The Wedding Advance: Can a Promise to Repay Save the Trustee?

Why the Other Options Are Incorrect

Option A is incorrect because a contingent interest does not prevent an advancement. The very purpose of a power of advancement is to allow capital to be given before an interest officially vests.

Option B is incorrect because while the statutory financial limits do not restrict this wide express power, B treats the exercise as a simple check-the-box exercise ("because statutory restrictions have been removed"). It misses the core legal requirement that Harriet must determine if this specific lopsided allocation constitutes a proper, justifiable exercise of her fiduciary discretion.

Option C is incorrect because Ethan and Sophie hold contingent interests and are minors (17 and 15); they do not have the legal capacity or the absolute right to block the advancement via a consent requirement.

Option D is incorrect because it focuses on a personal repayment agreement. A power of advancement is meant to be an outright transfer for a beneficiary's benefit, not a mechanism for turning the trustee into a bank that negotiates commercial loan repayments with contingent beneficiaries. Olivia's promise to repay does not automatically make the advancement a proper exercise of trust discretion.