Archive for August, 2009

Private Trust Company Launches Decline in South Dakota

South Dakota Trust Company Launches PIERRE, SD., Aug 28 – New private trust company launches have declined in the past two years according to data recently released by the South Dakota Division of Banking. Previously, the South Dakota regulator only reported the name and address on South Dakota Trust Company formations. The new Excel format report, called a credentials roster covers more comprehensive information which includes, if the enterprise is public or private and its launch date.

Private trust companies or family trust companies cater to ultra-high-net-worth individuals with at least $100 million in investable assets. These trust companies which have been set up by families to avoid the necessity of using third-party trust companies and who have special assets such as closely held family businesses, real estate or partnership interests or don’t feel comfortable handing over their assets either to an individual or to a big trust company to manage.

Private trust companies often have boards set up with various committees that enable family members from many generations of branches to be involved in managing the family’s wealth.

Private trust companies launches hit a peak in 2007 with 4 launches and when they were chronicled in a Wall Street Journal article; Wall Street Journal; Matters of Trust: Super-rich Setup Companies. According to the WSJ story, private trust companies have been promoted by private trust company expert John P. C. Duncan, a Chicago lawyer. Duncan reported, in 2007, that the numbers have increased because more trust lawyers have touted their benefits.

TRUST COMPANY TRENDS

South Dakota 2009 LaunchesSouth Dakota public trust company start-ups have surged this year. Last month, The Trust Advisor reported an increase in start-ups nationwide including South Dakota. With five launches completed and several other now awaiting filing, 2009 will likely become a record year for the State.

SHIFT TO NEVADA?

Perhaps the reason for the decline in South Dakota is that many trust lawyers are waiting for a new Nevada law to become effective October 1, 2009,  Nevada SB-310 which permits private family trust companies to be setup without special licensing and without regulatory capital. Previously, Nevada required private trust companies to have $300,000 of regulatory capital.

Earlier this year, Duncan testified at a Nevada State Senate Hearing in support of SB-310, endorsing higher capital requirements for public institutions and no licensing or capital requirements for private family trust companies.

L. Scott Walshaw, Nevada’s former banking commissioner and regulatory advisor with Garrison Institutional said, “It’s too early to determine that the decline in South Dakota is a definite trend. There is not enough data to statistically validate any conclusions.”

Walshaw added, “Besides the year is not over and there could be ten filings before the end of the year. As for the shift to Nevada no one knows how many new trust companies will be incorporated under SB-310.”

 

 

, , ,

No Comments

More Advisory Firms Expected to Start Trust Companies – Article by Charles Paikert: Interview Outtakes

Investment NewsEarlier this week Charlie Paikert from Investment News in New York interviewed me for a story he published on my favorite topic – advisor-owned trust companies.

My employer, Garrison Institutional and I were ecstatic with the fine article he published this afternoon and posted on the Investment News web site.

As a reporter Charlie asked great questions. He spent about a half hour on the phone with me and I sent him two or three pages of background information before we spoke.

I was pleased to see that one of our clients,  Christopher Holtby for Wealth Advisors Trust Company was interviewed and quoted generously in the story.

Considering that the article was squeezed into a meager 934 words, a lot of the important points I conveyed never found their way into the story.

Fortunately, I was lucky enough to take a few notes to jog my memory. The  points that didn’t get covered, important enough for me to bring to your attention can be found below:

  • The trust company business has a long history. First, there are bank trust companies, then wire house trust companies, then independent trust companies and now advisor-owned trust companies.
  • The disintegrating wire house business model creates a void for trust company resources for independent advisors.
  • Independent trust companies provide clients with ”administrative” trustees that direct the investment management component for the independent advisor.
  • Administrative trustees or unbundled best-of-breed providers charge less money than bundled providers – sometimes as low as 50 basis points per year.
  • There are problems with the advisor and administrative trustee relationship – if the client passes away the business can be lost, fees and client relationship are not secure. There is no enforceable agreement between the advisor and the administrative trustee that the business will stay put.
  • Financial advisors can gain the best of both worlds with an advisor-owned trust company. They can own the relationship and own the custody forever.
  • Wealth managers are falling in love with the concept of starting their own trust companies. This is an untapped area for most advisors.
  • Advantages of an advisory owned trust company:
    • The client receives services from an all‑in-one provider, has the ability to create special purpose trusts and also receive certain tax advantages and lower fees. This “vertical integration” makes the advisor’s services more valuable.
    • The advisor gets to begin a new conversation with the client, keep control of the assets for future generations and makes the client happier.
    • The advisor gains enterprise value adding more equity to the RIA if the business in ever sold or merged.
  • The most desirable states for new advisor-owned trust companies are South Dakota, Nevada and Delaware.
  • South Dakota may be the best state because of the low regulatory minimum capital requirement of $250,000.
  • Nevada has a good environment with a capital requirement of $1 million (half cash, half securities).
  • Delaware is the biggest and also very costly for an advisor – they require $1 million of capital, an office of 1500 square feet and trust officers.
  • There is more trust company activity this year. Garrison Institutional alone has completed four and has four more on the table.
  • It is very difficult to start a trust company on your own – you need to hire an attorney and learn and know about all the many regulations, arrange technology, custody and compliance with hosting state and states you will operate in.
  • Starting your own trust company without a consultant like Garrison Institutional is like buying a bookcase from Ikea – you have to assemble it yourself. Most advisors want a turn-key situation.

No Comments

Nevada Multi-Family Office Provider Kingsbridge PWM to Launch Trust Company

David DunnLAS VEGAS, NV., Aug 14 – Kingsbridge Private Wealth Management (www.kingsbridgepwm.com), a multi-family office provider announced this week that it will charter Kingsbridge Trust Company as a wholly-owned subsidiary in the fourth quarter of 2009.

David Dunn, Kingsbridge CEO, announced this week that Kingsbridge has retained Garrison Institutional (www.garrisonnevada.com) a Nevada-based trust institution consulting firm to assist with its launch and its ongoing operations. Dunn said no decision has been made at this point as to whether Kingsbridge will seek a state or federal trust charter.

Kingsbridge Private Wealth Management core business is providing high-quality services to ultra-high net-worth families.  Its minimum account size is $10 million.  Kingsbridge services include in addition to asset management, multi-generational wealth transfer services.  This includes assistance for the creation and the administration of special purpose trusts such as asset protection and dynasty self-settled trusts.  Kingsbridge also provides management for family assets such as real estate and personal property.  As part of its multi-family office services Kingsbridge provide financial mentoring for its family clients with special emphasis on teaching inheritors fiscal responsibility and guidance on making sound business decisions.

Dunn sees Kingsbridge Trust as a critical part of his long-term wealth management strategy.  One point in particular, that is often overlooked when serving ultra-high net-worth family is proper will and trust support. 

Dunn said, “Over the years we have seen wills and trust instruments created with complex provisions.  But we have not seen the trustees and the administrators who are responsible for carryout these instructions as the clients intended.” Dunn added, “Kingsbridge Trust Company will enable us to do the job right.  We will now be in a position to take the most complex trust document and make certain that they are administered by our trustees the way the client and estate planner intended.”

Kingsbridge Trust will exclusively service its clients and will accept no other outside business.  This will ensure that the trust company’s resources are not diluted.

Jerry Cooper, a relationship manager with Garrison Institutional, said “Dunn’s vision for Kingsbridge Trust is 100 percent client-minded.”  Cooper added, “At this time most wealth management organizations are cutting back its support services due to the financial slump.  In this case, Dunn through the use of Kingsbridge Trust will be doing the exact opposite.  By placing the needs of his clients and top quality of service ahead of everything else.”

No Comments

Lessons from The Michael Jackson Estate

Podcast

Michael Jackson

I interviewed two top trust professionals this week about Michael Jackson. The interview was not about his music or what might have led to his death. Our discussion was about his business affairs and what kind of estate plan he had in place.

The audio interview, posted on this blog, brings together Martin Shenkman, a noted trust advisor, will and estate’s attorney and CPA who writes for Financial Planning Magazine and the author of The Complete Book of Trusts.

In addition to Martin Shenkman, I interviewed Christopher Holtby, a well respected wealth manager with Midand Wealth Management and president of Wealth Advisors Trust Company, headquartered in South Dakota.

Cooper: Why do so many celebrities drop the ball and pass away with no will or estate plan in place?

Shenkman: Michael Jackson did have some plan in place. Based on what I learned there are some positives about what he did, but there are more lessons from what he appears to have not done.

The problem in Jackson’s case and often common amongst celebrities is that they seem to be involved with managers, lawyers, accountants that come to them and are referred to them through their own contacts rather than getting to find known, trusted, competent and well-respected advisors that can offer a client better choices.

Cooper: Christopher – Jackson acquired the music rights to approximately the 300 Beatle songs. Based on what you’ve seen was the transaction done right?

Holtby: This is a two-pronged question. First, those rights are being administered by Sony, which adds an extra layer of complication. With respect to Mr. Jackson’s own taxes and estate planning issues it remains too early to tell whether the planning was done correctly.

Cooper: Martin can you offer any comments about the Beatle’s transaction?

Shenkman: The only thing I can comment on is based on the information I learned from the media. But, if Jackson had purchased an interest where he is entitled to royalties he should have placed the asset in what is known as a defective grantor trust. With this, by contributing the asset to the trust when it was worth under $50 million the entire value of the asset would have been completely outside of his estate.

Cooper: What is a defective grantor trust?

Shenkman: When you sell an asset that is likely to appreciate you contributed to a trust in a state like Delaware or South Dakota, Alaska or Nevada that has special trust rules. The trust is structured for what we call a grantor trust which basically avoids capital gains or income tax on the ultimate sale but the gross and the value of that asset post sale would have been outside Mr. Jackson’s estate. In this case had he of done this he could potentially safe a half a billion dollars in estate tax.

Cooper: Are there any other celebrity cases that you have found similar things happen than in Jackson’s case.

Shenkman: We see similar things across the board. In each case there are valuable lessons to learn. One thing interesting Michael did do a couple of things right that other celebrities didn’t do. For example Michael did a very good job in his will listing his family members. He indicated who his children were. He indicated who his spouse was not. That was something for example that James Brown, the noted celebrity really didn’t clarify and created an opportunity for a will contest from Tammy Ray, Brown’s estranged wife.

Many celebrities do not bother to use institutional trustees, in other words use trust companies to serve as trustee to their estate plan with an institutional trustee or institutional co-trustee. The family members are better protected because they have the independence and the oversight of an institution helping to monitor and protect the family. That traditionally is better because it can avoid all kinds of problems not only for someone like Jackson but for many people coming out of the woodwork claiming rights as beneficiaries.

Cooper: So you are saying that an institutional trustee provides more professional responsibility?

Shenkman: Absolutely. Especially if the client is well know or has any notoriety. So the client wil receive full professionalism and the people who are attempting to contest a will or trusty may be dissuaded because of the placement of an institution.

Cooper: Christopher let me ask you a question about the unruly client — Based on what we have read and learned about Michael Jackson it would seem as though he was unruly in other areas he might have been a difficult client and unwilling to accept advice. How do you get a client to listen to you?

Holtby: Well the first thing that a client needs to understand is that it is one thing to get wealthy and it’s another thing to stay wealthy. Then all too often celebrities and many successful business people spend more than they make without doing the math so an advisor has to give tough advice. You have to be willing to be fired and if you are a yes man then the press will eventually talk about you as though you were a stooge.

Shenkman: I think he single most important point for a celebrity is they need a board of advisors or family office or some other arrangement like that that may be in a place to tell you what you may not want to hear. I don’t think this happens most of the time because when you look at Michael Jackson there are simple things. A man of stature somebody should have advised him every year to have his will rewritten. Even if there were minor changes so that he was continually enforcing what he wanted to do. It eliminates the possibility of a will contest.

Holtby: What celebrities forget is that they are actually a business. I recall a client that fired me several years ago because I wasn’t telling him what he wanted to hear. He was spending more than he was making. His net worth was about $700 million but he was spending money as if he had $1 billion. I told him that you can either prove a Harvard University theory true that if you spend more than you make you are going to wind up broke. He wound up firing me and today I heard that he only has about $10 million left.

Again you can listen to the interview by Podcast posted on this website. The comments are interesting and they may apply in your business.

In summary the major points are:

  • Consider using a special purpose trust when you client acquires an asset that may go up substantially in value by the time of his death.
  • Be as complete as possible when advising a client on a will. Be sure to include exactly who your children are, who the beneficiaries are and who your spouse is or is not.
  • Use the specialist with the best expertise. Celebrities and well-known people often garner connections through referrals and really don’t connect to the best people.
  • Use an institutional trustee whenever possible to ensure professionalism, accounting and monitoring of your client’s estate.
  • Have a client review his will annually. Make even small changes to confirm that his wishes contained in the will, will continue to remain.
  • Don’t be afraid to offer tough advice. Be willing to be fired if you feel that you are right. You will eventually be talked about in the press as if you were a stooge.
  • Create an inner circle of professionals for your client so that he has more than you to offer advice to discuss an important problem.
  • Make sure that your clients know how much they are spending and be careful they are not spending more than they are making.

No Comments