Trust Decanting

Jack Ledger (0:06)

Welcome to Cornerstone Private Office, the podcast for business owners, investors, and advisors who want to protect wealth, reduce taxes, and build enduring financial structures. I'm Professor Jack Ledger. For decades, I've advised high-performing entrepreneurs on how to build financial foundations that last beyond markets, beyond cycles, beyond generations. Each episode will break down complex financial strategies into clear, actionable frameworks you can apply immediately. Let's begin building your Cornerstone.

Families sometimes assume an irrevocable trust means exactly what the word implies, locked, unchangeable, permanent. For decades, that assumption was largely correct. But state law has quietly evolved, and today there's a tool that lets a trustee fix an outdated, irrevocable trust without ever setting foot in a courtroom. It's called decanting, and most families with an old trust document have never heard of it. Let's put this on the ledger.

Here's the framework. Decanting is the practice of a trustee pouring the assets of an existing irrevocable trust into a new trust with different, more suitable terms. The same way you'd pour wine from an old bottle into a new decanter, leaving the sediment behind. The trust is old. The terms no longer fit. Decanting lets the assets move forward without the outdated language attached. This matters because irrevocable trusts are, by design, meant to last a long time, sometimes generations. A trust drafted 20 or 30 years ago was written for the tax law, family structure, and beneficiaries of that era. Rigid distribution schedules, a named trustee who's no longer suitable or has since passed away, no provisions at all for a beneficiary who later developed a disability, none of that was foreseeable at drafting. Historically, fixing any of it meant going to court and asking a judge to modify the trust, an expensive, adversarial, and often slow process. Decanting offers another path where state law permits it.

Delaware's decanting statute is a clear example of how this works in practice. It allows a trustee who holds discretionary authority to distribute income or principle to instead appoint that property into a new, second trust for the eligible beneficiaries without a court proceeding, while preserving safeguards for marital deduction and other tax-qualified interests. No judge, no petition, no courtroom. Just a trustee exercising authority the law already grants. Picture a trust drafted in the 1990s that names a corporate trustee, which has since merged, changed its policies, and no longer serves families the way the original settler intended. Historically, the family's only real option was a costly court petition to have that trustee replaced and the trust's terms clarified. Where decanting is available, the acting trustee can instead pour the trust's assets into a new trust that names a better suited trustee and updates the administrative provisions, while keeping the substance of who benefits and how intact.

Most people misunderstand this part. Decanting isn't one uniform rule you can look up once and apply anywhere. It's a patchwork of individual state statutes, each with its own conditions, and the differences matter enormously depending on where a trust is administered. Take Florida. Its statute creates two distinct tiers of trustee authority. A trustee with what the law calls absolute power, over principle, has broad flexibility, including the ability to extend how long the trust lasts. But a trustee whose discretion is limited by an ascertainable standard has to keep the new trust's beneficial interests substantially similar to the original. Florida also requires at least 60 days written notice to qualified beneficiaries before decanting occurs, though that notice can be waived by signed consent. Ohio takes a similar two-tier approach, distinguishing trustees with absolute power from those without, and requires 30 days notice to current beneficiaries unless it's waived.

South Dakota, a state that markets itself aggressively as a modern trust jurisdiction, requires only 20 days notice, among the fastest timelines available. Here's the framework for why this variation exists. Decanting statutes are meant to give trustees flexibility, but every state has to balance that flexibility against protecting beneficiaries from being caught off guard. The notice period is that balance point, and it's set differently everywhere. This is precisely why the state governing a trust matters so much. The same trust, administered in two different states, could face a 60-day notice requirement in one and a 20-day requirement in the other, or could find that its trustee simply lacks the absolute power needed to decant at all under one state's two-tier framework while qualifying easily under another's.

Families with an older trust sometimes have more flexibility than they realize simply by understanding which state's law actually governs their document. Some states go further and build in solutions to specific problems. New York's statute expressly authorizes a trustee to decant an existing trust's assets into a supplemental needs trust for a beneficiary, even reducing that beneficiary's mandatory right to distributions, specifically to help preserve their eligibility for means-tested government benefits. Virginia has a nearly identical dedicated provision, letting a fiduciary decant into a special needs trust, including one with Medicaid payback provisions for a beneficiary with a disability. This is exactly the kind of gap an old trust document is likely to have. Nobody drafting a trust 30 years ago was thinking about a grandchild's future disability diagnosis. Decanting, in states that allow it, gives families a way to fix that gap without unwinding the entire trust. And this landscape keeps expanding.