BUY NOW IF YOU WANT TO USE A TRUST, Obama requiring background checks for NFA

[Risto]

In case anyone was wondering if all of your trustees (family members for me) will have to be printed, photographed, and checked; it appears so. I can assure you that none of them would be a prohibited person, but I don't want to subject them to that stuff just because I put their name down as a trustee. This really kills the trust part of it for me.

from ATF website document:

"Examples of who may be considered a responsible person include settlors/grantors,
trustees, partners, members, officers, directors, board members, or owners. An example of who
may be excluded from this definition of responsible person is the beneficiary of a trust, if the
beneficiary does not have the capability to exercise the powers or authorities enumerated in this
section"

[StraitR]

In case anyone was wondering if all of your trustees (family members for me) will have to be printed, photographed, and checked; it appears so. I can assure you that none of them would be a prohibited person, but I don't want to subject them to that stuff just because I put their name down as a trustee. This really kills the trust part of it for me.

from ATF website document:

"Examples of who may be considered a responsible person include settlors/grantors,
trustees, partners, members, officers, directors, board members, or owners. An example of who
may be excluded from this definition of responsible person is the beneficiary of a trust, if the
beneficiary does not have the capability to exercise the powers or authorities enumerated in this
section"

Generally speaking, most people are added to a trust for beneficiary purposes, but named as trustees for "freedom to operate" so to speak. If that's the case, you could amend the trust and list them as beneficiaries only. For example, my wife is the successor trustee on our trust, but we don't need her to be, it's more for convenience (freedom to operate) and so she could receive the NFA items if something happens to me. We can still achieve the same with her as a beneficiary. It's not like she wants to hit the range with my suppressors when I'm out of town. That said, we'll keep her as the successor trustee so there's never a doubt of her eligibility to possess the items within the trust.

Now, if you want additional people on the trust for the purpose of having access to the items within the trust, or if they want that privilege, they'll have to submit prints and pics for any transfer submissions after July 13th. I totally get what you're saying though, it's an added layer of hassle, especially for those with trustees that do not live local.

A friend of mine has five family members on his trust as trustees, all of which will be getting moved to beneficiaries or dropped. I foresee a lot of people being removed from trusts, and a good number simply named as beneficiaries.

[SteveB]

http://www.wsj.com/articles/gun-sile...&mod=djemITP_h

[Robinson]

Generally speaking, most people are added to a trust for beneficiary purposes, but named as trustees for "freedom to operate" so to speak. If that's the case, you could amend the trust and list them as beneficiaries only. For example, my wife is the successor trustee on our trust, but we don't need her to be, it's more for convenience (freedom to operate) and so she could receive the NFA items if something happens to me. We can still achieve the same with her as a beneficiary. It's not like she wants to hit the range with my suppressors when I'm out of town. That said, we'll keep her as the successor trustee so there's never a doubt of her eligibility to possess the items within the trust.

Now, if you want additional people on the trust for the purpose of having access to the items within the trust, or if they want that privilege, they'll have to submit prints and pics for any transfer submissions after July 13th. I totally get what you're saying though, it's an added layer of hassle, especially for those with trustees that do not live local.

A friend of mine has five family members on his trust as trustees, all of which will be getting moved to beneficiaries or dropped. I foresee a lot of people being removed from trusts, and a good number simply named as beneficiaries.

Wait a minute -- I was under the impression that a successor trustee does not have legal freedom to operate while the trustee is capable of acting in that capacity. That is why I've decided to name my wife as a co-trustee instead of the successor trustee. If I'm wrong then I just learned something.

[StraitR]

Wait a minute -- I was under the impression that a successor trustee does not have legal freedom to operate while the trustee is capable of acting in that capacity. That is why I've decided to name my wife as a co-trustee instead of the successor trustee. If I'm wrong then I just learned something.

No, looks like you're right, I'm wrong. Interesting, because I had a very close friend draw up our trust, and he knows these things. Then again, I told him that my wife wants nothing to do with the items in the trust, so maybe I got exactly what I asked for. Seems I need to have him amend it.

Thanks for pointing that out, sorry for any confusion.