Connelly Supreme Court Ruling: What it Means for Your Business

19 Jun 2024 Connelly Supreme Court Ruling: What it Means for Your Business

Authored by RSM US LLP, June 19, 2024

Executive summary:

• A recent Supreme Court case could reduce the value your heirs receive for a closely held business interest by up to 40% of any life insurance proceeds used in a redemption buy/sell arrangement
• The Supreme Court upheld the lower court decision that estate tax value was not reduced by the redemption obligation funded by life insurance to buy back a deceased owner’s shares
• Take action now: If your company has a redemption agreement funded by life insurance, review your agreement and consider making changes to avoid an unintended result

The recent Connelly Supreme Court case examined how life insurance used in business succession plans affects estate taxes.

What are the details of the case?

The case addressed whether buy/sell redemption obligation funded by life insurance proceeds should reduce the company’s estate tax value.

Michael Connelly and Thomas Connelly, the sole shareholders of Crown C Supply, had an agreement that the corporation would redeem a deceased shareholder’s shares using company-owned life insurance. When Michael passed away, the business used the life insurance proceeds to buy out Michael’s share of the company. Michael’s estate did not include the value of the life insurance proceeds in the calculation of the company’s value included in his estate, arguing that the value was offset by the company’s obligation to redeem the estate’s shares.

The IRS argued that the redemption obligation should not reduce the calculation of the company value included in Michael’s estate for estate tax purposes, leading to a higher estate tax bill. The table below compares the estate’s valuation of the company with the IRS’s valuation for estate tax purposes.

Assuming there was no adjustment to the proceeds the result of this change could be catastrophic to the heirs of a closely held business. In Michael’s example it cut the value received by his heirs in half from the intended $1.81M to $0.88M.

What did the Supreme Court decide?

The Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, ruled that the proceeds from the life insurance policy used to buy out the deceased owner’s share of the business were not offset by the redemption obligation.  The Court reasoned that the appropriate estate tax value should not affect the economic value for the remaining owners. Essentially, if each share was worth $100,000 prior to the redemption it should be worth the same amount following the redemption.

There is uncertainty if this decision would have been different had the parties involved had not been family members. However, the logic utilized could create issues for certain redemption arrangements.

What does this mean for your business?

For businesses, especially closely held entities, this decision underscores the importance of understanding how life insurance proceeds used for share redemptions are treated for estate tax purposes. In certain situations, this answer could decrease the amount passed to your heirs by up to 40% of the total life insurance proceeds.

Should you revisit your redemption agreement after the Connelly case?

• Does your redemption agreement use company-owned life insurance?
• Can your agreement set the redemption price at something other than the estate tax value?
• Are the parties involved in your buy-sell family members?
• Are you certain of the tax treatment of your existing redemption agreement?
• Have there been significant changes in ownership structure or overall value of your business since the agreement was drafted?

If you answered yes to any of these questions, there are solutions. Your tax advisor can help you assess the potential impact on your estate and explore alternative structures to ensure the agreement aligns with your goals and minimizes estate tax liability.

This article was written by Carol Warley, Andy Swanson, Amber Waldman, Michael Reeves and originally appeared on 2024-06-19. Reprinted with permission from RSM US LLP.
© 2024 RSM US LLP. All rights reserved. https://rsmus.com/insights/tax-alerts/2024/connelly-supreme-court-ruling-what-it-means-for-your-business.html

RSM US LLP is a limited liability partnership and the U.S. member firm of RSM International, a global network of independent assurance, tax and consulting firms. The member firms of RSM International collaborate to provide services to global clients, but are separate and distinct legal entities that cannot obligate each other. Each member firm is responsible only for its own acts and omissions, and not those of any other party. Visit rsmus.com/about for more information regarding RSM US LLP and RSM International.

The information contained herein is general in nature and based on authorities that are subject to change. RSM US LLP guarantees neither the accuracy nor completeness of any information and is not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for results obtained by others as a result of reliance upon such information. RSM US LLP assumes no obligation to inform the reader of any changes in tax laws or other factors that could affect information contained herein. This publication does not, and is not intended to, provide legal, tax or accounting advice, and readers should consult their tax advisors concerning the application of tax laws to their particular situations. This analysis is not tax advice and is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for purposes of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer.