However, compared to established ways to help disabled people such as Special Needs Trusts and Pooled Trusts, the ABLE Act seems complex, with many important questions unanswered.

For example, here are a few questions:

• To be eligible, an individual must be disabled before age 26. This excludes anyone who suffers a disabling illness or injury after that age, and also potentially individuals who did not receive a diagnosis before this age. Critics say it seems arbitrary and unfair.

• According to the IRS, the disabled person ("eligible individual") is both the owner and designated beneficiary of the ABLE Account.

The disabled person's Social Security number attaches to the account, and the disabled person is responsible for making investment decisions, documenting certification, and proving that distributions are used for qualifying expenses.  It's heavy financial responsibility to put on any young person – especially one who is disabled.

Some details are unfathomably complex and potentially risky. For example, distributions for some housing-related expenses are qualified for tax purposes, but they may also have negative impact on SSI benefits.

The biggest red flag is the ability of the federal government to capture all remaining account assets at the beneficiary's death, to reimburse Medicaid expenses.

This liability does not exist (to this extent) in Special Needs Trusts or Pooled Trusts, and it potentially creates perverse incentives. For example, a beneficiary diagnosed with a severe illness might be advised to empty the account, rather than have money confiscated after death to reimburse Medicaid.

Just when ABLE account money is needed to pay for end-of-life care, it might be gone.

You may want to advise clients with special needs children not to be the first on their block to jump into ABLE Act plans. Better to wait and see how it shakes out in the real world, after the IRS issues final regulations.