The retirement accounts are safe, and probably have nothing to do with a
trust. If I remember correctly, after paying his legal team he had no
assets except his NFL retirement (that's a defined benefit plan, right?)
and what he had put into qualified retirement plans. He may have a lot
of money in there, but it's all technically retirement money, and all
protected. I would expect that he wouldn't be able to change that,
either, without implications wrt the judgment.
Living (revocable) trusts are generally used for estate planning
purposes. The assets may as well be in my name personally from a
liability standpoint - it doesn't really protect any of it. Irrevocable
trusts are just that - irrevocable. Unless an internal triggering event
occurs, the letter of the trust cannot be broken. The danger of an
irrevocable trust which is worded to liberally is that it may not really
shield the assets properly (ability to sell principal/assets for
distribution at the trustees discretion). The other downside is that
irrevocable trusts are considered business entities, and pay high income
taxes as a result. They are, however, generally safe from attachment
(via litigation or other means) when prepared correctly.
I have a revocable trust that specifies how everything gets passed to my
daughter, and when. My assets will go into a irrevocable trust for her
until she reaches a certain age, at which time she gets everything free
and clear. For us it makes sense to set her up this way, as she is the
only grandchild on both sides of the family, and an only child - she'll
end up with a concentration of wealth rather than the usual dilution of
wealth across generations. They can place assets directly into her trust
(skipping our generation, for tax purposes).
On a side note...someone mentioned a while back about putting a business
automobile in the name of a corporation to shield them from some
personal liability. Unfortunately, the only time that will happen is if
a non-owner employee of the business is driving the car when the
accident occurs. If the owner is driving, both the owner (personally)
and the business will be at risk.
David Fisher wrote:
I don't doubt it...
I just know that when the Goldmans and the Browns
Won their civil suit after he was acquitted in the criminal
Trial, they were unable to touch any of his assets, retirement money,
Etc., because they were in a "trust"
Obviously, a gross over simplification of the subject by me.
* Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
* send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
* without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
* site at: http://www.seaint.org******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********