[_QrE]

According to the article, the CEO sold stock, and gifted stock to at least four trusts that have, in turn, sold the stock gifted:

> Subsequent filings from four trusts show that about half of his gifted shares were transferred to them. Those trusts have in turn sold most of the shares they reported receiving, netting at least $1.2 billion in proceeds so far.

Seems like the CEO thinks that it's downhill from here; I'm not sure what other reason there would be to do this.

[pc86]

> A spokesperson for CrowdStrike said the filings reflected estate planning and philanthropic activities

Estate planning is very likely code for tax avoidance. I know basically nothing about Kurtz, I would venture this is all going to family and structuring this staggering generational wealth so they don't overpay taxes.

[lotsofpulp]

Estate planning is about avoiding probate courts. It makes the transfer of control of assets much cleaner with almost no risk someone (e.g. an aggrieved family member) can tie it up in courts for who knows how long. It’s why you see even average personal homes placed in trusts.

[plorkyeran]

Placing personal homes into living trusts is also done for medicaid purposes. If you don't actually own the house then medicaid doesn't count it as an asset that you have to sell to pay for medical care, and there's a five-year clawback so you have to do it well in advance of needing it.

[pc86]

The average personal home is absolutely not placed in a trust. It can be but moving your residence into a trust for estate planning purposes is not a common thing.

[toast0]

It depends on the state. california is known for expensive probate and has a lot of turnkey trust attorneys with strong marketting. I still don't know that 'the average personal home' is in a trust there, but there are lots of 'average personal homes' held in trust, not just big fancy houses.

OTOH, California recently added a transfer on death deed that may provide a simpler way to avoid probate on homes, which may reduce the number of trusts formed just for that.

A lot of people leave California and still think they need a trust in other states, so trusts in other states are growing in numbers as well.

[psunavy03]

It's also done if you have, say, a vacation home in another state or have other assets which would make probate complicated.

[SoftTalker]

My parents did it on advice of their financial advisor. Is it common, probably not, most people don't have a financial advisor but setting up a revokable trust as part of an estate plan is not something that only the ultra-wealthy can do. It can make a lot of sense if you have any postive net worth to pass along to heirs. A lot of people don't, and if you are going to "die broke" (by intent or by happenstance) there's no point.

[lotsofpulp]

I did not intend to imply write average personal home is placed in a trust.

>It’s why you see even average personal homes placed in trusts.

This statement meant to convey that people with average levels of wealth, such that tax liability is low enough such that tax avoidance is not necessary, can also benefit from spending a couple thousand dollars with an estate lawyer.

Technically, their heirs benefit because they don’t need to deal with probate court.

[psunavy03]

This depends highly on state law and how bad inheritance taxes are.

"I have not seen this before" != "this is not common," as much as people on the internet tend to confuse the two.

[delfinom]

I know plenty of average person homes placed into irrevocable trusts for avoiding the medicaid seizure by parents doing so many years ahead of time as they get old.

[kube-system]

"you see even average personal homes placed in trusts." is very much not the same sentence as "The average personal home is placed in a trust"