You don't need a trust.
However, understanding trust law can make all income taxes disappear, and provide great asset protection -- but it requires a knowledge of multiple aspects of law, not just trust law.
Took me many years to figure it out. I doubt that not more than 1 in 10,000 CPA's could do it. Same goes for most attorneys.
Regarding common law trusts and "express trusts," I have read that document you posted and I agree with some of it, but not all of it.
An express trust is nothing more than a trust where the parties agree they are creating a trust, whereas an implied trust is a sitution that might be construed as a trust under law, even if the parties did not necessarily intend it. There is nothing more to it.
Regarding common law vs. state law, I think utilizing state law actually creates a better asset protection structure, and a better tax situation, than common law. That's because most courts today would not understand how to deal with common law -- and most trustees and attorneys wouldn't, either. Matter of fact, most would be hostile to it and try to cause problems, whereas they understand state law because they can "look it up." Common law requires much more knowledge, which is not taught in law school anymore.
Have you actually USED a common law trust for any period of time?
I do think it is possible to do it, but I see advantages to using certain states instead, as a practical matter in the real world today.
You don't need a trust.
However, understanding trust law can make all income taxes disappear, and provide great asset protection -- but it requires a knowledge of multiple aspects of law, not just trust law.
Took me many years to figure it out. I doubt that not more than 1 in 10,000 CPA's could do it. Same goes for most attorneys.
Regarding common law trusts and "express trusts," I have read that document you posted and I agree with some of it, but not all of it.
An express trust is nothing more than a trust where the parties agree they are creating a trust, whereas an implied trust is a sitution that might be construed as a trust under law, even if the parties did not necessarily intend it. There is nothing more to it.
Regarding common law vs. state law, I think utilizing state law actually creates a better asset protection structure, and a better tax situation, than common law. That's because most courts today would not understand how to deal with common law -- and most trustees and attorneys wouldn't, either. Matter of fact, most would be hostile to it and try to cause problems, whereas they understand state law because they can "look it up." Common law requires much more knowledge, which is not taught in law school anymore.
Have you actually USED a common law trust for any period of time?
I do think it is possible to d ito, but I see advantages to using certain states instead, as a practical matter in the real world today.