Source: http://www.ncbrc.org/tag/inherited-iras/
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 17:00:29+00:00

Document:
The interpretation in Clark v. Rameker of the federal exemption relating to inherited IRAs does not preclude a state from providing a broader exemption for inherited IRAs in its exemption scheme.
In other Supreme Court news, the Court granted certiorari in the case of Clark v. Rameker (In re Clark), No. 13-299. In that case, the Seventh Circuit created a split in the circuits when it held that a debtor may not exempt her inherited IRA in bankruptcy. In re Clark, No. 12-1241 & 12-1255 (April 23, 2013). The Fifth Circuit had reached the opposite conclusion in Chilton v. Moser, 674 F.3d 486 (5th Cir. 2012). NCBRC will file an amicus brief on behalf of the NACBA membership in this important case.
Despite the recent holding to the contrary by the seventh circuit, the court in In re Trawick, No. 12-12581 (Bankr. C.D. Cal. Aug. 29, 2013), held that inherited IRAs may be exempt under section 522(b)(3)(C). Exemptibility is contingent upon two elements: 1) that the IRA has received a favorable determination under IRC section 7805, or is otherwise in compliance with the requirement of the IRC, and 2) that the funds in the account are “retirement” funds. Here, the court noted that there is a split in the circuits as to whether inherited IRAs can ever be exempt, under the second factor, since the debtor himself did not contribute the funds toward his own retirement. See, e.g. Chilton v. Moser, 674 F.3d 486 (5th Cir. 2012); Mullen v. Hamlin, 465 B.R 863 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2012); Doeling v. Nessa, 426 B.R. 312 (B.A.P. 8th Cir. 2010) (exempt); In re Clark, 714 F.3d 559 (7th Cir. 2013), petition for cert. filed, No.13-299 (Sept. 6, 2013) (never exempt).
On May 4, NACBA filed an amicus brief in the consolidated cases of Rameker v. Clark, No. 12-1241 and, Adili v. Clark, No. 12-1255 (7th Cir.) on the issue of whether a debtor may exempt an inherited IRA under section 522(b)(3)(C). NACBA has been actively involved in the successful presentation of this issue in courts around the country, arguing that the plain language of the Bankruptcy Code and the Internal Revenue Code militates in favor of recognizing the exemption. The Bankruptcy Code exempts from the debtor’s estate “retirement funds to the extent that those fund are in a fund or account that is exempt from taxation under section 401, 403, 408, 408A, 414, 457, or 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.” Section 408(e) of the IRC provides that any IRA, including one that is inherited from a non-spouses, is exempt from taxation.
The trustee argued that inherited IRAs do not qualify as “retirement funds” as they are not funds that the debtor personally amassed for retirement purposes. The court found that the plain language of the Code does not limit “retirement funds” to those contributed by the debtor. As the funds at issue were contributed to a retirement fund they retain their status as “retirement funds” upon transfer. As to the second requirement for exemption, the court found that, under section 408(e) of the Tax Code, inherited IRAs enjoy the same tax exempt status as those funded by the debtor’s own contributions. Therefore the second prong of the exemption test was met. Finally, the court found support for its decision in section 522(b)(4)(C) which provides that certain transfers of IRA accounts similar to the type in an inherited IRA, do not alter the exempt status of the account.
NACBA filed an amicus brief in support of debtors’ position in this case.
The Fifth Circuit heard oral arguments on this issue on February 8th in the case of In re Chilton, No. 11-40377. NACBA filed an amicus brief in that case as well.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.