SESSION OF 2023
SUPPLEMENTAL NOTE ON HOUSE BILL NO. 2172
As Recommended by House Committee on
Judiciary
Brief*
The bill would enact the Uniform Trust Decanting Act
(UTDA).
Definitions (Section 2)
The bill would define various terms used throughout the
UTDA. Among the definitions in the bill:
●“Decanting power” would mean the power of an
authorized fiduciary under the UTDA to distribute
property of a first trust to one or more second trusts
or to modify the terms of the first trust;
●“Authorized fiduciary” would mean a:
○Trustee or other fiduciary, other than a settlor,
that has discretion to distribute or direct a
trustee to distribute part or all of the principal
of the first trust to one or more current
beneficiaries;
○Special fiduciary appointed by a court
pursuant to Section 9 of the bill; or
○Special-needs fiduciary under Section 13 of
the bill;
●“Beneficiary” would mean a person that:
____________________
*Supplemental notes are prepared by the Legislative Research
Department and do not express legislative intent. The supplemental
note and fiscal note for this bill may be accessed on the Internet at
http://www.kslegislature.org ○Has a present or future, vested or contingent,
beneficial interest in a trust;
○Holds a power of appointment over trust
property; or
○Is an identified charitable organization that will
or may receive distributions under the terms
of the trust;
●“First trust” would mean a trust over which an
authorized fiduciary may exercise the decanting
power;
●“Second trust” would mean a first trust after
modification under the UTDA or trust to which a
distribution of property from a first trust is or may
be made under UTDA;
●“Terms of the trust” would mean:
○The manifestation of the settlor’s intent
regarding a trust’s provisions as expressed in
the trust instrument or established by other
evidence that would be admissible in a judicial
proceeding; or
○The trust’s provisions as established,
determined, or amended by a trustee or other
person in accordance with applicable law,
court order, or nonjudicial settlement
agreement;
●“Trust instrument” would mean a record executed
by the settlor to create a trust or by any person to
create a second trust that contains some or all of
the terms of the trust, including any amendments;
and
●“Settlor” would mean, except as otherwise provided
in Section 25 of the bill, a person, including a
testator, that creates or contributes property to a
trust. If more than one person creates or
2- 2172 contributes property to a trust, each person would
be a “settlor” of the portion of the trust property
attributable to the person’s contribution except to
the extent another person has power to revoke or
withdraw that portion.
Applicability (Sections 3 and 5)
The bill would state the UTDA applies to irrevocable
express trusts, or express trusts that are only revocable with
the consent of the trustee or person holding an adverse
interest. The UTDA would not be applicable to trusts held
solely for a charitable purpose.
Additionally, the bill would allow a trust instrument to
restrict or prohibit exercise of the decanting power.
The bill would specify that the UTDA does not limit the
power of a trustee, powerholder, or other person to distribute
or appoint property in a further trust or to modify a trust under
the instrument, other state laws, common law, a court order,
or a nonjudicial settlement agreement. The bill would also
specify the UTDA does not affect the ability of a settlor to
make provisions in a trust instrument for the distribution of
trust property, appointment in further trust of the trust
property, or for modification of the trust instrument.
The UTDA would apply to any trust created before, on,
or after July 1, 2023, that:
●Has its principal place of administration in Kansas,
including trusts whose principal place of
administration has changed to Kansas; or
●Provides by its trust instrument that it is governed
by Kansas law or is governed by Kansas law for
the purpose of:
3- 2172 ○Administration, including administration of a
trust whose governing law has changed to
Kansas;
○Construction of the terms of the trust; or
○Determining the meaning or effect of the
terms of the trust.
Fiduciary Duties With Respect to Decanting Power
(Section 4)
The UTDA would require authorized fiduciaries to
exercise decanting power in accordance with their fiduciary
duties, including the duty to act in accordance with the
purposes of the first trust.
The bill would specify the UTDA does not create or imply
a duty to exercise the decanting power or to inform the
beneficiaries about the applicability of the UTDA.
The bill would further provide for purposes of the UTDA
and certain duties of trustees contained in the Kansas
Uniform Trust Code, the terms of the first trust are deemed to
include the decanting power, except as otherwise provided in
the first-trust instrument.
Reliance on Prior Decanting (Section 6)
The UTDA would specify that a trustee or other person’s
reliance upon the validity of the decanting of property or a
modification of a trust pursuant to the UTDA or other state law
would not make such person liable for any action or failure to
act as a result of this reliance.
Notice Requirements for Decanting (Section 7)
The bill would provide the notice period for decanting
begins when such notice is given under the terms of the
4- 2172 UTDA (described below), and ends 59 days after the day
notice is given. The bill would also provide an authorized
fiduciary may exercise the decanting power without consent
of any person and without court approval, provided other
requirements of the UTDA are met.
The UTDA would require notice be given in a record of
the intended exercise of the decanting power not later than
60 days before such exercise to certain persons as specified
by the bill. Such notice would be required to contain certain
information related to the manner and reason for the
proposed decanting and to include copies of related
agreements, instruments, and statements.
The bill would not require notice be provided to persons
not known to the fiduciary or who cannot be located after
reasonable diligence. Additionally, the bill would state an
exercise of the decanting power is not ineffective because of
failure to give the required notice to one or more persons if
the authorized fiduciary acted with reasonable care in
providing notice pursuant to the bill.
Before expiration of the notice period, the bill would
allow exercise of the decanting power if all persons entitled to
receive notice waive the period in a signed record.
The bill would state receipt of notice, waiver of the notice
period, or expiration of the notice period would not affect the
right of persons to seek judicial instruction or approval related
to a proposed decanting.
Authority to Represent and Bind (Section 8)
The bill would specify notice provided to a person with
the authority to represent and bind another person under a
first-trust instrument or the Kansas Uniform Trust Code has
the same effect as notice provided directly to such person.
5- 2172 Consent or waiver by the person with the authority
described above would be binding on the person represented
unless objected to by such person before the consent or
waiver could otherwise become effective.
A person with the above authority could also file an
application with a court on behalf of the person represented
to inquire whether the decanting power could be exercised in
accordance with the UTDA.
The bill would also specify that a settlor may not
represent or bind a beneficiary under the UTDA.
Authority of the Court to Intervene in the Exercise of
Decanting Power (Section 9)
The bill would allow certain specified persons to file an
application with a court seeking further instruction or approval
with respect to an exercise of decanting power and would
specify the actions a court could take upon such application.
●The bill would specify a proceeding to determine
whether a proposed or attempted exercise of the
decanting power is ineffective could not be
commenced by a person entitled to notice under
the UTDA or by a beneficiary unless such
proceeding is commenced within six months from
the day notice is given. Failure to receive a notice
would not extend the time by which such
proceeding would be required to be commenced if
the authorized fiduciary acted with reasonable
diligence to comply with the UTDA.
The bill would allow a court in a judicial proceeding
involving the decanting of a trust, as justice and equity may
require, to award costs and expenses, including reasonable
attorney fees, to any party, to be paid by another party, or
from the trust that is the subject of the controversy.
6- 2172 Signed Record (Section 10)
The bill would require an exercise of the decanting
power to be made in a record signed by an authorized
fiduciary. The signed record would be required to identify
either directly, or by reference, the first trust and the second
trust or trusts and state the property of the first trust being
distributed to each second trust, and the property, if any, that
remains in the first trust.
Decanting Power Of Fiduciary With Expanded
Distributive Discretion (Section 11)
The bill would define several terms used in this section,
including “noncontingent right,” “presumptive remainder
beneficiary,” “successor beneficiary,” and “vested interest.”
[Note: Some other terms used in this section are defined in
Section 2 of the bill, including “current beneficiary,” “expanded
distributive discretion,” “power of appointment,” and
“powerholder.”]
Under the provisions of the UTDA, an authorized
fiduciary that has expanded distributive discretion over the
principal of a first trust for the benefit of one or more current
beneficiaries may exercise the decanting power over the
principal of the first trust.
The bill would specify that in an exercise of the
decanting power, a second trust could not:
●Include as a current beneficiary a person that is not
a current beneficiary of the first trust, except as
otherwise provided in the bill;
●Include as a presumptive remainder beneficiary or
successor beneficiary a person that is not a current
beneficiary, presumptive remainder beneficiary, or
successor beneficiary of the first trust, except as
otherwise provided in the bill; or
7- 2172 ●Reduce or eliminate a vested interest.
The bill would further specify that in an exercise of the
decanting power, a second trust could be created or
administered under the law of any jurisdiction and such
exercise could:
●Retain a power of appointment granted in the first
trust;
●Omit a power of appointment granted in the first
trust, other than a presently exercisable general
power of appointment;
●Create or modify a power of appointment if the
powerholder is a current beneficiary of the first trust
and the authorized fiduciary has expanded
distributive discretion to distribute principal to the
beneficiary; and
●Create or modify a power of appointment if the
powerholder is a presumptive remainder or
successor beneficiary of the first trust, but the
exercise of the power may take effect only after the
powerholder becomes, or would have become if
then living, a current beneficiary.
The bill would specify that a power of appointment may
be general or nongeneral and that the class of permissible
appointees may be broader than or different from the
beneficiaries of the first trust. If an authorized fiduciary has
expanded distributed discretion over part, but not all, of the
principal of a first trust, the bill would allow the fiduciary to
exercise the decanting power over that part of principal over
which the authorized fiduciary has expanded distributive
discretion.
8- 2172 Decanting Power of Fiduciary With Limited Distributive
Discretion (Section 12)
The bill would define “limited distributive discretion” to
mean discretionary power of distribution that is limited to an
ascertainable standard or a reasonably definite standard.
The bill would provide that an authorized fiduciary with
limited distributive discretion over the principal of the first trust
for the benefit of one or more current beneficiaries may
exercise the decanting power over the principal of the first
trust.
The bill would allow a second trust to be created or
administered under the law of any jurisdiction. Under the bill,
second trusts in the aggregate would grant each beneficiary
of the first trust beneficial interests that are substantially
similar to those of the beneficiary in the first trust.
The bill would specify that the power to make a
distribution under a second trust for the benefit of an
individual beneficiary is substantially similar to a power under
the first trust to make a distribution directly to the beneficiary.
The bill would classify a distribution as being for the benefit of
the beneficiary if the:
●Distribution is applied for the benefit of the
beneficiary;
●The beneficiary is under a legal disability or the
trustee reasonably believes the beneficiary is
incapacitated, and the distribution is made as
permitted under the Kansas Uniform Trust Code; or
●Distribution is made as permitted under the terms
of the first-trust instrument and the second-trust
instrument for the beneficiary’s benefit.
If an authorized fiduciary has limited distributive
discretion, the bill would allow a fiduciary to exercise the
9- 2172 decanting power over the part of the principal that the
authorized fiduciary has limited distributive discretion.
Special-needs Trust (Section 13)
Definitions
The bill would define terms related to special-needs
trusts, including “beneficiary with a disability” and
“governmental benefits.” The bill would define a special-
needs trust to mean a trust the trustee believes would not be
considered a resource for the purposes of determining
whether a beneficiary with a disability is eligible for
governmental benefits.
The bill would also define special-needs fiduciary to
mean, with respect to a trust that has a beneficiary with a
disability, a trustee or other fiduciary, other than a settlor, that
has discretion to distribute:
●The principal of a first trust to one or more current
beneficiaries; or
●The income of the first trust to one or more current
beneficiaries, if no trustee or fiduciary has
discretion to distribute part or all of the principal of
a first trust.
The term would also encompass a trustee or other
fiduciary, other than a settlor, who is required to distribute part
or all of the income or principal of the first trust to one or more
current beneficiaries, if no trustee or fiduciary has discretion
under the above provisions.
Decanting Power
The bill would allow a special-needs fiduciary to exercise
the decanting power over the principal of a first trust as if the
10- 2172 fiduciary had the authority to distribute principal to a
beneficiary with a disability subject to expanded distributive
discretion if:
●A second trust is a special-needs trust that benefits
the beneficiary with a disability; and
●The special-needs fiduciary determines that
exercise of the decanting power would not be
inconsistent with a material purpose of the first
trust.
The bill would specify the following rules apply to an
exercise of the decanting power:
●Notwithstanding the bill’s provisions, the interest in
the second trust of a beneficiary with a disability
may:
○Be a pooled trust as defined by federal
Medicaid law for the benefit of the beneficiary
with a disability; or
○Contain payback provisions complying with
the reimbursement requirements of federal
Medicaid law;
●Provisions prohibiting a second trust from reducing
or eliminating a vested interest would not apply to
the interests of the beneficiary with a disability; and
●Except as affected by any change to the interests
of the beneficiary with a disability, the second trusts
in aggregate would be required to grant each other
beneficiary of the first trust beneficial interests in
the second trusts that are substantially similar to
the beneficiary’s interests in the first trust.
11- 2172 Special Rules to Protect Charitable Interests (Section 14)
The bill would define the term “determinable charitable
interest” to mean a charitable interest that is a right to a
mandatory distribution currently, periodically, on the
occurrence of a specified event, or after the passage of a
specified time, and is unconditional (as defined in the section)
or will be held solely for charitable purposes.
If the first trust contains a determinable charitable
interest, the UTDA would designate the Attorney General as
having the rights of a qualified beneficiary and allow them to
represent and bind the charitable interest.
If a first trust contains a charitable interest, the bill would
specify the second trust or trusts could not:
●Diminish the charitable interest;
●Diminish the interest of an identified charitable
organization that holds the charitable interest;
●Alter any charitable purpose stated in the first-trust
instrument; or
●Alter any condition or restriction related to the
charitable interest.
The bill would provide that if there are two or more
second trusts, the second trusts would be treated as one trust
for purposes of determining whether the exercise of the
decanting power diminishes the charitable interest or
diminishes the interest of an identified charitable organization
for purposes of the bill.
If a first trust contains a determinable charitable interest,
the second trust or trusts that include a charitable interest
pursuant to the bill would be administered under the laws of
Kansas unless the:
12- 2172 ●Attorney General consents in a signed record to
the second trust or trusts being administered under
the law of another jurisdiction; or
●A court approves the exercise of the decanting
power.
The UTDA would not limit the powers and duties of the
Attorney General under the laws of Kansas other than
provided for in the UTDA.
Limitations on Decanting Power (Sections 15 – 20)
First-trust Instrument Restrictions (Section 15)
The bill would provide that an authorized fiduciary could
not exercise the decanting power, to the extent the first-trust
instrument expressly prohibits exercise of:
●The decanting power; or
●A power granted by state law to the fiduciary to
distribute part or all of the principal of the trust to
another trust or to modify the trust.
The bill would also state exercise of the decanting power
is subject to any restriction in the first-trust instrument that
expressly applies to exercise of:
●The decanting power; or
●A power granted by state law to the fiduciary to
distribute part or all of the principal of the trust to
another trust or to modify the trust.
The bill would provide that a general prohibition of the
amendment or revocation of a first trust, a spendthrift clause,
or a clause restraining the voluntary or involuntary transfer of
13- 2172 a beneficiary’s interest would not preclude exercise of the
decanting power.
The bill would allow an authorized fiduciary to exercise
the decanting power under the UTDA even if the first-trust
instrument permits the authorized fiduciary or another person
to modify the first-trust instrument or to distribute part or all of
the principal of the first trust to another trust.
Additionally, the bill would provide that to the extent the
creation of a second-trust instrument is permitted, if a first-
trust instrument contains an express prohibition described
above, the provision must be included in the second-trust
instrument.
Fiduciary Compensation (Section 16)
The bill would state that if a first-trust instrument
specifies an authorized fiduciary’s compensation, such
person could not exercise the decanting power to increase
their compensation above the amount specified unless:
●All qualified beneficiaries of the second trust
consent to the increase in a signed record; or
●The increase is approved by the court.
The bill would clarify that a change in the authorized
fiduciary’s compensation that is incidental to other changes
made by the exercise of the decanting power would not be an
increase in the fiduciary’s compensation for purposes of the
bill.
Second-trust Instrument—Fiduciary Liability (Section 17)
The bill would provide that except as otherwise provided
in the bill, a second-trust instrument would not relieve an
authorized fiduciary from liability for a breach of trust to a
greater extent than the first-trust instrument.
14- 2172 Further, the bill would state a second-trust instrument
could provide for indemnification of an authorized fiduciary of
the first trust or another person acting in a fiduciary capacity
under the first trust for any liability or claim that would have
been payable from the first trust if the decanting power had
not been exercised.
The bill would specify that a second-trust instrument
would not reduce fiduciary liability in the aggregate. However,
a second-trust instrument could divide and reallocate
fiduciary powers among fiduciaries, including one or more
trustees, distribution advisors, investment advisors, trust
protectors, or other persons, and relieve a fiduciary from
liability for an act or failure to act of another fiduciary as
permitted by Kansas law other than the UTDA.
Modification of the Power to Remove or Replace a Fiduciary
(Section 18)
The bill would state an authorized fiduciary could not
exercise the decanting power to modify a provision in a first-
trust instrument granting another person power to remove or
replace the fiduciary unless the:
●Person holding the power consents to such
modification in a signed record and the
modification only applies to such person;
●Person holding the power and the qualified
beneficiaries of the second trust consent to the
modification in a signed record and the
modification grants a substantially similar power to
another person; or
●A court approves the modification, and the
modification grants a substantially similar power to
another person.
15- 2172 Limitations on Decanting Power With Respect to Tax Liability
(Section 19)
The bill would define relevant terms used in this section
and set limitations for an exercise of the decanting power with
respect to transfers of property affecting tax liability.
Tax deductions. Under the UTDA, if a first trust
contains property that qualified, or would have qualified but
for the UTDA for certain types of tax deductions as specified
in the bill, a second-trust instrument could not include or omit
any terms that would have a consequence of preventing the
transfer from qualifying for the deduction, or reducing the
amount of such deduction.
S corporation stock. The bill would specify that if the
property of the first trust includes shares of stock in an S
corporation as defined in federal law and the first trust is, or
but for the provisions of the UTDA would be, a permitted
shareholder, an authorized fiduciary could exercise the
decanting power with respect to any or all of such stock, but
only if the second trust receiving the stock is a permitted
shareholder under federal law. If the first trust would be a
qualified subchapter-S trust under federal law, the second
trust could not include or omit a term that prevents the
second trust from qualifying as a qualified subchapter-S trust.
Generation-skipping transfer tax. If the trust contains
property that qualified or would have qualified but for the
purposes of the UTDA for a zero inclusion ratio for purposes
of the federal generation-skipping transfer tax, the second
trust could not include or omit a term that prevents the
second trust from qualifying for a zero inclusion ratio under
federal law.
Qualified benefits property. If the first trust is directly
or indirectly the beneficiary of qualified benefits property, the
second-trust instrument could not include or omit any term
that if included in or omitted from the first-trust instrument,
would have increased the minimum distributions required
16- 2172 under federal law, including any applicable regulations or
similar requirements. If an attempted exercise of the
decanting power violates such, the trustee would be deemed
to have held such property and any reinvested distributions of
the property as a separate share from the date of the
exercise of the power applies to such share.
Grantor trust. If the first trust qualifies as a grantor trust
under federal law, the second trust could not include or omit a
term that if included in or omitted from the first-trust
instrument, would have prevented the first trust from
qualifying under federal law.
Tax benefit. The bill would define the term “tax benefit”
to mean a federal or state tax deduction, exemption,
exclusion, or other benefit not discussed by the UTDA, except
for a benefit arising from being a grantor trust.
The bill would specify a second-trust instrument could
not include or omit a term that if included in or omitted from
the first-trust instrument, would have prevented qualification
for a tax benefit if the:
●First-trust instrument expressly indicates an intent
to qualify for the benefit or the first-trust instrument
clearly is designed to enable the first trust to qualify
for the benefit; and
●Transfer of property held by the first trust or the first
trust qualified, or but for the UTDA would have
qualified for the tax benefit.
The bill would further specify that subject to the S-
corporation provisions, except as otherwise provided, the
second trust may be a nongrantor trust, even if the first trust
is a grantor trust.
Objection by a settlor. The bill would specify that an
authorized fiduciary could not exercise the decanting power if
17- 2172 a settlor objects in a signed record delivered to the fiduciary
within the notice period and:
●The first trust and a second trust are both grantor
trusts, in whole or in part, the first trust grants the
settlor or another person the power to cause the
first trust to cease to be a grantor trust, and the
second trust does not grant an equivalent power to
the settlor or other person; or
●The first trust is a nongrantor trust and a second
trust is a grantor trust, in whole or in part, with
respect to the settlor, unless the:
○Settlor has the power at all times to cause the
second trust to cease to be a grantor trust; or
○First-trust instrument contains a provision
granting the settlor or another person a power
that would cause the first trust to cease to be
a grantor trust and the second-trust
instrument contains such provision.
Trust Duration (Section 20)
The bill would specify that a second trust could have a
duration that is the same as or different from the duration of
the first trust. But, to the extent the property of a second trust
is attributable to property of the first trust, such property
would be subject to any rules governing maximum perpetuity,
accumulation, or suspension of the power of alienation that
apply to the property of the first trust.
Discretionary Distribution Standard (Section 21)
The bill would allow an authorized fiduciary to exercise
the decanting power whether or not under the discretionary
distribution standard of the first trust, the fiduciary could have
made or would have been compelled to make a discretionary
distribution of principal at that time.
18- 2172 Second-trust Instrument Noncompliance (Section 22)
Under the bill, if exercise of the decanting power would
be effective under the UTDA except the second-trust does not
comply in part with the UTDA, the decanting is effective. The
following rules would apply with respect to the principal of the
second trust attributable to the exercise of the power:
●A provision in the second-trust instrument that is
not permitted under the UTDA is void to the extent
necessary to comply;
●A provision required by the UTDA to be in the
second-trust instrument, but is absent, is deemed
to be included to the extent necessary to comply.
The bill would further specify that if a trustee or other
fiduciary of a second trust determines the above provisions
apply to a prior exercise of the decanting power, the fiduciary
would be required to take corrective action consistent with
their fiduciary duties.
Animal Trusts (Section 23)
The bill would define “animal trust” to mean a trust or
interest in a trust created to provide for the care of one or
more animals. “Protector” would mean a person appointed in
an animal trust to enforce the trust on behalf of the animal, or,
if no such person is appointed in the trust, a person appointed
by the court for such purpose.
Under the bill, the decanting power could be exercised
of an animal trust that has a protector to the extent the trust
could be decanted under the UTDA if each animal that
benefits from the trust were an individual, if such protector
consents in a signed record.
The bill would provide that a protector for an animal has
the same rights under the UTDA as a qualified beneficiary.
19- 2172 Notwithstanding other provisions of the UTDA, if a first
trust is an animal trust, in an exercise of the decanting power,
the second trust would be required to provide that trust
property may be applied only to its intended purpose for the
time period the first benefited such animal.
Kansas Uniform Trust Code—Second Trusts (Section 24)
The bill would provide that references in the Kansas
Uniform Trust Code to a trust instrument or terms of a trust
also include a second-trust instrument and its related terms.
Second Trust Settlor (Section 25)
Under the bill, and for purposes other than the UTDA, a
settlor of a first trust would be deemed to be the settlor of a
second trust with respect to the portion of the principal of the
first trust that is subject to the decanting power.
The bill would specify that in determining settlor intent
with respect to the second trust, the intent of the first trust
settlor, the intent of the second trust settlor, and the
authorized fiduciary may be considered.
Later-discovered Property (Section 26)
Pursuant to the bill, if exercise of the decanting power
was intended to transfer all the principal of the first trust to
one or more second trusts, later-discovered property
belonging to the first trust, and property paid to or acquired by
the first trust after exercise of the decanting power would be
part of the trust estate of the second trust or trusts.
Under the bill, if exercise of the decanting power was
intended to distribute less than all the principal of the first
trust to a second trust or trusts, such property as described
above would remain part of the trust estate of the first trust.
20- 2172 The bill would also specify that an authorized fiduciary
could provide in an exercise of the decanting power, or by the
terms of a second trust for disposition of such property
described above.
Debts and Liabilities (Section 27)
Under the bill, a debt, liability, or other obligation
enforceable against the property of a first trust is enforceable
to the same extent against property held by a second trust
after exercise of the decanting power.
Uniformity (Section 28)
The bill would require that in applying and construing the
UTDA, consideration be given to the need to promote
uniformity of the law among states that enact such law.
Electronic Signatures (Section 29)
The bill would state that the UTDA modifies, limits, or
supersedes the electronic signatures in the federal Global
and National Commerce Act, but does not modify, limit, or
supersede certain other federal laws, or authorize electronic
delivery of any of the notices described in that Act.
Severability (Section 30)
The bill would provide that if any provision of the UTDA
is held to be invalid, such invalidity would not affect other
provisions or applications of the UTDA that can be given
effect without such invalid provision or application.
21- 2172 Background
The Uniform Law Commission approved and
recommended passage of the UTDA for all states in 2015,
and it has recently been enacted in Alabama, California,
Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Maine, Montana, Nebraska, New
Mexico, North Carolina, Virginia, Washington, and West
Virginia.
The bill was introduced by the House Committee on
Judiciary at the request of a representative of the Kansas Bar
Association (KBA).
House Committee on Judiciary
In the House Committee hearing on January 31, 2023, a
representative of the KBA testified as a proponent of the bill,
stating the purpose of trust decanting is to provide greater
flexibility to a trustee by allowing the trustee to modify a trust
by distributing its assets to another trust. The representative
further stated by enacting the UTDA, Kansas would allow
trustees to decant under appropriate circumstances while
preventing abuse and preserving the intent of the settlor.
Written-only proponent testimony was provided by
representatives of the Midwest Trust Company and the
Kansas Bankers Association. No other testimony was
provided.
Fiscal Information
According to the fiscal note prepared by the Division of
the Budget on the bill, the Office of Judicial Administration
indicates enactment of the bill would have a negligible fiscal
effect on Judicial Branch operations.
Uniform Trust Decanting Act; trust; uniform laws
22- 2172