Jenna Rubin writes about the case of Vigliani v. Bank of America, which asked the trial court to consider whether a decedent’s revocable trust required a Family Trust to be funded with $3.5 million (exemption amount in 2009), $5 million (the exemption amount in 2010), or some other amount.

Read the beginning here:

This decision is an interesting one because it involves both a review of the uncertainty faced by practitioners in 2009 regarding the future of the estate tax exemption, and somewhat strange language in a trust meant to deal with that uncertainty.
Here, the trial court was asked to consider whether a decedent’s revocable trust required a Family Trust to be funded with $3.5 million (the exemption amount in 2009), $5 million (the exemption amount in 2010), or some other amount.  The trustees filed for declaratory relief to obtain a judicial determination of this issue, and the trial court held that the Family Trust should be funded with $3.5 million.
The Appellate Court disagreed with the trial court’s analysis.  First, it felt that the actual division and funding of the trusts were the responsibility of the trustee of the trust under the terms of the trust and F.S. § 736.0801. The Court also went on to explain why it felt that funding the Family Trust with $3.5 million was likely an incorrect result.
Find the article here
Posted by Pooja Shivaprasad, Associate Editor, Wealth Strategies Journal