Commentary on The New York Times article by Patricia Cohen Steven J. Oshins, a Nevada lawyer who specializes in estate planning, has never met the wealthy software entrepreneur Dan Kloiber, but he is nonetheless intensely interested in Mr. Kloiber's contentious divorce.
"I have had a Google news alert on that for a couple years," Mr. Oshins said as he discussed the case from his office in a squat pink complex about a 20-minute drive from the Las Vegas Strip. What animates Mr. Oshins is not the juicy marital feud, but the legal arcana governing a trust in Delaware where the Kloiber family parked assets worth hundreds of million of dollars, sheltered from estate taxes. Mr. Oshins, with a gleeful grin spreading across his face, relished the thought of the no-longer-beloved Mrs. Kloiber busting through the trust and exposing a potential chink in the formidable trust protection armor promised by Delaware — which just happens to fiercely compete with Nevada for the lucrative business of shielding assets owned by the superrich. Read more from the New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/09/business/states-vie-to-protect-the-wealth-of-the-1-percent.html
August 9, 2016
More Articles
'There's Definitely A Bubble' In Markets, Ray Dalio Says. Here's His Latest Advice.
Thought the market-bubble talk was over after Nvidia's latest earnings? Nobody told Ray Dalio.
Smartleaf and the Direct Indexing Lockup Myth: Why Tax Benefits Don’t Disappear After Year One
The “lockup” narrative around direct indexing suggests tax benefits vanish after initial loss harvesting. Jerry Michael, President of Smartleaf, dismantles the myth by showing how direct indexes can deliver tax efficiency across every client milestone—from onboarding legacy positions to withdrawals, charitable giving, and rebalancing. The issue isn’t whether direct indexes work long term; it’s whether advisors understand tax management beyond loss harvesting alone.