Multiple Trustees on an 'NFA trust?'

[Goldie]

In a classic case of jumping the gun, a friend and purchased (by which I mean paid for) .22LR silencers at the Chantilly gun show this weekend. They'll be transferred to SEG, but of course we didn't set up a trust first, so we need to get on that. My question is (and I plan on using one of the lawyers mentioned elsewhere on this forum and at guntrustlawyer.com), is it possible to set up a single trust and have us both as 'trustees' (meaning either of us could be allowed to possess the silencers)? I ask because there's a high probability that one of us will be leaving the state in a few years, at which point we'd just give the other the silencer. Given the difficulty of transferring one, is it possible to name both of us on the trust and have the "ownership" (legal authority to possess/use) interchangeable between us?

I'm reading what I can about the process now, but if anyone has any tips they'd like to share (or personal recs for an attorney), that would be appreciated as well. Thanks all.

[gunderwood]

Yes, you can have more than one trustee and either would have access to it. I've not heard about doing anything other than immediate family (e.g. husband and wife). Technically, anyone can be a trustee (if they meet the states requirements), but I'm not sure what the BATFE thinks about it.

You should realize that a trustee has full legal rights to the suppressor, that includes selling it. Unless you specifically make some provision which prohibits your friend from selling the suppressor, he could do so without your knowledge or permission. Also realize that depending on the state you move to, there may be some legal issues with possession, registration or storage of the NFA item. Not all states are as friendly as Virginia.

While you can create your own trust, you circumstances are not "normal" so I would definitely use a trust lawyer.

[Diomed]

It can be done, but an attorney with relevant background is definitely necessary.

You could also incorporate, use a LLC, etc. Sit down with a lawyer and discuss with him what you want to do, now and in the future so that you can choose the appropriate vehicle.

[Goldie]

I definitely intend to use a lawyer. As for my buddy having the ability to sell anything on the trust....meh. If it costs me $500 to find out I have a disloyal friend, I'd consider that worth the cost.

Thanks for the input, hopefully I get this ball rolling and then...find a host for the silencer :/

[user]

I have a real problem with the terminology; there is no such thing as an "NFA trust", legally - a trust is a trust is a trust. There is no legal limit on the number of co-trustees, but the trust has to be designed to deal with the eventual conflict that will arise when more than one trustee wants to go in a different direction. Also, the wording of the question shows that the OP thinks that the trustee is the person with the right to access to the property - that ain't necessarily so; it's the beneficiaries of the trust who get the "use" of the property ("use" is an old English legal term of art, don't confuse it with the English word of the same form). The important thing to keep straight is that the trust is a person, legally, and like having an autistic child, it needs people to see to its care and feeding who have a fiduciary relationship to the trust - those people are the trustees. But the trust itself is the legal owner of the silencers (in this case), not the trustees. In fact, the trustees may even be people who are prohibited by law from being in possession of silencers (e.g., convicted felons). Ownership is not the same as possession. It's the "cestui qui use" person (beneficiary) who must be "street legal" to possess the implement - but who will never own it. I hope that's a bit clearer than mud, most attorneys don't understand the niceties of property law (which is what this is).

[jdonovan]

is it possible to set up a single trust and have us both as 'trustees' (meaning either of us could be allowed to possess the silencers)?

Yes, but many trusts have a "grantor" (single person) who hold veto power on activities of the trust. This prevents a deadlock where half the trustees want to do X and half want Y.

but if anyone has any tips they'd like to share (or personal recs for an attorney), that would be appreciated as well.

Don't do it man..... No matter how well you like/know each other, sh**, I mean things, happen, and ruin friendships. More so when there is money, possessions, or women involved.

If you REALLLLY wanted to do it.... I would setup 2 trusts and name each-other beneficiaries. This would accomplish the goal. However, setting up a trust will cost you as much as the suppressor and the tax... good lawyers ain't cheap. So in the end you really wouldn't save much.

But being beneficiaries would mean you could hold the suppressor for your buddy until he moved to a more suppressor friendly state at some point in the future.

[Goldie]

Interesting points all around. I suppose when we find a lawyer we'll let them guide us in what they feel is the best direction.

User- I'm aware there's no real 'nfa trust,' I was just using the term so it was apparent what I was talking about. As for the legal intricacies of words like 'use,' 'trustee,' 'beneficiary,' etc...I don't pretend to know the proper terminology, so thanks for the information. I know you're an attorney of some flavor, so I'll come right out and ask if you handle trusts like the one I/we need? If not, who would you go to if you needed an atty for this? Given my general lack of understanding of the finer points of BATFE compliance, I want to make sure I use a competent atty who will do their best not to set me up for failure.

jdonovan- I hear you. This is not a 'BFF' situation where there's a lot of room for dramatic unraveling of the friendship. If we speak to an attorney and their honest advice is not to double-up, so be it. I'd like some kind of 'out' where one can possess the other's items if the need arises, but I don't particularly care how that's established. I appreciate the input, saving money is not the #1 concern, I'd much rather spend $1k on a trust lawyer than $100k on a defense team

[Diomed]

Also, the wording of the question shows that the OP thinks that the trustee is the person with the right to access to the property - that ain't necessarily so; it's the beneficiaries of the trust who get the "use" of the property ("use" is an old English legal term of art, don't confuse it with the English word of the same form).

Insofar as the ATF is concerned, the OP is correct; the Bureau takes the position that in trust ownership of NFA firearms, the only person(s) who may have physical possession of the firearm(s) is the trustee. The only time the beneficiary may have possession is when the trust's assets are distributed and the proper transfer forms have been filed and approved.