|
Wednesday, July 16, 2008 - Vol. 10, No. 168
How She Broke All the Rules and
Still Came Out on Top
Today's comment is by Mark Nestmann, our long-time Privacy Expert, Wealth Preservation & Tax Consultant and President of The Nestmann Group.
One of the best ways to protect your long-term savings is with an offshore trust — especially if you're vulnerable to lawsuits in the future.
Once your assets are properly set up in an offshore trust, a contingency lawyer can't touch them because the assets don't really belong to you anymore. Your assets now belong to the legal entity, the trust. So if God forbid, you ever lost a lawsuit, no lawyer can attach that trust's assets to your overall net worth.
However, like with most things, there's a right way — and a wrong way — to form an offshore trust. A Florida resident named Mary Morris found out the hard way.
Mary just became the latest poster child on how NOT to form and use an offshore trust. Yet, in spite of her mistakes, her offshore trust STILL saved her a cool US$1.5 million. Let me explain.
Mary's Sordid Story
Just a few short months ago, Mary was languishing in the Palm Beach County Jail. It looked as if she might remain there indefinitely unless she came up with US$2.5 million for child support payments and attorneys' fees.
Now Mary's out of jail, and it cost her only US$1 million...in spite of very poor asset protection planning.
Here's a brief summary of the very convoluted story:
Back in 2001, Mary and then-husband Leland Morris divorced. Leland won custody of their two children, but feared Mary would run away with the kids in violation of the divorce decree. So he offered Mary a US$1.5 million "bonus" payment if he became their primary caregiver. But, if Mary contested the agreement, she had to repay the bonus.
However, in 2003, Mary challenged the divorce decree and demanded more money. But apparently the judge wanted to prove the contracts you sign actually have meaning, so he ordered Mary to pay Leland US$1.8 million — the bonus plus US$300,000 of attorneys' fees.
Mary didn't pay. And, she didn't bother showing up for a court hearing to explain why. The judge issued a criminal contempt citation, ordering her to jail until she came up with the money.
Before deputies could pick her up, Mary disappeared...for almost five years. But in January 2008, Mary reemerged. Shortly thereafter, she traded in her jet-set lifestyle for a Palm Beach County prison cell. By then, the amount due had grown to US$2.5 million.
The Wrong Way to Form an Asset Protection Trust
And here's where the story gets interesting. In the midst of litigation with Leland, Mary formed a Cook Islands offshore trust and transferred virtually all of her assets to it.
She claimed that the money now belonged to the trustee, and that she had no way to repay the judgment. And, presumably in accordance with the terms of the trust, the Cook Islands trustee refused to satisfy the judgment.
Mary's transfer of assets to the trust arguably constituted a "fraudulent conveyance." I've spoken about these before. A fraudulent conveyance is an effort by a debtor to "hinder, delay, or defraud" a creditor. And, back in Palm Beach County, this didn't make the judge assigned to the case very happy. That's particularly true because, for the past five years, Mary has lived outside the United States on trust distributions.
It's therefore not surprising that when Mary reemerged in January 2008, the judge in the case promptly ordered her jailed. Subsequently, Mary and Leland's attorneys held a series of meetings on how to resolve the impasse.
They finally came to an agreement. If Mary could somehow persuade the Cook Islands trustee to release US$1 million, Leland agreed not to seek the additional US$1.5 million.
Mary contacted the trustee and asked it to convey US$1 million to satisfy the agreement. And, guess what? The trustee complied and transferred the US$1 million to the custody of the court. Mary is now free and presumably a lot less contrary than before.
Don't Go to Jail to Protect Your Assets
If nothing else, Mary's tale demonstrates that an offshore trust is one of the most effective means to protect your assets. Her tale of infamy also proves the correct way to set up a trust. To do this properly, you must give your trustee full legal domain over your assets, long before you have any legal difficulties.
If you don't give up control over your assets, or form the trust after a liability arises, you may have some explaining to do in front of a judge.
In these situations, there's a risk that a U.S. court could order you to repatriate the trust assets for your creditor's benefit. If you fail to do so, the court could cite you for contempt, and in extreme cases, order that you be jailed until you comply. That's what happened to Mary.
In spite of her protests to the contrary, Mary persuaded the Cook Islands trustee to make a payment to satisfy a domestic judgment. The judge was 100% correct in holding her in criminal contempt. (Of course, the trustee will deny this, and state that the payment was merely a prudent exercise of its discretionary authority.)
Fortunately, by avoiding the abusive circumstances in Mary's case, an offshore trust can LEGALLY protect your assets. Indeed, an offshore trust is one of the best instruments available for asset protection today.
Want to learn more? I'll be reviewing the top jurisdictions for offshore trusts in the August issue of The Sovereign Individual, The Sovereign Society's member's only newsletter. If you're not already a member, you can sign up for a risk-free trial membership here.
MARK NESTMANN, Privacy Expert &
President of The Nestmann Group
www.nestmann.com
|