A version of this article first appeared in CNBC’s Inside Wealth newsletter with Robert Frank, a weekly guide to the high-net-worth investor and consumer. Sign up to receive future editions, straight to your inbox.
The tightening presidential race has touched off a wave of tax planning by ultra-wealthy investors, especially given fears of a higher estate tax, according to advisors and tax attorneys.
The scheduled “sunset” of a generous provision in the estate tax next year has taken on new urgency as the odds of a divided government or Democratic president have increased, tax experts say. Under current law, individuals can transfer up to $13.61 million (and couples can send up to $27.22 million) to family members or beneficiaries without owing estate or gift taxes.
The benefit is scheduled to expire at the end of 2025 along with the other individual provisions of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. If it expires, the estate and gift tax exemption will fall by about half. Individuals will only be able to gift about $6 million to $7 million, and that rises to $12 million to $14 million for couples. Any assets transferred above those amounts will be subject to the 40% transfer tax.
Wealth advisors and tax attorneys said expectations of a Republican sweep in the first half of the year led many wealthy Americans to take a wait-and-see approach, since former President Donald Trump wants to extend the 2017 tax cuts for individuals.
Vice President Kamala Harris has advocated higher taxes for those those making more than $400,000.
With Harris and Trump essentially tied in the polls, the odds have increased that the estate tax benefits will expire — either through gridlock or tax hikes.
“There is a little increased urgency now,” said Pam Lucina, chief fiduciary officer for Northern Trust and head of its trust and advisory practice. “Some people have been holding off until now.”
The sunset of the exemption, and the response by the wealthy, has broad ripple effects on inheritances and the trillions of dollars set to pass from older to younger generations in the coming years. More than $84 trillion is expected to be transferred to younger generations in the coming decades, and the estate tax “cliff” is set to accelerate many of those gifts this year and next.
The biggest question facing wealthy families is how much to give, and when, in advance of any estate tax change. If they do nothing, and the estate exemption drops, they risk owing taxes on estates over $14 million if they die. On the other hand, if they give away the maximum now, and the estate tax provisions are extended, they may wind up with “givers’ remorse” — which comes when donors gave away money unnecessarily due to fears of tax changes that never happened.
“With givers’ remorse, we want to make sure clients look at the different scenarios,” Lucina said. “Will they need a lifestyle change? If it’s an irrevocable gift, can they afford it?”
Advisors say clients should make sure their gift decisions are driven as much by family dynamics and personalities as they are by taxes. While giving the maximum of $27.22 million may make sense today from a tax perspective, it may not always make sense from a family perspective.
“The first thing we do is separate out those individuals who were going to make the gift anyway from those who have never done it and are only motivated to do it now because of the sunset,” said Mark Parthemer, chief wealth strategist and regional director of Florida for Glenmede. “While it may be a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity as it relates to the exemption, it’s not the only thing. We want individuals to have peace of mind regardless of how it plays out.”
Parthemer said today’s wealthy parents and grandparents need to make sure they are psychologically comfortable making large gifts.
“They’re asking ‘What if I live so long I outlive my money,'” Parthemer said. “We can do the math and figure out what makes sense. But there is also a psychological component to that. As people age, a lot of us become more concerned about our financial independence, regardless of whether the math tells us we’re independent or not.”
Get Inside Wealth directly to your inbox
Some families may also fear their kids aren’t ready for such large amounts. Wealthy families who planned to make big gifts years from now are feeling pressure from the tax change to go ahead with it now.
“Especially with families with younger children, a primary concern is having donors’ remorse,” said Ann Bjerke, head of the advanced planning group at UBS.
Advisors say families can structure their gifts to be flexible — gifting to a spouse first, for instance, before it goes to the kids. Or setting up trusts that trickle out the money over time and reduce the changes of “sudden wealth syndrome” for kids.
For families that plan to take advantage of the estate tax window, however, the time is now. It can take months to draft and file transfers. During a similar tax cliff in 2010, so many families rushed to process gifts and set up trusts that attorneys became overwhelmed and many clients were left stranded. Advisors say today’s gifters face the same risk if they wait until after the election.
“We’re already seeing some attorneys start to turn away new clients,” Lucina said.
Another risk with rushing is trouble with the IRS. Parthemer said the IRS recently unwound a strategy used by one couple, where the husband used his exemption to gift his kids money and gave his wife funds to regift using her own exemption.
“Both gifts were attributed to the wealthy spouse, triggering a gift tax,” he said. “You need to have time to measure twice and cut once, as they say.”
While advisors and tax attorneys said their wealthy clients are also calling them about other tax proposals in the campaign — from higher capital gains and corporate taxes to taxing unrealized gains — the estate tax sunset is far and away the most pressing and likely change.
“In the past month, inquiries have accelerated over the [estate exemption],” Bjerke said. “A lot of people were sitting on the sidelines waiting to implement their wealth-planning strategies. Now, more people are executing.”
The Senate Judiciary Committee convened on Tuesday for a hearing on the alleged Visa–Mastercard “duopoly,” which committee members from both sides of the aisle say has left retailers and other small businesses with no ability to negotiate interchange fees on credit card transactions.
“This is an odd grouping. The most conservative and the most liberal members happen to agree that we have to do something about this situation,” committee chair and Democratic Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin said.
Interchange fees, also known as swipe fees, are paid from a merchant’s bank account to the cardholder’s bank, whenever a customer uses a credit card in a retail purchase. Visa and Mastercard have a combined market cap of more than $1 trillion, and control 80% of the market.
“In 2023 alone, Visa and Mastercard charged merchants more than $100 billion in credit card fees, mostly in the form of interchange fees,” Durbin told the committee.
Durbin, along with Republican Kansas Sen. Roger Marshall, have co-sponsored the bipartisan Credit Card Competition Act, which takes aim at Visa and Mastercard’s market dominance by requiring banks with more than $100 billion in assets to offer at least one other payment network on their cards, besides Visa and Mastercard.
“This way, small businesses would finally have a real choice: they can route credit card transactions on the Visa or Mastercard network and continue to pay interchange fees that often rank as their second or biggest expense, or they could select a lower cost alternative,” Durbin told the committee.
Visa and Mastercard, however, stand by their swipe fees.
“We consider them incentives, some people might consider them penalties. But if you can adopt new technology that reduces the risk and takes fraud out of the system and improves streamlined processing, then you would qualify for lower interchange rates,” said Bill Sheedy, senior advisor to Visa CEO Ryan McInerney. “It’s very expensive to issue a product and to provide payment guarantee and online customer service, zero liability. All of those things, and many more, senator, get factored into interchange [fees].”
The executives also warned against the Credit Card Competition Act, with Sheedy claiming that it “would remove consumer control over their own payment decisions, reduce competition, impose technology sharing mandates and pick winners and losers by favoring certain competitors over others.”
“Why do we know this? Because we’ve seen it before,” Mastercard President of Americas Linda Kirkpatrick said, in reference to the Durbin amendment to the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act, which required the Fed to limit fees on retailers for transactions using debit cards. “Since debit regulation took hold, debit rewards were eliminated, fees went up, access to capital diminished, and competition was stifled.”
But the current high credit card swipe fees for retailers translate to higher prices for consumers, the National Retail Federation told the committee in a letter ahead of the hearing. The Credit Card Competition Act, the retail industry’s largest trade association wrote, will deliver “fairness and transparency to the payment system and relief to American business and consumers.”
“When we think of consumer spending, credit card swipe fees are not the first thing that comes to mind, yet those fees are a surprisingly large part of consumer spending,” Notre Dame University law professor Roger Alford said. “Last year, the average American spent $1,100 in swipe fees, more than they spent on pets, coffee or alcohol.”
Visa and Mastercard agreed to a $30 billion settlement in March meant to reduce their swipe fees by four basis points for three years, but a federal judge rejected the settlement in June, saying they could afford to pay more.
Visa is also battling a Justice Department lawsuit filed in September. The payment network is accused of maintaining an illegal monopoly over debit card payment networks, which has affected “the price of nearly everything,” according to Attorney General Merrick Garland.
Check out the companies making headlines in extended trading. Keysight Technologies — Shares added more than 8%. The electronics test and measurement equipment company’s fiscal fourth-quarter results beat analyst estimates on the top and bottom lines. Keysight also issued a rosy outlook for the current quarter, anticipating adjusted earnings ranging from $1.65 to $1.71 per share, while analysts polled by FactSet called for $1.57 a share. Dolby Laboratories —The audio technology company advanced 10% after its fiscal fourth-quarter earnings of 61 cents per share topped Street estimates of 45 cents per share, per FactSet. Dolby also increased its dividend by 10% to 33 cents a share. Powell Industries — The manufacturer of electrical equipment slipped almost 14%. Net new orders for fiscal 2024 came in at $1.1 billion, compared to $1.4 billion in the year-ago period. The company noted that the decline was largely due to the inclusion of three large megaprojects in Powell’s oil and gas and petrochemical sectors in fiscal 2023. Azek Company — Shares of the residential siding and trim company ticked up 2% after its fiscal fourth-quarter results beat analyst estimates. Azek reported earnings of 29 cents per share on revenue of $348.2 million. Analysts surveyed by FactSet were looking for earnings of 27 cents per share and $339.1 million in revenue. La-Z-Boy — The furniture company gained nearly 3% following fiscal second-quarter results. La-Z-Boy reported earnings of 71 cents per share on revenue of $521 million. That’s an improvement from the year-ago period, in which the company posted earnings of 63 cents per share and revenue of $511.4 million. La-Z-Boy also upped its quarterly dividend by 10% to 22 cents per share.
Check out the companies making headlines in midday trading: Walmart — The big-box retailer saw shares jump nearly 5% to hit a record after the retail giant topped fiscal third-quarter earnings and revenue expectations. The retailer also hiked its outlook again as it saw growth in e-commerce and improvements in sales outside of the grocery aisles. Super Micro Computer — The server maker surged 29.2% after announcing BDO as its new auditor to replace Ernst & Young, which stepped down last month. Super Micro also provided a plan to the Nasdaq on how it will comply with the exchange’s rules. Lowe’s — The home improvement retailer dropped more than 3% after saying it expects sales to decline in 2024 . That guidance overshadowed a better-than-expected third-quarter report. Kraft Heinz — The packaged food company dipped about 1% after a Piper Sandler downgrade to neutral from overweight. The investment firm said Kraft Heinz is struggling to turn around a retail sales decline, including in its Lunchables brand, and that the potential role of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in the upcoming Trump administration could be a risk. Insmed — Shares rallied more than 8% after the drugmaker terminated a $500 million equity sales agreement with health-care investment bank Leerink Partners. Viking Holdings — Shares declined 1% even after the travel company exceeded Wall Street’s third-quarter estimates. Viking posted adjusted earnings of 89 cents per share on revenue of $1.68 billion. Analysts polled by FactSet forecast earnings of 84 cents per share, excluding items, on revenue of $1.67 billion. The company also reported strong advance bookings for the 2025 season. Symbotic — The automation technology company soared 26.2% after topping revenue estimates in the fiscal fourth quarter. Revenue came in at $576.8 million in the fourth quarter, beating the $470.2 million estimated by analysts, per FactSet. Symbotic also offered strong current-quarter top-line guidance. H & R Block , Intuit — The tax filing companies both fell after The Washington Post reported that President-elect Donald Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency commission is looking toward a new mobile app for filing taxes. Intuit shares pulled back 5.4%, while H & R Block declined 7.4%. — CNBC’s Jesse Pound, Yun Li, Sarah Min, Alex Harring, Sean Conlon and Pia Singh contributed reporting.