Posted on

Responsibilities of Being the Executor of a Will

4 min read

Responsibilities of Being the Executor of a WillThe appointed executor of a will is the person responsible for paying the debts and taxes of the will’s owner once he dies and then distributing what is left in the estate to named beneficiaries according to instructions of the will. While it might feel like an honor to be asked to be the executor, keep in mind that the responsibilities are far more onerous than being the best man at a wedding.

An executor takes on both legal and fiduciary responsibilities that can have aggravating and even punitive ramifications if not handled properly. The following outlines the responsibilities of being the executor of a will.

Probate

Many formal assets may already have a named beneficiary (e.g., insurance policies, retirement plans, bank and investment accounts); these distribution instructions are outside of and supersede any instructions in a will. All other assets that do not have a separate beneficiary assignment and are not held in a trust must go through the probate court process. It is important to start the process as soon as possible post-death in order to have the legal authority to discharge estate assets. You may require the services of an estate attorney to enter court filings, particularly if you do not live near the departed.

Documentation

First and foremost, you must have the original copy of the will. Ensure you have this or know how to access it when you accept the responsibility as executor. Next, assemble the decedent’s documents to identify all his assets and liabilities, including real estate and personal property. You will be responsible for paying off any outstanding bills and debt, as well as filing tax returns.

Mediator

If the beneficiaries are unhappy with the will’s instructions, the executor is expected to mediate disputes to represent the best interests of all beneficiaries based on the intent of the deceased.

Creditor Claims

The probate process may require or recommend a period of time, possibly six months or longer, during which you may need to place a notice in a local newspaper to alert creditors and debtors that the deceased’s estate has entered probate. This offers ample time for debtors to file claims before the estate assets are disseminated to beneficiaries.

Due Diligence

If the will instructs you to manage the estate’s invested assets, such as money held in a trust, you are required to make prudent investment decisions. For example, just because you personally invest in Bitcoin doesn’t mean that is a fiduciary responsible investment for the decedent’s assets. You must conduct due diligence and have a reasonable rationale for all investment decisions; otherwise, a beneficiary could take you to court for mismanaging the assets. One way to protect your investment decisions is to request that beneficiaries give their approval in writing for any major investment changes you make while managing the assets.

Recordkeeping

Maintain accurate and comprehensive records of all your actions and back-and-forth communications with beneficiaries, investment managers, lawyers, and judicial filings. Record keeping is not just for your benefit; it is considered part of your fiduciary duty as the executor of the will.

Be aware that should your actions as executor come under scrutiny and/or a beneficiary files a court claim that you have been negligent, you could be removed as executor and even be liable for personal restitution and/or punitive damages if a court determines you have been self-dealing. Although unfortunate, this is not an uncommon occurrence.

Responsibilities like this are why many people, particularly those with sizeable estates, choose to name an estate attorney or professional administrator as executor of their will. This allows for a degree of professional distance that can help protect beneficiaries from mismanagement of assets without the emotions associated with naming a close friend or relative as executor.

The executor for a smaller estate is more likely to be administered with ease and can give the owner peace of mind that he’s leaving this responsibility to a trusted friend or family member.

Posted on

Why AI Falls Short for U.S. Tax Guidance

4 min read

Why AI Falls Short for U.S. Tax GuidanceThe rise of artificial intelligence tools like ChatGPT and Grok has transformed how Americans seek information. From meal planning to complex financial questions, these platforms offer instant answers to virtually any query. But when it comes to U.S. tax advice – especially international tax matters – relying on AI can lead to serious and costly mistakes.

The Allure and Limitations of AI Tax Help

The appeal of AI for tax questions is understandable. However, AI’s limitations become glaringly apparent in international tax matters. This specialized field combines extraordinary complexity with constant change, creating a perfect storm that exposes AI’s weaknesses. The landscape shifts regularly through regulatory updates, IRS interpretations, and court decisions – changes that AI systems struggle to incorporate in real-time.

Consider the IRS Practice Units, internal training materials for tax examiners that became public in 2020. From January through early May 2025 alone, the IRS released 35 new Practice Units, with 22 addressing intricate international tax topics such as foreign tax credit computations, base erosion anti-abuse tax, and treaty provisions. These rapidly evolving resources represent just one stream of constantly changing tax guidance that AI models could fail to capture, leading to outdated or incomplete advice.

How AI Gets Tax Advice Wrong

AI’s accuracy problems stem from its fundamental design. Large language models like those powering ChatGPT and Grok train on vast amounts of text from diverse sources – online forums, books, articles, websites, and public records. This training produces responses that sound authoritative and conversational, but this polish masks significant limitations.

The core issue is what experts call “simplexity” – AI’s tendency to oversimplify complex tax law. When AI presents intricate regulations as straightforward concepts, it fundamentally misrepresents the law itself. This problem has already surfaced with the IRS’s own Interactive Tax Assistant chatbot.

AI systems also suffer from interpretation errors, reliance on outdated information, and conflation of similar but distinct tax concepts. For instance, an AI might confuse the Foreign Tax Credit with the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion – similar-sounding but entirely different provisions with vastly different implications.

The Real-World Cost of AI Errors

Mistakes in international tax compliance carry severe consequences. The IRS considers international tax enforcement a top priority, and errors in reporting foreign income or assets trigger substantial penalties. A late FBAR or foreign information return like Form 8938 or 5471 carries a $10,000 penalty. Errors involving foreign assets can result in a 40 percent accuracy-related penalty on unpaid taxes.

Importantly, relying on AI advice won’t qualify as “reasonable cause” to avoid these penalties. Last year, the U.S. Taxpayer Advocate Service highlighted a Washington Post analysis showing that AI chatbots from major tax preparation companies provided incorrect advice up to 50 percent of the time on complex questions. Beyond financial penalties, taxpayers face the stress of audits and the time-consuming burden of correcting mistakes.

Why Human Expertise Remains Essential

While AI continues to advance, it currently falls far short of replacing human expertise in international tax matters. Experienced tax professionals bring irreplaceable skills that algorithms cannot match. They stay current on evolving IRS guidance, monitor treaty updates, and analyze new case law. Most importantly, they apply professional judgment to each unique situation.

International tax planning rarely follows a one-size-fits-all approach. Professionals provide strategic thinking and contextual analysis that optimize outcomes for specific circumstances. They understand when exceptions apply, how different rules interact, and what documentation requirements must be met. These nuanced judgments remain beyond AI’s current capabilities.

Conclusion

This doesn’t mean AI has no role in tax planning. It can serve as a useful starting point for understanding basic concepts or generating initial questions to discuss with a professional. However, treating AI as a substitute for qualified tax advice is a risky gamble.

The appeal of instant, free tax guidance is strong, but the cost of getting it wrong can be devastating. Until AI can match the precision, current knowledge, and professional judgment of experienced tax professionals, taxpayers would be wise to view it as a supplement to – not a replacement for – human expertise.

Posted on

Understanding the Goodwill to Assets Ratio

4 min read

Understanding the Goodwill to Assets RatioThe goodwill to assets ratio measures how much of a company’s total assets come from goodwill – an intangible asset like brand value or customer loyalty – and it plays a role in assessing the company’s overall value. It provides a ratio or percentage of the amount of intangible versus tangible assets. Understanding what the ratio represents, how it is calculated, and how to interpret it is essential for effectively applying it to business operations and investment decisions.

Goodwill Defined

Goodwill can be defined as an intangible asset that comes about when the acquiring firm obtains such assets from the acquired firm at a higher value. When it comes to accounting standards, both International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), intangible assets must be evaluated for impairment, but don’t need to be amortized. Based upon IFRS 38, goodwill is generated solely during an acquisition and is defined as the amount of the acquisition price for the acquired company over its book value. IFRS 38 does not recognize goodwill generated by the company internally.

Calculating Goodwill

Goodwill = Liabilities – Assets + Purchase Price

If a company looks at acquiring another company for $750,000, and the company being acquired has assets of $900,000 and liabilities of $450,000, the net assets would be $450,000. Based on the goodwill formula:

Goodwill = $450,000 – $900,000 + $750,000 = $300,000

Once the goodwill has been established, the Goodwill to Assets Ratio Formula is used as follows:

Goodwill to Assets Ratio = Unamortized Goodwill / Total Assets

If one company is putting itself up for sale with a selling price of $75 million, it would have to establish its book value, based on recent financial statements, along with its goodwill value. Factors that go into calculating a company’s goodwill include if the company has prime real estate, a well-known brand, a rich list of clients, or intellectual property that sets itself apart from competitors in the industry that won’t expire for years. For example, if its intangible assets are $15 million, subtracted from its selling price of $75 million, its tangible assets or book value would be $60 million.

Based on the ratio, it’s calculated as follows:

$15 million / $75 million = 20 percent

Therefore, the ratio is 20 percent for the company’s goodwill as part of the company’s valuation. Otherwise, if the purchase goes through, whoever buys the company spends 20 percent on the company’s goodwill.

Analyzing the Goodwill to Assets Ratio

This ratio gives an overview of a business’s financial health. The lower the ratio, the more tangible or physical assets that can be sold. Conversely, the higher the ratio, the fewer intangibles a company has. Much like assets that can be written down, so can a company’s goodwill.

This ratio is not one-in-all and should be measured against businesses within the same industry. Based on this analysis, if a company has a large amount of goodwill on its financial statements, if it’s written down, it could still result in a lower valuation despite the company having a large amount of assets.

Looking over time, it shows the importance of ongoing evaluations. In 1975, according to the University of California, Los Angeles, companies on the Standard and Poor’s 500 (S&P 500) had $122 billion of intangible assets and $594 billion of tangible assets, or about a 21 percent intangible to tangible assets ratio. These companies included most industrial and energy sector names like GE, Procter & Gamble, 3M, Exxon Mobil, along with IBM, based on market capitalization. However, in 2018, the ratio increased to 84 percent of intangible to tangible assets. Intangible assets accounted for $21.03 trillion and $4 trillion when looking at most of the companies on the S&P 500, which included Apple, Alphabet, Microsoft, Amazon, and Facebook, based on market capitalization.

While the growth of technology and communication services has risen and skewed the tangible to intangible ratio, it shows the importance of evaluating companies and sectors individually, not just with a broad brush.

Sources

Boom of Intangible Assets Felt Across Industries and Economy