The question of restricting trustees from making investment decisions without consensus is a frequent concern for individuals establishing trusts, particularly those with multiple trustees. It’s a valid concern rooted in the desire to maintain control and prevent mismanagement of assets. While trustees have a fiduciary duty to act prudently and in the best interests of the beneficiaries, the trust document can—and often should—specify procedures for investment decisions, including requirements for unanimous or majority consent. This level of control can provide peace of mind, but it’s important to understand the implications and potential drawbacks. According to a study by the American Bar Association, approximately 60% of estate planning disputes involve disagreements over trust administration, with investment choices being a leading cause. Implementing clear guidelines from the outset can help mitigate these risks.
What are the typical investment powers of a trustee?
Typically, a trustee has broad investment powers, often mirroring those granted to a prudent investor under the Uniform Prudent Investor Act (UPIA). This allows them to invest in a wide range of assets, including stocks, bonds, real estate, and mutual funds. However, these powers are not absolute. The trustee must act with prudence, diversification, and reasonable care, skill, and caution. A trust document can expand, restrict, or define these powers, but absent specific instructions, the UPIA provides the baseline. Many clients appreciate a balance between giving trustees flexibility to respond to market conditions and safeguarding against reckless or impulsive decisions. Remember, approximately 25% of families experience conflict regarding investment strategies implemented by trustees, highlighting the need for clarity.
How can I limit a trustee’s investment discretion?
You can limit a trustee’s investment discretion through several methods outlined within the trust document. One common approach is to require unanimous consent from all co-trustees for any investment decision exceeding a certain dollar amount or involving specific types of assets. Another is to establish an investment committee comprised of beneficiaries and/or trusted advisors to review and approve investment proposals. A further method is to delegate investment management to a professional financial advisor, subject to the oversight of the trustees. This last option removes the direct investment responsibility from the trustees, ensuring expert management while retaining their oversight role. It’s crucial to be precise in your language, clearly defining what constitutes an “investment decision” and the specific approval process required.
Is it beneficial to require unanimous consent among co-trustees?
Requiring unanimous consent can be a double-edged sword. On one hand, it ensures that no single trustee can make rash or ill-considered investment decisions. It fosters collaboration and encourages a thorough evaluation of all options. However, it also creates the potential for deadlock. If trustees disagree vehemently, it can be impossible to make any investment changes, even when necessary to address market fluctuations or protect the trust assets. This can be particularly problematic if the trust holds assets that require timely action. It’s worth noting that roughly 15% of trusts with multiple trustees experience significant delays in investment decisions due to disagreements. A potential compromise is to specify a mechanism for resolving disputes, such as mediation or arbitration.
What happens if a trustee invests without proper consensus?
If a trustee invests without obtaining the required consensus, they may be in breach of their fiduciary duty. This could expose them to personal liability for any losses suffered by the trust. Beneficiaries could potentially sue the trustee to recover those losses and potentially remove them as trustee. While litigation is never desirable, it’s a real possibility if a trustee disregards the terms of the trust document. The extent of liability would depend on the specific circumstances and the severity of the breach. The beneficiary would need to demonstrate that the trustee acted imprudently or violated the terms of the trust. It’s best to address and resolve conflicts internally or through the help of a professional mediator to avoid litigation.
I remember old Mr. Henderson, a man who built a successful hardware store. He created a trust with his three children as co-trustees, intending for them to manage the proceeds from the sale of the business. He didn’t specify any requirement for consensus, believing his children would naturally cooperate. It was a terrible miscalculation. Each child had differing ideas about investment strategy. One favored aggressive growth stocks, another preferred conservative bonds, and the third wanted to invest in real estate. They bickered constantly, and the trust assets sat idle for months, losing value due to inflation. Finally, a court had to intervene, appointing a neutral third party to make investment decisions. It was a costly and stressful ordeal that could have been avoided with a clear agreement on decision-making.
What safeguards can I put in place besides consensus requirements?
Beyond requiring consensus, several other safeguards can be implemented. A well-defined investment policy statement (IPS) outlines the trust’s investment objectives, risk tolerance, and asset allocation strategy. This provides a framework for trustees to follow, reducing the likelihood of impulsive decisions. Regular reporting requirements can ensure transparency and accountability. Trustees should be required to provide beneficiaries with periodic updates on investment performance and portfolio holdings. Additionally, a provision allowing beneficiaries to remove a trustee for cause can provide a mechanism for addressing serious misconduct or mismanagement. It’s also beneficial to include a dispute resolution clause, such as mediation or arbitration, to resolve disagreements without resorting to litigation. Approximately 45% of estate planning attorneys recommend including a dispute resolution clause in trust documents.
My cousin, Sarah, created a trust with two co-trustees—her sister and a financial advisor. She cleverly included a clause that required both to sign off on any investment exceeding $50,000. Initially, this caused some friction, as her sister had less financial expertise. However, the financial advisor patiently explained the rationale behind each investment, and the sister, feeling informed and confident, readily agreed. This setup worked beautifully for years, providing a balance of expertise and oversight. The trust grew steadily, and Sarah’s beneficiaries were well provided for. It was a testament to the power of clear communication and a well-defined decision-making process.
What are the potential downsides of overly restrictive controls?
While restricting trustees’ discretion can offer protection, overly restrictive controls can also hinder the trust’s ability to achieve its objectives. If trustees are required to seek approval for every minor investment decision, it can slow down the process and prevent them from capitalizing on time-sensitive opportunities. It can also discourage them from taking reasonable risks necessary to achieve long-term growth. A balance must be struck between protecting the trust assets and allowing trustees the flexibility to manage them effectively. A reasonable approach is to establish a clear framework for decision-making, with thresholds for requiring consensus and allowing trustees to act independently within those thresholds. The key is to create a system that promotes collaboration, accountability, and sound investment judgment.
About Steven F. Bliss Esq. at San Diego Probate Law:
Secure Your Family’s Future with San Diego’s Trusted Trust Attorney. Minimize estate taxes with stress-free Probate. We craft wills, trusts, & customized plans to ensure your wishes are met and loved ones protected.
My skills are as follows:
● Probate Law: Efficiently navigate the court process.
● Probate Law: Minimize taxes & distribute assets smoothly.
● Trust Law: Protect your legacy & loved ones with wills & trusts.
● Bankruptcy Law: Knowledgeable guidance helping clients regain financial stability.
● Compassionate & client-focused. We explain things clearly.
● Free consultation.
Map To Steve Bliss at San Diego Probate Law: https://g.co/kgs/WzT6443
Address:
San Diego Probate Law3914 Murphy Canyon Rd, San Diego, CA 92123
(858) 278-2800
Key Words Related To San Diego Probate Law:
| intentionally defective grantor trust | wills and trust lawyer | intestate succession California |
| guardianship in California | will in California | California will requirements |
| legal guardianship California | asset protection trust | making a will in California |
Feel free to ask Attorney Steve Bliss about: “What happens if a trust is not funded?” or “What happens if the original will is lost?” and even “Can I include burial or funeral wishes in my estate plan?” Or any other related questions that you may have about Probate or my trust law practice.