Is this 1 or 2 large customers taking a massive stake to avoid the business getting sued into the ground? Or perhaps dumping equity by the backdoor because they are about to get sued into the ground?
> 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.
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.
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.
>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.
"I have not seen this before" != "this is not common," as much as people on the internet tend to confuse the two.
> 1 or 2 large customers taking a massive stake avoid the business getting sued into the ground
?
Almost certainly not classified as a charitable donation.
In this case, he obviously blows past that limit quickly.