The estate planning industry has become heavily trust-centric over the past two decades, and for good reason: trusts really are powerful tools for many families. But the pendulum has swung far enough that some attorneys now recommend trusts almost by default, regardless of whether the client’s situation actually calls for one.
There are plenty of situations where a well-drafted will — combined with smart beneficiary designations and maybe an enhanced life estate deed — does everything a trust would have done, at a fraction of the cost. Here are five scenarios I see regularly.
Scenario 1: The Single Retiree With a Paid-Off Home
Meet Helen, age 72. She’s widowed, lives in a home she owns outright, has a $40,000 savings account, and a $180,000 IRA. She has two adult children she wants to inherit everything equally.
A trust-based plan for Helen would cost around $3,000 in Michigan. A will-based plan: around $700. Here’s what the will-based plan looks like:
A simple will dividing everything equally between her two children. An enhanced life estate deed transferring the home automatically at death (Michigan-specific). A transfer-on-death designation on her bank account. Beneficiary designations on her IRA naming both children equally.
Total probate exposure: minimal personal property and maybe a car. Total probate avoidance: effectively complete for the major assets. Cost savings over the trust approach: about $2,300. For Helen, the trust is unnecessary.
Scenario 2: The Young Family Just Starting Out
Meet Mike and Sarah, both 34, with two young kids. They have a mortgaged home worth $325,000, combined 401(k) balances of $85,000, and $15,000 in savings. They’re planning to have another child and hoping to save more.
A trust-based plan would run them $3,500. For their situation, a will-based approach might actually be better:
Simple wills for each spouse, naming each other as primary beneficiary and the children (through a testamentary trust for minors) as backup. Guardianship nominations for the kids. Durable powers of attorney for finances and healthcare. Beneficiary designations on their 401(k)s. Joint tenancy ownership of the home.
Total cost: around $900. The testamentary trust provision in the will handles any inheritance for the minor children if both parents die. The joint tenancy handles the home on the first death. The beneficiary designations handle the retirement accounts.
For Mike and Sarah, a revocable living trust would be over-engineered for their current situation. They can revisit when they have more assets and the kids are older.
Scenario 3: The Minimalist Older Adult
Meet Dr. Wilson, 81, retired academic, no children, modest lifestyle. He has a small condo, a $90,000 investment portfolio, and a $12,000 bank account. He wants to leave everything to a handful of charities.
A trust would be complete overkill here. His will can designate the charities directly. Transfer-on-death on the bank account (to a selected charity or executor for distribution). Beneficiary designation on the investment account (to a selected charity). The condo gets handled by the will through probate.
Yes, the condo goes through probate. But in a simple, uncontested situation with clear beneficiaries, probate for a single asset in Michigan can be done for a few thousand dollars. Compared to $3,000+ for a trust he’d need to actively fund and maintain for years, the will-based approach is cleaner.
Scenario 4: The Very Small Estate
Some people simply don’t have enough assets to justify a trust. If your entire estate fits within your state’s small estate affidavit threshold (currently around $25,000 in Michigan for personal property), you may not even need probate at all — your heirs can claim assets via a simple affidavit procedure.
For someone with only a small bank account, a car, some personal belongings, and no real estate, a trust is massive overkill. A basic will and straightforward beneficiary designations cover everything needed.
Scenario 5: The Terminally Ill With Limited Time
This is a harder scenario. Sometimes people come in with a recent terminal diagnosis and only months to live. In these cases, I often recommend against establishing a new trust, because the time and effort required to properly fund a trust competes with time the person should be spending with family.
Instead: a well-drafted will, aggressive use of beneficiary designations and transfer-on-death titles for every asset that permits them, and potentially a durable power of attorney for any needed lifetime transactions. This approach gets 85% of the probate-avoidance benefit of a trust with 15% of the administrative burden.
When time is short, simplicity wins.
The Honest Framework Revisited
The trust-vs-will decision isn’t abstract. It depends on your specific family, your specific assets, and your specific goals. Before you commit to a trust-based plan costing thousands more than a will-based plan, ask these questions:
What specific benefit does the trust provide that a will-plus-beneficiary-designations wouldn’t? How much would I save in eventual probate costs versus the upfront trust cost? Am I willing and able to properly fund the trust and keep it funded? Do I have circumstances (blended family, special needs beneficiary, complex distributions) that genuinely require trust-level planning?
If the answers favor a trust, get one. If they don’t, don’t let anyone talk you into it.
Know What You’re Buying
Any time you’re evaluating the pros and cons of a trust against simpler alternatives, insist on a specific, measurable answer to the question “what problem is the trust solving that couldn’t be solved another way?” If the attorney can’t articulate that clearly, you’re probably being sold something you don’t need.
Estate planning isn’t about maximizing complexity. It’s about getting your family to the right outcome with the least friction. Sometimes that takes a sophisticated trust. Sometimes it takes a one-page will. The art is knowing the difference.
