![]() ![]() During trust's term, a settlor or other beneficiary may not communicate with the trustee except in writing and only regarding (A) a request for a distribution, (B) the general financial requirements regarding distributions from the trust as a whole, (C) direction to the trustee that, because a law, executive order, or regulation prohibits the settlor from holding an asset, the asset may not be held by the trust, (D) direction to the trustee to sell all of an asset initially placed in the trust because the settlor has determined the sale is necessary to avoid a conflict of interest, the appearance of impropriety, or an ethical violation quarterly the trustee may provide to the settlor a written report of the aggregate market value of the trust's assets and property but may not disclose to the settlor or other beneficiary of the trust, or any other interested party, any information about the identity and nature of any of the assets in the trust, and the trustee shall be required to report any known breach of this confidentiality.Trust instrument shall contain a clear statement that its purpose is to remove from the settlor control and knowledge of investment of trust assets so that conflicts between the settlor's responsibilities and duties as a public official and the settlor's personal or financial interests will be eliminated.Trustee shall have full authority to manage the trust.Trustee shall be a bank, trust company, or other institutional fiduciary.Trust may not contain investments or assets if the ownership right or interest is required to be recorded in a public office other than with the Alaska Public Offices Commission, or contain assets with permanency that makes transfer improbable or impractical, including real estate, security interests in personal property, mortgages, and interests in closely held businesses.To qualify as a blind trust, the following conditions must be met: (AK ST § 39.50.040) Because the facts of each situation may vary, this information may need to be supplemented by consulting legal advisors. This table is intended to provide general information and does not necessarily address all aspects of this topic. However, some interpretations of the absence of state statutory or regulatory direction have taken the opposite interpretation (see e.g. ![]() Officials in some states that lack blind trust rules have relied on federal law as a guide. Conflict and disclosure rules may require knowledge of a potential conflict, so the lack of awareness created by a blind trust might provide protection from conflicts. Note: legislators in states lacking relevant laws may still form blind trusts. Relevant administrative rules, advisory opinions and other authoritative sources of interpretation are cited where found. ![]() The following table lists blind trust statutes in each state, D.C., Virgin Islands, Guam and Puerto Rico. Critics of the practice have also argued against their effectiveness. In theory, a public official with a blind trust would be immunized from potential conflicts stemming from the assets held in trust because the legislator-beneficiary would have no knowledge of the impact of official actions on the personal financial interests.īlind trusts provide one potential solution in some states, but setting up one can be expensive and time consuming. Control over the trust and its assets are given to an independent trustee, who may buy and sell assets without the knowledge or consent of the beneficiary ("blind"). In a blind trust, an individual places assets that could otherwise create conflicts of interest into an asset vehicle ("trust"). Some legislators may use blind trusts in an attempt to ethically balance private interests with public duties. However, that experience may be tied to ongoing personal financial interests that would require recusal from participating in those matters. ![]() Legislators with experience in an industry are more likely to be given committee assignments involving the regulation of that industry. In some cases, the same experience that qualifies an individual for a role may create potential conflicts of interest. Sprawling business interests may require recusal from an equally sprawling number of duties. Failing to abide by disclosure or conflict rules may result in public scrutiny and, in some cases, sanctions. States often require government employees and elected officials to recuse themselves and disclose when public duties might impact their personal financial interests. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |