When done correctly, asset protectionis an expected result of proper legal planning. But if done wrong, assetprotection can be misused as a means to deceive lawful creditors. Make note,this type of planning is no â€œgameâ€ to be won by trickery.
The case of Waldron v. Huberisillustrative of the latter.
To say Waldron v. Huber is a complex case would be a gross understatement.The Huber case included Alaska LLCs,Washington properties, a failing partnership, and a Domestic Asset ProtectionTrust (DAPT). A recent Forbesarticle, titled â€œDomestic Asset Protection Trust Blows UpBigger Than Alaska In Huber Case,â€ provides an accuratedescription of the outcome.
Bottom line: in Huber, the courts found the legalplanning to be too-good-to-be-true. The comprehensive analysis of the case bythe Forbes article is instructive,highlighting certain considerations before electing to deploy a DAPT as part ofyour asset protection planning.
At IdahoEstate Planning we are the expertsyou need to know and trust. Work with us and we'll put together a plan thatworks for you and your loved ones. Remember, goodplanning is no accident.