Modification of Irrevocable Trusts in Missouri

The Missouri Uniform Trust Code set forth a number of procedures by which interested parties in an irrevocable trust can request that the Court modify its provisions. A trust typically becomes irrevocable after the settlor/trust-creator dies or becomes incapacitated. Circumstances change and things unforeseen by the settlor will often arise. To that end, Missouri sets forth certain ways in which an irrevocable trust may be modified so that beneficiaries are not unduly burdened with trust provision’s which are no longer in anyone’s best interests.
There are two specific ways to modify an irrevocable trust. First, the Court may modify a trust’s terms if circumstances have arisen which were not anticipated by the settlor, and the modification will further the purposes of the trust. Section 456.4-412, RSMo. Second, a trust may be modified if it has become uneconomical under Section 456.4-414, RSMo. The general rule of thumb as to whether a trust is uneconomical is if the value of the trust property is insufficient to justify the cost of administration.
In addition, there is a general method to modify an irrevocable trust that may be accomplished if  the beneficiaries consent under Sections 456.4A-411 and 456.4B-411, RSMo. Specifically, if all of the beneficiaries consent, the trust may be modified or terminated even if the modification is inconsistent with a material purpose of the trust. The modification may include the reduction or elimination of the interests of some of the beneficiaries, an increase in the interests of others, a change in the time or amounts of payments and distributions to beneficiaries, or provide for termination of the trust at a time earlier or later than that specified by its terms. Note further that the Court may sometimes modify the trust even if all of the beneficiaries do not consent if the Court is confident that the interests of all non-consenting beneficiaries will be adequately protected. 
Trust litigation and modification can be very complex. Contact with questions.
 

Related Articles

Will Contests, Self-Proving Wills

March 30, 2023

Will contests are unique for several reasons. Perhaps most significantly, the burden is on the proponent of the document to prove the will was executed and that the testator possessed the requisite capacity. Many times the “proponent” of the will is the defendant in the lawsuit. So, the will contest instructions contemplate the defendant presenting…

Read More

Trustee Abuse of Discretion Factors

October 30, 2022

Increasingly, trust instruments grant trustees “discretion” to do certain acts. Drafters include this language to account for unanticipated circumstances and make a trustee’s life easier. But even where a trustee has discretion, they can act improperly. “A grant of absolute discretion to a trustee is not a roving commission – the trustee must be guided…

Read More

Probate Exception to Federal Jurisdiction

September 9, 2022

There are two main ways for a lawsuit to end up in federal court. First, if the lawsuit “arises under” federal law. This is sometimes called federal question jurisdiction. Second, if there is diversity jurisdiction. There are, in turn, two main requirements for diversity jurisdiction: the amount in controversy must exceed $75,000 and all of…

Read More

Trust Language: “Necessary or Advisable” Distributions

March 4, 2022

The language of a trust is extremely important. And when a will, trust, and other estate documents form part of the same plan, they are interpreted together. Indeed, “[w]hen a trust and will form parts of the same plan, they must be construed together.” Shriners Hospital for Children v. Schaper, 215 S.W.3d 185, 189-90 (Mo….

Read More
Scroll to Top