My brother is to be the beneficiary of a trust at age 67, however, he is far behind in his child support obligation to the state and to his ex-wife. The trust states that he will not receive the trust until such time as it can be assured that no part of the trust can be collected by the state, the ex-wife, or the now adult children. Is there an age at which his outstanding obligation, over $100,000, ends? Upon his death the trust states that the trust will become property of his siblings and/or their heirs.

Quote:

---

Is there an age at which his outstanding obligation, over $100,000, ends?

---

I think his obligations to his ex, if left unpaid, will go until he dies. So NO, there is no age his obligations ends.

Interesting clause in the trust. I would question its legality. I suspect the state and/or the person he owes the support to, could sue to overturn that clause.

I doubt that the clause in the trust is legal and if challenged by the state in court, most likely will allow the state to take the money. Also since child support is actually payments for the children, merely paid to the parent as their custodian, I also believe the exwife can make claim on behalf of the children for their support.
** But this will most likely be at least two law suits against this trust once he is able to have the money at age 67. The state merely has to put an attachment on it, and then he will have to hire an attorney to prove they did not have this right.

Also at his death, the estate would have claims against it, for this money.

Each state has its own clauses on how long after the children are over 21 (or other rules) that support is collectible, Often those money to the state do not expire, but again this is by state law.

And please note, that courts normally take a slim view on people who do not pay their child support, so they can expect the courts not to be highly in his favor if at all possible.

I'm not sure the state will even have to wait until he is 67 to go after the trust.

Quote:

---

his outstanding obligation, over $100,000,

---

This case needs many more facts like the brothers INCOME, and why he hasn't cut a deal, as well as his age. Also what state are we talking about since many issue warrants of arrest for not paying child support obligations. At the least they garnish wages.

I suspect that OP is not being told the full story by the brother/ beneficiary. I also note that OP appears to be a contingent beneficiary, so it appears to be in his/her interest that the brother not receive a distribution from the trust.

I am curious who the trustee is: is it a relative who is perhaps playing fast and loose with the terms of the trust, or is a responsible fiduciary (and does the trust actually say what OP is being told it says)?