Removing Beneficiaries from Trust used prior to 41F

[hardcase]

I have a firearms trust set up 6 years ago, before 41F.

At the time I had my wife, my family attorney, my brother-in-law set up as beneficiaries. My CCW permit is due for renewal in a few months. I would like to get two more suppressors and figure this would be a good time to get finger-print cards or whatever else is currently needed to buy cans. From the practical side, I need to get my brother-in-law off my trust and my attorney who is now retired.

Can I, as Trustee, just remove them from the Trust?

There is verbiage in the Trust stating I can add Beneficiaries on Schedule B but this Trust was set up prior to 41F.

[Sharkbite]

I dont think 41f had any bearing on removing beneficiaries from pre-established trusts. If you add people to a trust that has NFA items in it, those people need fingerprints and backgrounds.

To delete beneficiaries, use the forms to do so, just as before 41f.

[smustian]

On your Beneficiary Schedule ?, draw a line through the name, write deleted and the date deleted. OR .. Just fill out another Schedule ? with the names you want on it and then sign and date the bottom. Not sure if it is necessary to keep the old one or not. I doubt it.

[plant.one]

shouldnt be an issue, depending on what their full status is in the trust and your specific trust language.

in my trust, its just a matter of printing out a new copy of the schedule A list of members.

however, in my case the other beneficiary's are also the successor trustee and alternate successor trustee - so i'm kind stuck with them :p (or would have to name replacements)

[ncorry]

Beneficiaries are not "responsible persons". Only "Responsible Persons" are required to submit fingerprints/ photos. A currently-serving trustee or currently-serving co-trustees are "responsible persons"; successor trustees, if not acting as a trustee at the time the Form 1/ 4 is mailed, are not "RPs".

The trust is required to have at least one beneficiary at all times. if a person is a beneficiary and is not ALSO a currently serving trustee (or co-trustee), they are not entitled to possess the trust's assets (AKA the NFA goodies). One person can not be the only trustee and the only beneficiary at the same time.

OP- Are your beneficiaries also currently-serving co-trustees? If they are, they can sign a form stating that, effective 12/7/2017, I, Jim Smith, co-Trustee of the OP NFA Trust, resign as a co-Trustee of the OP NFA Trust. Send a copy of that form in with your prints and complete copy of the OP NFA Trust with the Form 4.

If they are not currently-serving co-trustees, they're not responsible persons, so they don't have to send prints in.

[plant.one]

Beneficiaries are not "responsible persons". Only "Responsible Persons" are required to submit fingerprints/ photos. A currently-serving trustee or currently-serving co-trustees are "responsible persons"; successor trustees, if not acting as a trustee at the time the Form 1/ 4 is mailed, are not "RPs".

.

thats not true for all trusts, or in all states.


in some states - a beneficiary IS a responsible person allowed to posess the nfa item(s) in question. a beneficiary does NOT have to be listed as a trustee or a Beneficiary/trustee.

this is how it works here in Michigan, and how the language of my trust is drafted.


in other states a beneficiary only is not eligible to posses, and therefore wouldnt be considered a responsible person.


im sure this is why the "responsible person, able to posess" language was used, instead of saying beneficiary/trustee specifically.







the most accurate statement to describe this situation would likely be as follows

if you're able to be identified as a person able to posses the NFA items of the trust based on your state laws and your trust's language, your fingerprints & pics must be included

[ncorry]

Beneficiaries are not "responsible persons". Only "Responsible Persons" are required to submit fingerprints/ photos. A currently-serving trustee or currently-serving co-trustees are "responsible persons"; successor trustees, if not acting as a trustee at the time the Form 1/ 4 is mailed, are not "RPs".

.

thats not true for all trusts, or in all states.


in some states - a beneficiary IS a responsible person allowed to posess the nfa item(s) in question. a beneficiary does NOT have to be listed as a trustee or a Beneficiary/trustee.

this is how it works here in Michigan, and how the language of my trust is drafted.


in other states a beneficiary only is not eligible to posses, and therefore wouldnt be considered a responsible person.


im sure this is why the "responsible person, able to posess" language was used, instead of saying beneficiary/trustee specifically.







the most accurate statement to describe this situation would likely be as follows

if you're able to be identified as a person able to posses the NFA items of the trust based on your state laws and your trust's language, your fingerprints & pics must be included

I agree with your last sentence, that is a more accurate description of the federal law. However, it would seem that M.C.L.A. 555.16 allows a settlor to draft a trust that would allow a beneficiary to possess trust assets while owned by the trust, Michigan statutes do not use this as a default starting point.

Edited to add and clarify on 12/8:
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/form/ ... 4/download On page 4 of the current Form 4, Definition 1.e defines Responsible Person. The last sentence give examples for trusts, stating "An example of who may be excluded from this definition of responsible person is the beneficiary of a trust, IF THE BENEFICIARY DOES NOT HAVE THE CAPABILITY OT EXERCISE the enumerated powers or authorities." 36 of the states have adapted some version of the Uniform Trust Code. Unless the language of the trust specifically gives beneficiaries the right and power to possess and/or use the trust's assets while they are only a beneficiary, the default position of the UTC is that only the trustee (or co-trustees) have the current and present right to do so. SO, the bottom line is that plant.one is right, the most accurate statement would require looking at the Trust language. If there is no specific language that allows a beneficiary to possess the trust's assets, they do not have the right to do so, and would not be a responsible person.

Generally speaking (again, default position), a trustee has a fiduciary duty to protect and preserve trust assets. NFA trusts should address that and have some language that allows the trustee to use the assets and acknowledge that such use could result in the reduction of the assets' value. Otherwise, someone could argue that simply using the NFA goodies is a breach of the trustee's duty.

[plant.one]

im going by what my lawyer informed me related to how trusts and NFA controlled items interact at the time of its drafting - that being if you're listed as a beneficiary, and are not a minor-benefiricary yet to come of age - you are automatically eligible to posses NFA items owned by the trust as long as you meet the other state and federal requirements for posession. (ie: you're not a felon, are of age, etc etc etc)

i dont recall any specific language in my trust designating this as such. i'll take a detailed look at the trust language later and see if i can find it though.

[hardcase]

My wife and I renewed our CCW permit for another 5 years last week. The deputy that did the paperwork and finger prints said it would take 3 months to get our cards. NC is getting about as bad as ATF on paper stuff. He said if I go through a license check or get pulled to show LE my receipt plus my expired CCW permit and he/she could look it up on the computer in their car and not cart me off to jail. He did warn me not to carry in a state with reciprocity as most likely they would not have computer access to NC stuff.

I decided to wait on getting another can. I have 5 already that fits all the guns I own. I did want another .22 that is not aluminum as it is a pain to clean. The deputy said the Sheriff was OK with signing off on cans. NC has been going through this shall sign to a must sign thing. Our county Sheriff is new this year as the old one retired. I didn't want to get into my Trust (before 41F) with the SBRs on it. I have stamps for all of them but wanted to let the local new Sheriff get some time under his belt. We are planning to move to another county next year or the next as well.

My whole reason for the Trust was due to estate issue. I'm getting old enough to think about that sort of thing.

Another thing. Our local Sheriff now has a electronic finger print reader a little bigger than a Rubik's Cube than the old ink thing. I didn't ask how or if they could print off my prints to a card.

It seems like citizens in America have nothing private anymore. Finger prints, credit cards, computer pictures. No way of being anonymous.

[hardcase]

im going by what my lawyer informed me related to how trusts and NFA controlled items interact at the time of its drafting - that being if you're listed as a beneficiary, and are not a minor-benefiricary yet to come of age - you are automatically eligible to posses NFA items owned by the trust as long as you meet the other state and federal requirements for posession. (ie: you're not a felon, are of age, etc etc etc)

i dont recall any specific language in my trust designating this as such. i'll take a detailed look at the trust language later and see if i can find it though.

This is what the attorney that did my Trust told me as well. This was 6-7 years ago though.

My understanding is that part of the reason for 41F was that a Trust allowed someone without fingerprint/LE clearance to be in possession of a can or maybe even a SBR if their name was on the Trust.