Trust benefits beyond NFA?

[Eurodriver]

Thanks guys. I guess the next step would be just to talk to an attorney. I'm only 26 and don't have many assets, besides my house. I did completely overlook the fact that if something happen to me my wife could not do anything with the firearms without being on a trust.

Just an FYI, and this is only because I've seen it very recently. My buddy was in your exact position and got a trust. he named his wife (whom he loved very much and trusted with his life) as a co-grantor and trustee. Now they're divorced and it's a PITA getting her off the trust due to her being a grantor. Luckily for him, she doesn't want anything to do with it but it's still difficult.

Even his attorney who drew up the trust (and is an expert in Florida gun trusts) looked at him like...uhhh...

[domestique]

Just an FYI, and this is only because I've seen it very recently. My buddy was in your exact position and got a trust. he named his wife (whom he loved very much and trusted with his life) as a co-grantor and trustee. Now they're divorced and it's a PITA getting her off the trust due to her being a grantor. Luckily for him, she doesn't want anything to do with it but it's still difficult.

Even his attorney who drew up the trust (and is an expert in Florida gun trusts) looked at him like...uhhh...

Maybe it varies from state to state.

But in PA. The Settlor can do whatever they want. They can add or remove anyone from the Trust.

[SteveL]

Just an FYI, and this is only because I've seen it very recently. My buddy was in your exact position and got a trust. he named his wife (whom he loved very much and trusted with his life) as a co-grantor and trustee. Now they're divorced and it's a PITA getting her off the trust due to her being a grantor. Luckily for him, she doesn't want anything to do with it but it's still difficult.

Even his attorney who drew up the trust (and is an expert in Florida gun trusts) looked at him like...uhhh...

So would it have made any difference if she had only been listed as a co-trustee instead of a co-grantor?

[jack crab]

Property in trust passes outside of probate. There is no delay in moving the property under trust while non-trust property is administered/held/delayed by the executor/administrator of the estate.

Trust property is also not at risk to be liquidated/used to pay creditors of the estate.

Trust property passes as designated by the trust. Non-trust property will pass by will, or, absent a will, by intestate succession laws.

The qualification to that is jointly titled property may have rights of survivorship or accounts may be "payable on death."

[MJN99999]

Much of the property that I have purchased and/or paid-off over the years, real estate or otherwise, have been granted to a trust as soon as it was practical. I use estate planning professionals to create, review and modify the main trusts that I am grantor and beneficiary of because I want to make sure they are legally sufficient if challenged.

I have used a separate, firearm-specific 'gun trust' for all NFA purchases since 1980 and all of my non-NFA firearm purchases are immediately transferred to the same trust.

There is some generally great advice and observations in this thread so far, but one thing is missing...Insurance (and most people with focused trusts for narrow purposes - e.g., NFA purchases - aren't aware or don't think of this in my experience).

Definitely talk with an attorney with an estate-planning practice to make sure the trust structure is appropriate for your intents and purposes, but also schedule a visit with your insurance agent. Given that property purchased-by/granted-to a trust is literally owned by the trust, you may not have an insurable interest in the property once it is received by the trust. Without an insurable interest, the property owned by the trust may not be covered by any insurance you may have.

It is a simple thing to fix, the trust(s) can be added to any relevant insurance coverage as an 'additionally insured' and the trust's property is back under your insurance umbrella. There shouldn't be any additional cost for this (if there is it should be a nominal admin fee). FWIW, this isn't about liability - trusts are already liability proof* - it is about loss, damage or theft.


MikeN


*: A trust is a purely legal construct that can only exist and own things, nothing more. A trust is legally incapable of actually DOING or NOT DOING anything. As such, it can never be held liable for any act or omission - the casual definition of 'liability proof'.

[jack crab]

Not the OP here, but grantors can retain powers superior to trustees. In this instance, if the trust provided it, the husband/grantor could have powers to remove wife/trustee.

[jack crab]

I'm sure someone more law-proficient may come along and clarify or correct, but a lawyer also explained it to me as an extra layer of protection from liability. For example, if something is done negligently with an item the trust owns, and harm is caused, only the trust itself is liable. I am sure there are state-to-state variances and I am in no way trying to say that there aren't other penalties or personal culpability that can be placed on a trustee, but a certain amount of protect does exist. YMMV.

That is mostly correct. If someone does something negligently with trust property, the trust, the trustee, the negligent person, etc. will all be named as defendants with possible liability. Now, only the property within the trust can be seized to satisfy a judgment if the trust is found liable for damages arising from the negligent act. So, Trust A may be lost, but Trust B is safe.

However, there can still be individual liability for negligent acts. So, you as grantor/trustee/beneficiary could forfeit your trust property, and forfeit your separate, non-trust property all to pay a judgment. That's where insurance like an umbrella policy can be handy.

[jack crab]

*: A trust is a purely legal construct that can only exist and own things, nothing more. A trust is legally incapable of actually DOING or NOT DOING anything. As such, it can never be held liable for any act or omission - the casual definition of 'liability proof'.

That is not correct. A trust does things through its grantor, trustee, and beneficiary. Transfer an NFA item out of the trust to someone without the Form 4/tax and watch how fast the illegal capability arises.

Trusts are similar to corporations, LLCs, etc. They get sued and found liable for acts and omissions routinely.

[mattg1024]

My head hurts again. I think I've bitten off more than I can chew on this for the time being. I will continue to do more reading on this and see if I can find an attorney.

[mattg1024]

So if I have a trust, and a friend also has a trust, and we are listed as Trustees on each others trusts, could we be in possession of each others items?