-50- setting investment philosophy during his lifetime, followed by his son and son-in-law as successor trustees. However, by only considering the Revocable Trust assets in isolation, this analysis disregards more than half of the property involved in the business trusts. Decedent in effect used the assets of the Revocable Trust10 to enhance his ability to perpetuate a philosophy vis-a-vis the stock of the WTC trusts, such that none of the contributions should be disregarded in evaluating the practical implications of Schutt I and II. Mr. Howard testified that he did not believe he would have considered a proposal involving contribution only of the WTC trusts’ assets to entities structured as were Schutt I and II, without decedent’s willingness to place his own property alongside. As Mr. Howard explained: “it made real to me, certainly, when someone is willing to contribute that sum of money and tie it up the same way we were tying it up with respect to distributions, if not with respect to management, that this was something that he and the family, if they were willing to agree to it, felt strongly about.” This importance of decedent’s contributions to those negotiating on behalf of WTC, at least on a psychological level, reflects a critical interconnectedness between decedent’s contributions and those of the WTC trusts. 10 To employ an oft-used metaphor, the assets of the Revocable Trust served essentially as leverage in the form of a carrot.Page: Previous 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011