Kansas House Bill HB2722

Kansas 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/5/26
• Refer: 2/5/26

Caption

Providing that certain resultant trusts are not subject to claims of the settlor's creditors.

Summary

HB2722 amends the Kansas Uniform Trust Code, specifically K.S.A. 58a-505, to clarify when trust assets may be reached by a settlor’s creditors. The bill restates the general rule that revocable trust property remains subject to creditor claims during the settlor’s lifetime, and that for irrevocable trusts creditors may reach the maximum amount that could be distributed for the settlor’s benefit. It also preserves existing rules for trusts that were revocable at death, including exposure to creditor claims, estate administration costs, funeral expenses, homestead-related claims, elective share rights, and statutory allowances for a surviving spouse and children. The main substantive change is a new exception for certain “resultant trusts” created through specific estate-planning structures involving spousal powers of appointment and federal tax-code provisions. Under the bill, those resultant trusts are not subject to claims of the settlor’s creditors, and the surviving spouse exercising the power of appointment is treated as the settlor of the resultant trust. The bill also updates cross-references to federal tax law and preserves existing treatment of powers of withdrawal and lapse rules. In practical terms, the bill narrows creditor access to certain trust assets in a limited set of trust arrangements, likely affecting estate planners, trustees, beneficiaries, and creditors. It does not broadly change creditor rights against ordinary revocable or irrevocable trusts, but it creates a targeted protection for trusts that meet the bill’s detailed requirements. The measure would amend and replace the current version of K.S.A. 58a-505. The available context suggests the bill is technical and likely intended to align Kansas trust law with specific estate-planning and tax-structuring practices. There is no recorded committee transcript or vote history in the provided materials, so no direct evidence of support or opposition is available. Based on the bill’s sponsor request from the Kansas Bar Association and its Judiciary Committee origin, the bill appears to have been developed with legal-practice input and framed as a clarification rather than a major policy shift. The main point of contention, if any, would likely be the creditor-protection effect of exempting certain resultant trusts from settlor-creditor claims. Creditors may view the new exception as limiting recovery, while estate planners and trust beneficiaries may support the added certainty and protection. Because the bill is narrowly drafted and highly technical, any debate would likely center on whether the exception is appropriately limited and whether it creates an unintended shelter for assets.

Impact

HB2722 would amend K.S.A. 58a-505 in the Kansas Uniform Trust Code and repeal the existing section, thereby changing how certain trust assets are treated in relation to settlor creditors. The bill preserves the current rules for revocable trusts, irrevocable trusts, powers of withdrawal, and post-death claims against revocable-trust property, but adds a new statutory exclusion for specified resultant trusts created through spousal powers of appointment and related federal tax-code mechanisms. As a result, creditors would no longer be able to reach those qualifying resultant trusts under the settlor-creditor rules in this section.

Sentiment

The overall sentiment appears neutral to favorable, with the bill presented as a technical trust-law clarification rather than a controversial policy change. The fact that it was requested by the Kansas Bar Association and referred through the Judiciary Committee suggests professional legal support and a focus on aligning Kansas law with estate-planning practice. No votes or committee transcripts were provided, so there is no direct evidence of opposition or floor-level debate in the record supplied.

Contention

The likely point of contention is the bill’s creation of an exception that shields certain resultant trusts from claims of the settlor’s creditors. Supporters would likely argue that the change clarifies trust law and protects legitimate estate-planning structures, while critics could argue that it reduces creditor remedies and may allow assets to be placed beyond reach. Any disagreement would probably focus on the narrowness of the exception, the use of federal tax-code references, and whether the bill could be used to expand asset protection beyond its intended scope.