Summary:
There are lots of ways you can have your trust distribute
money to your beneficiaries. Here's a checklist of some of the considerations,
jargon and approaches. Too often people view these critical and personal decisions
as mere "boilerplate". Doing so may well jeopardize your intended goals for
setting up a trust. You need to take the time, and think through the "what ifs"
to make it work.
When
preparing a trust agreement consider all aspects of distributions decisions.
Who should make the decisions. Who are the trustees? Should you instead provide
for a distribution committee to make these decisions? When they should be made.
How they should be made? Start with personal details then conform those
decisions to meet tax law requirements for the particular trust. Here are some
points to consider:
● Should there be any
limits on the standards for distributions?
● Should different
trustees have different standards by which they can make distributions? For
example, an institutional co-trustee may be given an unlimited standard ("comfort
and welfare") while an individual
trustee may be limited to maintaining a beneficiaries lifestyle ("ascertainable
standard"). You may view the
institution as a stronger and more independent decision maker that won't be
pressured by a beneficiary in the same manner as a family member trustee.
● It's common to limit
distributions to the beneficiaries Health, Education, Maintenance and Support
("HEMS" - cause tax
lawyers need more acronyms to keep clients confused). what the tax law calls an "ascertainable standard". This is
loosely translated as maintaining the beneficiaries "standard of living". Lot's of people are comfortable with
this standard for distribution, but what does it mean? What is a beneficiaries
standard of living? When should it be determined? When you sign the trust (or
will creating the trust)? After you die? After Junior starts spending that big
insurance policy he collected after your death?
● How should the trustee
balance distributions when there are multiple current beneficiaries of one
trust? It's common to name a surviving spouse and children all as beneficiaries
of a by pass trust (intended to safeguard the current $2 million federal
exclusion, or often a lower state exclusion, from tax in the surviving spouse's
estate). Who should be favored if anyone?
● How should the trustee
balance distributions when there is a current beneficiaries (e.g., your third
spouse) and remainder beneficiaries (children of your first marriage) of one
trust? Some guidance as to how the trustee should balance distribution
decisions should be provided. Who should be favored if anyone? In some cases a
unitrust approach is advisable (e.g., pay 4% of the value of the trust each
year to the spouse, the remainder on her death to the children). It's
reasonable and clear. But often it's too simplistic and rigid to accomplish
your goals. If so, you need to provide parameters.
● Who should be included
in the definition of beneficiaries? If your children are named as beneficiaries
of a trust, what about their children (although GST issues will have to be
considered). How do you define
grandchildren? Should adopted children be included? Others? Should your
children's spouse's be included? Partners?
● Should the other
resources available to a beneficiary be considered? If grandma set up a trust
to pay for you daughter's lifestyle should the trust you set up distribute what
effectively will be a duplicative amount? Should assets required to be invested?
What about a house? Should a beneficiary be required to take out a reverse
mortgage (or otherwise tap home equity) before the trust can pay out? If you
mandate that support be considered this could be a risk. If your spouse is a
beneficiary of a by pass trust (not included in her estate) and the QTIP trust
(marital trust taxed in her estate) mandates distributions consider all
resources, increasing the distributions from the by pass trust will effectively
increase the tax on her death. Is that the intent?
0 Must all beneficiaries
of a trust be treated equally? Equal sounds simple and superficially "fair" but
does nothing to account for changed circumstances, different needs, etc. If one
child beneficiary has a major health issue is equal distribution really
appropriate?