The chart below, produced by Bridgeford Trust Company, presents a very clear comparison of important factors that should be considered when comparing South Dakota, Delaware, and Pennsylvania as a potential trust jurisdiction. These factors are particularly important for planners to consider when determining the most robust dynasty trust state, the most compelling asset protection statute and privacy provisions, as well as the state with the most advantageous tax treatment for clients. The chart again accentuates the vital importance of considering alternative trust jurisdictions in the wealth and trust planning process to ensure that clients are availing themselves of the most progressive trust laws in the country.
Click on the image below to view the chart in a larger, PDF format.
For more information about the importance of considering alternative trust jurisdictions in the planning process and the power of South Dakota law, please feel free to contact us via our contact page.
Bridgeford Trust Company is proud to be sponsoring 
Trust & Estates Magazine again names South Dakota as a top tier trust jurisdiction! Annually, Trust & Estates Magazine evaluates trust jurisdictions utilizing an objective approach that considers the following factors: 1) whether a state has a Rule Against Perpetuities; 2) whether a state has income, inheritance, or premium taxes; 3) whether the state has adopted “modern trust laws” such as decanting provisions, directed trust capability, and privacy options; 4) whether a state has an asset protection statute and the effectiveness of the statute; 5) and the effect of migration on the rights of beneficial interest. 
Bridgeford Trust is honored and thrilled to be featured in a recent Central Pennsylvania Business Journal article entitled, 
Domestic Asset Protection Trusts are a compelling planning tool to use in lieu of or in conjunction with prenuptial agreements in the pre-marital planning process. While prenuptial agreements serve a certain purpose, there are many personal and legal issues that deter couples from executing them, and as such, many practitioners have turned to alternatives to protecting assets obtained prior to marriage. 
Below is a link to a recent Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court opinion (McNeil v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania Commonwealth Department of Revenue) rejecting the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue’s attempt to impose an income tax on “resident trusts.” A resident trust is one created under the will of a decedent who was a Pennsylvania resident at the time of death or a lifetime “grantor” trust established by a Pennsylvania resident. Regardless of where the trust is sitused (which state has jurisdiction), under Pennsylvania law, the trust remains subject to Pennsylvania income tax even if the settlor, trustee, or beneficiaries do not have any contact with Pennsylvania.