Page 26 - Newcom

Help your client nd his way around a poorly written trust
by CAROLINE CAKEBREAD, a Toronto-based nancial writer
ALT DISNEY BUILT A FORTUNE GIVING Wthe world what it wanted: a fairytale end-
ing. But his personal legacy has been far from that, thanks to a poorly written trust that’s been tearing his family apart for years.
Set up by his daughter Sharon, with her three kids as bene ciaries, proceeds from the $400- million trust were to be distributed incrementally among them at ages 35, 40, and 45.
There was one notable caveat: money could only be given if the trustees, which include Shar- on’s ex-husband and her older sister, believed a child showed the “maturity and nancial ability to manage and utilize such funds in a prudent and responsible manner.”
The trustees exercised their power with monumentally uneven results. Not only did they refuse to give one son his money, they awarded
a full inheritance to a daughter with a history of drug addiction and a brain condition that left her mentally incapacitated.
They gave money to another daughter who’d also struggled with addiction, and who died of a drug overdose at 35—within a year of getting her rst disbursement.
The Disney case is a headline-grabbing example of how not to set up a trust.
And while not every trust dispute is an epic bat- tle, the case contains important lessons for anyone looking to set up a trust, says Lynne Butler, a St. John’s, N d.-based wills and estates consultant.
In fact, one of the biggest holes in the Disney trust was the vague criteria upon which trustees were expected to make decisions. How do you de ne “maturity” or “ nancial ability,” and how can these terms be used as rationale for giving money to one child and not another?
The Walt Disney case is one example of how not to set up a trust. Pictured: Walt and Sharon Disney in happier times.
2
26
6 A
A
A E
E
E
E 0
0 1
1 2
2
2
2 0
0
0 1
1
1
15
5
5
5
www.advisor.ca
GETTY IMAGES, THINKSTOCK