[WSBAPT] Complicated distribution scheme

[Joshua McKarcher]

This should be done via a custom beneficiary designation. If the custodian won’t accept one — nearly all will — she should leave that custodian and go to one of the scores who will.

That should wake the FA up, first of all: he or she is (1) practicing law without a law degree to suggest such a shockingly bad distribution scheme, and (2) making HIS/HER and the custodian’s life easier, the client from whom they are collecting close to $10,000/year in fees and her perfectly “draftable” wishes be damned.

(I am a cheerful chap, but I get a touch “lit up” at how much money some FAs are happy to take in fees over decades of holding funds, as contrasted with their actual effort or willingness to do anything beyond the most basic. It. Is. Appalling.)

This will achieve the client’s perfectly reasonable goal, second of all.

Notice I’ve said nothing about a trust. I “do trusts” all day long and might use one here depending on her other assets. BUT the solution above pertains whether the designation is outright (easier, certainly), or into asset protection trusts for the noncharitable beneficiaries (more complex but not even remotely beyond doing, even with separate trust shares for the individuals, with 10-year (11-tax-year) payout, etc.).

BUT this is all in the drafting and the precision. The designation should and will be rejected by the custodian if it doesn’t close every loop. but this is totally doable on a single sheet of paper with signature lines for wife — and husband to release his community property interest since not the 100% beneficiary.

Good luck!

Best, Josh

Joshua D. McKarcher
McKarcher Law PLLC
537 6th Street
Clarkston, WA 99403
(509) 758-3345
(509) 758-3314 (fax)
josh at mckarcherlaw.com
www.mckarcherlaw.com<http://www.mckarcherlaw.com/>
________________________________
From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> on behalf of Ann Manley <ann at manleyfirm.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 4, 2025 9:10:03 AM
To: WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv <wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: [WSBAPT] Complicated distribution scheme

Wife has an IRA with a million dollars. She wants her primary beneficiaries to be her husband (80%), niece 1 or her children if any (10%) and niece 2 or her children if any (10%). If either niece is dead w/ no kids, $ goes to husband.

But if husband is deceased, she wants each niece's share to increase to 20%, and have the rest distributed to a list of charities.

Can that be done via beneficiary designation, or is there a better way? (Or is the answer for her to come up with a less complicated scheme?)

Her financial adviser is saying that she should name her sister as a beneficiary, and then her sister can give money to the nieces and charities. That seems wrong.

Thanks!

Ann Manley, Esq.
The Manley Law Firm, P.S., Inc.
PO Box 16324
Seattle, WA 98116
(206)292-3064 / (206)292-3914 fax
www.manleyfirm.com<http://www.manleyfirm.com/>

The Manley Law Firm practice areas include Bankruptcy*, Estate Planning, Auto Accidents, Civil Litigation, Construction, Commercial and Contract Law, Personal injury, Small Business, Unemployment Claims, Wage Loss and Compensation claims

* The Manley Law Firm is a Debt Relief Agency. We help people file for bankruptcy relief under the Bankruptcy Code.

This email and any files transmitted with it are privileged, confidential, and intended solely to whom they are addressed. Any unauthorized use, copying, review or disclosure is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20250904/45ab5174/attachment.html>