Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Using Trusts in a Divorce
As part of estate and tax planning, individuals can place their assets in a trust. These include joint assets acquired during a marriage, pre-marital assets, or marital assets in one party's name. There are personal trusts for designated purposes, for example a trust imposed over real estate, such as a Qualified Personal Residence Trust (QPRT). A married couple could use a QPRT to place a jointly owned home in a trust and name the wife as the beneficiary and the child as a contingent beneficiary. Other trusts can serve as mechanisms for sheltering assets from taxation or can serve as a way to exclude assets from an estate or to protect assets. In a divorce case where a trust exists, it is possible to terminate the trust, with the agreement of all the parties, to utilize the proceeds to meet the needs of the parties in effectuating equitable distribution. Bear in mind that the termination of a trust can only be achieved by agreement and therefore such a goal cannot be achieved in a litigated matter. As part of a divorce settlement, certain types of trusts can be created for funding education expenses or covering medical expenses. These trusts would provide a mechanism for meeting support obligations.
During the negotiations in a matrimonial case, it may be beneficial to your client to utilize the asset or assets that were placed in a trust as part of the final equitable distribution plan. For example, if a husband owns a business and owes money to the wife as and for equitable distribution of her interest in the business, and a QPRT was created for the house, the value of the house in a QPRT may be able to be used to satisfy the spouse's equitable distribution claim. If the trust is terminated, the asset could be turned over to the wife, rather than utilizing notes, security and a payment plan to satisfy the equitable distribution obligation. The husband would then be able to receive the business outright without having it encumbered to satisfy his equitable distribution obligation to his wife.
Terminating a QPRT
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?