Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

Uniform Principal and Interest Act

Read a random definition: casus belli

A quick definition of Uniform Principal and Interest Act:

The Uniform Principal and Interest Act, also known as the Uniform Principal and Income Act, is a law that most states have adopted. It allows trustees to make adjustments that were not previously allowed. For example, a trustee can distribute money from the trust's principal to the beneficiaries who receive income if it is necessary to carry out the purpose of the trust. This law helps trustees manage trusts more effectively.

A more thorough explanation:

The Uniform Principal and Interest Act, also known as the Uniform Principal and Income Act, is a law that most states have adopted. It allows trustees to make adjustments that were not previously allowed. For example, a trustee could distribute principal to income beneficiaries if it were necessary to carry out the purpose of the trust.

Here is an example of how Vermont’s Uniform Principal and Income Act works:

Let's say a trust has $100,000 in principal and the trust agreement requires the trustee to pay the income to the beneficiary each year. However, the trust also requires the trustee to maintain the principal for the beneficiary's future use. If the trust earns $5,000 in interest in a year, the trustee can distribute that $5,000 to the beneficiary as income. But if the trust loses $5,000 in principal due to a bad investment, the trustee can take $5,000 from the income and add it to the principal to maintain the $100,000 for the beneficiary's future use.

This example illustrates how the Uniform Principal and Income Act allows trustees to adjust the distribution of principal and income to carry out the purpose of the trust.

Uniform Premarital Agreement Act | Uniform Probate Code

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
yeah there are so many good cuisines in ithaca
renard99
22:31
@lilypadfrog: that’s a pity I’da be liking them all
texaslawhopefully
22:31
Only food I’m going to miss for sure if I leave Texas is texmex
22:31
waspy hasnt had thai food in ithaca yet. ithaca thai is so good
^^^^ truuuuuu
22:32
there are two major thai places and they have very similar names bc a divorced husband and wife own them lol
22:32
personally i think taste of thai is better than taste of thai express but thats just me
i had pho tho and it was really good and huge portions
texaslawhopefully
22:32
Glad they have good Thai food, I love Thai food! Can’t wait to visit :)
22:33
when tex goes to ithaca i want to come
Dkk
22:34
Crying Tiger, best Thai dish.
damn im so hungry all i had today was a curry tonkatsu and buldak
and it was a lil baby noodle cup
vvv hungry
22:36
curry tonkatsu so yummeh
22:36
whats even open rn? pizza?
CTB is it i think
22:37
is collegetown pizza not open
22:37
i used to get a slice from there or wings over at like 1am after my shift at the restaurant
Dkk
22:48
Ross Ulbricht free. God Bless Trump. Huge win.
JeremyFragrance
22:54
agreed
texaslawhopefully
22:55
This is an interesting read: https://thedispatch.com/article/birthright-citizenship-trump-implications/
Dkk
23:01
I mean, idk how it's possible to end birth right citizenship without amending the constitution because to me the 14th amendment is pretty clear about it.
ross ulbricht tried to hire a hitman to kill 5 people
i am not that sympathetic to him
Dkk
23:04
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: That might have been an FBI agent. It was most likely him and he was most likely doing it to retrieve stolen funds that corrupt FBI agents stole, but yeah moral gray area but me personally, cool with hitmen. It's not like it is uncommon to hire hitmen. I don't think the action itself is necessarily wrong but the intent behind it can be.
Dkk
23:05
Like, Boeing whistblowers being killed by hitmen = wrong but a guy hiring hitmen to retrieve stolen funds = good to me.
texaslawhopefully
23:05
@Dkk: Yeah, for sure. My guess is it'll go to SCOTUS and it'll be 8-1 or 7-2, saying that EO was unconstitutional.
Dkk
23:06
Indeed. I need a count for how many exectuive orders he has signed and how many already have pending lawsuits.
i've been away for a while what were the most recent waves? any this week?
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.