II of H. Con. Res. 14, colloquially known as the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act", became law on July 4, 2025.
The "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" (the "Act") became law on July 4, 2025, and made permanent many of the tax reforms implemented by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act signed in 2017. In particular, the Act permanently increases the federal estate and gift tax exemption and the federal generation-skipping transfer tax exemption to $15,000,000 per person, adjusted annually for inflation, effective January 1, 2026.
The annual gift tax exclusion remains the same, currently set at $19,000 per recipient for 2025, with continued annual inflation adjustments.
Herren v. George S., Court of Appeals Case No. A171257, First District, Div. Three, Filed March 3, 2025.
Summary: An elder abuse restraining order (EARO) may be issued without adjudication of the elder’s capacity, and an attorney’s procurement of an elder's signature on the attorney's fee agreement constituted financial elder abuse under Welfare and Institutions Code Section 15610.30(a)(3).
George S., a wealthy 86-year old man with severe dementia and visual impairment, has two daughter, Susannah and Gabriella. In 2022, George S. restated his trust and designated Susannah, not Gabriella, as a co-trustee in the event of George's incapacity. In June 2022, George was seen by a psychologist, who diagnosed him with moderate dementia. In November 2022, George signed a durable power of attorney appointing Susannah as his attorney-in fact. By early 2023, Susannah began managing George's caregivers, and moved George to live closer to her. Around that time, two doctors determined that George lacked capacity to make medical and financial decisions.
According to Gabriella, in April 2024, George asked Gabriella for help finding counsel, after which Gabriella contacted a trust and estate attorney. In May 2024, without Susannah or the caregivers' prior knowledge, Gabriella allowed the attorney to meet with George at George's house. After insisting that George's caregiver leave George and the attorney alone, the attorney met with George for an hour or more. At that meeting, the attorney obtained George's signature on a fee agreement that the attorney brought, even though the attorney observed George could not read it and the attorney had to tell George where to sign.
After the attorney sent a demand letter for payment of a $100,000 retainer to the co-trustees of George's trust, Susannah, acting as George's attorney-in-fact, filed a request for an elder abuse restraining order against the attorney (and against Gabriella). The attorney objected to the restraining order stating that George retained the attorney to explore filing a petition to determine his competence, and the attorney believed George could retain her. After a lengthy evidentiary hearing, the trial court issued a restraining order against the attorney finding that the attorney's committed financial elder abuse under Welfare and Institutions Code Section 15610.30(a)(3), because (1) the attorney exerted undue influence to obtain a property right from George, namely, an agreement to pay a $100,000 retainer; and (2) the attorney knew or should have known the attorney's conduct would be harmful to George.
The attorney appealed on several grounds including that Susannah could not seek a restraining order without first rebutting the presumption that George had capacity to retain the attorney, and that the trial court could not issue the restraining order without first determining George's competence. The attorney also asserted that there was no substantial evidence that her conduct qualified as elder abuse.
The appellate court disagreed, concluding that (1) a restraining order may be sought and issued without a capacity determination; (2) the attorney's fee agreement is a property right; and (3) substantial evidence supported the trial court's determination that the attorney committed financial elder abuse by exerting undue influence in meeting with George alone to secure his consent to legal representation and a $100,000 retainer fee, even though the attorney knew George had been declared incompetent by two medical professionals.