Results 1 to 10 of 24

Thread: NFATCA Official Statement on Presidential Action

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #9
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by ExecDirector View Post
    Nope. And the definition varies from state to state. Beneficiaries may or may not be responsible persons (or even eligible to possess at a given point in time). And trustees may or may not, depending on their state of residence, etc. We are advocating for responsible person with a definition similar to that of the FFL process where one or more persons is designated as the legal "vouchsafe" for the entity. You can certainly have more than one... but you must have at least one. Just like an FFL. Same for corps, LLC's, etc.
    Thank you for the clear response. I really appreciate it.

    Nobel Laureate Friedrich Von Hayek was famous for promoting the "rule of law". This is paraphrased by my finance professor: "Tell me the rules of the game and I'll tell you how to make money". The lack of clarity around the future trust rules will certainly complicate things and make trusts less desirable simply because they aren't understood. My trust lawyer may be happy as may mean more business for him (but less volume). This proposed system is seriously making me wonder if I should dump my trust and go with individual transfers for future purchases.

    Just an off the cuff suggestion from a non-lawyer: If "responsible persons" was replaced with "settler" I'd be happy. Stipulations can be made if the settler is no longer the primary responsible person making all of the purchases. I can't help but think this petition could be reworded in a way to make future trust changes far more family friendly. Again, my trust is to simply avoid accidental felonies (constructive transfers) without the hassle of a family lineup night at the police station. Please forgive me if I don't understand the legalese. I'm not a lawyer.

    EDIT:

    We are advocating for responsible person with a definition similar to that of the FFL process where one or more persons is designated as the legal "vouchsafe" for the entity.
    Where is this in petition 1209? Cntrl-f didn't turn up any matches for "vouche"? If vouchesafe will ensure my family stays out of this I will certainly be happy.

    EDIT: #2

    ok I see it in The Partisan but not any formal petitions. (PDF) Is it listed anywhere else? Google can't find it either.

    I think I like the idea of vouchesafe but I need to learn more.

    Thank you very much for your responses.
    Last edited by LeonR; 11-17-2013 at 08:21 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •