What is the difference between community property and quasi-community property?

Question

I have a revocable trust and it talks about community and quasi-community property. I do not undestand the difference between the two types of propery. I live in California.

Answer 1

Jeffery B is pretty close. Quasi-community property is a legislatively adopted rule found in Family Code section 125:

"Quasi-community property" means all real or personal property, wherever situated, acquired before or after the operative date of this code in any of the following ways:
(a) By either spouse while domiciled elsewhere which would have been community property if the spouse who acquired the property had been domiciled in this state at the time of its acquisition.
(b) In exchange for real or personal property, wherever situated, which would have been community property if the spouse who acquired the property so exchanged had been domiciled in this state at the time of its acquisition.

What this does is eliminate arguments as to whether property obtained in a non-community property state is to be treated as community property in California: it is, but ONLY if it would have been community property if acquired in California.

Answer 2

The difference has to do with where the parties were living when an asset was acquired. If two people buy an asset in a
community property state, and later move to a non community property state, at the time of dissolution of marriage the division of the marital estate would be unfair. So, the courts developed the quasi-community property doctrine to assure a fair division of property by treating all assets as community property regardless of where they were acquired.
Now, that being said, there are exceptions to this rule. Any asset that was bought with separate property funds, such as a
gift to one spouse or an inheritance will retain that character and
will be a separate property asset. There is also a document called a transmutation, by which a spouse can change the character of a separate property asset and convert it to a joint asset. Similarly, a spouse can use the same document to renounce or disclaim their interest in a joint asset and convert it to the separate property of the other spouse.
Now, if you have a spouse, there should not be an interest for that person in your trust, because only earned income during marriage is considered a joint asset. Besides, I suspect that the
gift doctrine would probably apply, which also argues for the same result. It all depends on the source of the funds used to establish the trust. Only if they were the result of a personal injury claim or something like that could there be an allegation that the trust was a joint asset. Otherwise it should be all yours.

Answer 3

Dependents are literally not an challenge. In a community property state, all property obtained with assistance from a married couple even as living jointly is presumed to be owned with assistance from the "community" of the husband and spouse except they can coach in a special way. lenders can assemble money owed due from both better 1/2 from communtiy property. In a non-community property state, income and sources are separate. There are good and undesirable factors to both equipment.

Answer 4

To me, this suggests that there are various items of property that are community property. They can easily be identified as community property. Example, you and the wife buy a chair during your marriage. This is community property.

The word "quasi" put in front of the word "community" suggests that there are items of property present that may well be community property. Example: you own a chair and then you get married. You bring the chair into the marriage. During the marriage, it has a new covering put on it. Money is spent on it, marital money. Question is now whether the wife has a claim to it so it is quasi-community property.

That's my take on this.