Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act
Key takeaway
The Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act is a model law that states may adopt.
In Minnesota, for example, chapter 521A governs fiduciary access to digital assets, subject to user directions, disclosure requirements and federal law, and other states differ.
The Minnesota chapter covers fiduciaries acting under wills or powers of attorney, personal representatives acting for deceased people, conservatorship proceedings, and trustees acting under trusts. It applies to a custodian if the user resides in Minnesota or resided there at death.
It excludes an employer’s digital asset used by an employee in the ordinary course of the employer’s business.
Which disclosure directions control?
In Minnesota, for example, an online tool direction overrides a contrary will, trust, power of attorney, or other record only if the tool allows modification or deletion of the direction at all times, and other states differ.
If the user gave no tool direction under that provision, or the custodian provided no tool, a will, trust, power of attorney, or other record may allow or prohibit disclosure, including communication contents.
Either statutory direction overrides a contrary terms of service provision only if that provision does not require affirmative, distinct assent separate from assent to the terms of service.
Access has limits
In Minnesota, for example, the chapter preserves the user’s and custodian’s contractual rights to access and use digital assets, and other states differ. It gives a fiduciary or designated recipient no new or expanded rights beyond the user’s rights.
User directions and federal law may modify or eliminate access. Terms of service may also modify or eliminate access if the user has provided no direction under the chapter’s user direction provision.
What if the trustee originally used the account?
In Minnesota, for example, a custodian must disclose account assets held in trust, including the trustee’s communication catalog and contents, to a trustee who is an original account user unless the court or trust provides otherwise, and other states differ.
Federal restrictions on protected communication contents remain separately applicable.
Federal protection for communication contents
Federal law prohibits public electronic communication service providers from knowingly disclosing communication contents while in electronic storage by that service, subject to statutory exceptions.
For a public remote computing service, the prohibition covers contents carried or maintained on behalf of a subscriber or customer and received electronically from that subscriber or customer. It also covers communications created by processing transmissions from that subscriber or customer.
Both categories must be carried or maintained solely to provide storage or computer processing to that subscriber or customer. The provider must lack authorization to access those contents to provide services other than storage or computer processing.
Statutory exceptions include disclosure to an addressee, intended recipient, or their agent, disclosure authorized by the federal provisions listed in Sources, and disclosure with specified lawful consent. Other statutory exceptions also exist.
The consent exception covers lawful consent from the originator, an addressee, or an intended recipient, or from the subscriber for a remote computing service.
Two related terms
Digital asset: In Minnesota, for example, this means an electronic record in which an individual has a right or interest, and other states differ. It excludes an underlying asset or liability unless that asset or liability is itself an electronic record.
Online tool: In Minnesota, for example, this is a custodian’s electronic service allowing a user to direct disclosure or nondisclosure of digital assets to a third person through an agreement distinct from the terms of service, and other states differ.
Put the plan on paper
This perspective on documenting family decisions offers a practical starting point for a conversation about digital accounts.
"But the main point is every quarter when you meet with your family or when you meet with your investment team, it should be on paper, exactly what you're trying to do and why you're trying to do that."
Common questions
Does appointment as a conservator automatically grant digital asset access?
No. In Minnesota, for example, a court may grant a conservator access to a protected person’s digital assets after an opportunity for a hearing under chapter 524, and other states differ.
A state appointment or court order alone does not establish a federal exception permitting disclosure of protected communication contents.
Can a conservator request that an account be closed?
Yes, in Minnesota, for example, a conservator with general asset-management authority may request suspension or termination for good cause by supplying a certified court order authorizing management of the protected person’s property, and other states differ.
This provision authorizes a request rather than unrestricted unilateral account control.
Sources
- Minnesota chapter 521A, statutory title and fiduciary access provisions.
- Minnesota statutory definitions.
- Minnesota scope and employer asset exclusion.
- Minnesota user directions and priority.
- Minnesota contractual rights and access limits.
- Minnesota disclosure to an original user trustee.
- Minnesota conservator access and account requests.
- Federal communication disclosure restrictions and exceptions, including disclosure authorized by sections 2517, 2511(2)(a), or 2703.