Salt Lake City Utah 84119 asset protection lawyer

Asset Protection Attorney: What Are The Advantages Of An Asset Protection Trust or DAPT?

Asset Protection Attorney

Go Back

Information Security Policies: Foundations of Asset Protection

Information security policies, whether corporate policies, business unit policies, or regional entity policies provide the requirements for the protection of information assets. An information security policy is often based on the guidance provided by a frame work standard, such as ISO 17799/27001 or the National Institutes of Standards and Technology's (NIST) Special Publication (SP) 800 series standards. The Standards are effective in providing requirements for the "what" of protection, the measures to be used, the "who " and "when" requirements tend to be organization-specific and are assembled and agreed based on the stakeholders' needs.

Governance, the rules for governing an enterprise are addressed by security-relevant roles and responsibilities defined within the policy. Decision making is a key governance activity performed by individuals acting in roles based on delegated authority for making the decision and oversight to verify the decision was properly made and appropriately implemented. Aside from requirements for protection measures, policies carry a variety of basic concepts throughout the entire document. Accountability, isolation, deterrence, assurance, least privilege and separation of duties, prior granted access, and trust relationships are all concepts with broad application that should be consistently and appropriately applied.

Policies should ensure compliance with applicable statutory, regulatory, and contractual requirements. Auditors and corporate counsel often provide assistance to assure compliance with all requirements. Requirements to resolve stakeholder concerns may be formally or informally presented. Needs for the integrity of systems and services, the availability of assets when needed, and the confidentiality of sensitive information can vary significantly based on cultural norms and the perceptions of the stakeholders.

The criticality of the business processes supported by specific assets presents protection issues that must be recognized and resolved. Risk management requirements for the protection of especially valuable assets or assets at special risk also present important challenges. NIST advocates the categorization of assets for criticality, while asset classification for confidentiality is a long standing best practice.

Requirements for policy may arise from a contractual source or from a partner's request, the Payment Card Industry's Data Security Standard (PCI DSS) requires a policy addressing the Standard's requirements that applies to all assets within the scope of the standard. DSS requirements can be integrated into a single corporate policy but given the stringency of the requirements an enterprise may elect to segregate protection domains with separate dedicated policies so that less stringent requirements are applied to assets outside the scope of the DSS, saving resources and tailoring protection based on the lesser perceived threat/risk to the assets.

Risk assessments are an important source of policy requirements that are specific to the environment and assets to be protected. Risk mitigation measures based on an assessment of risk and the assets at risk allows managers the opportunity to weigh investment against potential damage to reach a level of risk acceptable to the decision makers.

Attacks targeting online applications and their data have become an issue of well-founded concern, policy should focus on risks in this area by specifically addressing the software development lifecycle and measures to ensure bespoke applications are sufficiently robust to withstand common attacks.

Policies should be reviewed and accepted at senior levels, ensuring the policy's authorizing authority has the stature necessary to make policy compliance mandatory. An authorization process to document and approve instances of noncompliance should also be provided. Often a compliance window is granted to allow time for the implementation of the policy by all applicable organizational entities.

Auditors often provide assurance of compliance as a result of their activities. The senior Auditor is also an important stakeholder and reviewer of policy drafts and amendments. Policies should be reviewed on an agreed schedule, often every two or three years. Changes in technology, evolution of business objectives and changes to the organization's goals and processes all act to invalidate and outdate a policy. Keeping the policy fresh and relevant is essential to providing appropriate protection to important assets and supporting mission performance.

ISO 17799/27001 and NIST SP800-53A Revision3 both provide a long list of information protection best practices. There is frequently an inclination to declare one of the documents to be the corporate standard and demand policy comply with the corporate standard. Ignoring cost issues, there are several important things wrong with this approach, first and most importantly, it ignores risk realities. Best practices are the average, where extraordinary risks exist, they are too weak and where risk is significantly below average they are too strong, wasting resources. Policy should be based on reality, not an idealized set of homogenized requirements. Arguably the correct approach is to begin with a standard and bend it to fit the shape of the enterprise. There is one exception to this rule, shops that run an absolutely standard architecture can benefit from the simplicity and straightforward nature of a standardized policy. Governance issues remain and should be dealt with quickly and cleanly as exceptions.

Security guidelines, component configuration standards, and standard operating procedures are based on and build on the information security policy. Care should be exercised that the documents are consistent with each other and are reviewed and exercised for correctness and reliability. Security training is often based on the detailed documents ultimately leading to repeatable processes and a predictable level of protection being realized.

An information security policy is a necessary first step in securing an environment and providing appropriate protection to all information assets. Building consensus around a policy is an effective approach to resolving concerns and resistance to the idea of mandated controls. Listening to and involving stakeholders while ensuring the policy reflects their issues will go a long way in gaining acceptance of the program of protection.

Go Foward

All Articles

Home

Ogden Utah 84403 asset protection living trust

Asset Protection Attorney: Learn the Ways to Safeguard Assets From Liabilities by Asset Protection

protect your property

Go Back

Asset protection is one of the primary purposes for creating a limited liability company ("LLC"). LLCs provide two types of asset protection: (1) protecting the members from the liabilities of the company (sometimes called protection from "inside liabilities") and (2) protecting the assets of the LLC from the liabilities of the members (sometimes called protection from "outside liabilities").

If an LLC owns a rental house and the tenant sues the LLC because they slipped and fell down the stairs, this is an example of an inside liability. The general rule is that the tenant can sue the LLC, but they cannot go after the assets of the members unless they can pierce the corporate veil of the LLC. Piercing the corporate veil is very difficult to do. The test for a piercing of the corporate veil may vary slightly from state to state, but generally the tenant must prove that the LLC is the alter-ego of the member, and that the member has not treated the LLC as a separate and distinct legal entity. Because the laws protecting the members from an inside liability are similar in every state, the asset protection against inside liabilities is similar regardless of where the LLC is filed.

If a member is a physician and is sued for malpractice, the creditor may attempt to go after the assets of the LLC in order to collect on the judgment. This is an example of an outside liability because a creditor of a member is seeking to get into the LLC through the member. The remedies available to a creditor of a member vary greatly from state to state. In some states, the creditor of a member has a right to foreclose on the members interest and become the owner of it. In other states, the creditor of a member is limited to a charging order. A charging order is a court order which requires the LLC to pay any distributions that otherwise would have been paid to the member directly to the creditor. A charging order is not a good remedy for a creditor because the creditor is only entitled to distributions if the LLC decides to make a distribution; a creditor cannot force a distribution to be made. Therefore, an LLC offers greater asset protection if it is governed by the laws of a jurisdiction that strictly limits the remedies of a creditor.

Most if not all states follow the "internal affairs doctrine" established by the United States Supreme Court. This doctrine says that the internal affairs of a company are governed by the laws of the state where the company is filed, not the laws where the business activities take place or where the members are located. In fact, most states have a statutory provision stating that the internal affairs of an LLC are governed by the laws of the jurisdiction where the LLC was filed. This means that if an LLC is filed in Alaska and a California resident sues another California resident who is a member of the Alaska LLC for a tort committed in California, the issue as to whether the creditor can get information or assets from the LLC is governed by the laws of Alaska and not the laws of California. In other words, the state where an LLC is filed is critical in determining the asset protection provided by the LLC from outside liabilities.

Another issue affecting the asset protection provided by an LLC is confidentiality. In some states, the members and managers of an LLC are required to be disclosed and included in the state records which are available to the public. In other states, the members and managers are not made a part of the public record. Many people feel that they have better asset protection if the identity of the members and managers are not made public.

Having studied the laws of every state in this regard, and having read many scholarly articles on the subject, it is my opinion that Alaska provides the strongest asset protection against outside liabilities because they not only limit the remedies of a creditor of a member to a charging order, but they also prohibit a creditor from obtaining a court order for inquiries, accountings or directions (see Alaska Statutes 10.50.380). Several other states expressly limit the remedies of a creditor to a charging order, which should also be sufficient to prevent a creditor of a member from collecting from an LLC.

When it comes to confidentiality, I believe that the New Mexico LLC is the best option because there is no public disclosure of members and managers and no requirement for the filing of an annual report.

Nevis is a country in the Caribbean that has the best LLC laws in the world. Nevis LLCs offer the strongest asset protection and confidentiality of any jurisdiction. Nevis LLCs can be created and maintained without excessive cost or complexity. Any business or assets can be owned by a Nevis LLC, wherever it is located. If you want the strongest asset protection available, I recommend a Nevis LLC.

If you want the best LLC within the United States, I feel that Alaska is the best option for asset protection purposes and New Mexico is the best for confidentiality of managers and members. Alaska has a convenient online filing system, but New Mexico has lower filing fees and zero annual renewal fees. In conclusion, it is important to note that the laws described in this article are apt to change from time to time. This article is provided for informational purposes and should not be used as legal advice for any specific situation. Readers are advised to seek competent legal counsel in designing and creating limited liability companies or engaging in asset protection planning.

Go Foward

All Articles

Home

Logan Cache Co. UT trust and estate attorney

Asset Protection Lawyer: The New Asset Protection Strategy in Divorce Cases

Asset Protection Lawyer

Go Back

Information Security Policies: Foundations of Asset Protection

Information security policies, whether corporate policies, business unit policies, or regional entity policies provide the requirements for the protection of information assets. An information security policy is often based on the guidance provided by a frame work standard, such as ISO 17799/27001 or the National Institutes of Standards and Technology's (NIST) Special Publication (SP) 800 series standards. The Standards are effective in providing requirements for the "what" of protection, the measures to be used, the "who " and "when" requirements tend to be organization-specific and are assembled and agreed based on the stakeholders' needs.

Governance, the rules for governing an enterprise are addressed by security-relevant roles and responsibilities defined within the policy. Decision making is a key governance activity performed by individuals acting in roles based on delegated authority for making the decision and oversight to verify the decision was properly made and appropriately implemented. Aside from requirements for protection measures, policies carry a variety of basic concepts throughout the entire document. Accountability, isolation, deterrence, assurance, least privilege and separation of duties, prior granted access, and trust relationships are all concepts with broad application that should be consistently and appropriately applied.

Policies should ensure compliance with applicable statutory, regulatory, and contractual requirements. Auditors and corporate counsel often provide assistance to assure compliance with all requirements. Requirements to resolve stakeholder concerns may be formally or informally presented. Needs for the integrity of systems and services, the availability of assets when needed, and the confidentiality of sensitive information can vary significantly based on cultural norms and the perceptions of the stakeholders.

The criticality of the business processes supported by specific assets presents protection issues that must be recognized and resolved. Risk management requirements for the protection of especially valuable assets or assets at special risk also present important challenges. NIST advocates the categorization of assets for criticality, while asset classification for confidentiality is a long standing best practice.

Requirements for policy may arise from a contractual source or from a partner's request, the Payment Card Industry's Data Security Standard (PCI DSS) requires a policy addressing the Standard's requirements that applies to all assets within the scope of the standard. DSS requirements can be integrated into a single corporate policy but given the stringency of the requirements an enterprise may elect to segregate protection domains with separate dedicated policies so that less stringent requirements are applied to assets outside the scope of the DSS, saving resources and tailoring protection based on the lesser perceived threat/risk to the assets.

Risk assessments are an important source of policy requirements that are specific to the environment and assets to be protected. Risk mitigation measures based on an assessment of risk and the assets at risk allows managers the opportunity to weigh investment against potential damage to reach a level of risk acceptable to the decision makers.

Attacks targeting online applications and their data have become an issue of well-founded concern, policy should focus on risks in this area by specifically addressing the software development lifecycle and measures to ensure bespoke applications are sufficiently robust to withstand common attacks.

Policies should be reviewed and accepted at senior levels, ensuring the policy's authorizing authority has the stature necessary to make policy compliance mandatory. An authorization process to document and approve instances of noncompliance should also be provided. Often a compliance window is granted to allow time for the implementation of the policy by all applicable organizational entities.

Auditors often provide assurance of compliance as a result of their activities. The senior Auditor is also an important stakeholder and reviewer of policy drafts and amendments. Policies should be reviewed on an agreed schedule, often every two or three years. Changes in technology, evolution of business objectives and changes to the organization's goals and processes all act to invalidate and outdate a policy. Keeping the policy fresh and relevant is essential to providing appropriate protection to important assets and supporting mission performance.

ISO 17799/27001 and NIST SP800-53A Revision3 both provide a long list of information protection best practices. There is frequently an inclination to declare one of the documents to be the corporate standard and demand policy comply with the corporate standard. Ignoring cost issues, there are several important things wrong with this approach, first and most importantly, it ignores risk realities. Best practices are the average, where extraordinary risks exist, they are too weak and where risk is significantly below average they are too strong, wasting resources. Policy should be based on reality, not an idealized set of homogenized requirements. Arguably the correct approach is to begin with a standard and bend it to fit the shape of the enterprise. There is one exception to this rule, shops that run an absolutely standard architecture can benefit from the simplicity and straightforward nature of a standardized policy. Governance issues remain and should be dealt with quickly and cleanly as exceptions.

Security guidelines, component configuration standards, and standard operating procedures are based on and build on the information security policy. Care should be exercised that the documents are consistent with each other and are reviewed and exercised for correctness and reliability. Security training is often based on the detailed documents ultimately leading to repeatable processes and a predictable level of protection being realized.

An information security policy is a necessary first step in securing an environment and providing appropriate protection to all information assets. Building consensus around a policy is an effective approach to resolving concerns and resistance to the idea of mandated controls. Listening to and involving stakeholders while ensuring the policy reflects their issues will go a long way in gaining acceptance of the program of protection.

Go Foward

All Articles

Home

Upper Avenues Utah living will lawyer

Asset Protection Lawyer - A Guide to Asset Protection

law office help

Go Back

These potential scenarios should concern any entrepreneur or investor: You get sued personally and lose; the judgment creditor (the entity that won the suit and was awarded a judgment against you) decides to go after your business and investment assets. Or you have a retail store plus several real estate investments; you get sued for something related to the store and the judgment creditor decides to attach your real estate. You can cry, "Unfair!" all day long and it won't matter if you haven't taken the appropriate asset protection steps.

An asset protection tool you need to understand is the charging order. By definition, a charging order is an order issued by a court to a judgment creditor which essentially compels an entity of which the debtor is a partner or member to direct to the creditor until the judgment is satisfied any distributions that would otherwise have been made to the debtor (from Asset Protection: Concepts & Strategies for Protecting Your Wealth by Jay Adkisson and Christopher M. Riser, McGraw-Hill, 2004).

What this means is that if you have an interest in a Charging Order Protected Entity (COPE) [entities for which creditors are limited to using charging orders as remedies in collecting debt, such as a Limited Partnership (LP), a Limited Liability Company (LLC), and certain others] and a creditor obtains a charging order, the entity is ordered to pay the creditor any money that would have gone to you until the judgment is paid in full. In most states, the creditor has no rights with respect to the ownership or management of the entity and cannot force the entity to make a distribution. The idea is to balance the rights of creditors with those of the non-debtor partners.

Charging orders do not come into play with assets such as stock in a corporation or personal property. But in an entity such as an LLC, legislators have taken steps to prevent creditors from attaching partnership or membership interests and essentially becoming partners or members themselves because such a change in ownership could disrupt the operations of the entity. Where you are not protected by state law, discuss this issue with your attorney because you may be able to create a comparable level of protection through your operating agreement.

How you are protected

As long as the creditor has the charging order, the LLC can simply not make any distributions and the creditor should not receive any money. For example, let's say a visitor to your home slipped on the sidewalk, sued you, and won. As a judgment creditor, he decides to go after all of your assets and gets a charging order against the LLC that owns your real estate investments. He typically can't collect anything until the LLC makes a distribution, and you and the other members of the LLC are perfectly within your rights to decide to not make any distributions for as long as you like. Because of this, creditors with charging orders are often willing to negotiate a settlement to get at least a portion of their money and be done with the situation.

Another issue that often prompts judgment creditors to settle charging orders quickly is the potential for tax liability. If the creditor is entitled to the distribution when it is made, he may also be obligated to pay the taxes. It's possible for the members of the LLC to issue a K-1, which is the tax form used to report a member's share of an LLC's income, potentially making the creditor liable for taxes on profits even though he hasn't received any money.

As of January 2007, there were no known cases where the IRS has held a judgment creditor holding a charging order liable for taxes--but nor are there any cases where the IRS has specifically relieved a judgment creditor of such liability. Until case law becomes definitive on the issue, creditors may be reluctant to take a chance that they could be held liable for taxes on profits they haven't received and may never receive.

The protection offered by charging orders may be circumvented in a number of ways, depending on the state in which the entity operates and your individual circumstances.

Be aware that simply forming a partnership or LLC is not going to automatically protect your assets. Charging order protected entities are some of the strongest and most acceptable asset protection tools available, but to be effective, they must be properly structured and carefully drafted according to your particular requirements and the laws of your state.

Go Foward

All Articles

Home

Sandy Utah 84094 will trust

Asset Protection Lawyer - Selecting the Jurisdiction of a LLC For Maximum Asset Protection

law office help

Go Back

To safeguard your rental assets and properties there are some simple things that you may consider.

Prepare a strong and sound lease agreement

When there is some problem with the tenants or with your property, the first and foremost thing is to produce the lease agreement in the court of laws. A vital aspect of a lease agreement is to obey the state and local laws. So your chief requirement should be an airtight lease agreement.

Purchase properties in the name of a legal entity

Always try to build a legal entity under the name of which you could purchase property. Also ensure to have a joint ownership of the property. This would help avoid problems related to suing or litigation by others. As when you own a property in your name, it will instantly show up as an asset if someone chooses to sue you and this can call for serious legal problems.

You should also restrict the number of properties that each of your legal entities own as all the other undertaken properties would be susceptible, if even one among them is litigated. Hire reputable providers for proper asset protection services, when you find self-management difficult.

Provide appropriate legal disclosures to the tenants

You must give the tenants the most authentic and legal real estate disclosures while they are signing the agreement. An agreement with loop holes can make your tenants are successful in suing you if they wish to. Remember to check all your local landlord and real estate laws before creating the agreement and if required contact a local real estate lawyer specializing in landlord-tenant law.

Decent property management and tenant screening

Screening tenants is a real tactful and hard job, requires keen investigating knowledge and proper assessment, understanding for scrutinizing both individual and business tenants. The main purpose of this screening is to evaluate the probability of the tenant in fulfilling the terms of the rental agreement and also in taking care of the rental property in question.

Property management is an equally important aspect of property protection. It's always true that a good landlord who responds to his tenants when they call for a problem or concern about their legal assets, are less likely to be sued. So keeping a good rapport with your tenant is very essential. You can even hire property managers instead to help you manage and protect your rental properties in an efficient way.

All of these can prove to be highly time consuming and complex for most of you, so opting for some asset protection services could help greatly in bringing down all the hard work and tension related to managing your rental property.

Go Foward

All Articles

Home

Sanpete County Utah trust to protect assets from creditors

Asset Protection Attorney: Information Security Policies: Foundations of Asset Protection

law office help

Go Back

An asset protection trust offers a perfect solution for holding certain assets (life insurance policies, cash investments, real property, etc) for a specific beneficiary, which can be a group or a single person. There are several different advantages to transferring the personal belongings into a trust. Here are several of the key advantages that might be worth considering:

Protection from fees related to care homes - If an elderly relative needs to go into a long-term residential home, it is often the case that the associated costs will need to be personally met. A common way for the local authorities to receive funds for the long-term care is to essentially inherit the assets, with your main asset relating to the home.

By taking the action at an early stage that is well ahead of requiring any potential care assistant, you are able to protect the home and make certain the full benefit of the property is passed on to the chosen family members.

A highly effective solution for solving matters relating to inheritance - An asset protection trust can make it easier to transfer the belongings in the event of death (due to no transfer of ownership), and makes sure the assets are given to the persons identified at the time of writing the will. If the family circumstances are quiet involved where step-children might feature or where a marriage has broken down, you will likely find that using a trust can make the process go that much smoothly.

Helps to protect the inheritance from creditors - In a situation where a beneficiary of a Will is expensive financial difficulties with debts, any money that is automatically transfer via the information given in a Will could be seized from them by the creditors seeking to recover outstanding debts. But, since any assets transferred to a trust will remain part of the trust even after death, they aren't collectible by the creditors and will remain the full property of the beneficiaries.

Making certain those in need are given the right help - A further quality aspect to relying on the asset protection trust companies is to help those beneficiaries that might not be able to manage on their own. Whether this might relate to someone who often makes poor decisions or physically impaired, a trust is able to give specific guidance on how the benefit is passed to an individual to make certain they are cared for and provided long-term security.

Go Foward

All Articles

Home

Provo Utah Co. UT asset security company

Asset Protection Lawyer - Asset Protection - Protecting Yourself in a Divorce

Asset Protection Attorney

Go Back

These potential scenarios should concern any entrepreneur or investor: You get sued personally and lose; the judgment creditor (the entity that won the suit and was awarded a judgment against you) decides to go after your business and investment assets. Or you have a retail store plus several real estate investments; you get sued for something related to the store and the judgment creditor decides to attach your real estate. You can cry, "Unfair!" all day long and it won't matter if you haven't taken the appropriate asset protection steps.

An asset protection tool you need to understand is the charging order. By definition, a charging order is an order issued by a court to a judgment creditor which essentially compels an entity of which the debtor is a partner or member to direct to the creditor until the judgment is satisfied any distributions that would otherwise have been made to the debtor (from Asset Protection: Concepts & Strategies for Protecting Your Wealth by Jay Adkisson and Christopher M. Riser, McGraw-Hill, 2004).

What this means is that if you have an interest in a Charging Order Protected Entity (COPE) [entities for which creditors are limited to using charging orders as remedies in collecting debt, such as a Limited Partnership (LP), a Limited Liability Company (LLC), and certain others] and a creditor obtains a charging order, the entity is ordered to pay the creditor any money that would have gone to you until the judgment is paid in full. In most states, the creditor has no rights with respect to the ownership or management of the entity and cannot force the entity to make a distribution. The idea is to balance the rights of creditors with those of the non-debtor partners.

Charging orders do not come into play with assets such as stock in a corporation or personal property. But in an entity such as an LLC, legislators have taken steps to prevent creditors from attaching partnership or membership interests and essentially becoming partners or members themselves because such a change in ownership could disrupt the operations of the entity. Where you are not protected by state law, discuss this issue with your attorney because you may be able to create a comparable level of protection through your operating agreement.

How you are protected

As long as the creditor has the charging order, the LLC can simply not make any distributions and the creditor should not receive any money. For example, let's say a visitor to your home slipped on the sidewalk, sued you, and won. As a judgment creditor, he decides to go after all of your assets and gets a charging order against the LLC that owns your real estate investments. He typically can't collect anything until the LLC makes a distribution, and you and the other members of the LLC are perfectly within your rights to decide to not make any distributions for as long as you like. Because of this, creditors with charging orders are often willing to negotiate a settlement to get at least a portion of their money and be done with the situation.

Another issue that often prompts judgment creditors to settle charging orders quickly is the potential for tax liability. If the creditor is entitled to the distribution when it is made, he may also be obligated to pay the taxes. It's possible for the members of the LLC to issue a K-1, which is the tax form used to report a member's share of an LLC's income, potentially making the creditor liable for taxes on profits even though he hasn't received any money.

As of January 2007, there were no known cases where the IRS has held a judgment creditor holding a charging order liable for taxes--but nor are there any cases where the IRS has specifically relieved a judgment creditor of such liability. Until case law becomes definitive on the issue, creditors may be reluctant to take a chance that they could be held liable for taxes on profits they haven't received and may never receive.

The protection offered by charging orders may be circumvented in a number of ways, depending on the state in which the entity operates and your individual circumstances.

Be aware that simply forming a partnership or LLC is not going to automatically protect your assets. Charging order protected entities are some of the strongest and most acceptable asset protection tools available, but to be effective, they must be properly structured and carefully drafted according to your particular requirements and the laws of your state.

Go Foward

All Articles

Home

Redmond Place Draper Utah medicaid asset protection

Asset Protection Attorney: Learn the Ways to Safeguard Assets From Liabilities by Asset Protection

Asset Protection Lawyer

Go Back

Information Security Policies: Foundations of Asset Protection

Information security policies, whether corporate policies, business unit policies, or regional entity policies provide the requirements for the protection of information assets. An information security policy is often based on the guidance provided by a frame work standard, such as ISO 17799/27001 or the National Institutes of Standards and Technology's (NIST) Special Publication (SP) 800 series standards. The Standards are effective in providing requirements for the "what" of protection, the measures to be used, the "who " and "when" requirements tend to be organization-specific and are assembled and agreed based on the stakeholders' needs.

Governance, the rules for governing an enterprise are addressed by security-relevant roles and responsibilities defined within the policy. Decision making is a key governance activity performed by individuals acting in roles based on delegated authority for making the decision and oversight to verify the decision was properly made and appropriately implemented. Aside from requirements for protection measures, policies carry a variety of basic concepts throughout the entire document. Accountability, isolation, deterrence, assurance, least privilege and separation of duties, prior granted access, and trust relationships are all concepts with broad application that should be consistently and appropriately applied.

Policies should ensure compliance with applicable statutory, regulatory, and contractual requirements. Auditors and corporate counsel often provide assistance to assure compliance with all requirements. Requirements to resolve stakeholder concerns may be formally or informally presented. Needs for the integrity of systems and services, the availability of assets when needed, and the confidentiality of sensitive information can vary significantly based on cultural norms and the perceptions of the stakeholders.

The criticality of the business processes supported by specific assets presents protection issues that must be recognized and resolved. Risk management requirements for the protection of especially valuable assets or assets at special risk also present important challenges. NIST advocates the categorization of assets for criticality, while asset classification for confidentiality is a long standing best practice.

Requirements for policy may arise from a contractual source or from a partner's request, the Payment Card Industry's Data Security Standard (PCI DSS) requires a policy addressing the Standard's requirements that applies to all assets within the scope of the standard. DSS requirements can be integrated into a single corporate policy but given the stringency of the requirements an enterprise may elect to segregate protection domains with separate dedicated policies so that less stringent requirements are applied to assets outside the scope of the DSS, saving resources and tailoring protection based on the lesser perceived threat/risk to the assets.

Risk assessments are an important source of policy requirements that are specific to the environment and assets to be protected. Risk mitigation measures based on an assessment of risk and the assets at risk allows managers the opportunity to weigh investment against potential damage to reach a level of risk acceptable to the decision makers.

Attacks targeting online applications and their data have become an issue of well-founded concern, policy should focus on risks in this area by specifically addressing the software development lifecycle and measures to ensure bespoke applications are sufficiently robust to withstand common attacks.

Policies should be reviewed and accepted at senior levels, ensuring the policy's authorizing authority has the stature necessary to make policy compliance mandatory. An authorization process to document and approve instances of noncompliance should also be provided. Often a compliance window is granted to allow time for the implementation of the policy by all applicable organizational entities.

Auditors often provide assurance of compliance as a result of their activities. The senior Auditor is also an important stakeholder and reviewer of policy drafts and amendments. Policies should be reviewed on an agreed schedule, often every two or three years. Changes in technology, evolution of business objectives and changes to the organization's goals and processes all act to invalidate and outdate a policy. Keeping the policy fresh and relevant is essential to providing appropriate protection to important assets and supporting mission performance.

ISO 17799/27001 and NIST SP800-53A Revision3 both provide a long list of information protection best practices. There is frequently an inclination to declare one of the documents to be the corporate standard and demand policy comply with the corporate standard. Ignoring cost issues, there are several important things wrong with this approach, first and most importantly, it ignores risk realities. Best practices are the average, where extraordinary risks exist, they are too weak and where risk is significantly below average they are too strong, wasting resources. Policy should be based on reality, not an idealized set of homogenized requirements. Arguably the correct approach is to begin with a standard and bend it to fit the shape of the enterprise. There is one exception to this rule, shops that run an absolutely standard architecture can benefit from the simplicity and straightforward nature of a standardized policy. Governance issues remain and should be dealt with quickly and cleanly as exceptions.

Security guidelines, component configuration standards, and standard operating procedures are based on and build on the information security policy. Care should be exercised that the documents are consistent with each other and are reviewed and exercised for correctness and reliability. Security training is often based on the detailed documents ultimately leading to repeatable processes and a predictable level of protection being realized.

An information security policy is a necessary first step in securing an environment and providing appropriate protection to all information assets. Building consensus around a policy is an effective approach to resolving concerns and resistance to the idea of mandated controls. Listening to and involving stakeholders while ensuring the policy reflects their issues will go a long way in gaining acceptance of the program of protection.

Go Foward

All Articles

Home

Salt Lake City Utah 84106 trust law

Asset Protection Lawyer - Selecting the Jurisdiction of a LLC For Maximum Asset Protection

legal help

Go Back

Asset protection systems refer to the various strategies available for protecting your valuables from lawsuits and creditor-collection attempts. This sort of protection is usually adopted by most businesses and individuals. Some simple steps can help protect most of your assets without incurring much expense or trouble.

In fairly safe areas in which crime is not a major problem, a basic system designed for asset protection may be enough. Everyone will certainly want to protect his home, since a house is considered to be one's biggest and most expensive asset. There are three ways one can do this, which include physical protection, corporate protection, and insurance protection.

A physical protection system refers to what you can change in the property structure to protect it. The first point to remember is that you never buy a home in areas of high crime or natural disasters such as earthquakes or landslides. Then, consider installing security systems, burglar alarms, and fences. Home security systems are designed to help prevent theft or damage of your valuables while you are away from home.

Corporate protection is offered through limited liability companies, corporations, and trusts. Having your property in this entity provides legal security and possible tax breaks. The benefits of this protection vary according to your location, so it is important to look into the type of corporate protection while you are thinking about purchasing properties.

A third protection system, which is simple to do, is the utilization of the inherent asset protection of an insurance policy. Many insurance companies and banks provide you good rates for insurance on an investment property. An insurer is always ready to pay a specified amount of money to or for you if a specific incident occurs. The incident might be your falling sick, someone damaging your assets, or a natural disaster.

Go Foward

All Articles

Home

Provo Utah 84604 ilit

Asset Protection Attorney: What Are The Advantages Of An Asset Protection Trust or DAPT?

protect from divorce

Go Back

"Asset protection" has long been a strategy in divorce cases across the United States. The term "asset protection" refers to the use of a legal strategy in order to hide or shield assets from the Courts. Bitcoins, the relatively new internet currency, will most likely become the next frontier of asset protection.

In divorce cases, asset protection can take many forms. Sophisticated asset protection techniques involve transferring money to an overseas account, the formation of legal entities (trusts, corporations, limited liability companies) and other methods.

The most unsophisticated and simple form of asset protection, and perhaps the most common in divorce cases, is simply holding money in the form of cash (i.e., inside a home safe or in a bank safety deposit box). In this way, a person that is in the process of divorce believes that he can "protect" the cash from the divorce process. The divorcing spouse might keep the existence of the cash secret from his spouse, divorce lawyer and Court, in order to avoid being ordered to share the cash with his spouse. This strategy may or may not be successful, but it is surely not legal because it requires that the person misrepresent his assets to his spouse and to the Court.

A sophisticated divorce lawyer will know how to uncover hidden assets of this kind through the examination of financial records and other means of legal discovery. Bitcoin, however, has the potential to replace the hiding of cash as the most common form of asset protection in divorce cases. Given the structure of the bitcoin system and most divorce lawyers ignorance regarding bitcoins, it could become a significantly more successful method than hiding cash.

Bitcoin is the digital currency that was created in 2009 by the anonymous developer known the by pseudonym as Satoshi Nakamoto. It is a currency that exists only in digital form. All bitcoins and transactions are "registered" on the bitcoin block chain that is updated by bitcoin users rather than a centralized authority. The transactions, however, do not include names but rather the digital identification of each bitcoin. Bitcoin owners keep their bitcoins in a bitcoin wallet. The wallet is not necessarily a physical wallet, but rather various methods for storing the digital identification of the bitcoin. The wallet might be kept on a computer, the server of a bitcoin wallet website, or even a piece of paper.

While is theoretically possible to trace the transfer of a bitcoin by examining the block chain, one will only discover the public identification key of the bitcoin rather than the name of the owner. If the wallet is kept on a person's computer or on a website (where a party to a divorce registered his name) it is possible to discovery the existence of the bitcoins. However, wallets do not have to be associated with a name. Furthermore, if a person uses a "brainwallet" tracing a bitcoin to a specific person becomes almost impossible through any conventional method. A brainwallet is the use of a memorized passphrase in order to store a bitcoin.

The methods for discovering hidden cash will be the first approach of any divorce lawyer for discovering a bitcoin asset protection plan. Unfortunately many, if not most, divorce lawyers and judges are unfamiliar with bitcoins and the fact that bitcoins can be used to hide assets. A divorce lawyer who doesn't understand bitcoins cannot possibly be expected to uncover hidden bitcoin assets. If you have any suspicion that your spouse might be hiding assets, make sure your lawyer understands the bitcoin system and how to discover hidden bitcoin assets.

Go Foward

All Articles

Home