Estate Planning Strategies for Cryptocurrency
While digital assets, or more precisely, cryptocurrency, have made certain transactions simpler, they have complicated the estate planning process. Clients who have acquired such assets must incorporate them into their estate planning documents or risk losing them forever.
March 19, 2021 at 10:00 AM
10 minute read
Digital assets, or more precisely, cryptocurrency, are growing exponentially in terms of value and popularity. Although cryptocurrency and digital assets may have made certain transactions simpler, they have complicated the estate planning process. Clients who have acquired such assets must incorporate them into their estate planning documents or risk losing them forever. The traditional notion of distributing all assets via a residuary clause of a Last Will and Testament and then having an executor search for digital assets does not work in the new world of cryptocurrency.
|What Is Cryptocurrency?
All cryptocurrencies are fundamentally the same. They are merely digital currency, which exist online and not in a material or tangible form. They are really just evidence of entry in a public ledger maintained through the use of blockchain technology. There are no physical coins or notes, nor are the funds controlled by a central government. The currency is encrypted and decentralized and, as a result, it is extremely difficult to counterfeit. In its simplest form, when an individual purchases cryptocurrency, the purchase is associated with a public and private key. The public key is visible to the entire network of decentralized computers across the world and is a specifically recorded transaction with a unique identification that cannot be changed. A private key is the digital equivalent of a password and proves ownership of the cryptocurrency, which is stored in a digital wallet and is the only method of accessing the digital currency.
Unlike a traditional bank account, an owner (or a fiduciary such as an executor or trustee) cannot contact any central institution and request access to the funds if the private key is lost or stolen. Anyone who obtains a private key would have access to the owner's cryptocurrency so the key must be safeguarded and protected. Think of it as a safe with only one non-replaceable key. While third-party companies, such as Coinbase, have now established a "vault," that is, in essence, a safety deposit box for a user's private keys, those owners who continue to retain their private key must proceed with caution and plan accordingly. As discussed in greater detail, below, since cryptocurrency is really just a series of unique computer code, it cannot be stored in the same fashion as fiat (or traditional) currency. If a decedent fails to plan properly, his or her digital assets may be lost forever.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAs AI-Generated Fraud Rises, Financial Companies Face a Long Cybersecurity Battle
SEC Enforcement Chief Grewal—Whose Hard Line on Crypto Tormented the Industry—Stepping Down
4 minute readPlaintiff Can't Opt Out of $97 Million Securities Settlement, NJ Fed Judge Rules
4 minute readGibbons' Securities Team Co-Chair to Defend The Children's Place Specialty Retailer
Trending Stories
- 13rd Circuit Strikes Down NLRB’s Monetary Remedies for Fired Starbucks Workers
- 2Latest Class of Court Officers Sworn into Service in New York
- 3Kirkland's Daniel Lavon-Krein: Staying Ahead of Private Equity Consolidation
- 4Many Southeast Law Firms Planned New, Smaller Offices in 2024
- 5On the Move and After Hours: Goldberg Segalla, Faegre Drinker, Pashman Stein
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250