Estate planning becomes more complicated when a person’s life does not fit neatly within the borders of one state. It is increasingly common for individuals and families to own homes in more than one state, spend significant portions of the year in different locations, have children living throughout the country, maintain businesses or investment properties in several jurisdictions, or retire to one state while continuing to own property in another.
For clients with connections to Florida and Massachusetts, these issues arise frequently. Someone may live primarily in Massachusetts but own a condominium in Florida. Another person may have moved permanently to Florida while retaining a vacation home or investment property in Massachusetts. A married couple may spend part of every year in each state and be uncertain which state they actually consider home. Others may have trusts or wills prepared years ago in another state and wonder whether those documents still accomplish what they intended.
Owning property or spending time in more than one state does not necessarily mean that a person needs entirely separate estate plans. It does mean that the plan should be reviewed from a multi-state perspective.
Why More Than One State Complicates an Estate Plan
Estate planning laws are state-specific. Although many of the basic concepts are similar from one state to another, states can have very different rules regarding probate, homestead property, creditor protection, spousal rights, estate taxation, trusts, fiduciary appointments, and the manner in which real property passes at death.
The first question is often not simply, “Where do you live?” The more useful questions are where you are legally domiciled, where your property is located, how that property is titled, what type of property you own, and what your overall estate plan says.
Domicile generally refers to the state a person considers his or her permanent legal home. A person can own several residences, but ordinarily has only one domicile at a particular time. That distinction can become important for probate administration, state taxation, and other legal purposes.
Real estate creates another layer because the location of the property matters. A person who is domiciled in Massachusetts but owns Florida real estate has a connection to the laws of both states. The same is true for a Florida resident who continues to own a Massachusetts home, rental property, or other real estate.
The way an asset is titled can be just as important as where it is located. Property owned individually may be treated differently from property owned jointly, through a revocable trust, through a limited liability company, or with a beneficiary designation.
For that reason, multi-state planning should begin with the entire picture rather than with a single document. A will prepared in one state may still be valid after a move, but validity is only one part of the analysis. The larger question is whether the documents, ownership structure, beneficiary designations, and tax planning still work together under the client’s current circumstances.
What Happens to Out-of-State Property When Someone Dies?
One of the questions I hear most often is: If I live in Massachusetts but own a home in Florida, will my family need probate in Florida when I die?
Potentially.
When someone dies owning real estate individually in a state other than the state of domicile, a second probate proceeding may be required in the state where that real estate is located. This is commonly called ancillary administration.
Florida law specifically provides for ancillary administration when a nonresident dies leaving assets in Florida. Massachusetts probate procedures similarly recognize estates of nonresidents who owned Massachusetts property.
Consider a Massachusetts resident who owns a primary residence in Massachusetts and a condominium in Naples, Florida, both individually titled. If that person dies, the family may need a Massachusetts probate proceeding for the estate generally, termed a domiciliary proceeding, and a Florida ancillary proceeding to establish authority over the Florida real estate.
This does not necessarily mean that every person who owns property in two states will have two probates. How an asset is titled can change the result.
Real estate held in a properly established and funded revocable living trust, for example, generally does not have to pass through probate solely because of the owner’s death. Property owned with valid survivorship rights may also pass differently. Business entities can create another layer because what the person owns may be an interest in an LLC rather than direct title to the underlying real estate.
That is one of the reasons multi-state estate planning should include a title review. Preparing a trust without transferring appropriate assets into it does not accomplish the same result as a properly funded trust plan.
It is also important to distinguish between a will and a probate-avoidance plan. A will does not prevent probate. A will tells the probate court how probate assets should be administered and distributed. If individually titled real estate remains in two different states, the existence of a will by itself does not necessarily eliminate the need for proceedings in those states.
Which State’s Law Governs What?
There is no single rule that says one state’s law controls every issue simply because a person declares that state to be home.
Different issues can be governed by different laws.
Domicile can affect where the primary probate estate is administered and may affect state estate-tax exposure. The location of real estate can bring the property within the laws of the state where the real estate sits. Trust documents may contain provisions selecting governing law. Business interests can be affected by the law under which an entity was formed. Marital-property rights and creditor protections can also vary significantly from state to state.
This becomes particularly important when someone moves.
For example, an individual may have completed an estate plan while living in Massachusetts and later establish Florida domicile. The existing will and trust do not automatically become meaningless merely because of the move. However, the plan should be reviewed to determine whether fiduciary appointments, homestead provisions, powers of attorney, health care documents, tax planning, and the ownership of real estate still make sense under Florida law.
The reverse is equally true. A person who moves from Florida to Massachusetts should not assume that a Florida plan addresses Massachusetts estate-tax exposure or Massachusetts-specific planning considerations.
The family structure also matters. Both Florida and Massachusetts give surviving spouses important statutory rights, but those rights are not identical.
Florida, for example, provides a surviving spouse with an elective share equal to 30 percent of the elective estate, subject to the statutory framework governing what is included in that estate. Florida also has specific constitutional and statutory restrictions concerning the devise of protected homestead when an owner is survived by a spouse or minor child.
Massachusetts has its own rules governing surviving spouses and intestate estates. For example, the share of a surviving spouse when there is no will depends on whether the deceased person also left descendants or parents and whether the spouses had children from other relationships.
The practical lesson is that a multi-state estate should not be analyzed by taking one state’s rules and assuming they apply everywhere.
Coordinating One Estate Plan Across States
Another question I hear regularly is: I own property in both Florida and Massachusetts. Do I need separate estate plans?
Usually, the better starting point is one coordinated estate plan rather than competing sets of documents.
Having one Florida will and another Massachusetts will covering the same estate can create obvious problems if the documents revoke one another or contain inconsistent instructions. The same problem can occur with multiple powers of attorney, health care documents, or trusts created without considering what already exists.
The goal is coordination.
For many clients, a revocable living trust becomes the central document within that structure. A properly designed trust can own assets in more than one state and establish one set of instructions for how those assets are managed during incapacity and after death.
When I prepare a revocable living trust plan, I also prepare and recommend a pour-over will as part of the overall estate plan. The pour-over will operates as a companion document to the trust and can address probate assets that remain outside the trust at death. It may also contain provisions that cannot simply be replaced by the trust, such as nominations relating to minor children.
But creating the documents is only one part of the process.
Funding matters.
Real estate must be reviewed to determine whether it should be transferred to the trust and whether there are state-specific considerations before doing so. Bank and investment accounts should be reviewed. Business interests may require assignments or amendments to company records. Beneficiary designations on retirement accounts and life insurance should be coordinated with the estate plan rather than changed automatically.
For multi-state clients, deeds deserve particular attention. A Massachusetts property and Florida property should not necessarily be treated as though they are interchangeable. Homestead rules, mortgage provisions, property-tax considerations, ownership between spouses, creditor issues, and other state-specific concerns can affect how property should be held.
Coordination also includes incapacity planning. A complete estate plan ordinarily addresses not only what happens after death but also who can make financial and health care decisions during life.
Someone who spends substantial time in more than one state should consider whether the documents are likely to be practical when dealing with financial institutions, medical providers, real estate, and other assets located in different jurisdictions.
The objective is not to accumulate as many documents as possible. It is to create one understandable structure in which the documents and assets work together.
People Who Divide Their Time Between States
Florida and Massachusetts have a particularly large population of individuals who divide their time between the two states.
Some refer to themselves casually as “snowbirds,” but from an estate-planning standpoint, the more important issue is determining where the person is actually domiciled and ensuring that the legal and financial structure is consistent with that intention.
Simply owning a Florida home does not by itself answer every domicile question. Neither does spending a certain number of days in one state automatically resolve every legal or tax issue.
A person’s overall circumstances may matter: where the primary home is located, where the person votes, where vehicles are registered, where a driver’s license is maintained, how tax returns are filed, where valuable personal property is kept, and many other facts can become relevant depending upon the issue.
For estate planning, the important point is consistency.
If someone considers Florida home but all estate documents identify Massachusetts as the residence, Massachusetts real estate remains individually titled, financial accounts use a Massachusetts address, and other records have never been updated, that inconsistency can create questions later.
The same applies to someone who has moved permanently back to Massachusetts after years in Florida.
A relocation is therefore an appropriate time to review an estate plan even when no beneficiaries have changed.
The tax difference between Florida and Massachusetts makes this especially important for some clients. Florida currently does not impose a separate Florida estate tax on estates of individuals. Massachusetts, by contrast, has a separate estate tax system and generally requires a Massachusetts estate-tax return when the gross estate plus adjusted taxable gifts exceeds the applicable $2 million filing threshold for deaths occurring on or after January 1, 2023.
That does not mean that changing a mailing address eliminates Massachusetts tax exposure or that every person with $2 million of assets will owe a particular amount of tax. It does mean that domicile and asset location can have meaningful consequences and should be reviewed as part of the overall plan.
Where Trusts Help, and Where They Do Not
Trusts can be particularly useful for multi-state families, but they are sometimes expected to accomplish things they do not actually do.
A revocable living trust can provide one structure for owning and administering assets located in several jurisdictions. If real estate is appropriately transferred to the trust during the owner’s lifetime, trust ownership may also avoid the need for a separate probate proceeding solely to transfer that property after death.
This can be especially valuable when a client owns homes in both Florida and Massachusetts or owns additional vacation or investment properties elsewhere.
A trust can also provide continuity during incapacity. The successor trustee identified in the document can potentially assume management of trust assets according to the terms of the trust without requiring each asset to be addressed separately through a probate proceeding after death.
A revocable living trust does not, however, eliminate every state-law issue.
Putting Florida homestead into a revocable trust does not mean Florida homestead law disappears. Florida’s restrictions on the devise of homestead can apply to trust dispositions as well as to property titled directly in the owner’s name. Florida’s statute expressly addresses homestead held through certain trusts for this purpose.
Similarly, a revocable living trust does not ordinarily provide creditor protection for the person who created the trust simply because assets have been retitled into it.
A trust also does not eliminate the need to consider taxes. Federal estate-tax rules still apply where applicable, and state estate-tax exposure must be evaluated independently.
Finally, a trust that is never funded may provide very little probate avoidance. If the trust agreement exists but the client’s homes, accounts, and other probate assets remain individually titled, those assets may still require administration.
For those reasons, trust planning should be viewed as part of an overall ownership and administration strategy rather than as a document that automatically fixes every multi-state concern.
What Happens If There Is No Will or Trust?
Another important question is: What happens if I die without a will in Florida or Massachusetts?
When someone dies without a valid will, state intestacy statutes generally determine who receives probate assets. The result depends on the person’s family circumstances and the law that applies.
This does not mean that the state automatically “takes everything.” It means the legislature has created a default inheritance plan for people who do not create their own.
Those default rules may or may not match what the person actually wanted.
They can be particularly problematic for blended families. Florida’s intestacy statute, for example, treats a surviving spouse differently when either spouse has descendants from another relationship. Massachusetts also changes the surviving spouse’s intestate share depending upon the decedent’s surviving parents, descendants, and whether either spouse has descendants outside the marriage.
Intestacy also does not decide every asset. Property with a valid beneficiary designation, joint survivorship ownership, or trust ownership may pass independently of the intestacy statutes.
That is why estate planning should focus first on understanding how each asset passes, rather than simply asking whether someone has a will.
Working With One Attorney Across States
For clients with multi-state concerns, one of the biggest practical benefits of coordinated representation is having someone look at the entire structure rather than viewing each property or document in isolation.
I am admitted to practice in Florida, Massachusetts, and New York, although my practice is primarily focused on Florida and Massachusetts. This allows me to work with clients whose lives and assets cross those state lines while recognizing when another jurisdiction or a specialized issue requires additional local counsel.
Multi-state representation does not mean one attorney should attempt to handle every legal issue in every jurisdiction. There are situations involving real estate, taxation, business entities, litigation, or specialized planning where coordination with accountants, financial advisors, or counsel in another state is appropriate.
The objective is to keep the client’s overall plan coordinated.
For someone with a home in Florida, a second property in Massachusetts, children living elsewhere, business interests in another jurisdiction, or estate documents prepared years ago before a move, the starting point should be the same: understand the complete picture first.
From there, the documents, ownership structure, beneficiary designations, and administration plan can be coordinated so that they work together rather than creating separate legal systems for each part of the client’s life.