HB 287-UNIFORM ACT: PROPERTY INTEREST DISCLAIMER  CHAIR FRENCH announced the consideration of HB 287. [CSHB 287(JUD) was before the committee.] 9:20:47 AM GRETCHEN STAFT, Staff to Representative Max Gruenberg, said HB 287 makes it easier to disclaim a property interest. A disclaimer occurs when a person who is left a property interest in a will or trust says for any reason, "I don't want it." HB 287 establishes the rules by which a property interest can be disclaimed and establishes where that disclaimed interest will go. The Uniform Disclaimer of Property Interest Act was promulgated in 1999 and this legislation updates the Act. 9:23:03 AM MS. STAFT said the only substantive change to the uniform act relates to child support on page 9, lines 9-15. This provision would bar a disclaimer to the extent that the disclaimant may have child support obligations. The sponsor's reasoning is that it's bad public policy to allow somebody to disclaim a bequest when they have a child who needs financial support. The bill has not been controversial, she said. TERRY THURBON, Chief Administrative Law Judge, Office of Administrative Hearing, Department of Administration (DOA), said she is an Alaska delegation commissioner to the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. She related that despite the child support provision, the national conference has characterized HB 287 as substantially similar to the uniform bill and has no concern with it being titled as a Uniform Act. CHAIR FRENCH asked if she knows why the national Uniform Act doesn't contain a provision that relates to child support. MS. THURBON replied she isn't sure that some other states haven't entertained a similar variance. She opined that now that it's been brought to the attention of the national conference, that exception might be included when the Act is next revised. 9:26:10 AM SENATOR COGHILL offered the view that the disclaimant might be under some duress and asked if other protections exist so that they don't disclaim their interest before thoroughly understanding what it is they're disclaiming. MS. THURBON said the disclaimant isn't necessarily a person under duress and she suspects there are sufficient protections in law against coercion. SENATOR COGHILL said he's just looking for protections against mischief or fraud. 9:28:47 AM DAVE SHAFTEL, representing himself, said he is an attorney who works in the area of estate planning and trust administration. He is a member of an informal group of attorneys and trust officers who have been working with the Legislature since 1997 to recommend provisions to improve the Alaska law. This bill was first introduced several years ago and his group has had an opportunity to study it and consult with a law professor at Florida State University who has written a number of articles on the Uniform Act. The professor made several procedural recommendations to improve the Act and those have been included in this bill. MR. SHAFTEL said that in 35 years of practice in this area he's never had a client disclaim because they were trying to get out of some other obligation. Most of the disclaimers are used as a tool for postmortem planning, to help rearrange things when a family agrees that the planning didn't as well as they wanted. Disclaimers can also be used for tax purposes, because a spouse was left out of the will, or because the disclaimant wanted their children to receive the property interest. 9:31:37 AM Addressing Senator Coghill's concern, he said the courts are sensitive to the fact that some people take advantage of others. This is particularly true in the area of estates and trusts because often you're dealing with elderly people. Alaska law provides good remedies for this. 9:34:52 AM CHAIR FRENCH closed public testimony and announced he would hold HB 287 in committee.