Page 2 of 2

Re: NFA Trust - Obama's BATF Kills Benefits

Posted: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 21:00:04
by jdonovan
if you want to be able to play, then you have to bear some costs, and not all costs are monetary.

So start a 2nd trust and put all the new stuff on trust #2.

You need to start reading the rules in a way that they can benefit you... and stop reading for gloom and doom.

Re: NFA Trust - Obama's BATF Kills Benefits

Posted: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 00:19:55
by SHMIV
It's ridiculous that we have to even discuss this.

I'm reading all the posts, knowing that they were written by intelligent folks, and noting the disagreement. It's absurd. The fact that the law is that complex,that there is room for this much disagreement, is simply absurd.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ] Image

Re: NFA Trust - Obama's BATF Kills Benefits

Posted: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 10:03:49
by WVUBeta1904
MarcSpaz wrote:Meaning, they are only beneficiaries until I die, then automatically become a trustee at my death. I don't even know if that is possible/legal.
Correct.

A successor trustee is not a beneficiary in the terms of the traditional sense; meaning they do not simply inherit items specified in a trust once the grantor passes (ending their relationship with the trust). Once the duties of a revocable/living/family trust are unable to be carried out by the initial trustees (death, incapacity, resignation, etc..), a successor trustee(s) is/are appointed as the new trustee(s) for the trust (now considered irrevocable), and must manage the estate. It can be a very intensive role no matter how you look at it. Successor trustees often sign resignation documents for this reason, and would rather others take the responsibility of settling one's estate matters. Every state has it's own laws concerning the duties and responsibilities of a trustee.

While having many advantages (as you know), they can also be confusing, as well as plain irritating.