Joe Paterno Turned Home Over last July to Wife for $1

STATE COLLEGE, Pa. — Joe Paterno transferred full ownership of his house to his wife, Sue, for $1 in July, less than four months before a sexual abuse scandal engulfed his Penn State football program and the university.

Documents filed in Centre County, Pa., show that on July 21, Paterno’s house near campus was turned over to “Suzanne P. Paterno, trustee” for a dollar plus “love and affection.” The couple had previously held joint ownership of the house, which they bought in 1969 for $58,000.

According to documents filed with the county, the house’s fair-market value was listed at $594,484.40. Wick Sollers, a lawyer for Paterno, said in an e-mail that the Paternos had been engaged in a “multiyear estate planning program,” and the transfer “was simply one element of that plan.” He said it had nothing to do with the scandal.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/16/sports/ncaafootball/in-july-paterno-transferred-ownership-of-home-to-his-wife-for-1.html

Hmmm...now why would he do that 4 months ago?:shrug:

to lower tax liability.

To me the key items were his personal attorney saying it was part of a “multiyear estate planning program,” and the transfer “was simply one element of that plan.”

The other part was "It appears the family house had been the subject of years of complex and confusing transactions. "

It seems the most probable given his age.

The transfer is likely one of many from Joe Paterno to various family members. He will be sued, not the family members.

The goal is to minimize the estate

There's nothing particularly unusual about an 84-year-old man doing this.

In the case of my in-laws they are alive but having health problems. My husband has taken over the trust, if he is unable or unwilling to oversee it his sister takes over. Provisions are very clear on how remaining assets are to be divided.

Estate planning is common for elderly couples with assets, but the $1 transfer to his wife seems odd. Looks like he's sheltering assets there.

they have had years to do this. If it were for taxes I would bet Joe was getting all sorts of advice to do this long ago.

"Experts in estate planning and tax law, in interviews, cautioned that it would be hard to determine the Paternos’ motivation simply from the available documents. It appears the family house had been the subject of years of complex and confusing transactions. "

I take that to mean there have been tax moves going on for some time now.

Anything and everything that can be done to move assets to the next generation without paying estate taxes will be done. For most people, the estate tax is irrelevant or affects only a modest portion of the estate. For the wealthy there is a lot of value at stake.

He had better have proof this had been in the works and part of a "multiyear estate planning program" and not something else.

From the article:

Experts in estate planning and tax law, in interviews, cautioned that it would be hard to determine the Paternos’ motivation simply from the available documents. It appears the family house had been the subject of years of complex and confusing transactions.

This could also be year one and it was the first move. To "prove" that all it would take is the attorney saying so under oath.

But retitling property into a trust is a common estate tax planning move. Notice that she is no longer a joint owner, but is now a trustee, probably with the right to live in and enjoy the property that passes automatically in the trust to someone else upon her death.

It just happens to be close to campus on the residential side.

I think you'd be shocked to see it.

Check the neighborhood comps.

;-)

Mind boggling.

seized to satisfy any judgment that may be brought against Joe Paterno alone.

Actually, I think in most cases a home that the person is living in is generally exempt under state homestead laws.

It seems unlikely that this move was related to the scandal.

The house was sold to a trust, not to her personally.

That way the surviving Spouse is covered. In this case he took himself off of ownership, transferring title to his wife, so if she dies first then he would be subject to taxes.

What's your point?