[DRAFT] Right To A Last Will

[Trellania]

"Ambassador, I have never once argued that the World Assembly needs to conform to C.D.S.P. laws. My entire argument has been, and clearly so, that this is a one-size-fits-all approach that makes unsupported assumptions and fails to accommodate the need for nuance in this field."

Dame Allania sighs. "One-size-fits-all is every proposal and resolution this assembly deals with. The nuance in the field is the allowance of local laws to interact with and adjucate how this is implemented. You are so busy complaining about the forest in your way you don't realize the tree you need is right in front of you."

OOC: Not nearly as much as you suggest, and that is literally the worst way to handle transfer of belongings that I can possibly come up with. You deliberately incur a capital gains liability when any risk of an estate tax is, axiomatically, lower, and you are inviting the kind of subjective assessments of intent inherent in inter vivos transfers when in poor health.

OOC: California has a law where estates below certain monetary values avoid probate entirely but above that amount will be probated, while my own state does not and probates all wills. Those are just the two that come to mind immeditely And it's not the worst way if you're smart; you just put someone as co-owner of any property and accounts, so that when the original owner dies full ownership transfers. So far, not had a tax issue yet.

"Ambassador, at no point have I argued that policy should be subordinate to wills. I have argued the opposite. You have misconstrued my argument against the Dead Hand Policy idea and somehow mistook it for an argument against government regulation of private legal constructs. This is a special kind of inane."

"You're right; that is a special kind of inane. I have in way argued such either; that seems to be entirely your imagining. I have been pointing out the fact your argument is relying upon false stances, mistaken importance of anecdotes, and your own internal problems for some time."

OOC: Seriously, WTF? Was that IC response a mistake?

"Anecdote is itself assertion of subjective fact as evidence. I have admitted, twice now, that I am not offering anecdote. I am challenging the original commenter's assertion of fact."

"You have yet to present nonsubjective evidence, ambassador. If you are not offering anecdote, you admit you are offering pure fiction."

"I think you are continuing to mistake my identification of the shortcomings of this proposal as waxing poetic on the woes of the C.D.S.P.'s estate system. This is not the case. I have made no comment as to my national or subnational law."

"Ambassador, I am sorry, but I am failing to see how you are not being dishonest. You have argued about wills working in a particular legal set-up, a particular situation that is too specific to not be employed in a nation, and are missing the fact that from earlier comments and from the stances of the bill drafters that legal situation is far from universal. I fail to see how you have not been arguing your nation's laws this entire time. Unless you are representing some other nation or simply playing Soul Stealer's Advocate."

"Ambassador, I don't believe you have a point to make."

"Ambassador, I cannot help you with mistaken beliefs. That is a personal problem."

[Imperium Anglorum]

Elsie Mortimer Wellesley. Bell is entirely correct and summarises our view on this issue. We would recommend other ambassadors to examine their views in light of his expertise.

[Goobergunchia]

This proposal absolutely does not thwart a member nation's ability to impose such taxes onto inheritances, and so wider interests of public wellbeing can be served, without using an individual's entire wealth or estate for such."

"To the extent your proposal creates a right that does not exist, it either limits that right so much as to make your proposal toothless or it does it so aggressively as to wipe out any of the nuance domestic will and estate policies have been able to address. This is a matter best left entirely to individual states."

This gets at the issue that we have with this draft proposal. It is our understanding that clause 4 of the proposal permits a 100% estate tax (or perhaps, a 100% tax above one knugel), therefore rendering the rest of it essentially moot.

To the extent we believe it wise to pursue this direction of legislation, we would be more inclined to support a simple requirement that estates must be treated regularly and governments cannot levy duties on particular estates based solely on the identity of the decedent.

[Lord] Michael Evif
Goobergunchian WA Ambassador

[OOC: ... actually, did we ever outlaw bills of attainder more generally?]

[Trellania]

OOC: I'm actually having a hard time finding states that don't probate wills. Some do informal probates, but it seems the majority of the United States doesn't allow wills to operate outside probate.

[Daarwyrth]

"Spillover trusts are an alternate mechanism of disposing of property to wills. Your definition of will would include that mechanism by my reading, which would negatively effect those with such estate plans.

Vyn Nysen: "What would have to change in the definition of will to ensure that the mechanism you mention wouldn't be included, and that the normal procedures to probate a will would be enacted?"

OOC: I have to admit that I have no idea what 'spillover trust' means, and I tried to find something on Google but came up short. Could you point me to something that explains it?

"That is not how that term is used. The dead hand policy is meant to describe how the requirements of a will can manage property long after the death of the decedent, regardless of novel circumstances. This seems a particularly weak rejoinder."

"I concede the point, Ambassador Bell, yet I am left to wonder whether it is truly so problematic that an individual would inherit at one point or another. Material possessions remain material possessions, after all. Traditions for example are also dictated upon society by long-dead hands, and yet they are still practiced. Perhaps I am looking at this from a different perspective, could you name examples where the dead hand policy would cause problems for an heir or heiress?"

"Yes, this is generally the problem."

Maria vyn Nysen smiles slightly. "Well, I would call the fact that the author of a will is alive quite joyful, Ambassador Bell. Yet is the flexibility of a will at this stage truly problematic? An individual should have the freedom to have a change of heart, or to wish to alter a decision."

"This is, quite literally, the entire reason there exists a probate system in many states."

"Which is why both our delegation as well as the delegation from Adezku are willing to alter the text of the proposal to ensure that the probate system will be adequately applied."

"I'm not certain, ambassador, why the system needs to exist if the system will circumvent the entire policy of disposition of property after death that you seek to impose. It is rather like banning whistling except where states allow it., which is the thrust of my complaint."

"The current text of the proposal and the way it seeks to regulate the disposition of property after death would benefit from a rewrite here and there, to ensure that it is brought in accordance with the most common practices regarding inheritance law. I fully realise you are opposed to the implementation of this resolution, yet if you would have any pointers as to how to improve the text of this draft, we would be most grateful. Both our delegations see merit in the establishment of the right to a last will as a right guaranteed by the World Assembly, to ensure that it cannot be taken away from individual across the member states at some point in the future."

"Leaving aside my personal beliefs on this, why? Why should the state permit waste at the expense of the living?"

"The state should not permit waste at the expense of the living, it should seek - in the opinion of our delegation - a balance between both, a balance that ensures that those who earned their wealth and fortune get to keep part of what they worked so hard for, while the other part is used to create a better life for the living. A state can accomplish this by inheritance tax, which most if not all states already apply. After all, the inheritors are part of the living as well."

"Herein we find the problem with this approach. It is easy to cover this in terms of what a low-value estate of only a few hundred thousand greenbacks without looking to the multi-million greenback estates that are often the source of this contentious transfer. But your proposal makes no distinction between the two. And, indeed, couldn't, given that the line between the two is not an objective amount. Another reason this more properly belongs in the hands of member states and not the World Assembly. You cannot effectively craft a policy that is both effective and appropriately inclusive at this scale."

"The argument sounds familiar, and I understand that you do have a point. In this particular case, its about ensuring that there is the guarantee that every individual across the member nations will have the right to form a will, but also to refuse an inheritance should they be marked as an heir or heiress to an estate. The resolution intends to establish the existence of the right in all member nations, yet leaves - in our opinion - enough room for member nations to properly regulate it. With this we hope to thwart any future attempts at taking away the right of individuals to freely and without instructions, conditions or unnecessary restrictions form a will. Perhaps this may sound unrealistic in your ears, but we are convinced that sooner or later such an attempt will come to pass."

"Initially, you assume any inherited wealth is itself something the inheritor earned through labor. For another, you assume, inherently in this aspect of your policy, that societal interests are, by definition, subordinate to the mere desires of the individual. This is not a universal truth, especially relative to property disposition."

"We do not mean to subordinate one interest over another. As I said before, it is our intent and hope to see a balance between interests that's fair to all members of society, inheritors as well as the general public."

"One may argue, ambassador, that the desires of one who is no longer alive are of less concern than the concerns of those still living."

"And yet many nations and peoples see their culture dictated by traditions passed down through those who are no longer among the living, with the living concerning themselves with the fact that those traditions are properly observed by new generations. Surely it is not inconceivable the same would apply to inheritances and wills? After all, the inheritance may serve as a deeply treasured memory of the deceased by the living. It would be unjust to deprive someone of such a memory, or comfort."

"Here we again run into the question of scale. Under your conception, you are locked into an either-or arrangement, when individual states could readily make accommodations specific to their interests and values."

"Could you explain what you mean with the "either-or" remark? Is it tied to the wording of the definition of "will"?

"Inheritance tax rarely helps the disowned child, the neglected spouse, or any number of scenarios where an individual with an equitable interest in the estate is left out, regardless of the interests of the state in ensuring those individuals are cared for or any reliance and sacrifice of that individual on the expectation of receiving a share.

"Both our delegation as well as the delegation from Adezku are willing to include wording that would address these issues, Ambassador, as we too want to see these affairs applied justly and fairly. Our delegations will examine the text to see how it can be mended to accommodate your concern here."

"To the extent your proposal creates a right that does not exist, it either limits that right so much as to make your proposal toothless or it does it so aggressively as to wipe out any of the nuance domestic will and estate policies have been able to address. This is a matter best left entirely to individual states."

"Leaving this to the affairs of member nations without the guarantee of a right to a will would - in our opinion - bring the risk of future infringements upon that right. We are deeply concerned about this prospect, which is why we may appear so adamant to continue working on the implementation of this proposal. As I have stated before, both authoring delegations will have a closer look at the text of this proposal, to address as many of the concerns you raised as we can."

[WayNeacTia]

"To the extent your proposal creates a right that does not exist, it either limits that right so much as to make your proposal toothless or it does it so aggressively as to wipe out any of the nuance domestic will and estate policies have been able to address. This is a matter best left entirely to individual states."

"Leaving this to the affairs of member nations without the guarantee of a right to a will would - in our opinion - bring the risk of future infringements upon that right. We are deeply concerned about this prospect, which is why we may appear so adamant to continue working on the implementation of this proposal. As I have stated before, both authoring delegations will have a closer look at the text of this proposal, to address as many of the concerns you raised as we can."

"Ambassador, shall we regulate the size of toilet paper sheets next? That would at least have more international bearing that this. Wills are a provincial matter. They aren't even dealt with on the federal level of most nations. I think it would be best to leave it at that."

Wayne

[Daarwyrth]

"Leaving this to the affairs of member nations without the guarantee of a right to a will would - in our opinion - bring the risk of future infringements upon that right. We are deeply concerned about this prospect, which is why we may appear so adamant to continue working on the implementation of this proposal. As I have stated before, both authoring delegations will have a closer look at the text of this proposal, to address as many of the concerns you raised as we can."

"Ambassador, shall we regulate the size of toilet paper sheets next? That would at least have more international bearing that this. Wills are a provincial matter. They aren't even dealt with on the federal level of most nations. I think it would be best to leave it at that."

Wayne

Vyn Nysen: "We would not have touched this subject, had we not felt the right to formulate a will without unnecessary restrictions, directions or conditions was threatened, Ambassador. As it happens, we have come to the conclusion that a guarantee of this right by World Assembly law is absolutely necessary."

[WayNeacTia]

"Ambassador, shall we regulate the size of toilet paper sheets next? That would at least have more international bearing that this. Wills are a provincial matter. They aren't even dealt with on the federal level of most nations. I think it would be best to leave it at that."

Wayne

Vyn Nysen: "We would not have touched this subject, had we not felt the right to formulate a will without unnecessary restrictions, directions or conditions was threatened, Ambassador. As it happens, we have come to the conclusion that a guarantee of this right by World Assembly law is absolutely necessary."

"Ambassador, may I remind you, that it not your delegation that passes the resolution, but the World Assembly as a whole. Lest we have to remind you of the vote to ban corporal punishment? We saw just how well a good majority of our members feel about the WA meddling in minutiae? Now I am well aware that this probably will come as a heart stopping shock to you, but most national governments are not run by three year old's, and are fully capable of making law on piddly ass little shit without the WA having to hold their hands."

Wayne

[Greater Cesnica]

Vyn Nysen: "We would not have touched this subject, had we not felt the right to formulate a will without unnecessary restrictions, directions or conditions was threatened, Ambassador. As it happens, we have come to the conclusion that a guarantee of this right by World Assembly law is absolutely necessary."

"Ambassador, may I remind you, that it not your delegation that passes the resolution, but the World Assembly as a whole. Lest we have to remind you of the vote to ban corporal punishment? We saw just how well a good majority of our members feel about the WA meddling in minutiae? Now I am well aware that this probably will come as a heart stopping shock to you, but most national governments are not run by three year old's, and are fully capable of making law on piddly ass little shit without the WA having to hold their hands."

Wayne

"Wayne, may I inquire as to why you insist on outputting an air of abject arrogance and an utter lack of common decency? I am well aware that this probably will come as a heart-stopping shock to you, but have you considered that such behavior is annoying, and makes people hold your opinion in lesser regard as a result, no matter what potential merits said opinion may have had?"

[Jedinsto]

three year old's

*three year olds

[Wallenburg]

"The entire body of this proposal couches itself in exemptions and permissions for national law, to the extent that I wonder why the author has not come to the conclusion already that this sort of proposal is of no international utility? Inheritance is a near-universally recognized practice, and where it is not this proposal allows member states to not recognize it anyway."

[Imperium Anglorum]

Wayne's version of IC is like saying "I want to shoot people and steal their money in GTA Online".

[Old Hope]

"Ambassador, shall we regulate the size of toilet paper sheets next? That would at least have more international bearing that this. Wills are a provincial matter. They aren't even dealt with on the federal level of most nations. I think it would be best to leave it at that."

Wayne

Vyn Nysen: "We would not have touched this subject, had we not felt the right to formulate a will without unnecessary restrictions, directions or conditions was threatened, Ambassador. As it happens, we have come to the conclusion that a guarantee of this right by World Assembly law is absolutely necessary."

Why should people have such a right?
They should not. Their belongings should be distributed in a manner that causes less problems than a will that potentially sours personal relations between those who are related to the deceased, potentially ignores the needs of the (especially minor) children,.... A neutral inheritance system is much, MUCH better than the existance of legally enforceable wills(unnecessary lawyers, personal strife, fake/forced wills that cannot be always detected...)

[Araraukar]

Elsie Mortimer Wellesley. Bell is entirely correct and summarises our view on this issue. We would recommend other ambassadors to examine their views in light of his expertise.

IC: "I think you'll need to take it up with whatever entity maintains the universal translators here; I could understand most single words out of what he said, but put together the way they were, the sentences didn't have much sense in them. Something something jargon something. And most of what he seemed to be arguing about would be caught by the "national law applies" part of the proposal.

Oh and officially against; aside from personal items, inheritances go entirely through the state in Araraukar to avoid creating an owner class elite part of the population. Everyone should rise or fall on their own merits, not because of what one of their ancestors did or didn't do."

OOC: Of course the "personal items" may include something like very valuable jewelry, but if the one who inherits it would try to sell it within a fairly long time of inheriting it (10 or 15 years, I forget which number I gave it last time), then it would be counted as something that should have gone through the state and they'll only get like maybe 10% of the sale price.

And yes, Araraukar is practically a meritocracy. And a dictatorship. And a police state. And a utopia if you're law-abiding. Possibly dystopia if you're law-breaking. It's complex.

Wayne's version of IC is like saying "I want to shoot people and steal their money in GTA Online".

OOC: Never played that - can't you run them over with cars in that version?