From the standpoint of estate and tax planning, cash gifts between individual to individual, or between individual and organization, normally follows a standard legal and standard context. This process is familiar, accepted and rarely questioned as it is conducted according to the standard precedent.

As a contrast, when cash gifts are conducted follows the standard rules, limits, etc. outside of the estate and tax planning framework, there appears to be a distinctly opposed mental approach to the ideas of what cash can be distributed between individuals.

There exists a legal and accepted function provides a legitimate foundation for handling of those gifts, etc. for those of substantial or of sufficient financial means. Professional advice is retained as a normal consequence of maintain the rules. However, stepping beyond our more familiar context, the action of gifting could introduce a penalty of suspicion, and, in a few states, particularly Kentucky and Nebraska, have established actual penalties under specific cases.

Mentally and structurally, those seeking to examine gifting activities outside of tax or estate planning region engages in a choice, both right and wrong, from the array of available programs, systems, etc. This examination step leads to a breaking down of a significant mental barrier of a different type, a barrier that is key to the gifting concept – that one gives first, initially for the benefit of the recipient, as a method of attraction and as an act of faith to others who possess the ability to move beyond the same mental obstacle. Honestly, the idea of releasing hard-earned assets flies in the face of that which we are taught. We are taught that unconventional, benevolent giving is frequently a basis for fraudulent activity, and that ‘..all that glitters ain’t gold…’ Nonetheless, benevolence is a learned behavior, or certainly one which can be taught, and is hopefully, found to be a basic motivator. Without it comes the justification for scrutiny and suspicion, given the legacy of previous violations of some less than honest attempts in the past.

Naturally, or perhaps, incredibly, and in light of the trait of suspicion, we’re brought to an entirely different perception under estate planning rules, where a win-win is the goal of all concerned, unquestionably. Tax planning in itself is a constant struggle toward win-win, to follow the spirit of the tax laws, as we aim for the optimum conclusion for the control of ones personal, appreciated and acquired resources.

It is totally up to those who participate in any and all cash gifts, and certainly for purposes not involved in estate planning, to scrutinize the motives, the processes and programs that exist, to honor ethical and lawful behavior, and to maintain reasonable expectations with respect to what can or should happen as a result of any involvement.