Limited Liability Companies in the News (I wrote)

So I haven’t been writing on my blog a lot lately. But I have been writing. Here are just three examples:

  1. The October 2018 issue of The LLC & Partnership Reporter, a publication of the ABA’s Business Law Section, sports an article I wrote titled, “Wyoming’s Series Limited Liability Company Act: (Virtually) All in the Operating Agreement.” You can find it on page 31. The piece makes clear that Wyoming’s new series act is straightforward and allows an LLC’s operating agreement to do most of the heavy lifting regarding how a particular LLC is managed and how members relate with one another and with third parties.
  2. Another article I wrote appears in the same issue, this one titled, “Utah’s ‘Benefit Limited Liability Company Act”: A Bridge Too Far?” My answer is Yes, the bridge isn’t even needed. You’ll have to read the piece to understand why. You can find it on page 42.
  3. My most recent article appears in the February 2019 issue of Wyoming Lawyer, a publication of the Wyoming Bar. Titled “2018 Case Law Review,” the story discusses a number of recent cases from around the country. I’m particularly interested in whether other states, including Wyoming and Utah, will follow the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals’ holding in Sky Cable, LLC v. DIRECTV and recognize the creditor’s remedy of reverse veil piercing. What’s reverse veil piercing, you ask? Read my article in Wyoming Lawyer!

We’re (Wyoming’s) Number 3!

According to WealthManagement.com, that is:

Because Wyoming has no additional estate or income taxes, it’s an ideal place to set up a trust. There are more than 28 trusts per 1,000 households, the eighth most in the study. On average, these trusts have an income of $145,651. Trusts in Wyoming are also able to deduct a large amount of taxes. The average trust in Wyoming has deductions worth $73,100, the fifth-highest amount in our study.

According to Wyoming attorney Amy M. Staehr, Wyoming is actually number 1. A look at the table of contents to her article The Discovered Country: Wyoming’s Primacy as a Trust Situs Jurisdiction, will give you an idea of why she makes that claim (page numbers omitted):

I. INTRODUCTION
II. FROM 2011 TO THE PRESENT—UPDATES, ADDITIONS, AND
MODIFICATIONS TO WYOMING TRUST LEGISLATION
A. Background
B. Ultra Tax Friendly
C. Enhanced Trust Privacy
               1. Court Privacy
               2. Narrower Definitions of Certain Interested Parties
                          a. “Qualified Beneficiary” 
                          b. “Interested Person”
D. Modern Trust Laws 
               1. Statutory Trust Decanting
               2. Trustee’s Insurable Interest 
               3. Tenancy by the Entirety Protection 
                4. Perpetual Noncharitable Purpose Trusts
                5. Premortem Trust Contests
E. Private Family Trust Companies
F. Asset Protection
               1. Wyoming Qualified Spendthrift Trusts 
               2. Discretionary Asset Protection Trusts
               3. Wyoming Limited Liability Companies
                             a. Privacy
                             b. Veil Piercing
III. CONCLUSION 

So go (set your trust up in) Wyoming!

ATF Says No to Bump Stocks

The ATF released its final rule on Bump Stocks today:

The final rule clarifies that the definition of “machinegun” in the Gun Control Act (GCA) and National Firearms Act (NFA) includes bump-stock-type devices, i.e., devices that allow a semiautomatic firearm to shoot more than one shot with a single pull of the trigger by harnessing the recoil energy of the semiautomatic firearm to which it is affixed so that the trigger resets and continues firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter.

The rule will go into effect 90 days from the date of publication in the Federal Register.

As [name your favorite reporter of talking head] might say, it remains to be seen whether the rule will withstand Supreme Court scrutiny. The argument is that regulations can outrun the underlying statute. In this case, many argue that the ATF (aka The Trump Administration) has done just that. 

Sean Davis at The Federalist does a pretty good job of fleshing out the argument. In summary, he writes,

The new bump stock ban ignores the current statutory definition of a machine gun, creates a new regulatory definition contrary to the existing statutory definition (and contrary to how the U.S. Constitution requires new laws to be passed and enacted), and falsely characterizes how bump stocks work in order to implement a nationwide gun control ban and confiscation regime.

Next, the courts will have their say. Stay tuned.

By the way, I won’t be disappointed when bump stocks are no more (though I think their danger is overstated). However, I am disappointed that the making of the new rule violated the rules of law making. The Trump Administration should be ashamed, the general public should be worried, and Congress should wake up. A few more regulatory moves by this or any other president, and Congress will be a nullity. And that’s bad. 

I hope the courts step in and shout Stop It!

Seminar this Wednesday: Estate Planning for Blended Families

I’ll be presenting a seminar at the Orem Public Library on Estate Planning for Blended Families.
When                 Wed, April 5, 7pm – 8pm
Where                Orem Public Library, Media Auditorium (map)
Description       Couples with blended families face special challenges when it comes to making sure that stocks, bonds, real estate, and other property and family heirlooms go to the right persons at the right time when a spouse dies. This seminar will address such issues and discuss ways to solve them, using wills, trusts, and other estate planning documents.
.
Hope to see you there.

So You’re the Trustee of Your Parents’ Trust . . .

If you’re already or soon to be a trustee of a family trust you might want to read my new piece on Medium: Trustee Much? 5 Ways to Avoid Sibling on Sibling Mayhem.

What Do You Do When You Can’t Find the Decedent’s Will?

If the title of this post describes you, you might want to read my post at Medium.com.

Celebrity Estate Planning Mistakes that Keep on Giving–to the Wrong Person

My dad was a life insurance salesman. I remember rummaging around in his sales materials and finding a service he subscribed to that reported on the estate tax problems of the rich and famous and even the not-so-famous. He used the  reports to make the point that his prospective clients needed to do some estate and insurance planning, so their families wouldn’t face similar fates.

I was reminded of this when I stumbled upon this 2013 article from Forbes, “Monumental Estate Planning Blunders of 5 Celebrities.” The piece details the woes of rocker Jim Morrison, Rat Pack icon Sammy Davis Junior, hotelier Leona Helmsley,  QB Steve McNair, and, my favorite sad story, actress Marilyn Monroe:

Some celebrities have erred by not going far enough with their estate planning. For instance, famous actress and model Marilyn Monroe left most of her estate to her acting coach, Lee Strasberg.

“She left him three-fourths of her estate, and when he died, his interest in Marilyn’s estate went to his third wife, who did not even know Marilyn. Marilyn’s mistake was not putting her assets in trusts,” says Nass.

Strasberg’s third wife, Anna, eventually hired a company to license Monroe’s products, which involved hundreds of companies including Mercedes-Benz and Coca-Cola. In 1999, many of Monroe’s belongings were auctioned off, including the gown she wore to President John F. Kennedy’s birthday party, for more than $1 million. Strasberg ended up selling the remainder of the Monroe estate to another branding company for an estimated $20 million to $30 million, according to a remembrance of the star by NPR in 2012.

It’s unlikely Monroe would have wanted someone she didn’t know to profit so handsomely from her belongings. A trust would have provided for Strasberg while he was alive and then after his death could have directed the remainder of her estate to someone of her choosing.

Yes, I imagine was very unlikely that she wantedStrasberg’s 3rd wife to laugh all the way to and from the bank. But poor planning allowed that to happen.

Kanban Boards, Focus, and Productivity

One of my many weaknesses is maintaining focus. Often it seems squirrels are everywhere. And that’s frustrating because when I am focused, my head down, I move forward quickly and accomplish a lot.

So it was that I got excited when I heard John Grant describe so-called Kanban Boards on a Legal Talk Network podcast. (Warning, the podcast starts out slowly and Grant can be a bit jargony–so much so that I almost turned the podcast off–but it gets better and when he began talking about Kanban Boards, I was hooked.)

I rushed home, watched his video on the the subject and created my own  board. I’d show you my board, but I have client names on some of the Post-it Notes–did I mention that a Kanban Board is essentially a white board divided into columns and covered with Post-It Notes? Since I began using my board three weeks ago, I’ve been multiple times more focused and productive. Can’t recommend the tool highly enough.

By the way, Kanban Boards are not just for attorneys. They’ll improve anybody’s life.

Here’s the video:

https://vimeo.com/132379002

 

Like Sand through the Hourglass

At least one soap opera had a happy ending.

What’s the Value of Water?

The answer to the question, “what’s the value of water?” is it depends. No surprise there, but to be clear, I’m not talking about the value of the water that runs out of your tap. I speaking of the value of water that is appurtenant to your farm or ranch land. What’s it worth in an of itself?

Well, Deborah Stephenson of DMS Natural Resources LLC, writing at Hall and Hall makes clear that the answer is in no way clear and depends on a number of things, including:

  1. Quantity – The quantity of water that a water right yields.

  2. Marketable Region – The feasible region in which the asset can be transferred to a new user.

  3. Alternative Water Supply Options – Availability of existing water supplies and future water development opportunities within the region.

  4. Water Quality – The quality of a water source can influence the suitability of a water right for a potential new use.

  5. Reliability – The amount of water that is regularly available to the water right holder compared to the claimed or stated volume on the water right. The amount of water available is determined based on a combination of water source yields, hydrological conditions, and the water right’s legal attributes –  mainly priority date.

  6. Seasonality – The period during which the water right holder can divert or withdraw water from the source.

  7. Highest and Best Use – The highest value use to which the water right can physically and legally be put to use.

Using those seven criterion, you can arrive at an appraised value of the water in question. But that only gets you so far, Stephenson says. No, you also have to look at water in the operational context, and that assessment is based on three considerations:

  1. Utilizing the water in the current agricultural operation.

  2. Utilizing the water on-site, but changing the use to a non-agricultural purpose.

  3. Decoupling the water and transferring it off the property.

You should be able to readily see that each of those factors will influence the value the water. I’m going to leave it at that. Stephenson covers the topic quite well, so click on the link above and continue–if you’re interested.

The Wyoming State Bar does not certify any lawyer as a specialist or expert. Anyone considering a lawyer should independently investigate the lawyer’s credentials and ability, and not rely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. This website is an advertisement.