The Faculty Lounge

CFP: Inheritance and Inequality - Drexel Law Review

Announcement of Conference Symposium and Call for Proposals

Inheritance and Inequality

Fifth Biennial Conference on Critical Trusts & Estates and Symposium of the Drexel Law Review

Expressions of interest due May 1, 2024

Program September 27-28, 2024, Philadelphia, PA

We are pleased to announce a conference on “Inheritance Inequality” (the Fifth Biennial Conference on Critical Trusts and Estates). The conference will take place on Friday September 27 and Saturday September 28, 2024 at Drexel University’s Thomas R. Kline School of Law, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and will be sponsored by the Drexel Law Review. The keynote speaker will be Chris Rabb, genealogist, family historian, educator, author, policy-shaper. His keynote will address the intersections of race, wealth, and social enterprise. 

We invite paper and/or full panel proposals on any topic related to the many intersections of wills, trusts and estates with gender, race, class, and other identity axes. We are especially interested in presentations and papers that explore connections between and among wills, trusts, estates, gender, race, and wealth inequality. Such topics might include, but are not limited to, connections between estate planning, wealth inequality, and climate change; non-traditional families; wills and trusts issues for the LGBTQ+ community, incarcerated people, and the undocumented; offshore assets and domestic inequality; and inheritance and citizenship.

We also invite interventions on any other aspect of the conference theme of inheritance inequality (for example, access to estate planning, default rules and definitions, property transfer rules and norms, the estate tax and luxury taxes, private responses to climate change, and integrating climate change into the Trusts and Estates curriculum). Interdisciplinary approaches, linking the law to themes in art, literature, history, and the social sciences, among others, are welcome. Participants can be academics, practitioners, government officials, policy researchers, economists, graduate students, or others with an interest and expertise in inheritance law. Contributors from the United States as well as other countries are welcome. 

Those interested in participating in the conference are asked to submit 300 word abstracts of paper proposals, or 1,000 word panel proposals, including brief descriptions of the papers on the panel, to Deborah Gordon ([email protected]), Carla Spivack ([email protected]), and Gracen Hashem ([email protected]) by Wednesday, May 1, 2024. Proposals should indicate if there is interest in publishing, as publication opportunities will be available to selected presenters. Applicants will be notified before June 1, 2024. Selected participants will be expected to circulate draft papers no later than August 27, 2024.  Final papers will be due October 27, 2024.

For those presenting at the conference, the sponsor will cover lodging and selected meal costs. If a participant is unable to obtain reimbursement from their home institution for travel, such expenses may be covered should funds become available.

We eagerly anticipate hearing from prospective participants and are enthusiastic about facilitating engaging conversations at the upcoming conference.  

Symposium Announcement—The Federal Income Tax: Racially Blind but Not Racially Neutral

Trusts and Estates Collaborative Research Network (CRN56)

CALL FOR PAPERS 

Annual Meeting on Law and Society

San Juan, Puerto Rico

June 1-4, 2023

IN PERSON ONLY

Abstracts deadline: 8 November 2022

The Trusts and Estates Collaborative Research Network invites you to submit your paper and panel proposals for the upcoming annual meeting on Law and Society, to be held in San Juan, Puerto Rico. This conference will be in-person only. There will be no hybrid or virtual panels. 

We invite papers and proposals that touch in any way on succession (inheritance), equity, or wealth transfers more generally. Subjects of inquiry may involve any aspect of government or social policy with respect to trusts, estates, inheritance, wealth transfer, equity or courts with jurisdiction over these issues.

The conference theme of ‘Separate and Unequal’ offers an opportunity to explore the role of law in normalizing inequality and discrimination. However, papers are not limited to these topics.

We welcome any papers on the topic of trusts and estates. For more information about the conference theme, visit:

https://www.lawandsociety.org/sanjuan2023/

How to submit:

To be included in a CRN56 Trusts and Estates session please submit your proposal directly through the Law and Society Association’s website by November 8, making sure to select CRN56 from the dropdown menu. 

We welcome any of the following submissions: 

• Individual papers (we will organize submissions into panels).
• Paper sessions: panels formed around a single theme, with 4 or 5 paper presenters, and a chair/discussant.
• Roundtables: formed around a single topic with 4 to 8 participants, and a chair. 
• Author Meets Reader (AMR): for scholarly books published in 2022. 

Individual abstracts can be submitted in English or Spanish

Session abstracts must be in English, but can be presented in Spanish as long as all papers in the session are in Spanish. 

For more information on the different submission types, and how to submit, visit: https://www.lawandsociety.org/types-of-submissions/

Important information about the conference:

More information including details regarding visa requirements, and accessibility information can be found at the conference website: 

https://www.lawandsociety.org/sanjuan2023/

 

Who Cares About Prince Philip's Will?

No doubt the family members of Prince Philip care about his will. So do some fans of the British Royal Family. Many people don't care at all.

As for myself, I teach Wills, Trusts & Estates.I'm interested in seeing Prince Philip's will and possibly using it as a teaching tool. But can I? Nope. Nick Piška (Kent Law School) explains why (here).  Here are some excerpts from Professor Piška's helpful explanation:

Under the Senior Courts Act 1981 wills are normally open to inspection by the public. However public access to wills is subject to a rule that wills shall not be open to inspection where the court believes that it would be ‘undesirable or otherwise inappropriate’. This little used rule has been used to seal the wills of senior members of the royal family for over a century in accordance with a convention that was developed privately between the royals, their lawyers, the Attorney-General and the judiciary. The effect of a High Court decision last year concerning the sealing of Prince Philip’s will could have an impact on public access to wills beyond the royal family and provide a further means for the wealthy to hide their assets.

The High Court decision confirmed and clarified the convention that the wills of senior members of the royal family are sealed, initially for 90 years. It did so on the basis of two arguments: to protect the dignity of the sovereign, and to protect the privacy of the Her Majesty.

There are a number of problems with the High Court’s reasoning. ***

The origin and rationale of public access to wills is unclear, although we know that it has been a statutory right since 1857. Various rationales have been given, including informing beneficiaries of their rights and possible creditors of the estate. ***

In terms of making the case for a general public interest in wills, an important factor is being able to understand and have an open debate about wealth inequality. Perhaps the most concerning aspect of the sealing of Prince Philip’s will is that the convention has been extended to not even disclosing the value of the estate. Such information is crucial in understanding wealth inequality, and knowing the contents of wills further helps us explore patterns of distribution of wealth.

Read the full piece here.

image source: Wikimedia Commons

Critical Trusts and Estates at Oklahoma City University School of Law

Today and tomorrow, Oklahoma City University School of Law is hosting the Critical Trusts & Estates Conference.  Here are today's programs and speakers:

Changing Families, Changing Law? Redux

• Patricia Cain, Santa Clara University School of Law, What’s Right and Wrong about the Uniform Cohabitants’ Economic Remedies Act
• Naomi Cahn, University of Virginia School of Law, The Hundred-Year Life
• Nick Piska, Kent University, The Families and the English Law of Succession
• Bria Winston, Mugg Winston, Edmond, Oklahoma, Changing Families in Oklahoma Law

Death and Taxes

• Victoria Haneman, Creighton University School of Law, Tax-Sheltering Funeral Savings
• Kayla R. Stephen, Attorney, Kirschbaum Law Group, Adjunct Professor, Mitchell College, Pay to Stay Incarceration and Probate
• Phyllis Taite, Oklahoma City University School of Law, Do Taxing Systems Impact Income and Wealth Inequality? Investigating Disparities in OECD Member and Contributing Countries
• Bridget Crawford, Pace University Elizabeth Haub School of Law and Lee-ford Tritt, University of Florida Levin College of Law, The Appalachia Tax

Pedagogy Roundtable: Bringing Race, Gender, and Class into the Wills and Trusts Classroom

• Karen Sneddon, Mercer University Walter F. George School of Law Challenging Students’ Assumptions to Aid Them in Serving Underserved Clients
• Carla Spivack, Oklahoma City University School of Law, Teaching Breach of Fiduciary Duties in the Context of Cobell v. Salazar
• Allison Anna Tait, Richmond School of Law, Teaching About the Role of Succession Law in Perpetuating the Wealth Gap
• Deborah S. Gordon, Drexel University Thomas R. Kline School of Law Language Matters

Trusts and Estates on the Ground: How We Plan, How We Draft, How We Know What We are Planning and Drafting

• Tina Cockburn, Faculty of Business and Law, Queensland University of Technology, Stephen Whyte, School of Economics & Finance, Queensland University of Technology, A Behavioral Economics Analysis of Will Making Preferences: Lessons from Australia
• Karen J. Sneddon, Mercer University Walter F. George School of Law, The Good, the Bad and the Ugly: Narrative and Wills
• Andrew Gilden, Willamette University School of Law
• Eva Subotnik, St. John’s University School of Law, Copyright’s Capacity Gap

Keynote Speech

Susan Gary, University of Oregon School of Law, Trust Law as a Tool for Employee-Controlled Companies

Tomorrow, the program will continue with more T&E discussion (details after the fold).

CFP: Third Biennial Conference on Critical Trusts and Estates

Oklahoma City University School of Law will host the Third Biennial Conference on Critical Trusts and Estates  April 8-9, 2022 in Oklahoma City.  The conference provides a forum for a wide range of work dealing with connections between succession law, broadly defined, and systemic inequality.   We invite submissions of proposals for both individual papers and panels from any of a wide range of perspectives – historical, empirical, doctrinal, textual, theoretical and practical.  We especially welcome submissions from junior scholars and those who have not attended in the past.  Please send 200-300 word proposals to Phyllis Burke, at [email protected] by February 21, 2022.    

There is no charge to attend the conference and remote-participation options likely will be available.      

CFP: Trusts & Estates Collaborative Research Network of Law and Society Association

Trusts & Estates Collaborative Research Network

Global Meeting on Law and Society

Lisbon, Portugal (& Virtual), July 13-16, 2022

 

Call for Participation – Deadline for Trusts & Estates CRN Proposals November 10, 2021 11:59 PM ET (USA)

Submission Link: here

The Trusts & Estates Collaborative Research invites proposals for (i) individual papers to be organized into panels; (ii) fully-formed panel proposals; and (iii) proposals for other sessions such as Author Meets Reader, Salon, or Roundtable discussions that explore any aspect of the law, practice or effects of trusts, equity, and estates, broadly defined. We also seek volunteers to serve as Chairs and/or Discussants for paper panels.

The CRN welcomes work that bears in any way on succession (inheritance), equity, or wealth transfers more generally. Subjects of inquiry may involve any aspect of government or social policy with respect to trusts, estates, inheritance, wealth transfer, equity or courts with jurisdiction over these issues.

If you would like to present an individual paper as part of a Trusts and Estates CRN panel, submit an idea for a fully-formed panel, or propose an Author Meets Reader, Salon or Roundtable session, please submit your proposal by November 10, 2021 at 11:59 p.m. Eastern (USA) via the LSA submission page here: https://lsa-annualmeeting.secure-platform.com/a/organizations/main/home

When you submit your proposal, please indicate that it is for CRN #56 Trusts and Estates.

If you would like to volunteer as a chair or discussant, please email Bridget Crawford (bcrawford [at] law.pace.edu).

For papers that are not already organized into panels, the CRN will organize submitted papers into panels with cohesive themes.

You are welcome to link your paper in some way to the 2021 conference theme, “Rage, Reckoning, & Remedy,” but there is no requirement to do so.

Please note that LSA rules limit you to one conference participation as a Paper Presenter, Roundtable Participant, Author.  There are no caps on appearances as Chair and/or Discussant on a panel, or an AMR reader.

Please also note that the format for the conference is hybrid, meaning some panels will be entirely online and some panels will be entirely in-person, but no “mixed” hybrid/live panels are permitted. Please indicate with your submission whether you plan to attend the conference in person or virtually only. For more information about this year’s format, please see LSA’s FAQ page here: https://www.lawandsociety.org/faqs-lisbon-2022.

 

They Were Her Property: White Women as Slave Owners in the American South

Stephanie E. Jones-Roger "makes a bold argument about the role of white women in American slavery.... Stephanie E. Jones-Rogers draws on a variety of sources to show that slave-owning women were sophisticated economic actors who directly engaged in and benefited from the South’s slave market. ... [E]nslaved people were often their primary source of wealth. Not only did white women often refuse to cede ownership of their slaves to their husbands, they employed management techniques that were as effective and brutal as those used by slave-owning men. White women actively participated in the slave market, profited from it, and used it for economic and social empowerment. By examining the economically entangled lives of enslaved people and slave-owning women, Jones-Rogers presents a narrative that forces us to rethink the economics and social conventions of slaveholding America." (Yale University Press.)

This is an important book. A very important book. A couple of thoughts. First, a few white women Southerners were disgusted by slavery. Stephanie Jones-Rogers recognizes this; Angelina and Sarah Grimke sisters were very against slavery. (212 n.40.) Second, Southern slave-owner females were (for the most part) proslavery. Third, Southern white slave-owners males were worse than Southern white women slave-owners mostly (e.g., 8-10, Martin v. Georgia, 25 Georgia 494 (1858)).

John McDonogh 1779-1850

This. I know him through McDonogh's Exectors v. Murdoch, 56 U.S. (15 How.) 367 (1854), which permitted him to use considerable resources to help public school students.  

Edward Colston, Bristol, England, is another example.

Remote Will Executions Temporarily Allowed in New York

Remote will executions are temporarily permitted in New York, courtesy of Governor Cuomo's Executive Order 202.14. Here is the relevant excerpt:

For the purposes of Estates Powers and Trusts Law (EPTL)  3-2.1(a)(2), EPTL 3-2.1(a)(4), Public Health Law 2981(2)(a), Public Health Law 4201(3), Article 9 of the Real Property Law, General Obligations Law 5-1514(9)(b), and EPTL 7-1.17, the act of witnessing that is required under the aforementioned New York State laws is authorized to be performed utilizing audio-video technology provided that the following conditions are met:

• • The person requesting that their signature be witnessed, if not personally known to the witness(es), must present valid photo ID to the witness(es) during the video conference, not merely transmit it prior to or after;
  • The video conference must allow for direct interaction between the person and the witness(es), and the supervising attorney, if applicable (e.g. no pre-recorded videos of the person signing);
  • The witnesses must receive a legible copy of the signature page(s), which may be transmitted via fax or electronic means, on the same date that the pages are signed by the person;
  • The witness(es) may sign the transmitted copy of the signature page(s) and transmit the same back to the person; and
  • The witness(es) may repeat the witnessing of the original signature page(s) as of the date of execution provided the witness(es) receive such original signature pages together with the electronically witnessed copies within thirty days after the date of execution. 

Electronic wills are officially permitted in very few states, although that may change. The Uniform Law Commission approved the Uniform Electronic Wills Act in July, 2020. New York's temporary experiment with remote witnessing during the stay-at-home period may cause some skeptics to embrace electronic wills.

Executing a Last Will and Testament During a Pandemic

Traditionally, a valid will must be:

(1) in writing;

(2) signed by the testator (or in the testator's name by another at the testator's request and in the testator's conscious presence); and

(3) either (A) signed by two individuals each of whom witnessed the signing of the will or the testator's acknowledgment of the testator's signature, or (B) acknowledged before a notary public.  So says Uniform Probate Code § 2-502. 

In states that have not adopted the UPC, holographic wills may or may not be allowed. In four states--Nevada, Indiana, Arizona, and Florida--electronic wills are permitted--but not necessarily with remote witnessing (such as by webcam). The recently-approved Uniform Electronic Wills Act leaves it to the adopting state to decide whether a witness's "electronic presence" will suffice for the purpose of witnessing a will.

In a jurisdiction like New York that does not permit holographic wills (except in the rarest of circumstances) and does not allow notarized wills, how is a person supposed to execute a valid will in an era of social distancing? I suppose the testator could meet up with friends in a city park, all the while maintaining appropriate six-foot distance, and then conduct a traditional will ceremony.

Here's another idea, which probably only works for people who live in houses or in apartments with windows viewable from another apartment or from the sidewalk:

• The testator arranges with the neighbors that the testator will go to the neighbor's yard;
• Two neighbors come to a window, or a front door with a glass pane.
• The testator gets close to the window, holds up the will, and signs it while the neighbors are watching;
• The testator says, "This is my will. I have read it and understood it. It disposes my property in accordance with my wishes. I would like you to sign your names as witnesses."
• The testator pushes the will through the mail slot or slips the will under the door.
• The two neighbors retrieve the will from the mail slot.
• The two neighbors go back to the door or window. While the witnesses watch each other and while the testator is watching, each witness signs as a witness.
• The witnesses push the will back out to the testator through the mail slot or under the door.

I think it works. The ceremony is unusual, but it should meet either the "line of sight" test or the "conscious presence" test for witnesses. H/T Ellen Aprill.  Am I missing anything?

To make it easier for people to execute wills during this pandemic, Governor Cuomo should issue an emergency order allowing remote witnessing of wills. Remote notarization is temporarily allowed in New York. The inability to update a will a real problem that can be fixed relatively easily. To be sure, this pandemic likely will push many states to adopt electronic wills statutes with remote witnessing, once legislatures are back in session. In the meantime, remote witnessing should be permitted.

 

Suffolk Seeks Trusts & Estates Visitor

Suffolk University Law School in Boston is looking for a Spring 20201 visitor to teach Trusts & Estates.  Here is the info:

Suffolk University Law School in Boston invites applications for a position as a Visiting Professor for the Spring semester of the upcoming academic school year (Spring 2021), with the primary responsibility of teaching two sections of the course in Trusts and Estates (one day and one evening section).  Applications should be received by February 17 (although applications will be considered on a rolling basis until the position is filled) and must include a letter detailing desire and qualifications to teach Trusts and Estates, as well as a curriculum vitae.  Applications should be addressed to Professor Rosanna Cavallaro ([email protected]) and uploaded to the Suffolk University website via Jobvite.

Suffolk University is an equal opportunity employer. The University is dedicated to the goal of building a diverse and inclusive faculty and staff who contribute to the robust exchange of ideas on campus, and who are committed to teaching and working in a diverse environment.  We strongly encourage applications from groups historically marginalized or underrepresented because of race/color, gender, religious creed, disability, national origin, veteran status or LGBTQ status.

Suffolk University does not discriminate against any person on the basis of race, color, national origin, ancestry, religious creed, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, marital status, disability, age, genetic information, or status as a veteran in admission to, access to, treatment in, or employment in its programs, activities, or employment.

Light Years: Documentary Film Aging (Positively and with Creativity)

A few weeks ago, I was lucky to attend a screening of a new documentary film, Light Years. Director Claire Marie Panke has put together a beautiful and worthwhile documentary about three older adults and how they approach aging.  The film would make a great supplement to classes in Elder Law or Estate Planning. Here is the film synopsis:

Light Years celebrates positive aging, creative aging, conscious aging ~ and the power and potential of midlife and beyond. 

The film introduces Dee, a writer and professor who savors her life-long passion for African dance; Anita, whose work as an actress, dancer, playwright and poet spans eight decades and a host of adventures; and Paul, who started painting at 51 and helps  redefine “retirement” to be more about service than shuffleboard.

Dee, Anita and Paul know that whether eighteen or eighty, we all need meaningful relationships, a sense of purpose, and an outlet for personal and creative expression.  They reveal that the second half of life can yield profound rewards, modeling the ways Baby Boomers have reframed what our later years can look like.

This is the heartbeat of Light Years: the choice to remain engaged in community, to continue learning, giving back, and growing as we grow older.

As their stories evolve over several years, Dee, Anita and Paul face physical challenges and threats to their independence. Each responds with a resiliency that transcends those challenges and affirms our potential for renewal at any age.

More details are available here.

In a talk-back after the film screening, the director spoke about some of our own negative stereotypes of the elderly as "prejudice against our future selves." That was a new way (for me, at least) of thinking, and definitely made me sit up and take notice of my own attitudes and experiences. As a Trusts & Estates lawyer and teacher, I talk often about death and dying. I work with older people all the time. And now that I've turned 50, people who are 70, 75 and older don't seem that "old" any more....This film was inspiring.

UC Davis/ACTEC Symposium, "An Empirical Analysis of Wealth Transfer Law"

Today the UC Davis Law Review hosts its 53rd annual symposium. This year's topic is "An Empirical Analysis of Wealth Transfer Law." The program is co-sponsored by the ACTEC Foundation. Here's the program for today's events:

Opening Remarks by Dean Kevin Johnson
8:45-approx. 9:00 AM

Panel 1: MARRIAGE
Moderated by Professor David Horton (UC Davis)
Panel with:

Professor Naomi Cahn (GWU), What's Wrong about the Elective Share Right? with comments by Professor Shayak Sarkar (UC Davis)

Professor Alyssa DiRusso (Samford), Using Empirical Data on the Widowhead Effect to Optimize Simultaneous Health Law and Drafting, with comments by Professor Andrea Chandrasekher (Davis)

Professor Jeffrey Pennell (Emory), Individuated Determination of a Surviving Spouse's Elective Share

Professor Russell James (Texas Tech), Empirical Analysis of Charitable Bequest Transfers: A Comprehensive Review, New Findings, and the Emerging Potential of Longitudinal Data

9:00 AM-10:45 AM

Break
10:45 AM-11:00 AM

Panel 2: RESEARCH USING PROBATE RECORDS
Moderated by Professor Adam Hirsch (San Diego)
Panel with:

Professor Reid Kress Weisbord (Rutgers), Fiduciary Authority and Liability in Probate Estates: An Empirical Analysis, with comments by Professor Jane Baron (Temple)

Professor Bridget Crawford (Pace), What Probate Courts Cite: A Study of the New York County Surrogate's Court 2017-2018, with comments by Professor Donna Shestowsky (Davis)

Professor Alberto Lopez (Alabama), Antebellum and Postbellum Testamentary Transfers in Three Kentucky Counties

Professor David Horton (UC Davis), Do-It-Yourself-Wills, with comments by Professor Alexander Boni-Saenz (Chicago-Kent)

11:00 AM-12:45

Lunch and Keynote Speaker

12:45-2:30

Panel 3: NONPROBATE TRANSFERS, ESTATE PLANNING, AND INTESTACY
Moderated by Professor David Horton (UC Davis)

Professor Adam Hofri-Winogradow (Hebrew University), The Statutory Liberalization of Trust Law Across 152 Jurisdictions: Leaders, Laggards and the Market in Fiduciary Services, with comments by Professor Christopher Elmendorf (UC Davis)

Professor Adam Hirsch (San Diego), Waking the Dead: An Empirical Analysis of Revival of Wills

Professor Gary Spitko (Santa Clara), How Should Will Substitutes Matter in Intestacy? A Qualitative Study (co-authored with Professor Mary Louise Fellows (Minnesota))

Professor Emily Taylor Poppe (UC Irvine), Surprised by the Inevitable; An Empirical Examination of National Estate Planning Behavior, with comments by Professor Menesh Patel (UC Davis)

Professor Danaya Wright (Florida), What Happened to Grandma's House: The Real Property Implications of Dying Intestate

2:30-4:30

Wills Formalities in the 21st Century

Testicle gripping had solemn significance in ancient pre-Roman times. When a man took an oath, the action’s importance was underscored by the equally memorable act of publicly holding either his own or another man’s genitals.

These are the opening lines of my article on Wills Formalities in the Twenty-First Century, 2019 Wisc.  L. Rev. 269. Call me...fixated...but I haven't been able to get the fact out of my mind since I read this article more than 20 years ago: Joshua T. Katz, Testimonia Ritus Italici: Male Genitalia, Solemn Declarations, and a New Latin Sound Law, 98 Harv. Stud. Classical Philology 183 (1998). I'm glad to be able to put to good use this otherwise random (to me, not to linguists, of course) knowledge. The joys of cross-disciplinary reading are abundant.

CFP: Trusts & Estates Collaborative Research Network, Law & Society 2020

CFP: Trusts & Estates Collaborative Research Network of Law and Society Association

Trusts & Estates Collaborative Research Network

Law and Society Association Annual Meeting

Denver, Colorado, May 28-31, 2020

Call for Participation – Deadline September 20, 2019

Submission Link: https://form.jotform.com/91848913844167

The Trusts & Estates Collaborative Research invites proposals for (i) individual papers to be organized into panels; (ii) fully-formed panel proposals; and (iii) proposals for other sessions such as Author Meets Reader, Salon, or Roundtable discussions that explore any aspect of the law, practice or effects of trusts, equity, and estates, broadly defined. We also seek volunteers to serve as Chairs and/or Discussants for paper panels. Successful proposals likely will bear in some way on succession (also referred to as inheritance) and/or wealth transfers (whether at death or during lifetime, outright or in trust). Subjects of inquiry may involve any aspect of government or social policy with respect to trusts, estates, inheritance, wealth transfer, equity or courts with jurisdiction over these issues.

If you would like to present an individual paper as part of a Trusts and Estates CRN panel, submit an idea for a fully-formed panel, or propose an Author Meets Reader, Salon or Roundtable session, please  submit a 500-word abstract/description by Friday, September 20, 2019 at 5:00 p.m. GMT via this link: https://form.jotform.com/91848913844167.

The planning committee will then attempt to organize the papers into panels with cohesive themes, and to populate other sessions as appropriate. You are welcome to link your paper in some way to the 2020 conference theme, “Rule and Resistance,” but there is no requirement to do so.

Jeffrey Epstein's Will Filed for Probate In Virgin Islands

And the New York Post has a copy here. Turns out Mr. Epstein executed a will in jail two days before he committed suicide. 

New Book Announcement: David Joulfaian's "The Federal Estate Tax"

David Joulfaian (Financial Economist at the U.S. Department of the Treasury and Adjunct Professor of Economics at Georgetown University) has published with MIT Press a new book called The Federal Estate Tax.  It is an in-depth look at the history and operation of the tax, with lots of good wealth data, too.  Here is the publisher's description:

Governments have been levying some form of inheritance tax since the ancient Egyptians did so in the seventh century BC. In the United States, the federal government experimented with various forms of inheritance taxes, settling on an estate tax in 1916 and a gift tax in 1932. Despite this long history, there are few empirical studies of the federal estate tax. This book offers the first comprehensive look at U.S. estate and inheritance taxes, examining their history and evolution, structure and inner workings, and economic consequences. Written by David Joulfaian, a veteran economist at the U.S. Department of the Treasury, the book provides accessible accounts of such topics as changes in tax laws, issues of equity, the fiscal contribution of the estate tax, and its behavioral effects.

Joulfaian traces the evolution of U.S. inheritance taxes from 1797 to the present, noting that the estate tax rate and base expanded through 1976, then began to decline. He describes the tax itself, explaining that it currently applies to estates and gifts in excess of $11.18 million, and outlines applicable deductions and credits. He sketches a profile of taxpayers and their beneficiaries; surveys the revenues from estate and gift taxes; and discusses the effect of estate taxation on labor decisions, saving and wealth accumulation, charitable giving, life insurance ownership, and other economic activities. Finally, he addresses criticisms of the estate tax and analyzes its shortcomings. Accompanying tables present a wealth of data gathered by Joulfaian in his research and not available elsewhere.

Gulati on Horton and Weisbord

Mitu Gulati has a new post over Credit Slips on David Horton and Reid Weisbord "Boilerplates No Contracts Clauses."

SCOTUS Takes on State Income Taxation of Trusts

Tomorrow the Supreme Court hears oral arguments in the case of North Carolina Dep't of Revenue v. Kaestner Family Trust (No. 18-457).  The question presented is whether the Due Process Clause prohibits states from taxing trusts based on trust beneficiaries' in-state residency. Michelle Simon (Pace) and I think the answer is yes, the Due Process Clause does prohibit taxation, where the state's only connection to the trust is the residence of a discretionary trust beneficiary (i.e., someone who is eligible but not entitled to receive distributions of trust income and/or principal), and where the discretionary trust beneficiary has not in fact received any distributions from the trust.

We have a short essay in the UCLA Law Review Discourse that explains the background to the Kaestner Family Trust case and argues why taxation is unconstitutional in this case.  Here is the abstract to our essay, The Supreme Court, Due Process and the State Income Taxation of Trusts:

What are the constitutional limits on a state’s power to tax a trust with no connection to the state, other than the accident that a potential beneficiary lives there? The Supreme Court of the United States will take up this question this term in the context of North Carolina Department of Revenue v. Kimberley Rice Kaestner 1992 Family Trust. The case involves North Carolina’s income taxation of a trust with a contingent beneficiary, meaning someone who is eligible, but not certain, to receive a distribution or benefit from the trust, who resides in that state. Part I of this Article explains the background of Kaestner Trust and frames the constitutional questions that will be before the Court at oral arguments on April 16, 2019. Part II examines how and why due process applies in the state income taxation context, with a particular emphasis on how familiar concepts of general and specific jurisdiction apply uneasily to donative trusts. Part III articulates the reasons that the Court should hold that a state has no constitutional authority to impose a tax on trust income where the trust’s only connection with the forum state is the residence of a contingent beneficiary. Kaestner Trust is the most important due process case involving trusts that the Court has decided in over sixty years; it bears directly on the fundamental meaning of due process.

The full essay is here.

Image : Arthur Rothstein, The Supreme Court Building, Washington, D.C., 1936, Farm Security Administration and Picture Collection, NYPL Digital Collections (here)