Article Review: Unconstitutional Perpetual Trusts

Paul Sullivan has written a review that discusses Robert H. Sitkoff and Steven J. Horowitz’s new article entitled, Unconstitutional Perpetual Trusts, which analyses constitutional issues of perpetual trusts under select states’ laws and constitutions.  Provided below is an excerpt from the review:

Critics of perpetual trusts have argued against them on moral grounds — saying tying up money for generations is bad public policy and could lead to a virtual aristocracy.

But Mr. Sitkoff is taking a new tack by questioning their legality.

In the paper, “Unconstitutional Perpetual Trusts,” which will appear in the coming issue of The Vanderbilt Law Review, Mr. Sitkoff and his co-author, Steven J. Horowitz, an associate at the law firm Sidley Austin, argue that legal challenges to these trusts could come from two sources: creditors in a state where the trusts are unconstitutional who are seeking ways to maximize their settlements and view the trusts as large sources of money, and descendants who want to break the trust and get their money now and without strings attached.

For the rest of the review, see Paul Sullivan, The Ins and Outs of Trusts That Last Forever, The New York Times, Dec. 5, 2014.