should the law allow trusts for non-charitable purposes to exist?

Question

With all the problems they cause. Do their benefits out way their disadvantages?

Answer 1

Trusts don't cause problems, in fact, in most circumstances, they resolve many problems. So, to answer your question, YES, trusts should be allowed by law. Trusts don't generally cause problems in and of themselves and, yes, their benefits far outweigh any disadvantages in most cases.

Trusts are not right in every circumstance, consult a lawyer in your area for details.

Answer 2

The primary purpose of trust law is for non-charitable (private) trusts.

Trusts exist so that one person can receive the benefits of property, while someone else does the management. Trusts have existed since the dawn of the concept of property ownership.

I don't know what problems you think they cause, but most of the problems come as a result of corruption and mismanagement by the trustee -- same as corporate directors being corrupt and mismanaging corporate funds.

So, the solution is not to eliminate a basic legal principle that has been in use for thousands of years. The solution is to punish those who abuse their position of authority.

Answer 3

How else are parents going to leave their property for the benefit of undferage of mentally handicapped children? How, for that matter, does one ensure that the assets of such people are properly managed while the parents are alive? No, the concerns which prompted the original concept of the trust are still with us and will continue to be with us and the thought of simply abolishing them is alarming.

Answer 4

in many circumstances trusts arise without people even knowing about them, for example in the purchase of land, the vendor will hold on trust for the buyer when contracts are exchanged.

They are a central theme in our legal system and they cannot be prohibited!

Answer 5

They take most of the money in administrative cost
leaving very little money to benefit recipients.

Answer 6

yes.

Answer 7

NO