On June 16, 2020, the sun was shining, summer was in bloom, and people—long cooped up indoors—were in greater numbers on the streets, as “lockdown” restrictions resulting from the pandemic have begun to ease up. In season with these phenomena, OBA Trusts and Estates section members engaged in an interesting discussion on Wills and estates law during the Brown Bag Lunch.
A topic of discussion raised early in this month’s BBL was foreign estate trustees and difficulties encountered when deceased persons own assets in multiple jurisdictions, particularly when those jurisdictions have drastically different systems for dealing with the administration of estates. BBLers were quick to offer creative suggestions to deal with problems encountered.
Once again the controversial case of Calmusky v. Calmusky came up in discussion. In this decision, it was said that there is a presumption of resulting trust with Registered Income Fund (RIF) designations. Members discussed the dilemma they now face: whether to refer to RIFs in the Wills they draft, which would result in increased estate administration tax, or to merely do as they have always done, and let the RIF pass outside of the estate by way of the beneficiary designation, which the decision in Calmusky has now put at risk. Echoing the views raised at the May BBL, some attendees predicted that this decision will be successfully appealed or that other courts will choose not to follow it.
Please log in to read the full article.