Before reaching the income provisions of a settlement deed, it
is usual to find powers of appointment of capital and income.
A power of appointment may allow
It will usually extend to the whole or part of the capital as
the trustees in their absolute discretion decide, and the persons
to benefit will be some members of the class of objects as the
trustees in their discretion decide.
These powers alone do not tell us whether the trust is
discretionary. ‘Income’ is within the powers above, but
this does not mean that the income is subject to discretion as it
arises. An exercise of the power in the prescribed form (deed) is
required to dispose of the income.
The power of appointment hangs over any existing vested
interests in possession but has effect only when actually
exercised. In deciding whether a trust is IIP or discretionary, the
trust in default of appointment prevails.
If a person has an interest in possession they can demand
their benefit, whatever it might be. But if the trustees have an
existing power of accumulation the interest is not
‘vested’ and the trusts are discretionary.
Every settlement yields benefit, even if the benefit is not
in the form of income. Whether it yields income, or a right to
reside, or to enjoy a chattel, the benefit is produced day by
day.
The trustees can exercise their power and take a beneficial
interest away from William, the default beneficiary, and in doing
so they bring William’s vested interest to an end. This gives
rise to a claim under IHTA84/S52 (1) against William personally as
the deemed transferor, on the full value of the underlying assets.
(
IHTM16091)
His interest in this example is said to be vested subject to
divesting. It is an interest in possession for so long as he is
allowed to enjoy it.
If the trustees revoke William’s interest and appoint
to his brother James on similar terms, the trusts are still
interest in possession. The important point is that the
trustees’ power of appointment cannot be used retrospectively
to deprive William or James of the benefit that was due to them up
to the date on which the deed or resolution exercising the power
says it is to go elsewhere.
In contrast, because a power of accumulation takes effect
‘at source’ before any interest can vest, its existence
is enough to prevent William or James from taking any vested
interest from the beginning.