Testimentory trust for minor children - what terms would you put on it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trustee (a professional, not family) can disburse what they see fit at any point; kid is entitled to half of what is there at 30 and the other half at 40.

Those professional trustees take a large payoff for their work.

It's 1% of AUM. Since I have never used a professional to manage investments, I saved plenty on the front end.

https://fhtrust.com

What’s 1% on an $8,000,000 trust for 15 years?

Parents die when kid is 30.

Over a 15 year period (if kid gets remainder at 45), that 1%

Kid gets half at 30 and half at 40. Our use case for this plan is that we die when the kid is not 30, but 18. Someone else needs to manage the money at that age, and we have no family we would want to do it.

1% of AUM for that interval seems like a small price to pay for not putting the entire sum in the hands of an 18 year old.

Trusts can be changed. If the kid is past 18 and responsible (say 30, as in your example), we could change the terms. This is the plan for now, when kid is 12.

I sure do appreciate your concern for us, though, and hope you're directing the same scrutiny to the people involved in managing your money, if there are any.

Testy! It would have been okay to say: yeah, it IS a lot of money being thrown away even in years the money manager makes no distributions and over 10 years, it’s like throwing away 10% of our kid’s inheritance. We don’t have another option that will work, though.

It also would have been okay for you to have asked questions about any of that before weighing in with unasked-for advice.

But you didn’t do that, so I felt no obligation to moderate my response to you.

The info was for everyone, not you alone. It’s the weekend- try and relax a little.

Your commitment to the unasked-for advice bit is notable!

I repeat: try and relax a little.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:we have appointed executor and a back up and they are to use a HEMS type guide for spending from the trust before disbursements.

Inheritance is 1/3 at 25; 1/3 at 30 and 1/3 at 35. those are not subject to HEMS. there is a clause allowing the trustee to withhold if child is at significant risk of mismanaging assets due to drugs or signgifiant mental health, and directs that money should be spent on their behalf for their care.

If you are leaving a large amount of money there are better ways than a testamentary trust. You would need a marital deduction trust and generation skipping trusts are the safest way to keep the money in the family.

You’ll probably still be around when your kids are those ages so that type of trust wouldn’t be helpful although I guess you would update your plan.

[Anonymous]

What you want is pretty standard. Don't overthink it. An experienced atty will know what to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is actually a good thread. I have elementary-aged kids and a trust already established. I need to work on the incentive provisions though, so reading ideas is really helpful.

Incentive provisions are obnoxious and insulting. You only see those in the movies. You’ve raised your kids, what you’re trying to do is called dead hand control. You still want to control your kids after you’re gone. It’s not a good idea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I only have about $1m to give per kid, and my sibling is the executor, and I want them off the hook as soon as possible so my kids would get full access in their twenties. I hope I raised them to be good decision-makers.

+1. These trusts with all the rules and strings attached are a pain for everyone. At some point you have to let it go and trust your kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You need to name a trustee who has great judgement, and understands your wishes. I might say that education should prioritized over other expenditures , once the children are 18 and have been housed, clothed and fed.

You could give ages at which subsequent funds are disbursed…but if you gave an excellent trustee then let them decide based upon how the kid is doing in life, their needs, maturity, etc.

Or just let the kids be their own trustees. We have had many many trusts in my family over the generations. Most everyone (greatgrands, grands, parents, aunts, uncles, cousins, sibs) has been their own trustee.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is actually a good thread. I have elementary-aged kids and a trust already established. I need to work on the incentive provisions though, so reading ideas is really helpful.

Incentive provisions are obnoxious and insulting. You only see those in the movies. You’ve raised your kids, what you’re trying to do is called dead hand control. You still want to control your kids after you’re gone. It’s not a good idea.

+10000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trustee (a professional, not family) can disburse what they see fit at any point; kid is entitled to half of what is there at 30 and the other half at 40.

Those professional trustees take a large payoff for their work.

It's 1% of AUM. Since I have never used a professional to manage investments, I saved plenty on the front end.

https://fhtrust.com

What’s 1% on an $8,000,000 trust for 15 years?

Parents die when kid is 30.

Over a 15 year period (if kid gets remainder at 45), that 1%

Kid gets half at 30 and half at 40. Our use case for this plan is that we die when the kid is not 30, but 18. Someone else needs to manage the money at that age, and we have no family we would want to do it.

1% of AUM for that interval seems like a small price to pay for not putting the entire sum in the hands of an 18 year old.

Trusts can be changed. If the kid is past 18 and responsible (say 30, as in your example), we could change the terms. This is the plan for now, when kid is 12.

I sure do appreciate your concern for us, though, and hope you're directing the same scrutiny to the people involved in managing your money, if there are any.

Testy! It would have been okay to say: yeah, it IS a lot of money being thrown away even in years the money manager makes no distributions and over 10 years, it’s like throwing away 10% of our kid’s inheritance. We don’t have another option that will work, though.

It also would have been okay for you to have asked questions about any of that before weighing in with unasked-for advice.

But you didn’t do that, so I felt no obligation to moderate my response to you.

The info was for everyone, not you alone. It’s the weekend- try and relax a little.

Your commitment to the unasked-for advice bit is notable!

I repeat: try and relax a little.

Thereby--again--proving that you cannot stop the bit!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We're going to specify in our will that the assets left in our estate plus our life insurance payouts will find a trust for each of our minor children. We are talking about when the trust would provide funds. If you anticipated a million to a million and a quarter in each trust, what would you specify and why? Simple lump payout at a certain age? Payouts at multiple ages? Allow guardians to cover educational expenses? Something else?

Just curious what people's preferences or recommendations would be. Tips and experiences?

We have one kid and she'll receive her distributions in age increments (25, 35, 45). We have provisions to protect against future partners/divorce (some precatory language, some not). For example, stating we want her to have a prenup for the trust assets and to not commingle funds with any spouse (among other things). We have the contest provisions in it (you contest, you are disinherited). And we have remainder funds (or funds if she dies before her children) going only to our grandchildren.

I know some friends who condition distributions on a drug test (we did not).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is actually a good thread. I have elementary-aged kids and a trust already established. I need to work on the incentive provisions though, so reading ideas is really helpful.

Incentive provisions are obnoxious and insulting. You only see those in the movies. You’ve raised your kids, what you’re trying to do is called dead hand control. You still want to control your kids after you’re gone. It’s not a good idea.

I don't think they're obnoxious. Depends on the kid. BUT you do have to ensure the provisions are obtainable. Requiring a Ph.D for a C-student in HS with learning disabilities, for example. Is it possible? Yes. Probable, no. That's an extreme example.

[Anonymous]

Our kids are our sole beneficiaries and will divide an estate of $10 to 20 million. One is currently 21 and the other is 18. Trust until age 35. Receive half of it at age 30 and the remainder at 35. No other restrictions.