Resources

South Dakota Trust Law Update – 2020 Edition

Trust laws in South Dakota are often changing and evolving. 2020 was no different, as a number of legislative bills were introduced. Patrick G. Goetzinger of Gunderson, Palmer, Nelson & Ashmore, LLP, discusses the legislative changes in trusts and fiduciaries this past year, the influence of the pandemic and why it matters to you.

A Dynamic Duo: South Dakota’s Trust Laws & Business Entity Statutes

Some things work really well when paired together. South Dakota’s robust trust industry and favorable business statutes make for a great pairing. Patrick G. Goetzinger of Gunderson, Palmer, Nelson & Ashmore, LLP, explains how combining your business with a family trust creates a ‘dynamic duo’ that offers a number of substantial benefits.

South Dakota Trust Law: Pulling Back the Curtain A Soup to Nuts Tour of South Dakota Trust Law

There’s a lot to see behind the scenes in the vast number of South Dakota trust options and techniques. Patrick G. Goetzinger of Gunderson, Palmer, Nelson & Ashmore, LLP, gives you a full tour of options and tips, from big to small. In it, he advises on the many alternatives you should consider as they relate to you or your family’s personal situation.

Is a Domestic Asset Protection Trust a Legitimate Estate Planning Tool?

DAPT A Domestic Asset and Protection Trust, or DAPT: In a DAPT, the grantor may be designated a permissible beneficiary and allowed access to the funds in the trust account once the account is funded by assets.

Can a SD Protection Trust Protect Against Execution to Satisfy a Foreign Judgment?

Can a South Dakota Asset Protection Trust protect against execution to satisfy a foreign judgement? We address this complicated question and discuss South Dakota’s unique “spendthrift” statute.

FIELDING VS. COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE: AFTER MORE THAN 20 YEARS, IS MINNESOTA’S FIDUCIARY “PERMA-TAX” ON IRREVOCABLE TRUSTS NO LONGER PERMANENT?

Since January 1, 1996, the State of Minnesota has taxed the income, both ordinary and capital gains, of what Minn. Stat. § 290.01, subd. 7b(a) defines as a “resident trust.” Affirming a 2017 decision of the Minnesota Tax Court, the Minnesota Supreme Court, in Fielding vs. Commissioner of Revenue (A17-1777, July 28, 2018), ruled that, as applied to the four trusts at issue in the case, Minn. Stat. § 290.01, subd. 7b(a) is unconstitutional in violation of the due process clauses of both the U.S. and Minnesota Constitutions. Although Fielding did not declare the “resident trust” statute unconstitutional on its face, it appears that, after more than 20 years, there once again is the opportunity to formulate a course of action by which at least an inter vivos irrevocable trust can affirmatively change its tax residence from Minnesota to a state, such as South Dakota, that does not levy fiduciary income tax. For further commentary, download the pdf below.