The Trust's New Tax ID: A Simple Form That Can Cause Big Problems

 

At a glance

• When the grantor dies, a revocable trust usually becomes irrevocable and needs its own employer identification number (EIN).
• The application is free and online, but a few entries decide where IRS mail goes and which years the IRS expects returns.
• A wrong start date, a wrong entity type, or the decedent named as responsible party can produce years of IRS notices.
• A trust can owe no tax and still have to file Form 1041.
• If you already have an EIN, you can confirm what the IRS has on file with one phone call.

Seemingly simple decisions can cause real difficulty in administering an estate. One of them is how to get the trust its new tax identification number after the grantor dies: whether the successor trustee applies alone, accepts help from a bank teller or a friend, or asks an attorney or accountant to handle it.

What Changes at Death

The grantor, sometimes called the settlor, is the person who creates the trust and usually puts property into it. While the grantor is alive, a revocable trust is generally a "grantor trust" for income tax purposes. It has no separate tax existence. In most cases it uses the grantor's Social Security number, and the grantor reports the trust's income on a personal return.

When the last grantor dies, that changes. The trust becomes irrevocable and a separate taxpayer, and it needs its own EIN (Form SS-4 instructions; Treas. Reg. § 301.6109-1(a)(2)). A trust cannot keep using a dead person's Social Security number.  

Two early mistakes are common: assuming nothing needs to be done with a joint trust when the first spouse dies, and assuming that a trust with little or no income needs neither its own EIN nor a tax return.

    • Joint trusts need attention at the first death. In many joint trusts, the first spouse's death creates an irrevocable family or bypass trust that needs its own EIN right away. The surviving spouse's share usually keeps using the survivor's Social Security number. Treating the whole trust as unchanged until the second death is a common mistake.

    • Filing is not limited to trusts that owe tax. A domestic trust must file Form 1041 if it has any taxable income, if it has gross income of $600 or more, or if it has a nonresident-alien beneficiary (Form 1041 instructions). A trust can owe no tax and still have to file.

Two other decisions come up at the same time:

    • The § 645 election. A revocable trust can elect to be treated as part of the decedent's estate for income tax purposes (Form 8855). The election can allow a fiscal year and a single return. It is easy to miss if no one raises it.

    • Form 56. Form 56 tells the IRS who the fiduciary is.

Why the Paperwork Matters

Institutions need to know the trust's exact name, who the trustee is, and what the trustee may do. In Ohio, a certification of trust or Certificate of Trust, gives them that without disclosing the whole trust document. A memorandum of trust is used mainly when recording real estate ( and in most cases is unnecessary if a certificate trust is recorded). These documents often show the trust's EIN as well.

When an attorney or accountant handles the application and the certification together, both are usually done within a few days and agree with each other. Increasingly, though, successor trustees apply on their own, or rely on well-meaning helpers with neither legal nor tax training. The results range from frustrating to costly.

What Goes Wrong: Seven Cases

Each of these is drawn from actual cases.

    • The bank teller. A successor trustee goes to the bank to reach the trust's account. A helpful teller explains that the trust needs a new number and helps the trustee apply online. The account is closed, a new one is opened under the new EIN, and the trustee leaves with a slip of paper showing the number. At the next institution, the trustee presents the death certificate and the EIN and asks to liquidate the account. The institution refuses. It doesn't know what the trust's title is or should be, or what authority the successor trustee has. After several attempts, the trustee hires an attorney to prepare the documents that would have prevented the delay in the first place.

    • Same facts, wrong date. The attorney reviews the teller's paperwork and finds that the application listed the date the trust was signed, years ago, as the date it was funded. For a trust that becomes irrevocable at death, the right date is generally the date of death, when the trust first needed its own number. A wrong date can produce IRS letters demanding Form 1041 returns for every year back to that date.

The letters reflect a matching problem from a bad application. They do not mean every trust must file from the day it was signed. The attorney offers to help correct the record now, before the letters arrive, rather than answer them later.

    • Same facts, no copy. This time the teller applied online and printed nothing. The attorney can't tell what was entered and is reluctant to rely on a number that may cause loss later. Applying for a second number is not the answer. The IRS does not cancel EINs, and a trust should have only one. Instead, the trustee calls the IRS Business & Specialty Tax Line (800-829-4933) and asks for a 147C letter. The letter confirms the number and what the IRS has on file, and the trustee and attorney correct anything that is wrong.  

    • The decedent as responsible party. The teller names the deceased grantor as the responsible party, because the grantor created the trust. Form SS-4 still describes the responsible party for a trust as the grantor, owner, or trustor, and for an estate as the fiduciary. After the grantor is dead, though, the person who controls the trust is the successor trustee, and that trustee's number belongs on the application. Naming the decedent sends the mail to a dead person at an address the trustee is about to sell. Here the trust also received the decedent's IRA, which made the trust's income taxable. No one told the trustee a Form 1041 was due, and the IRS letters went unread at the old house. By the time the trustee learned of the return, the trust's assets had been distributed. A fiduciary who distributes assets before paying federal taxes can be personally liable. The trustee paid the tax, penalties, and interest from personal funds.

    • The beneficiary who was also trustee. An insurance agent helps a successor trustee fill out a life insurance claim form, apply online for an EIN, and open a money market account for the proceeds. The trustee is also the trust's only beneficiary and receives means-tested benefits, such as SSI and Medicaid. The trust was drafted as a third-party special-needs trust to protect those benefits. A beneficiary who is also sole trustee can lose the protection the trust was written to give, and a distribution can count as income in the month it is paid. Some states, and some benefit programs, are stricter than others. Here the trustee needed advice before filing the claim. Resigning as trustee before the money landed was the point of the trust's design. No one told him, and the beneficiary lost benefits, including health coverage. The EIN wasn't the cause. The lack of legal advice was.

    • Fourteen years of letters. A successor trustee applies online and administers the trust. The application lists the decedent as responsible party, the decedent's home as the mailing address, and the wrong start date. The IRS sends letters demanding Form 1041 returns for fourteen tax years, all to the decedent's home, which the trustee has already sold. Eventually a revenue agent calls. With the trust's assets long distributed, the trustee pays an attorney and an accountant from her own funds to resolve the matter. The returns were never really owed for those years; the trouble came from a bad application and mail that no one received.

    • The wrong digits. A family friend helps the trustee get an EIN but writes the number down wrong. Neither notices. The IRS contacts the trust when a return is filed under the wrong number, and an accountant is hired to sort it out. A 147C letter would have caught the error in minutes.

Where the Trust’s EIN Application Goes Wrong

Item on Form SS-4	Common mistake	What to enter instead	What can happen
Legal name (line 1)	A shorthand name that doesn’t match the trust document	The trust’s exact name and date, matching the certification of trust	Institutions can’t match the number to the account title
Mailing address (lines 4a–4b)	The decedent’s home	The successor trustee’s address, or the attorney’s or accountant’s office	IRS letters go to a house that is about to be sold, and no one reads them
Responsible party (lines 7a–7b)	The deceased grantor	The successor trustee, who now controls the trust	The IRS links the trust to a dead person; mismatches and notices follow
Type of entity (line 9a)	“Estate” checked for a trust, or a trust number used for a probate estate	“Trust” for the trust; a separate EIN for any probate estate	Returns and notices are filed under the wrong kind of taxpayer
Date funded (line 11)	The date the trust was signed or first funded, years ago	Generally the date of death, when the trust first needed its own EIN	Letters can demand Form 1041 returns for every year back to that date
Closing month (line 12)	A fiscal year picked without a § 645 election	December, unless the trust will make a § 645 election to be taxed with the estate	Returns filed on the wrong schedule; a planning opportunity missed
Third-party designee	A helper applies with no written authority and keeps no copy	An authorized designee, a signed authorization, and a saved copy of the application	No one can later show what was entered or fix it quickly

Line numbers refer to the current Form SS-4. The IRS revises the form from time to time, so check the current instructions before applying.

If You Already Have an EIN

• Confirm what the IRS has. Call the IRS Business & Specialty Tax Line at 800-829-4933 and ask for a 147C letter. Check the trust's name, the mailing address, and the start date.

• Answer every notice. If letters arrive demanding returns for years before the death, respond in writing. Explain the date of death and the date the trust first needed its own number. Ignoring the letters lets the problem grow.

• Report changes on Form 8822-B. Use Form 8822-B to report a new mailing address or a new responsible party, such as a change of trustee. A change of responsible party must be reported within 60 days. Form 8822-B does not, by itself, fix a bad original application.

• Keep the paper. Save the IRS confirmation notice and a copy of the application with the trust's records.

A Word to Helpful Professionals

Tellers, bankers, insurance agents, brokers, financial planners, and friends often help with this application in good faith. IRS procedures require a third party who applies on someone else's behalf to be authorized by that person. When the helper skips that step or keeps no copy, a simple typo or online glitch can take weeks to untangle. Fixing an online mistake can take longer than getting the number right the first time.

Helpers should also know that they may be liable for an application completed incorrectly, and that their professional insurance may not cover the loss. For non-lawyers, advising a trustee on these choices may amount to the unauthorized practice of law or go beyond the scope of their license.

Bottom Line

The EIN application is free, and a careful trustee can complete it. But a handful of entries decide where the IRS sends its mail and which years it expects returns: the start date, the mailing address, the responsible party, the type of entity, and the tax year. Other decisions travel with it, such as the § 645 election, Form 56, a joint trust's first-death split, and the certification of trust institutions will ask for. That is where an attorney or accountant earns the fee. A few hours of professional help at the start costs far less than years of IRS letters, a frozen account, or a trustee paying the trust's taxes out of pocket.

Can’t We All Just Get Along? Fostering Family Harmony in Estate Administration

Estate administration can test even the closest families. Old resentments surface, expectations clash, and grief and money can turn minor misunderstandings into lasting rifts. The worst cases devolve into violence.

The good news is that this conflict and its consequences are largely preventable. Thoughtful planning and deliberate communication can significantly reduce the friction that so often accompanies the settling of an estate,  and that holds true both before death and after it.

The Power of Family Meetings

A central theme of effective estate administration is transparency. When beneficiaries are left to speculate about why certain decisions were made, or when information dribbles out slowly and unevenly, suspicion grows. Regular, structured communication counters that tendency.

One practical step is to hold family meetings at two critical points. The first occurs after the estate-planning documents have been signed. In a calm setting, or via video conference,  the parent or grandparent can explain the plan's overall structure, the reasons for choosing particular fiduciaries, and the broad philosophy behind the distributions. None of this requires disclosing every account balance. This conversation gives the next generation a narrative. It replaces guesswork with understanding, and it often defuses issues that would otherwise erupt later.

Who attends is worth thinking through as carefully as what gets discussed. At minimum, that means the people actually named to act: the successor trustee or executor, and any agents under a financial or health care power of attorney. Adult beneficiaries typically belong in the room too, especially if they're the audience the meeting is meant to reach. In-laws, caregivers, and other family members with no formal role are usually better left out—not to keep secrets, but to keep the conversation focused on the plan rather than who else is in the room. 

One common exception is a beneficiary's spouse in a genuinely stable, long-term marriage, particularly where the spouse is instrumental in the family, such acting as a caregiver for an in-law, nephew or niece; some families include them deliberately, on the theory that excluding them just moves the conversation to a kitchen table the parent isn't at. 

Whatever the structure of the meeting, it's worth memorializing in some way: a short follow-up letter summarizing what was discussed, a brief note in an attorney's or financial planner's file documenting who attended and what was covered, or, where the client is comfortable and with advice of counsel, a recording of the parent explaining their own reasoning. That contemporaneous record often bridges a later dispute and a quick resolution. 

For a client who values privacy above all else, the meeting can be scaled back accordingly. The details can be limited to what successor trustees or executors need to act quickly when the time comes—where the documents are kept, who to call, and what the first steps look like—without walking through account balances or distribution shares. At minimum, health care agents should leave with their own copy of the health care power of attorney in hand, not just a description. A document that exists only in a binder at the lawyer's office does an agent no good in an emergency room at eleven at night.

The second meeting should take place early in the administration process. This might be shortly after death, or after a principal's incompetency, incapacity, or move to a facility. Within the first several weeks, once the immediate arrangements are behind the family and before a vacuum of information has time to form. The fiduciary and the beneficiaries gather, in person or by video, to review the roadmap: what the documents say, what the realistic timeline looks like, what information will be shared and when, and how questions will be handled. Counsel may or may not be involved in this meeting. Counsel will generally advise participation, but the family may want to forego the cost and expense.  Regardless, putting issues on the table early, while allowing everyone to be heard, reduces the sense that decisions are being made behind closed doors.

These meetings echo a point we have emphasized in earlier articles about late-life planning. Last-minute changes to wills or beneficiary designations, especially when made in isolation, often spark litigation—the "magical mystery tour" of contests, delays, and legal fees. Plans explained while the creator can still answer questions tend to move more smoothly.

Logistics Matter

Where and how a family meeting happens is not just a scheduling detail. It can be a safety decision. Grief, anger, and old family resentment do not always stay contained, and a disputed inheritance is one of the more reliable ways to bring years of tension into a single room at once. The worst cases remind us that gathering everyone in one room is not automatically the safest way to have this conversation.

A telephone or video conference is worth considering for exactly this reason. It lets every participant speak candidly without anyone in the room being able to physically intimidate, loom over, or threaten another person. No one can block a doorway, corner a sibling in a hallway, or let a raised voice turn into something physical. The conversation still happens. The safety risk that comes from putting people in the same physical space does not. This matters most when a participant's judgment or self-control may be compromised by a mental or physical disability, an active illness, acute grief, or plain rage, or when someone has already said or done something that signals real hostility. In those situations, a video call is not a lesser substitute for meeting in person. It is the more responsible choice.

Video also preserves something a phone call loses. Everyone can still see faces and read tone, which keeps the meeting feeling like a family conversation rather than a conference call about someone else's inheritance.

When a family genuinely prefers, or needs, to meet in person, a neutral location is worth considering over a private home: the attorney's conference room, a library conference room, a hotel meeting room, a church or senior center.  These might be preferable to a family member's kitchen table. A professional setting tends to keep behavior more measured, and it gives the attorney or fiduciary a natural, non-confrontational way to end the meeting if it starts to go sideways. Whatever the format, decide in advance and say plainly to all involved: the goal of the meeting is a calmer estate, not a reenactment of the conflict the plan is trying to prevent.

Choosing Fiduciaries with Harmony in Mind

The choice of executor or trustee is another frequent flashpoint. Naming one child over others, or naming co-fiduciaries who do not work well together, can place family members in adversarial roles. A corporate or independent fiduciary often serves the family better when relationships are already strained, when there is a blended family, or when the assets or tax issues are complex. An institutional trustee brings process, experience with difficult dynamics, and, most importantly,  neutrality. No sibling is left feeling that another sibling holds unchecked power over the inheritance.

That said, an institutional trustee is not free of trade-offs. It charges a fee, and it will not know the family's history the way a sibling or a longtime family friend would. Families who want neutrality without fully giving up a personal touch sometimes turn to a specific type of corporate trustee built for this role, name a corporate trustee alongside an individual co-trustee, or reserve certain personal, non-financial decisions to a family member while the institution handles the accounts. The right balance depends on exactly how much conflict the family is trying to insure against.

This recommendation aligns with the broader planning philosophy we have discussed for resilient estate plans. A well-structured revocable trust administered by a capable trustee, family or professional, generally produces less conflict than a collection of payable-on-death designations, joint accounts, and beneficiary forms that can be changed with little formality or oversight. Clear fiduciary authority, coupled with the duty to inform and account, creates a framework that is harder to attack and easier to understand.

Building Conflict-Resistance Into the Plan

Meetings and communication matter, but a well-drafted plan can also do some of this work on its own. A few tools worth considering:

A no-contest, or in terrorem, clause conditions a beneficiary's share on not challenging the plan, or, in a broader version, not challenging a wider range of the decedent's estate-planning decisions.  It does not stop a determined challenger with nothing to lose, but for a beneficiary who is already receiving a meaningful share, it raises the cost of a marginal or tactical contest considerably.  Some Ohio practitioners use a “peace and tranquility” clause, a provision that charges a beneficiary’s share with the cost of nuisance objections or delay. Local tradition attributes a humane version of that idea to drafting associated with the late Judge Willard F. Spicer, longtime Summit County Probate Judge.

A trust protector is a neutral third party, separate from the trustee, given specific authority to interpret ambiguous provisions, resolve disagreements among co-trustees, or make limited administrative adjustments as circumstances change over the years a trust may run. For a trust expected to last decades, having someone who can settle a genuine ambiguity without a trip to court is often the difference between a disagreement and a lawsuit.

A mediation or arbitration clause keeps disputes that do arise out of open court. That matters for two reasons. Litigation is public record and adversarial by design; the process itself can end a family relationship the estate plan was meant to protect. Requiring mediation first, with arbitration as a backstop, gives a family the chance to resolve a disagreement without that added damage.

Prevention Still Beats Damage Control

Many of the disputes that arise during administration have their roots in decisions made, or avoided, years earlier. Plans executed in a hurry near the end of life carry real risk. As we have written in our articles on late-in-life planning, courts will look beyond the words of a will or trust when the circumstances surrounding its signing contradict what those words claim to accomplish. A plan signed in isolation, shortly before death, with no contemporaneous record of the reasoning behind it, is exactly the fact pattern that invites that kind of scrutiny. Planning undertaken while capacity is clear, documented carefully, and communicated appropriately stands on firmer ground, both legally and relationally.

Consider two versions of the same family. In the first, a parent quietly rewrites a trust two months before death, after a hospitalization, without telling anyone. The children learn of the change at the reading of the trust, alongside a diagnosis they never knew about and a rewritten distribution scheme they were not prepared for. Litigation follows almost as a matter of course. In the second, the same parent made a similar change two years earlier, walked each child through the reasoning at a family meeting, and had a physician's and counsel's contemporaneous capacity note document the change. The outcome may be identical on paper. The family's experience of it, and the odds that it survives a challenge, are not.

Supported decision-making arrangements, carefully drafted powers of attorney, and thoughtfully funded trusts can also reduce the likelihood that a guardianship becomes necessary. That outcome, as this blog has discussed before, often introduces its own layers of family tension and loss of autonomy, on top of whatever health crisis brought the family to that point in the first place.

Practical Habits That Help

• Select fiduciaries with an honest assessment of family dynamics, not just sentiment.

• Use a professional or corporate trustee, or a neutral trust protector, when conflict is foreseeable.

• Hold both family meetings, and send a short written agenda beforehand so no one arrives blindsided.

• Build a communication protocol into the plan itself, e.g., who receives updates, on what schedule, and through what channel, and follow it even when there is nothing new to report.

• Be upfront that the attorney represents the fiduciary. Be equally upfront that the fiduciary's duties still run to every beneficiary, not just to the person who hired the attorney.

• Consider a no-contest clause and a mediation or arbitration provision, so that disagreements have a path that does not run through open litigation.

• Document major decisions and the reasoning behind them, even when a formal accounting is not legally required.

Complete harmony is not always achievable. Some family relationships arrive at the estate-administration stage already fractured. Even in those cases, process and transparency limit the damage. They give reasonable beneficiaries confidence that the rules are being followed, and they make it harder for a discontented party to claim that information was withheld or that the fiduciary acted arbitrarily.

Final Word

Estate administration will always involve detail, deadlines, and difficult emotions. It does not have to involve scorched-earth conflict. The families that navigate it most successfully are usually those whose planning was communicated clearly during life and whose administration is conducted with deliberate openness after death. That combination, backed by a plan drafted to withstand disagreement rather than invite it, remains one of the most effective conflict-avoidance strategies available. If your own plan was drafted years ago without any of these tools in mind, it is worth a conversation about adding them.

Trustee Personally Liable for Rent-Free Occupancy and Trust-Funded Renovations

A recent decision from the New Hampshire Supreme Court delivers a clear and costly reminder to trustees: living rent-free in trust-owned property and using trust funds for personal renovations constitutes a breach of fiduciary duty, and the trustee can be charged personally for both the improvements and the fair rental value.

The Facts

After their mother died, three siblings, Nathaniel Moffat, Sarah Srebro, and Matthew Moffat, became equal beneficiaries of the Pamela Dawson Moffat Revocable Trust. The Trust was the residuary beneficiary of their mother’s Maryland-probated estate and required equal distribution among the three children.  The Trust was apprently not funded with either of the properties, thereby necessitating probate.  The trust held two neighboring properties in Hancock, New Hampshire; the first being a longtime family summer home, and the second being a nearby house purchased in 2020 with the mother’s funds.

Nathaniel served as trustee. He moved into the nearby house, paid for substantial renovations with trust assets, and occupied the home rent-free for an extended period. When the siblings could not agree on how to divide the real estate, Nathaniel petitioned the probate court for partition. Sarah responded with counterclaims alleging multiple breaches of fiduciary duty.

The Probate Court conducted a four-day trial, the probate court exercised its equitable partition powers to award the summer home to , award the nearby house to Nathaniel, but charged Nathaniel with the value of the trust-funded renovations and the fair rental value of his rent-free occupancy, finding that he had breached his fiduciary duties by prioritizing his personal interests over those of the other beneficiaries, and further, ordered him to reimburse the trust for the attorney’s fees and costs incurred in the litigation.  The case was appealed. 

On July 7, 2026, the New Hampshire Supreme Court affirmed the probate court's ruling in full. The Court held that, the probate court acted within its broad equitable discretion in partitioning the properties, the court's findings of breach of fiduciary duty were supported by the record, specifically, the trustee’s decision to occupy trust property rent-free and to use trust funds for renovations that primarily benefited him, and that the probate court had proper subject-matter jurisdiction over the fiduciary-duty counterclaims, even though the trust contained a District of Columbia choice-of-law clause.  On a procedural basis, the Supreme Court found that certain challenges to the remedy (including fee awards) had been waived or not properly preserved for appeal.Why This Matters for Families and Trustees

Trustees often believe that because they are also beneficiaries, they can treat trust real estate more casually, especially a family home. This case firmly rejects that notion. A trustee who occupies trust property without paying rent or who spends trust money on improvements that primarily benefit himself can be surcharged for both the rental value and the cost of the renovations. The decision reinforces several core principles of trust administration that are especially relevant in aging-in-place and family-wealth planning:

• A trustee must act solely in the best interests of all beneficiaries.
• Self-dealing with trust real estate (even when the trustee is also a beneficiary) requires careful documentation, consent, or court approval.
• Probate courts have wide equitable authority to fashion practical remedies when siblings cannot agree on the division of trust property.
• Personal use of trust assets without proper accounting creates lasting financial and family consequences.

Conclusion

Parents who place a family home or vacation property into a revocable trust (or who fund a trust that later purchases real estate) should consider clear instructions about occupancy, rent, and improvements. Beneficiaries who serve as trustees must understand that the role carries strict fiduciary obligations, even toward siblings.  When family real estate is involved, proactive planning and transparent communication remain far less expensive than years of litigation and personal liability.

If you are serving as trustee of a trust that owns real property, or if your family is struggling with the division of trust-owned homes, consult experienced counsel before decisions about occupancy or renovations are made. As this case demonstrates, the cost of getting it wrong can be substantial.

Case: Moffat v. Srebro, 2026 N.H. 25 (July 7, 2026)

Texas Court of Appeals: A Trustee Cannot Appear Pro Se — The Unauthorized Practice of Law Sinks an Appeal

A recent Texas Court of Appeals decision delivers a clear and important reminder for trustees, settlors, and families who rely on trusts: a non-lawyer trustee cannot represent the trust in court. Doing so constitutes the unauthorized practice of law (UPL) and can result in the dismissal of the entire case.

The Case

In Almericas Veterans Mortgage Trust v. Brock & Scott, the Third Court of Appeals dismissed an appeal filed by the trust’s pro se trustee.  The trustee, Ronnie Dansby, filed a notice of appeal on behalf of Almericas Veterans Mortgage Trust after receiving an adverse trial-court order. The Court of Appeals promptly notified him that, under Rule 7 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, a trustee may not appear pro se in a representative capacity. Rule 7 permits individuals to represent only themselves,  not other persons or entities. Only a licensed attorney may represent a trust.

Because no attorney filed an amended notice of appeal on the trust’s behalf, the court dismissed the appeal. The court relied on established Texas authority which holds that a non-attorney trustee who files pleadings or appears for the trust engages in the unauthorized practice of law.

Why This Matters for Aging-in-Place and Elder Law Planning

Many clients name a trusted family member as successor trustee of their revocable living trust, believing the trustee can handle “everything” without hiring a lawyer. This case shows the limits of that assumption.

• A trust is a separate legal arrangement. When a trustee acts on behalf of the trust in litigation, the trustee is representing another’s interests, not merely his or her own.
• Filing a notice of appeal, a motion, or any pleading for the trust is considered the practice of law under Texas law.
• Courts will dismiss cases, sometimes after significant time and expense have already been invested, if the trust is not properly represented by counsel.

This rule applies not only in Texas but in most states. The principle is the same: non-lawyers may represent themselves, but they may not represent others (including a trust or an estate).

Practical Takeaways for Trustees and Families

• Do Not File Pleadings Pro Se on Behalf of a Trust: Do not file pleadings pro se on behalf of a trust. Even a simple notice of appeal can trigger dismissal.

• Budget for Legal Representation:  When a trust becomes involved in litigation (foreclosure defense, creditor claims, beneficiary disputes, etc.), the trustee must retain licensed counsel.

• Choose Successor Trustees Carefully: Name individuals who understand that professional legal help will be required for court matters, and consider naming a corporate or professional trustee when complex assets or potential disputes exist.

• Review Your Trust Language: Confirm that the trust authorizes the trustee to hire attorneys and pay legal fees from trust assets.

• Act Quickly If a Pro Se Filing Has Already Occurred: Many courts will allow a short window for a licensed attorney to appear and cure the defect.

Bottom Line

A well-drafted revocable living trust can avoid probate and provide excellent management during incapacity or after death. But the trust itself is not a “self-help” vehicle in the courtroom. Trustees who attempt to represent the trust without a license risk having their case dismissed, and may themselves face accusations of unauthorized practice of law.

If you serve as a trustee (or expect to), treat litigation as a professional matter that requires licensed counsel. Protecting the trust’s assets and the beneficiaries’ interests is far more important than trying to save a legal fee.

Buying/Selling a Business- Nuts and Bolts

This office often consults with clients regarding the sale of a business, typically in settlement of an estate.   The following is general information that can aid a client or a client's family in understanding the process and available options. 

I.  Corporations/Limited Liability Companies

Most business sales/purchases of corporations or companies (limited liability companies) are either executed through an Asset Purchase Agreement (APA) or a full equity/stock acquisition (also called a stock purchase, share purchase, or equity purchase). They differ fundamentally in what is being bought, how ownership and risk transfer, tax treatment, complexity, and continuity of operations.

A.  Core Distinction:  Asset Purchase vs. Full Acquisition

• Asset purchase: The buyer acquires specific assets (and typically only specifically assumed liabilities, if any) of the target business under an Asset Purchase Agreement. The seller’s legal entity continues to exist afterward and retains any excluded assets, liabilities, and the sale proceeds.  This seller's legal entity is typically either terminated or repurposed immediately after the sale. 
  cantrellfirm.com
• Full acquisition (stock/equity purchase): The buyer acquires all (or substantially all) of the ownership interests (shares of a corporation or units/membership interests of an LLC) from the owners. The buyer takes ownership of the entire legal entity itself, including all its assets and all its liabilities (known and unknown).
  cantrellfirm.com

Side-by-Side Comparison

Aspect	Asset Purchase	Full Equity/Stock Acquisition
What is transferred	Selected assets (equipment, IP, inventory, contracts, goodwill, etc.) and only agreed liabilities	Entire ownership of the legal entity (and therefore everything it owns and owes)
Seller’s entity after closing	Continues to exist; holds retained assets/liabilities and sale proceeds	Transferred to buyer; seller(s) exit ownership
Liability exposure	Limited: buyer assumes only liabilities expressly listed in the APA	Broad: buyer inherits all historical and contingent liabilities
Tax treatment (buyer)	Often favorable: step-up in tax basis of assets to fair market value; ability to amortize goodwill (typically over 15 years  in the U.S.)	Usually less favorable: carryover (historical) tax basis; no automatic step-up (unless special elections such as IRC §338(h)(10) or similar are available and elected)
Tax treatment (seller)	Often less favorable: potential ordinary income on certain assets; possible double taxation for C-corporations (entity-level tax + shareholder tax)	Often more favorable: typically capital gains treatment at the owner level; single level of tax in many cases
Contracts, licenses & permits	Usually require individual assignment and third-party consents; non-assignable items may not transfer	Generally continue automatically with the entity (subject to change-of-control clauses)
Employees & benefits	Often treated as new hires by the buyer; benefit plans usually do not transfer and must be recreated	Continuity—employees remain with the same employer; plans generally stay in place
Complexity & process	More complex and time-consuming: asset-by-asset transfers, title changes, consents, possible sales/use taxes	Simpler transfer of ownership interests; fewer mechanical steps
Business continuity	Potential disruption; buyer may need to re-establish relationships and re-title assets	High continuity; operations, contracts, and identity of the business remain largely intact
Typical preference	Preferred by buyers (liability control + tax benefits)	Preferred by sellers (tax efficiency + cleaner exit)

B.  Key Advantages and Disadvantages

Asset Purchase

• Buyer Advantages:
• Ability to cherry-pick desirable assets and leave unwanted liabilities behind.
• Tax step-up and amortization benefits that can improve after-tax cash flow.
• Reduced risk of unknown historical claims (e.g., environmental, employment, tax, or product liability).

• Buyer Disadvantages / Seller Advantages:

• Administrative burden and cost of transferring individual assets and obtaining consents.
• Risk that key contracts, licenses, or customer relationships cannot be assigned.
• Potential sales tax or transfer taxes on assets.
• Seller (especially a C-corp) may demand a higher price to compensate for less favorable tax treatment.

Full Equity Acquisition:

•  Buyer Advantages:

• Operational and contractual continuity with minimal disruption.
• Simpler mechanics and often faster closing once diligence is complete.
• Avoids the need to retitle assets or renegotiate every contract.

• Buyer disadvantages:

• Full assumption of all liabilities, including contingent and unknown ones.
• No automatic tax basis step-up (unless a special election is available and agreed).
• Greater due-diligence burden because the entire historical risk profile transfers.

C.  Practical Considerations

• Buyers commonly prefer asset deals when the target has significant contingent risks, when only part of the business is desired, or when maximizing tax benefits is a priority.
• Sellers commonly prefer equity deals for tax efficiency, simplicity, and a complete exit.
• Deal structure is heavily negotiated and influenced by the target’s entity type (C-corp, S-corp, LLC/partnership), the presence of minority owners, regulatory licenses, and tax elections that can sometimes make a stock deal taxed more like an asset deal (or vice versa).
• In both cases, the definitive agreement (APA or Stock/Equity Purchase Agreement) will contain detailed representations, warranties, indemnities, purchase-price adjustments, and closing conditions that allocate risk between the parties.

In short: an asset purchase lets the buyer acquire the business operations selectively while leaving the legal shell (and many risks) behind; a full equity acquisition transfers the entire legal entity and everything that comes with it. The choice is driven primarily by risk allocation, tax consequences, and the desire for operational continuity. Legal, tax, and accounting advice specific to the jurisdiction and parties is essential for any actual transaction.

II.  Sole Proprietorship

A sole proprietorship has no separate legal entity. The business and the owner are legally the same "person." There are no shares, units, or ownership interests that can be transferred independently of the individual.

• A true “full acquisition”/equity or stock purchase is not possible. You cannot buy the “company” itself because none exists as a distinct legal person.
• Virtually every acquisition of a sole proprietorship is structured as an asset purchase. The buyer buys specific assets (equipment, inventory, customer lists, goodwill, intellectual property, etc.) directly from the individual owner.
• Liabilities stay with the seller personally unless the buyer expressly assumes them in the agreement. The buyer generally does not inherit unknown personal liabilities of the sole proprietor simply by buying assets.
• Tax treatment follows the sale of individual assets (ordinary income on inventory/depreciation recapture, capital gain treatment on other items, allocation of purchase price under the residual method). The IRS generally treats the sale of a business as the sale of its individual assets.
  irs.gov
• Continuity issues (contracts, licenses, employees) still arise and often require third-party consents or new agreements, just as in a corporate asset deal.

In short, the classic “asset vs. stock” choice largely disappears; the deal is almost always an asset purchase.III.  Partnership: General Partnership, Limited Partnership, LLP, etc.

Partnerships are entities, so both structures remain available, but with different mechanics and tax rules than corporations:

• Purchase of Partnership Interests:  This is the equity equivalent of a stock purchase.  The buyer acquires ownership interests from the partners. This can transfer the entire entity. Tax treatment is more complex than a corporate stock sale. Gain on “hot assets” (unrealized receivables and inventory) is often ordinary income rather than pure capital gain. A §754 election can allow the buyer a step-up in the inside basis of partnership assets. Buying 100% of the interests is sometimes treated, for the buyer, similarly to an asset purchase under certain IRS rulings.
  irs.gov
• Asset purchase: The partnership sells selected assets (and may or may not distribute the proceeds or liquidate). Liability exposure for the buyer is limited to what is assumed, similar to a corporate asset deal. Tax consequences flow through to the partners.
• Liability Exposure:  Liability after sale depends largely on the type of partnership.  In a general partnership, partners typically have unlimited personal liability; buying interests can expose the buyer to that history unless carefully structured. Limited partnerships and LLPs offer more protection.
• Continuity:   Continuity of contracts, licenses, and employees is generally better with an interest purchase (the entity continues), but change-of-control or consent provisions can still apply.  In other words, continuity depends upon the partnership agreement, the specific relationship/contract at issue, and the terms of the sale. 

Overall, the buyer preference for asset deals (liability control + basis step-up) and the seller preference for equity deals still exist, but partnership tax rules (especially hot assets and basis adjustments) add extra complexity that does not apply to pure corporate stock sales.IV.  Online Self-Help / Informational ResourcesThere are free, non-commercial or government-affiliated educational materials and checklists that can help buyers and sellers understand the process and protect themselves through better due diligence and awareness. They are not, however, substitutes for professional legal, tax, or accounting advice.

• IRS (tax-focused, highly authoritative):

• Sale of a Business:  The IRS "Sale of a Business" overview page explains that a business sale is generally treated as the sale of individual assets, with links to relevant forms and rules.
• Sales and Other Dispositions of Assets: IRS Publication 544 covers allocation of purchase price, residual method, and capital vs. ordinary treatment of gain/loss.
• Partnerships: Publication 541 provides specific rules for sales of partnership interests.

• SCORE:   SCORE is a nonprofit organization and resource partner of the U.S. Small Business Administration. Its network of more than 10,000 volunteer mentors provides free, expert business mentoring, education and resources to entrepreneurs.  Among these are articles and webinars covering:

• Buying and Selling a Business:  Numerous articles and webinars, some state-specific, educate business owners and prospective buyers.

• Due Diligence:  SCORE offers checklists for buying or selling a business (covers financials, assets, contracts, legal standing, employees, etc.).
• Information Gathering: “Questions to Ask When Buying or Selling an Existing Business” checklist.
• Loans and Financing:  SCORE provides information and checklists regarding obtaining business loans. 
• Valuation: Articles and checklists on the due-diligence and valuation process.

• SBA and SBDCs:  The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) and related Small Business Development Centers offer:

• Guidance: General guidance on managing and transferring businesses, including the need for a formal sales agreement that specifies assets or ownership interests.
• Resources: Various free checklists from SBDCs (e.g., business buyer’s checklists that explicitly ask whether the deal is an asset or stock/interest purchase and what liabilities will be assumed).

• Other: Practical informational aids can be acquired from:

• Business Centers:  Free due-diligence checklists are published by university-affiliated or state small-business centers that walk through financial review, physical assets, contracts, UCC filings, licenses, and employee issues.

These materials equip clients to ask better questions, prepare stronger due-diligence requests, and recognize major red flags before signing anything. Because entity type, state law, and tax elections vary widely, the resources themselves repeatedly note that professional advice remains essential for the actual transaction documents and tax planning.