Analyze

Turn an estate-planning intake into a planning memo

Right-sizes the plan to the estate: which documents, who serves, which beneficiary designations quietly override the will, where the state estate tax bites, and what funding actually requires.

About 15 minstarterEstates, Solo / small firm, Tax

Your prompt4,875 characters

Still to fill in: Intake responses, Client's state of domicile

RoleYou are an estate planning attorney who has drafted thousands of wills, trusts, and powers of attorney for working families and modest estates. You right-size the plan to the client rather than to the fee, you check beneficiary designations before drafting a word, and you will not sell a revocable trust to someone who needs a will and a durable power of attorney.What I needTurn the intake below into a planning memo for a client domiciled in Client's state of domicile who says they want: Simplest thing that works. Tell me what to draft, what to fund, and what I have to fix before anyone signs.InputsIntake: Intake responses Existing documents: Existing documents What the client raised: What the client raised Domicile: Client's state of domicile What the client says they want: Simplest thing that worksHow to work this1. Recommend will-based or trust-based in one sentence, naming the facts that drive it: probate cost in Client's state of domicile, number and location of parcels, protected beneficiaries. If Simplest thing that works is bigger than the facts warrant, recommend the smaller plan. Then the document set, one line of reason each, incapacity documents included, naming what fails if each is not signed. 2. State the dispositive scheme in the client's own words, then its ambiguities: predeceased beneficiaries, a specific gift whose asset is gone, tangible property, whether lifetime help to one child counts against their share. 3. Audit everything that passes outside the will (each retirement account, policy, TOD or POD account, jointly titled parcel), with the action required, the form, and who signs it. 4. Flag tax exposure as a range, never a conclusion: federal exemption, any Client's state of domicile estate or inheritance tax and its threshold, what lifetime gifting costs in lost basis step-up. Where the facts show contest or capacity risk, list the execution steps and what each proves later. Close with the funding sequence and a flat fee stating what is in and out.Ask me firstBefore you produce anything, ask me these questions, then stop and wait: 1. What do the retirement and life insurance beneficiary designations actually say today, not what the client intends? They override the will, and I need them before recommending a structure. 2. Is any real property outside Client's state of domicile, and how is each parcel titled: sole, joint with right of survivorship, tenancy in common, or already in a trust? 3. Is any beneficiary receiving means-tested benefits, in a creditor or divorce situation, or struggling with addiction? Each one changes the shape of that beneficiary's share. Do not begin the memo until I answer. If I tell you to proceed anyway, state each assumption you are making at the top of your output and mark it [ASSUMPTION - verify].Output formatA memo, in this order: snapshot; the right-sizing recommendation; the document list; the dispositive scheme with its ambiguities; fiduciaries and backups by role; an outside-the-will table (Asset | How it passes now | Action | Who signs); tax flags; contest and capacity steps; funding sequence; scope and fee; dated next steps. End with one line naming the two of my answers that most changed this plan (the structure, the document set, or the funding sequence) and what you would have recommended without them. If an answer changed nothing, say so. It means I should not have been asked.Never do this- If this memo would fit any client with a house and two children, it is too generic. It has to move with this client's parcels, designations, and family facts. - No hedging filler. Cut "arguably," "estate planning is highly personal," and "a trust may be beneficial." Do not tell me to consult an attorney or a tax professional. I am the attorney, and I will decide when a CPA is needed. - Never invent a statute, an exemption amount, or a tax rate. Every threshold and citation comes from my inputs or carries [UNVERIFIED - confirm the current figure]. Exemptions change, and a wrong number here becomes advice. - Where you do not know how Client's state of domicile handles a no-contest clause, a spousal elective share, or small-estate administration, say you do not know. Do not smooth over the gap with fluent prose. - Do not pad. A $400,000 estate with two adult children and no property outside the state gets a short memo. Length is not value.Before you answer- Did I recommend the smallest plan that does the job, or default to a trust? - Did I address incapacity documents and the outside-the-will audit, or only the will itself? - Is every tax threshold marked for verification rather than stated as fact? - Would this memo fit another family's file? It should not.

Adds driver's-seat tunes: options instead of answers, questions before work, every citation flagged. Your values come with it.

Pressure-test it

Makes the AI switch hats and attack its own answer.

The adult child who receives the smaller share is sitting across a table from a contest lawyer working on contingency. Read this memo as the son. Name the three facts they would build an undue-influence or capacity case around: who arranged the meeting, who benefits, what changed and when. Then name the two execution steps that would defeat that case and the one ambiguity in the dispositive scheme that would otherwise cost the estate a year of litigation to resolve.

Go deeper

Pushes the work further once the basics are right.

Signing is the middle of this, not the end. Produce the two client-facing pieces this memo requires: a one-page letter listing exactly what the client must gather, in the order they will need it: deeds by parcel, current beneficiary designation forms, account statements, insurance declarations, and the funding checklist for after execution, showing each asset, the instrument that moves it, who signs, and the confirmation to put in the file.

Before you run it

What to gather first

The intake questionnaire or interview notes
Estate size and composition, including how each parcel is titled
Current beneficiary designations as the forms actually read
Family structure: spouse, children, blended family, dependents, estrangements
Any existing will, trust, or power of attorney and when it was signed

Watch for

State estate and inheritance tax thresholds change and the federal exemption is scheduled to move. Verify every figure against the current year before it goes to a client.
Beneficiary designations and survivorship titling override the will entirely. Until you see the forms as they read today, the dispositive scheme in this memo is a hypothesis.
A beneficiary on means-tested benefits needs a properly drafted special-needs trust. A generic discretionary trust can cost them their benefits.
Real property outside the domicile state usually means ancillary probate unless it is held in trust or retitled. Recommending a trust without funding it accomplishes nothing.
Where capacity or undue influence is a live risk, the file is the evidence. Contemporaneous notes, a separate meeting without the interested family member, and a physician letter all age better than a well-drafted document.

What comes back

A planning memo: snapshot line, the right-sizing recommendation with its reasons, the document set with one line of justification each, the dispositive scheme with ambiguities flagged, fiduciaries and backups by role, special-issue flags paired with techniques, a table of assets passing outside the will with the action and signer for each, tax flags marked for verification, contest and capacity steps, the funding sequence, scope and flat fee, and dated next steps.

See an example of what you’ll get

Snapshot. Renata Halloway, 58, widowed 2023, Oregon domicile. Roughly $1.72M: Portland residence $760K, Bend rental $320K, TIAA $410K, brokerage $180K, cash $50K. Two adult children: daughter in Portland (primary caregiver), son in Texas (estranged, reconciling). Wants 60/40 in the daughter's favor. Right-sizing: trust-based. Not because the estate is large, but because two Oregon parcels plus an intended unequal split plus an estranged beneficiary is exactly the fact pattern that produces a contested probate. A revocable trust keeps the split out of the public record and lets the Bend rental income keep flowing during administration. Client said she was not sure what she wanted; this is the recommendation and the reason. Documents. Revocable trust (probate avoidance, privacy on the 60/40, administrative continuity for the rental). Pour-over will (catches anything unfunded; nominates personal representative). Durable financial power of attorney: without it, an incapacity means a conservatorship petition and a public hearing. Oregon advance directive plus HIPAA authorization naming both children. Memorandum of tangible personal property. Letter of intent explaining the 60/40, kept in the file rather than incorporated. Dispositive scheme and its ambiguities. 60% to daughter, 40% to son, after tangible property per the memorandum. Three ambiguities to resolve before drafting: (1) if the son predeceases, does his 40% go to his children or to the daughter: per stirpes or per capita; (2) the Bend rental is currently the source of the daughter's caregiving support, so decide whether it is a specific gift or part of the residue; (3) whether the $38,000 the client advanced her daughter in 2024 is an advancement against her share or a gift. Passing outside the will. | Asset | How it passes now | Action | Who signs | |---|---|---|---| | TIAA $410K | Beneficiary form; reportedly still names late husband | New designation, 60/40, contingent per stirpes | Client, TIAA form | | Portland home | Sole name | Deed to trust at execution | Client, recorded Multnomah Cty | | Bend rental | Sole name | Deed to trust; update landlord insurance to trustee | Client, recorded Deschutes Cty | | Brokerage $180K | Individual account | Retitle to trust, or TOD matching the scheme | Client, custodian form | Tax flags. Federal: no exposure, well under the current exemption [UNVERIFIED - confirm the current figure]. Oregon: exposure. Oregon taxes estates above its filing threshold, which is materially lower than federal [UNVERIFIED - confirm the current threshold and rate table]. On these numbers, plan for a five-figure Oregon estate tax and discuss whether annual gifting, a charitable bequest, or life insurance held outside the estate is worth the complexity. Basis: both parcels get a step-up at death; gifting them during life gives up that step-up and would cost the children more than the tax saves. Contest and capacity. Unequal split, estranged beneficiary, recent widowhood, and a caregiver child who benefits. Steps: separate execution meeting with no child present; contemporaneous file notes on capacity and reasons for the split; physician letter within 30 days of execution; video the execution; the letter of intent in the file. Do not add a no-contest clause without first confirming how Oregon enforces one [UNVERIFIED]. Scope and fee. $3,800 flat: trust, pour-over will, financial power, advance directive, HIPAA, memorandum, plus funding: both deeds prepared and recorded and beneficiary-change letters drafted. Out of scope: tax return preparation, ancillary probate, any contested matter, business succession. Half at engagement, half at execution. Next steps. Conflicts on both children and the son's spouse this week. Client produces both deeds and the current TIAA designation before drafting begins. Drafts in 21 days, execution within 45. What your answers changed. Your answer that the TIAA form still names her late husband is what moved funding ahead of drafting in the next steps. $410K, roughly a quarter of this estate, is currently pointed away from the 60/40 entirely, and without it this memo would have recommended the same trust while treating the beneficiary paperwork as a closing formality. Your answer that both parcels sit in her sole name and neither is outside Oregon is why the Bend rental is a deed-to-trust action item rather than an asset that already bypasses the plan; had it been held jointly with right of survivorship with the daughter, that $320K would pass outside the trust and the intended 60/40 would land nearer 67/33 in fact. Your answer that neither child is on means-tested benefits or sitting in a creditor or divorce situation changed nothing here. The 60/40 shares needed no special-needs or discretionary structure either way, and I would have recommended the same outright distribution without it.

Why this prompt is built the way it is

## Framework 1. **Right-size first, incapacity included.** Will-based or trust-based is a conclusion from facts: probate cost and duration in this state, number and location of parcels, protected beneficiaries, not a default and not an upsell. Durable financial power, health-care directive, HIPAA authorization: most plans fail while the client is alive, not after. 2. **Plain-language disposition, ambiguities flagged.** What happens if a child predeceases, what happens to a specific gift when the asset is gone, who takes the tangible personal property. 3. **Audit what passes outside the will.** Retirement accounts, life insurance, TOD and POD accounts, jointly titled property. Each one with the form to file and who has to sign it. This is where plans actually fail. 4. **Tax flags, contest hygiene, and funding.** Federal exemption, state estate or inheritance tax and its threshold, basis step-up consequences of lifetime gifting, each marked for verification, never stated as a conclusion. Where the facts warrant it, list the execution steps and say what each one proves. Then the funding sequence: deeds, beneficiary forms, retitling, who signs what and when. An unfunded trust is a will with extra steps.