Private Wealth 2025

Last Updated August 12, 2025

USA – California

Law and Practice

Authors



Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP is an international law firm with a particular focus on the technology & life sciences, energy, financial, and real estate & construction sectors. Recognised as one of the most innovative law firms by the Financial Times and one of the top firms for client service by BTI Consulting, Pillsbury and its lawyers are highly regarded for their forward-thinking approach, their enthusiasm for collaborating across disciplines and their authoritative commercial awareness.

Individual Taxation

The United States imposes an income tax on citizens and residents and certain income of non-resident “aliens”. California (otherwise, CA) imposes an annual income tax based on California residency and based on certain other contacts with California. In 2025, California income tax rates ranged from 1% to 12.3%. An individual is a California resident if he or she is present in California for other than a temporary or transitory purpose, or is domiciled in California, but is outside of California for a temporary or transitory purpose. Residents are taxed on all income, including income which has its source outside of California. Non-residents are taxed only on income which has its source in California, while part-year residents are taxed on all worldwide income received during the portion of the year they were California residents and on California-source income during the portion of the year they were non-residents. California’s residency scheme poses special challenges related to “declared” and “factual” intent to establish residence when clients desire to sever ties with California. The California Franchise Tax Board conducts residency audits regularly.

The US annual income tax rates range from 10% to 37%. In addition, there are add-on rates in certain investments. Long-term capital gains and qualified dividends may be subject to an additional net investment income tax of 3.8% when net investment income or the excess of the modified adjusted gross income exceeds USD250,000 (married filing jointly), USD200,000 (single), or USD125,000 (married filing separately). Net investment income includes gross income from interest, dividends, non-qualified annuities, royalties, and rents that are not derived from the ordinary course of a trade or business, plus net gain from the disposition of property not used in a trade or business. Gross income and net gain (or loss) from a trade or business may be included in net investment income if it is a passive activity or its source is from trading financial instruments or commodities. The net investment income tax is also known as the Medicare contribution tax.

California imposes a tax on all income to a decedent’s estate if the decedent was a California resident at the time of death. The rule applies regardless of the residence status of the fiduciary or beneficiary. (California Revenue and Taxation Code, Section 17742.)

Alternative Minimum Tax

California residents are also subject to the 7% California alternative minimum tax on the calculated alternative minimum tax income which exceeds an exempt amount, before credit reductions. The California alternative minimum tax income is calculated starting with the taxpayer’s federal taxable income, then adds back certain deductions which are typically itemised, and adjustments. The existence of long-term capital gains and qualified dividends increases the likelihood that the California alternative minimum tax will apply. There are no exemptions and no phase-outs. (California Revenue and Taxation Code, Section 17062(b)(3)(A)(iv). See 1.2 Exemptions.)

US taxpayers are subject to federal alternative minimum tax of 26% or 28%. The US alternative minimum tax income is calculated starting with adjusted gross income, then adds back tax preference items and deductions, then is reduced by the alternative minimum tax exemption up to a phase-out amount. The federal alternative minimum tax income includes income from incentive stock options that were exercised and state and local tax refunds.

Mental Health Services Tax

California imposes a 1% Mental Health Service tax on taxable income more than USD1 million. There is no equivalent federal tax. The California Mental Health Services Act of 2020, in which Section 17043 is added to the California Revenue and Taxation Code. (See 1.2 Exemptions.)

Estate Taxation

The US does not have an inheritance tax, but imposes an estate tax on the assets of a decedent’s estate. The US federal estate tax is calculated based on the fair market value of the assets owned by the decedent at death, net of any debts and applicable deductions and exclusions. It is payable by the decedent’s estate. (See the discussion on exclusions in 1.2 Exemptions.)

California does not have an inheritance tax or an estate tax.

Trust Taxation

California requires that a trust pay California income tax on all income of the trust if the fiduciary or beneficiary, except for a contingent beneficiary, is a California resident. The rule applies regardless of the residence status of the settlor. The residence of a corporate fiduciary is where the corporation transacts the major portion of its administration of the trust. California Revenue and Taxation Code, Section 17742. California trust tax rates are the same as individual taxation rates. Distributions from a trust are generally considered taxable income to the beneficiary and would be taxed in the state where the beneficiary resides. However, capital gains are not included in the distributable net income (DNI) of the trust, and therefore would not be “carried out” to a trust beneficiary with a distribution. Accordingly, capital gains would be taxed at the trust level, and subject to California income tax if for example, the trustee resides in California. Note, however, trust capital gains may be added to DNI in the trustee’s discretion, if done consistently, which may alleviate this issue. On the other hand, distributing all the capital gains may not be in the best long-term interests of the trust beneficiaries.

Foundation Taxation

California state law governs the establishment of nonprofit corporations either as a non-profit public-benefit corporation, non-profit religious corporation, or a charitable trust. There are two categories of non-profit corporations: private foundations and organisations which have a charitable purpose. Once established, the entity applies for tax exemption with the Internal Revenue Service and the California Franchise Tax Board for a determination that the entity is tax-exempt. Federal tax-exempt status under the Internal Revenue Code (IRC), Section 501(c)(3) permits a charitable organisation to pay no tax on the income from its investments, subject to certain parameters (such as prohibitions on self-dealing and unrelated business taxable income) and permits donors to claim a charitable deduction for their contributions. The charitable contribution deduction for donors to a private foundation is limited to a lower percentage of adjusted gross income than for a public charity and may restrict the value of the asset being contributed which can qualify for the deduction.

Gift Tax

California does not impose a gift tax. However, all US citizens and residents are subject to US federal gift and estate taxation. However, the United States federal annual gift tax exclusion allows the taxpayer to transfer tax-free gifts to any number of individuals up to USD19,000 in 2025 per individual recipient. Married spouses may “split” a gift and thereby utilise the annual exclusion or exemption(s) of the non-donor spouse. If the donor gives more than the exclusion amount, the excess is charged against the lifetime gift and estate tax exemption of USD13.99 million in 2025. The tax rate on gifts exceeding the lifetime gift and estate tax exemption is between 18% and 40%.

Generation-Skipping Transfer Tax

The federal transfer tax system imposes a wealth transfer tax at each generation. This is known as the gift tax for transfers during life, the estate tax for transfers at death and the generation-skipping transfer tax (GST) for transfers of property at death or during life to persons two or more generations below the transferor. It applies to trusts when trust distributions are made to the grantor’s grandchildren (or subsequent generation) or when the beneficial interest passes to the grantor’s grandchildren (or subsequent generation). California currently does not impose a generation-skipping transfer tax on any generation-skipping transfers made after 31 December 2004.

Capital Gains Taxation

California imposes a tax on net capital gains, regardless of the holding period, at the same rates as the taxpayer’s ordinary income. The US taxes short-term capital gains as ordinary income, and long-term capital gains are subject to tax at between 0% and 20%.

Federal Estate Tax Exclusion and Spousal Portability

The US federal estate exemption limit is USD13.99 million in 2025. The federal estate tax is imposed only on amounts which exceed the exemption and rates range from 18% – 40% plus a base tax between USD0 and USD345,800. The exemption is scheduled to decrease to USD5 million in 2025, indexed for inflation; however, anticipated federal legislation known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act would, if passed, permanently increase this exemption to USD15 million, indexed for inflation, starting in 2026. The unused portion of a deceased spouse’s or registered domestic partner’s federal exemption is portable to the survivor, the deceased spouse unused exemption (DSUE) amount. The survivor elects portability by reporting the value of the deceased spouse’s or partner’s estate on the date of death, less taxable gifts, on IRS Form 706.

Alternative Minimum Tax Exemption

The federal AMT exemption amount for tax year 2025 starts at USD88,100 (USD68,650 for married individuals filing separately) and begins to phase out at USD626,350 for unmarried individuals and married individuals filing separately. The federal AMT exemption amount for tax year 2025 starts at USD30,700 for estates and trusts and begins to phase out at USD102,500. The federal AMT exemption amount for tax year 2025 starts at USD137,000, with phase-out beginning at USD1,252,700 for married couples filing jointly or for surviving spouses.

California exempts up to USD40,000 of alternative minimum taxable income from the alternative minimum tax, subject to ongoing change.

Annual Gift and Estate Tax Exclusion

California does not impose a gift tax. However, there is a substantial federal gift tax. The United States federal annual gift tax exclusion allows the taxpayer to transfer tax-free gifts to any number of individuals up to USD19,000 in 2025 a per individual recipient. If the recipient receives more than the exclusion, the excess is charged against the lifetime gift and estate tax exemption of USD13.99 million in 2025. Gifts are reported on IRS Form 709, United States Gift (and Generation-Skipping Transfer) Tax Return. The tax rate on gifts exceeding the lifetime gift and estate tax exemption is between 18% and 40%. The lifetime gift exemption and the estate tax have a single combined exclusion. Accordingly, lifetime gifts will reduce the exemption remaining to be applied against estate taxes at death.

California Capital Gain or Loss Adjustment

California capital gains are taxed at ordinary income tax rates. Appreciated assets receive a step up in basis to their fair market value at the time of death. In California, a special planning opportunity exists that property held as community property will receive a full step up on the entire property upon the death of the first spouse to die, even though that spouse is only deemed to own one-half of the community property assets.

Non-resident aliens and non-citizens are subject to United States and California income tax on income generated by real property located in the US, or California, respectively. The US tax is a flat 30% flat rate, or lower treaty rate of the resident country, if the property is not effectively connected with a US trade or business. Non-resident aliens can elect to treat all income from US real property as effectively connected income with a trade or business, which then allows deductions related to the property to be used to reduce taxable income. At sale, capital gains are taxed in the same manner as if it were sold by a US citizen. Non-residents are also subject to a 15% non-resident withholding tax on the gross sales proceeds unless the non-resident seller is exempt from the withholding, either because it is a low-value sale (under USD300,000) or if withholding is reduced or eliminated under a treaty between the non-resident jurisdiction and the US. To request a reduction or dispensation from withholding on dispositions of US real property use IRS Form 8288-B.

In California, non-resident aliens and non-citizens are taxed on real estate income and may take advantage of deductions, exemptions and other rules to reduce taxable income from real property in the same manner as US citizens.

In 2021, 2022, and 2023, California lawmakers proposed a bill (most recently, California AB 259) that would impose a 1% annual wealth tax on households with a net worth of more than USD50 million and 1.5% on households worth more than USD1 billion. A version of the bill seeking to tax extreme wealth has been introduced multiple times. Some versions include an “exit tax,” seeking to collect the wealth tax even after a taxpayer relocates to a new residence outside California. This has caused some uncertainty, and may be one factor for private wealth clients to establish residency outside California. Another factor is the very high state income tax rates in California compared with other states, such as Nevada, Wyoming and Florida, which have a zero income tax rate.

The United States is not a signatory to the OECD’s CRS.

California-based entities with business units that engage in multinational tax arrangements between any EU country and the US must comply with the EU DAC 6.

FATCA and FinCEN

Under FATCA US/California entities, individuals, institutions, and trusts who hold financial assets outside the US and meet the income tax reporting threshold are required to report the assets on IRS Form 8938. In 2025, the reporting threshold ranges from USD50,000 to USD150,000 for individuals living in the US and USD200,000 to USD600,000 for individuals living outside the US.

In addition, if a US person, resident alien, trust, estate, or domestic entity has a financial interest in or signatory authority over an offshore financial account, the account must be reported on FinCEN Form 114, Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts, or FBAR. The information requested on each form is different, thus due to the different rules and differences in the definition of “financial account,” not every taxpayer will need to file both forms or report the same foreign financial accounts. Reporting is required if the aggregate value of any one or more financial accounts exceeds USD10,000 at any time during the calendar year. Notably, residents of US territories are not included in the definition of “United States” for Form 8938 reporting, while resident aliens of US territories and US territory entities are subject to FBAR reporting.

The United States Corporate Transparency Act

As of 1 January 2024, California corporations, limited liability companies, and other entities which were registered to do business in the United States were subject, unless one of the 23 exemptions applied, to reporting requirements of the Corporate Transparency Act. Entities were required to electronically report beneficial ownership information (BOI) about individual persons who directly or indirectly own or control the entity to the US Department of Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN). A “beneficial owner” is “any individual who, directly or indirectly, either exercises substantial control over such reporting company or owns or controls at least 25 per cent of the ownership interests of such reporting company.” BOI is not public, but FinCEN will disclose BOI to US, state, local, Tribal, and foreign officials for national security, intelligence, and law enforcement related purposes. Financial institutions may have access to BOI with the consent of the reporting company. The primary purpose of the CTA is to combat money laundering, drug trafficking, terrorism, and corruption.

Companies created or registered to do business in the US before 1 January 2024 were required to file a BOI report by 1 January 2025. Companies created or registered after 1 January 2024 had 90 days after notice of creation to file. A reporting company created or registered after 1 January 2025 had 30 days.

Generally, non-exempt reporting entities were also required to report the name, date of birth, address, and upload an image of an unexpired identity document for each beneficial owner of the entity. The entity was also required to report its name, address, and for entities created after 1 January 2024, information about who formed the company. In FinCEN’s ongoing efforts for gatekeeper compliance, legal counsel and staff who assisted in the formation of the company may fall within the definition of company applicants who are required to report.

On 26 March 2025, the Department of Treasury issued an interim final rule which exempts domestic entities from any BOI reporting requirements. Foreign entities are still subject to BOI reporting requirements but do not have to report the BOI for beneficial owners who are US persons. 

In the US and California, high net worth families often engage in strategies with skilled advisers to seek to reduce the high transfer tax, which can decimate their family’s often hard-earned assets. Many such strategies, when correctly implemented, can be very effective. However, there is concern in that younger generations may become disincentivised to work if they receive too much gratuitous wealth, and trusts are often used to limit unfettered access to inherited wealth, while also protecting assets from potential attacks from third party creditors or others seeking to obtain the assets. As the cost of living, education, and taxes continues to escalate, many families in the US tend to have fewer children than was historically the case.

Individuals and entities subject to California law routinely have businesses and families in multiple other jurisdictions. Planning for succession and wealth transfer for these family members is done in compliance with the laws of the relevant jurisdictions, and in consultation with local counsel as required.

California does not have a forced heirship regime, however, in some cases, California courts may apply the law of another jurisdiction to an estate administered in California which may include a forced heirship regime. For example, the State of Louisiana has rules to prevent a testator from disinheriting his or her children. California’s community property laws essentially entitle a spouse to one half of the other spouse’s assets earned during marriage, whether at death or in a divorce. In addition, one spouse generally cannot sell the primary residence which is community without the consent of the other spouse.

California Community Property

In California, all property earned by either spouse during the marriage is presumed to be community property, owned 50/50 by each spouse. The presumption is rebuttable. The spouses may agree in writing to transmute separate property to community property or vice-versa. Separate property includes property acquired before the marriage and separate during the marriage, gifts and bequests made to only one spouse, and a portion of personal injury settlements. Separate property that has been comingled with marital assets can become community property.

In California one spouse cannot transfer marital property outside the community without the consent of the other spouse.

California Prenuptial Agreements

California prenuptial and postnuptial agreements are governed by the California Uniform Prenuptial Agreement Act. This prescribes the requirements for how such agreements may be created and addresses what can and cannot be set forth the contract. As long as the parties have drafted and executed their prenuptial agreement in compliance with the Act, and a California court finds no fraud, duress, non-disclosure of assets, or unconscionable terms, then the prenuptial agreement is enforceable. A California matrimonial attorney should be consulted before entering into such an agreement, as certain terms are advisable to include, to ensure the agreement is enforceable and not deemed to be unconscionable.

Reassessment on Transfer Taxes

In California, real property is reassessed at its fair market value when it is sold, transferred by gift, or inherited at death. It may be deemed to be sold and therefore subject to being re-assessed upon transfer of a certain percentage of ownership if held in certain entities and under certain fact patters. Complex rules apply to such transfers and to requirements for filing various informational returns such as the Form BOE100-B with the California Board of Equalization.

Spousal Exclusion

All transfers of real property between spouses, whether by gift, sale, inheritance, or pursuant to divorce, are exempt from reassessment. 

Parent–Child and Grandparent–Grandchild Exclusion

California real property owners may avoid the property tax increases for certain transfers to children. However, after Proposition 19 passed in 2021, transfer exclusions between parents and family members became significantly limited. Following implementation of Proposition 19, transfers of a primary residence between parents and children are exempt from reassessment, but only up to USD1 million of assessed value. In the case of transfers by trust qualify for the exclusion when beneficial ownership changes from parent to child.

California public policy is designed to prevent trusts from existing indefinitely to encourage money to be used and to circulate in commerce rather than remain in a trust. A California trust is subject to the Rule Against Perpetuities, and therefore exists for the lifespan of the youngest individual alive at the time the trust is established, plus an additional 21 years, which results in a trust duration of approximately 90 to 100 years. At the end of the period, the trust assets must be distributed and the trust ends. State laws differ regarding the permissible duration of an irrevocable trust, for example, Wyoming allows an irrevocable trust to last for 1,000 years, and in Delaware personal property may be held in trust indefinitely. California families often opt for Wyoming and Delaware trusts to take advantage of this, combined with zero state income tax rates there.

Transfer of Digital Assets

California and most states have adopted the Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act (RUFADAA) (2015), which applies to wills executed and trusts created before, on, or after 1 January 2017. Under the rules, a custodian of the digital asset may disclose information in a decedent’s (a “user’s”) account to the decedent’s fiduciary or settlor, in other words, the personal representative or trustee. The fiduciary has the right of access to any digital asset in which the decedent or settlor had an interest and is an authorised user. A digital assets is defined as an electronic record in which an individual has a right or interest, and generally does not include the underlying asset or liability. The disclosure may include the content or a catalogue of the user’s electronic communications but does not include digital assets deleted by the user. A fiduciary, the custodian, or the ultimate recipient of the digital asset may obtain an order limiting the custodian from disclosing all or part of the decedent’s asset if the user directs it, or if it is provided in a trust to limit disclosure. The fiduciary may request an in camera review of the digital asset. The fiduciary is subject to the same duties as are imposed on fiduciaries when they manage tangible property: the duty of care, duty of loyalty, and the duty of confidentiality. California does not explicitly address the transfer of cryptocurrency for purposes of succession. For detailed information see California Probate Code, Sections 870–884.

A wide variety of trusts are recognised and respected in California including revocable trusts, irrevocable trusts, and Foundations. In 2018, California enacted the California Uniform Trust Decanting Act (2018) (California Probate Code, Section 19501 ), which allows trustees and authorised fiduciaries to modify the terms of certain California trusts without the consent of the beneficiaries, and of revocable trusts where revocation requires the consent of a trustee or third person with a right contrary to the interest of the settlor. Most California residents whose assets indicate the need for estate planning utilise a revocable trust, to avoid the need for probate which can be costly and burdensome.

A wide variety of trusts are recognised and respected in California including revocable trusts, irrevocable trusts, and Foundations. In 2018, California enacted the California Uniform Trust Decanting Act (2018) (California Probate Code, Section 19501 ), which allows trustees and authorised fiduciaries to modify the terms of certain California trusts without the consent of the beneficiaries (provided the beneficiaries receive notice of the decanting and have an opportunity to object), and of revocable trusts where revocation requires the consent of a trustee or third person with a right contrary to the interest of the settlor. Trusts often used in California for estate and tax planning purposes include intentionally defective grantor trusts (IDGT), a qualified personal residence trust (QPRT), a grantor retained annuity trust (GRAT) and a spousal lifetime access trust (SLAT).

California imposes an income tax on a trust where a trustee or non-contingent beneficiary is a resident of California. Thus, for settlors who do not reside in California, care is often taken to ensure the fiduciary is not a resident of California. Conversely, California resident Settlors often establish non-grantor trusts in other states such as Wyoming or Delaware to take advantage of the zero income tax rate in those states on the income of the trust. Similarly, planning may be done, with experienced California tax advice, for an owner of a business to relocate to another state prior to the sale of a business.

The California Uniform Trust Decanting Act (2018) (California Probate Code, Section 19501) allows trustees and authorised fiduciaries to modify the terms of certain California trusts without the consent of the beneficiaries, and of revocable trusts where revocation requires the consent of a trustee or third person with a right contrary to the interest of the settlor. A California trust which could take advantage of these decanting provisions must have its principal place of administration in or changed to California, and contain a provision that the trust is governed by the laws of California. (California Probate Code, Section 190501, 19505.)

The ability of a trustee or authorised fiduciary to exercise the decanting power depends on the terms of the trust and the trustee’s power to make distributions to the beneficiaries. A trustee needs to have “expanded distributive discretion”, which includes the ability to modify administrative (which requires only “limited dispositive discretion”) and dispositive terms, such as changing a beneficiary’s interest, in the first trust to exercise the decanting power. In exercising the decanting power, a trustee may not (i) include as a current beneficiary a person that is not a current beneficiary of the first trust, (ii) include as a presumptive remainder beneficiary or successor beneficiary a person that is not a current beneficiary, presumptive remainder beneficiary, or successor beneficiary of the first trust, or (iii) reduce or eliminate a vested interest. (California Probate Code, Section 19511.)

Generally, a trustee may decant to change the situs and governing law of the trust out of California as long as there is sufficient nexus to the new jurisdiction. For example, bypass marital trusts can be decanted by giving the surviving spouse a power of appointment over the trust property after the death of the first spouse to step up the value of the property, thereby reducing capital gains tax. An irrevocable trust may be decanted to improve administrative provisions, or modify outdated provisions. Decanting is an opportunity to add significant protections, such as expanded trustee discretion, to California special needs trusts. Further, the ability to decant and modify a provision to convert a mandatory distribution to a discretionary distribution enhances protection of the trust’s assets from creditors.

Although consent and court approval are not required, the trustee or authorised fiduciary must give notice of the intent to exercise the decanting power to each settlor, qualified beneficiaries, holders of presently exercisable powers of appointment, persons with a current right to remove or replace the fiduciary, all fiduciaries of the first and second trusts, and, in certain cases, the Attorney General.

Separately, most estate planning includes opportunities for the grantor and/or his or her spouse to receive some financial benefit from the transferred assets, should unforeseen circumstances mandate a need for this. For example, in an IDGT, the spouse of one grantor may receive some trust assets as a discretionary beneficiary; a GRAT includes a specified return to the grantor, and a sale of an asset for a note to an IDGT provides a deferred return to the grantor, and many corporate arrangements may include indirect control in the grantor over assets transferred to a trust, taking into account evolving tax law in this area, which is designed to prohibit the grantor retaining control over transferred assets, the penalty being inclusion in the estate of the grantor for estate tax purposes.

In California, trusts are a popular and effective mechanism for protecting assets from unforeseen creditors of the beneficiaries.

In California, selection of the situs for asset protection is a critical strategy in establishing a trust. Generally assets transferred to a trust are exempt from the creditor of the beneficiary, except to the extent the beneficiary has the “right” to receive them. Accordingly, discretion for a trustee as to how much, if any, to distribute is often preferred, compared to giving the beneficiary the “right” to receive trust assets for his or her health, education, maintenance or support (HEMS). Certain states, such as Wyoming and Delaware, have self settled trust laws providing that an individual may transfer assets in trust for himself or herself and avoid creditors. In general, a transfer to a trust will not provide protection against the claims of an existing creditor. This dates back to the English Statute of Elizabeth (“A transfer to evade, defraud, or delay a [known] creditor is void.”) as a fraudulent transfer. Once the situs of a trust is established, the creation of an entity, such as a private trust company or a family office, to manage family holdings is an effective tool for asset management and planning. The office can be used to manage and administer financial matters, attend to administrative matters relating to tangible assets, and manage who uses shared assets. A family office creates a clear framework for managing the complexities of owning, maintaining and growing a diversity of assets, as well as attending to succession planning.

In California, trusts are a popular method for family business transfer tax and succession planning.

In California, selection of the situs for asset protection is a critical strategy in establishing a trust. A limited liability company (LLC) is often used to own a business; membership interests in the LLC can then be transferred to a trust to reduce income and transfer tax. Trusts can be tailored to accommodate family goals, in terms of decision making, distributions and investments. The family office or a private trust company is often used for extremely valuable family enterprises or assets.

Transfers of partial interests in an entity such as a partnership or an LLC are often discounted to reflect lack of marketability and lack of control, which can result in transfer tax savings.

The high concentration of wealth in California often leads to trust disputes and will contests. Trust lawsuits encompass claims against a trustee regarding the administration of a trust, lack of capacity of a testator, violation of trust terms, and undue influence. More frequently, litigants sometimes assert exaggerated (or unfounded) claims, seeking a settlement, or aggressively use tactics such as bringing a conservatorship action to gain control over the person and property of another person.

California’s heightened court involvement makes the probate process arduous. This process typically ranges from 12–24 months.

Mechanisms for compensating aggrieved parties include:

  • compelling trustee to perform specified duties;
  • seeking a court order to prevent the trustee from furthering a breach of trust;
  • appointing a temporary trustee;
  • removing the trustee; and
  • imposing an equitable lien or a constructive trust on trust property.

The basic objective of damages is compensation, and the theory is that the party injured by breach should receive the equivalent of the benefits of performance. A petitioner can seek the disgorgement of the trustee’s profits through a money judgment against the trustee or seek to establish a rightful claim to specific assets. Punitive damages are awarded to discourage oppression, fraud or malice, further punishing the wrongdoer on top of the actual damages that were suffered. Ultimately, compensation hinges on a loss stemming from a recognised breach.

The prevalence of corporate fiduciaries in California is directly related to the concentration of wealth. It is common for a grantor of a trust with substantial capital and assets to involve these corporate fiduciaries. These entities often possess specialised expertise and can help shield trustees from personal liability. When considering what constitutes ordinary care and diligence, a professional representative (corporate fiduciary) is held to a higher standard of care based on their presumed expertise. This higher standard of care applies to all professional personal representatives, whether individual or corporate. Note that, in 2024, California enacted both a California Uniform Directed Trust Act statute and a Professional Fiduciaries Act, CA AB-2148, providing much needed guidance.

When a personal representative, including a trustee of a trust or a foundation, breaches his or her fiduciary duty, he or she may:

  • be responsible for any resulting loss incurred by the omission;
  • be forced to disgorge profits or compensation; and/or
  • be responsible for profit that would have accrued in the absence of this negligence.

The fiduciary may avoid or minimise these liabilities by acting reasonably and in good faith given the circumstances. A trustee may delegate investment functions as prudent under the circumstances. A trustee that properly selects an agent, establishes the scope of delegation, and periodically reviews the agent’s performance will not be liable to the beneficiaries for actions/decisions of the agent. Many trusts include exculpatory clauses, providing for no trustee liability except for fraud or wilful misconduct, and the trustee may obtain directors’ and officers’ liability insurance. Self-dealing can result in the fiduciary insuring a positive outcome in the related investment (becoming personally liable for any loss).

California law provides that a trustee shall invest and manage trust assets as a prudent investor would. The trustee must exercise reasonable care, skill, and caution. A single investment or action is not inherently prudent or imprudent. Rather, the whole portfolio is considered a part of an overall investment strategy with a relative risk and return objective. In general, the obligation to diversify assets is a tenet of prudent investment.

The trustee has a duty to diversify the investments unless, under the circumstances, it is prudent not to do so. Investments should be guided by the following criteria:

  • economic conditions;
  • risk management practices;
  • possible effect of inflation or deflation;
  • tax consequences;
  • expected total return of income and appreciation of capital;
  • needs for liquidity; and
  • other resources of the beneficiaries.

The trustee can operate a business within the trust property, and he or she can change its structure (ie, incorporation or dissolution). However, this is only permitted if the trust document or court allows it.

Someone is a resident of CA if they are (i) present in CA for other than a temporary purpose or (ii) domiciled in CA, but outside CA for a temporary purpose. Factors used to determine the strength of one’s ties to CA include, but are not limited to, the:

  • amount of time spent in CA versus other states;
  • location of spouse and children;
  • location of principal residence;
  • state of issued driver’s licence;
  • state where one is registered to vote;
  • location of banks where accounts are maintained; and
  • permanence of one’s work assignments in CA.

Rather than relying on a single factor or a fixed number of ties, CA considers the strength of connections to the state. (State of California – Franchise Tax Board).

There is a specified process for gaining US citizenship. An immigration attorney should be consulted.

It is relatively easy to become a resident in California. For example, buying or renting a permanent residence in California, combined with being employed in California and sending children to school in California should suffice. Conversely, it can be difficult to cease to be treated as a California resident. In order to effectively do so, as many of the domicile factors listed as possible should be established in the desired new state of residence and a California state tax attorney should be consulted.

In California, a special needs trust may be established if:

  • the incompetent person has a disability that substantially impairs their ability to care for themselves;
  • the incompetent person has special needs that will not be met without the trust; and
  • the assets transferred to the trust do not exceed the amount reasonably necessary to meet the special needs.

A special needs trust (SNT) is designed to preserve public assistance benefits for a disabled beneficiary. A first party SNT is funded with assets that belong to the beneficiary or which the beneficiary is legally entitled. A third party SNT is funded with the assets of anyone other than the disabled beneficiary or their spouse.

Ultimately the trust enables the special needs beneficiary to receive assets while also staying eligible for supplemental security income, Medi-Cal, and other government benefits.

California requires a court proceeding to oversee the appointment of a guardian. The goal of this procedure is to ensure that the guardian is suitable to maintain the best interests of the person under guardianship.

Guardians are required to annually submit a status report to the court, providing information regarding the guardianship. This includes details such as the guardian’s address, the child’s current residence location, reasons for changes, and other factors. If this report is not submitted by the guardian, the court may order the guardian to make themselves available for purposes of investigation of the guardianship.

Six months after the appointment of a conservator, a court investigator must visit the conservatee and assess the appropriateness of the conservatorship. The investigator then reports to the court on the conservatee’s placement, quality of care, and finances. This procedure occurs annually thereafter. The court will consistently review if less restrictive alternatives or terminating the conservatorship is appropriate. The court, on its own motion or by request of interested parties, may schedule a hearing or request an accounting for further review. A spouse ceases to have standing to bring a conservatorship proceeding if a divorce is pending. This mitigates against the risk of the conservatorship proceeding being used as an offensive weapon in a divorce, where the moving party wishes to gain control of the other person’s property or “personal protection” for their own benefit, rather than for the benefit of the proposed conservatee.

California’s Department of Aging has set forth the Master Plan for Aging (MPA) initiative. One of the goals is entitled “Affording Aging”. California is currently analysing the impact of job loss on older workers’ employment, retirement, and health. Additionally, the state has implemented CalSavers, a state sponsored retirement plan, to help employees prepare for the future. MPA has also invested in programmes to address issues of hunger and homelessness amongst aging adults. The presence of an initiative displays that financial preparation for longer lives is topical and will continue to be addressed.

For purposes of intestate succession, a parent-child relationship exists if that child is:

  • a natural child; or
  • an adopted child.

Adopted Children

Adoption severs the relationship between an adopted person and their natural parents unless:

  • the natural parent and adopted person lived together as parent and child, or the natural parent was married to or cohabitating with the other natural parent at the time the person was conceived and died before the person’s birth; and
  • the adoption was by the spouse of either natural parents or after the death of either natural parents.

Children Born Out of Wedlock

The marital status of one’s parents does not affect the child’s classification. A child born out of wedlock is considered a natural child.

Posthumously Conceived Children

These children are eligible for any of the deceased parent’s property if:

  • the father, in a signed and dated writing, makes the specified birth of the child clear; and
  • the conceived child is in utero within two years after the father’s death.

Surrogacy

In California, intended parents may establish their legal parental rights before the birth of the child without formal adoption proceedings. Upon birth of the child, the intended parents are encouraged to secure a parentage order from the court. This establishes the legal parental rights and terminates rights of the surrogate.

Same-sex marriage is recognised in California. Currently, legislators in California are seeking to include the right to marriage equality in the California Constitution. Domestic partners may file a Declaration of Domestic Partnership with the Secretary of the State. Registered domestic partners are afforded the same rights, protections, and benefits as a married couple in the State of California.

Federal tax law limits charitable contributions of cash to a public charity to 60% of the donor’s federal adjusted gross income (AGI). California limits contributions of cash to a public charity to 50% of the donor’s federal AGI. The federal and California limit on non-cash contributions, such as stocks, to a public charity is 30% of AGI. The federal and California limit on contributions of cash to a private foundation is 30% of AGI. The federal and California limit on noncash contributions to a private foundation is 20% of AGI. If a person has insufficient income in a given year to maximise the contribution, the person has five additional years to apply any unused portion of the deduction as a carry-forward. Deductions for charitable giving is designed to encourage individuals to support goals which benefit the public good. Given California’s high state income tax and the concentration of wealthy individuals there, charitable giving is an important component of estate planning for wealthy Californians.

Charitable Trusts

A charitable remainder trust (CRT) allows the beneficiary of the trust to receive payments for a set number of years or for the remainder of their life. At the end of the term, the remaining assets are transferred to the public charity of the donor’s choice.

A charitable lead trust (CLT) enables the charity to receive income from the trust for a set term, after which the remaining assets are distributed to the non-charitable beneficiaries.

Charitable trusts offer immediate tax deductions on the assets contributed. Additionally, highly appreciated assets can be transferred to a trust and diversified, while deferring some of the capital gain tax.

Donor-Advised Funds (DAFs)

DAFs provide donors with an investment account solely for the goal of charitable giving. This irrevocable charitable gift is tax deductible and any investment growth within the account is tax free. Unlike private foundations which are required to distribute a minimum of 5% of their assets each year, a DAF may continue indefinitely, despite the charitable contribution deduction having been received upon transfer of assets to the DAF.

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

2550 Hanover Street
Palo Alto
California 94304-1115
USA

+1 650 233 4046

jmccall@pillsburylaw.com www.pillsburylaw.com
Author Business Card

Trends and Developments


Authors



Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP is an international law firm with a particular focus on the technology and life sciences, energy, financial, and real estate and construction sectors. Recognised as one of the most innovative law firms by the Financial Times and one of the top firms for client service by BTI Consulting, Pillsbury and its lawyers are highly regarded for their forward-thinking approach, their enthusiasm for collaborating across disciplines and their authoritative commercial awareness.

Strategic Issues in High Net Worth Litigation and Dispute Resolution

The planning phase

The importance of clear communication

Money is a sensitive topic. It is almost impossible for a child to bring this subject up with a parent, and parents can also find it hard to discuss with their children. Similarly, with a spouse, the discussion of finances can be fraught with the danger of offending the other spouse, and, for that reason, this topic can be avoided and, when conflict arises, a spouse can fail to effectively advocate for themselves.

While complicated, money must be directly discussed, as it is a reality of modern life. It affects living expenses, and, after essentials are covered, it affects luxuries, such as vacations and other amenities. Money impacts a family’s sense of financial security, directly related to peace of mind. An imbalance in access to finances among family members or between spouses can lead to jealousy, competition and destructive bitterness. Sometimes these forces can lead to litigation, leaving scars in a relationship that will never be healed.

The first building block in avoiding these issues is clear communication about shared and personal finances. To prepare for a discussion on this topic, it can be helpful to obtain advice from an experienced financial advisor. Considerations can include how much information to share with a spouse or child and when; and the extent to which the family member with greater assets plans to share their wealth, and with whom. In a family where there has been a second or third marriage, the inheritance for the children can be vulnerable to the needs or demands of the succeeding spouse(s). This should be addressed upfront, so that a plan can be arrived at that reflects the true wishes of the wealthy spouse. Clearly advising a subsequent spouse and the children from a prior marriage on the aforementioned issues can reduce tension among the family members. Once decided, later communications may be more authentic, as there is no incentive for “jockeying for position”.

Trusts as a protective mechanism

A trust can be an excellent mechanism for protecting children or a spouse, providing long-term financial support, and ensuring that assets pass to the intended recipient(s), as opposed to a third party – not just a potential unknown creditor or a spouse in a divorce, but also to others who may capitalise on a lack of ability by the beneficiary to adequately safeguard themselves.

Trusts can achieve the nuanced goals of the settlor, providing comfort in knowing the child will be guided by experienced professionals for investments and long-range financial planning.

Trusts can also segregate assets among children and between children from a prior marriage, as opposed to a subsequent spouse. Funding trusts can be tax efficient, using discounts to leverage available exemptions, reduce or eliminate state income tax and select a state which permits a long-term trust to maximise the GST tax savings. The attached chart shows a review of trust planning considerations in various trust jurisdictions – see link for Comparison of Trust Laws. Use of life insurance in a trust can reduce transfer and income taxes.

Similarly, a marital trust for a spouse, even one who is the parent of the children – who often are the remainderman – can be important to protect the spouse in a later marriage and ensure the remainder passes to the intended beneficiaries, such as the children. Careful analysis should be given to the amount of principal to be paid to the spouse/income beneficiary; for a second marriage, a unit trust or fixed overall percentage payout (if greater than the accounting income) can provide clear boundaries and also a tax benefit within the context of a Qualified Domestic Trust.

Care must be taken when creating an irrevocable trust. The recent Murdoch case, where a Nevada Court held that later amendments to existing irrevocable trusts were not allowed, illustrates the importance of carefully considering the terms of, and assets to be funded into, irrevocable trusts before finalising them. In Murdoch the patriarch wished to modify the allocation of interests in a series of family companies, seeking to consolidate control in one trust, but the beneficiaries of the other existing trusts objected. In this case, consideration of long-range tax matters could potentially have helped to reach a settlement, which may still occur during the appeals process.

The importance of a prenuptial agreement

A related sensitive topic is a prenuptial agreement, which is important, particularly in a first marriage with young and inexperienced parties. First, the full disclosure required by the prenuptial agreement will enlighten both parties as to whether the other one has substantial assets and whether they are liquid, and the extent of existing debt owed by the other person. Next, the process of writing the prenuptial agreement requires both parties to communicate about the amount they wish to leave each other upon death, the method for paying expenses during marriage, and how assets will be divided in the event of divorce. The prenuptial agreement starts the couple on a path of direct – hopefully respectful – communication, and will also reveal each party’s approach to money; if too aggressive or one-sided, that may be a red flag. Note that the prenuptial agreement is essential in the event of a divorce. Certain states, such as California, can require extreme reallocation of assets (in California, 50/50 for community property – all earnings during marriage, and income (50% of the difference between the spouses, potentially for life). To ensure the prenuptial agreement is valid, each party must be represented by their own local matrimonial attorney and the agreement must reflect the nuances of the law of the state of the marriage. For example, in California, to be valid, it may be prudent to limit, but not try to entirely eliminate, the term during which the higher-earning spouse must pay the lower-earning spouse after a divorce. Similar limitations apply in Florida and other states.

Boundaries

To be effective, estate and trust planning works best as a team effort. In order to succeed, a subtle but essential component is for the beneficiary to be able to adequately advocate for themselves in order to develop healthy “boundaries” both inter-generationally and between spouses.

For example, a wealthy client may acquiesce and give a demanding spouse money or interest in their residence because they think it is “easier” to do so, and because they want a companion. However, in the long run, giving in when it is against one’s true wishes can lead to bad – or even dangerous – outcomes, including being taken advantage of multiple times by others who want money and are not genuinely caring for the client. Conversely, if the client can receive appropriate training to have strong self-esteem and set boundaries in terms of what they can and cannot provide for their spouse, or even children, they will have a more genuine – and, consequently, more fulfilling – relationship, as opposed to feeling as though they are providing the services of a bank or – even worse – are a victim. Professional advice should be regularly implemented to help clients develop the ability to self-advocate and navigate challenging relationships. Examples of how a lack of self-esteem can become self-destructive are discussed below in the context of the Conservatorship Proceeding and Nursing Home considerations.

Litigation and dispute resolution

Frequently, the issues discussed above can lead to an actual court case. When this happens, it is essential that the client obtain skilled advice not just from litigators but also from savvy trust and estate lawyers who can offer strategic advice as early as possible in the proceedings.

Preparation for negotiations

If possible, it is a good idea to speak with the different constituents prior to the designated time for a “meet and confer” opportunity for settlement. They should be encouraged to communicate what they really want. Quite often, a party will be diverted by ancillary considerations, thereby obfuscating the real issue, and if one can ask them to say what will make them happy/what their goal is, it will be possible to resolve the issues more quickly.

Quantify the different outcomes

A key aspect of preparation for negotiations is to prepare calculations well in advance of the scheduled settlement meeting, reflecting the different net monetary results to the parties, depending on the different potential outcomes of the negotiations. An essential component of this is the impact of taxes – both income and/or estate, gift or GST – on their net recovery.

However, quite often, litigators and matrimonial lawyers are not experts at preparing tax calculations. The tax approach can help resolve a dispute since, if one’s desired outcome is more tax efficient for various parties it will incentivise them to agree with one’s stance. Conversely, if an opposing party knows that their desired outcome may possibly subject them to significant tax, that can serve as leverage.

One should prepare the calculation prior to the settlement meeting or mediation and advise the other parties to “do their own math” – if they do not know how to do circular calculations, for example, where part of the remainder goes to charity, giving rise to a deduction from transfer tax, which thereby increases the charitable remainder, further reducing the tax, and so forth. That will be their responsibility and, moreover, it gives counsel a better chance to guide the negotiations, since counsel will understand the mathematics ahead of time. Counsel may need to engage a fiduciary accountant to assist with these calculations, since these can be quite time-consuming and complex.

The settlement agreement

Try to arrange for all the parties to be present in a mediation setting for an entire day (often this extends throughout the night, which evolves during the settlement process; it is best not to have any parties leave before the settlement agreement is signed, optimally). A tactful, intelligent and flexible mediator is invaluable if one can be arranged to facilitate the mediation.

If a settlement is possible, it is advisable to prepare a draft settlement agreement ahead of time; if this is not possible, then do it during the night of the meeting in order to obtain everyone’s signature while they are in the mood to agree. If parties depart from the mediation in the middle of the night, it can create tremendous difficulty in obtaining their signature later, which can also require the entire agreement to be renegotiated.

Litigation and resolution

The abovementioned tools can be implemented to resolve a difficult case. However, in some cases, opposing parties can be so difficult that they refuse to settle. In such a case, it is essential to be armed with aggressive, strategically skilled and experienced litigators.

The Court process

Credibility

In litigation it is extremely important to maintain and build upon credibility. This can be achieved only by being straightforward and 100% truthful with the Judge, the Court representatives, such as the Court Investigator and the other parties about every aspect of the case. It is essential to present one’s point of view at the outset, illustrating why one’s client is entitled to their desired outcome. At the same time, where there are inevitable weaknesses in one’s client’s case, it is best to admit those and if possible, explain a mitigating reason for that weakness. This disarms one’s opponent.

Knowledge of the law

Naturally, it is critical to carefully research all aspects of the case prior to going to Court, to grasp the issues and digest relevant case law. To be creative and effective, it is essential to try to think outside the box. In a recent real estate case in Wyoming, the local real estate statute was problematic because it was ambiguous, and a creative attorney was able to win the litigation thinking “big picture” to find that the outcome desired by the opponents was likely unconstitutional as an unlawful taking in violation of the 5th and the 14th Amendments of the Federal Constitution, as well as under the governing State Constitution.

Cases regarding tax issues should not be avoided, as they can provide key leverage to obtain a desired outcome.

The sympathetic client

It is important to identify the aspects of a client’s position that are appealing to the average person, and therefore likely to influence the Court. Determine this by evaluating the legitimacy of their goal. Where, for example, a client has been victimised by the unreasonable behaviour of the opposing party, this should be persuasive because it is a wrong that needs to be corrected. On the other hand, if a potential client appears to be unreasonable, overly aggressive or untruthful, it is not likely to win the sympathy of the Court.

Diplomacy, respect and patience

Given that the dispute resolution process is inherently stressful and contentious, it is understandable that all parties may be vulnerable to anger. To combat this (as anger can escalate and block resolution), remember that the opposing attorneys are likely to be intelligent and to have some valid points. As much as we want to “win”, being sensitive to their clients’ vulnerabilities and goals increases our chance of settlement. It is crucial to avoid ancillary debates, such as whether the other attorney has been offensive or irritating. Instead, aligning oneself as their reasonable ally in reaching a settlement is a good approach. We are all human. It is important to take a deep breath and try to resolve conflicts that may arise during the settlement process or when discussing the case in the hallway after a court hearing. Naturally, the best foundation for a win is detailed study of the law and the calculations, but respect for the other attorneys, diplomacy and patience are key ingredients to a successful outcome.

Moreover, the Judge and the court are likely to observe all reasonable behaviour, which will incentivise them to work to achieve a fair settlement.

Recent examples of high net worth litigation techniques and dispute resolution

Conservatorship Proceedings

In a recent California case, a husband was administering psychiatric drugs to his wife who had previously suffered from depression. He enlisted the support of a local doctor who would bring the drugs to his house on a Saturday and receive cash payments. As a result of over-medication, the wife spent her days and nights alone in a room, mostly sleeping. During this timeframe, the husband arranged for a post-nuptial agreement to be written whereby the parties agreed that the substantial assets of the wife should all be transferred to the husband’s account for “safekeeping”. An unscrupulous lawyer was retained by the husband to “represent” the wife in the post-nuptial agreement. Meanwhile, the husband was carrying on an affair with one of his employees. Fortunately, the wife discovered the affair, and this served as a wake-up call for her. She moved to California to live with a family member and retained a competent trust and estates attorney. With the assistance of her family member and the attorney, who referred her to a trustworthy hospital, she obtained appropriate psychiatric counselling and was able to extract herself from her medical dependence.

The lawyer was able to reclaim the wife’s assets that had been wrongly deposited into the husband’s account. This was made easier when the attorney advised the bank that the wife had been on drugs when the bank made the transfer and the bank admitted it had taken instructions from the husband, not directly from the wife, and the assets were immediately transferred back to the wife’s account.

Upon realising that he could not entice his wife back to live with him, the husband then brought a Conservatorship Proceeding. Although he had not seen her for several years, he alleged that she was addicted to the drugs – that he had been administering – and was able to unable to care for herself or for her own assets. Fortunately, the wife had strong California counsel. They were able to explain to the Court Investigator that the wife had received appropriate psychiatric counselling and had rid herself of the medical dependency. The Court came to the aid of the wife. During the proceedings, the wife chose to file for divorce. Under governing state law, if a divorce action is pending, the other spouse loses standing to seek a Conservatorship. The Court ruled that that divorce was sufficient to deprive the husband of standing in the Conservatorship case and dismissed his petition.

This case illustrates how a Conservatorship can be improperly used as an offensive weapon to control the person and the property of the other spouse in a divorce.

In another similar case in New York, a Conservatorship Petition was successful. In this particular case, although a divorce was pending, the spouse that brought the petition for the Conservatorship was not deprived of standing and was able to succeed. The wife was placed in an institution, and the husband was able to continue his extramarital affair while using the wife’s assets for his comfort and luxurious life style.

Used correctly, a Conservatorship can provide Court-supervised oversight of a client’s assets. However, in a contentious family situation, a Conservatorship can potentially constitute a dangerous trap for a client and should be cautiously guarded against. Building relationships with doctors and friends (who would later testify to the client’s competence if needed) and obtaining a baseline record of cognitive ability from a qualified expert can protect one’s client, particularly when there is a potential enemy who could seek to control their assets alleging incompetence and using the Conservatorship Proceeding as an offensive tool.

Nursing-home considerations

Occasionally, a client is placed in a nursing home against their choice by a spouse who alleges that the client cannot care for themselves. This approach can be taken to an extreme when the client is not really in need of continuous medical assistance. In some cases, the nursing home in which the client is placed is not a high-quality one, lacking quality medical care. The client can then succumb to numerous medical issues and may not live very long. Loved ones should be on hand to advocate for the client to be placed in a good-quality medical facility, to ensure that long-term care insurance is in place, or to provide express instructions that the client must remain at home with around-the-clock nursing if they are unable to care for themselves.

Will and revocable trust estate planning documents

In another recent California case, a very wealthy client lived alone. While he had attempted to create a will with his estate planning attorney, he did not complete the process. He died without any clear record of which estate planning documents he intended to use to control his vast estate. Litigation arose among the intestate heirs who thought that he had died intestate and other beneficiaries who produced a document which they asserted was a hand-written – or holographic – will. Without adequate records as to whether that holographic will was valid, and without the client having completed his official estate planning documents, the case was poised for extended litigation. Fortunately, the parties reached a settlement, avoiding years of potential protracted and expensive litigation. In this case, the impact of taxes on the various beneficiaries’ interests was a key tool in reaching a settlement.

This highlights the importance of ensuring that one’s clients have their wills and trusts up to date and that the originals are carefully safeguarded in a vault at the lawyer’s office. This can alleviate uncertainty as to what their wishes actually are when they die, and can mitigate the possibility of foul play if documents that control a vast amount of wealth are neither safeguarded nor certain to be valid.

California Supreme Court weighs in on trust modification methods

Since the Fourth District Court of Appeal’s decision in Haggerty v Thornton(2021) 68 Cal.App.5th 1003, California courts have been divided on how revocable trusts may be modified. Haggerty held that unless a trust explicitly states that a particular method of modification is exclusive, the statutory method under Probate Code Sections 15401 and 15402 remains valid.

Section 15401 allows revocation either by the method stated in the trust or by a signed writing (excluding a will) delivered to the trustee during the settlor’s lifetime. If the trust expressly makes its method exclusive, that method must be used. Section 15402 states that a revocable trust may be modified using the revocation procedure unless the trust provides otherwise. Unlike 15401, it lacks language requiring exclusivity, leading to inconsistent rulings.

Contrary to Haggerty, appellate courts often previously required adherence to the trust’s modification method, even if not labelled exclusive. On 8 February 2024, the California Supreme Court resolved this conflict, adopting Haggerty’s reasoning. It ruled that the statutory method applies unless the trust clearly makes its own procedure exclusive.

Accordingly, settlors wishing to limit trust modifications to a specific method must include explicit language in the trust declaring that method as the sole procedure. Without such a statement, modifications may be made via signed, non-testamentary writing delivered to the trustee during the settlor’s lifetime.

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

2550 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA 94304-1115
USA

+1 650 233 4046

jmccall@pillsburylaw.com www.pillsburylaw.com
Author Business Card

Law and Practice

Authors



Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP is an international law firm with a particular focus on the technology & life sciences, energy, financial, and real estate & construction sectors. Recognised as one of the most innovative law firms by the Financial Times and one of the top firms for client service by BTI Consulting, Pillsbury and its lawyers are highly regarded for their forward-thinking approach, their enthusiasm for collaborating across disciplines and their authoritative commercial awareness.

Trends and Developments

Authors



Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP is an international law firm with a particular focus on the technology and life sciences, energy, financial, and real estate and construction sectors. Recognised as one of the most innovative law firms by the Financial Times and one of the top firms for client service by BTI Consulting, Pillsbury and its lawyers are highly regarded for their forward-thinking approach, their enthusiasm for collaborating across disciplines and their authoritative commercial awareness.

Compare law and practice by selecting locations and topic(s)

{{searchBoxHeader}}

Select Topic(s)

loading ...
{{topic.title}}

Please select at least one chapter and one topic to use the compare functionality.