Bill 211 would amend Alberta’s Assured Income for the Severely Handicapped Act to exclude assets held in a discretionary trust from the asset value calculation used under section 3(3)(d). A person with a beneficial interest in such a trust would therefore not have the trust’s assets counted for that statutory determination.
The bill addresses a narrow interaction between disability-benefit eligibility and trust planning. Its effect depends on the trust meeting the new definition: distributions must depend on a trustee’s decision to exercise—or not exercise—a discretionary power.
The amendment does not itself create a trust, require distributions, or change the rest of the AISH eligibility framework.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill defines “discretionary trust” as a trust where the distribution of assets to a beneficiary depends on a trustee’s exercise or non-exercise of a discretionary power. It then directs that assets held in such a trust must be left out of the asset-value determination under section 3(3)(d) of the AISH Act.
Who It Affects
The change directly affects AISH applicants and beneficiaries who hold a beneficial interest in a qualifying discretionary trust, as well as trustees, families, estate planners, and officials administering the asset test. It does not address assets held through every type of trust or otherwise amend the Act’s broader income and eligibility rules.
Why It Matters
The bill separates a beneficiary’s potential interest in a trust from assets the beneficiary can directly access or control. That distinction could allow families to use trustee-controlled arrangements without automatically jeopardizing the beneficiary’s treatment under the specified AISH asset calculation.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The amendment operates through two linked changes. First, it adds a statutory definition of “discretionary trust.” The defining feature is control over distributions: the beneficiary does not receive trust assets automatically, because payment depends on the trustee deciding to act—or deciding not to act—under a discretionary power.
Second, the bill adds section 3.1 to the AISH Act. For the asset determination referenced in section 3(3)(d), administrators must exclude the value of assets held in a discretionary trust in which the person has a beneficial interest.
The text focuses on the location and legal structure of the assets, not on whether the person has already received a distribution.The amendment is narrower than a general trust exemption. It applies only where the arrangement fits the new definition and only to the asset calculation identified in section 3(3)(d).
It does not say that every trust interest is excluded, and it does not alter how money actually distributed to a person might be treated under other parts of the AISH framework.The bill also leaves the operational details to the existing Act and its administration. It does not set a dollar limit, impose reporting requirements, prescribe trustee powers, or establish a process for verifying whether a particular trust is genuinely discretionary.
The Act would need to be applied to determine whether a trust’s governing terms satisfy the definition.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill defines a discretionary trust by reference to a trustee’s power to decide whether trust assets will be distributed to a beneficiary.
Section 3.1 excludes qualifying trust assets from the value determination made under section 3(3)(d) of the AISH Act.
The exemption applies where the person has a beneficial interest in the discretionary trust; it does not require the person to control the trust.
The text does not establish a monetary cap, minimum trust duration, or separate eligibility threshold for excluded trust assets.
The amendment comes into force on Proclamation, leaving its effective date to a future proclamation rather than specifying a fixed date.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Identifies the Act being amended
This clause states that Bill 211 amends Alberta’s Assured Income for the Severely Handicapped Act, chapter A-45.1 of the 2006 Statutes of Alberta. It provides the legislative vehicle for the targeted changes that follow.
Defines discretionary trust
The bill adds a definition to section 1 of the AISH Act. A trust qualifies when distribution of its assets to a beneficiary depends on the trustee exercising, or failing to exercise, a discretionary power.
That wording makes trustee discretion the key dividing line. A trust that requires payment to the beneficiary, or gives the beneficiary an enforceable right to demand assets, may raise different classification questions under the amendment.
Excludes qualifying trust assets from the specified asset test
New section 3.1 provides that the value of a person’s assets for purposes of section 3(3)(d) must not include assets held in a discretionary trust in which the person has a beneficial interest. The provision addresses the valuation step directly rather than rewriting the general definition of eligibility.
For administrators and advisers, the practical issue will be documenting both the person’s beneficial interest and the trustee’s actual discretionary authority. The text does not prescribe evidentiary standards or explain how disputed trust terms should be resolved.
Sets commencement by proclamation
The amendment takes effect on Proclamation. It therefore does not attach a fixed commencement date to the statute, and the trust exclusion would not operate until the provision is proclaimed.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on this topic across all five countries.
Explore this topic in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- AISH applicants with qualifying discretionary trusts benefit because the trust’s underlying assets would not be included in the specified asset-value determination.
- Existing AISH beneficiaries whose families establish or maintain trustee-controlled trusts could retain a benefits-related planning option that does not automatically count the trust corpus against them under section 3(3)(d).
- Families and estate planners supporting people with severe disabilities gain a clearer statutory basis for separating inherited or gifted assets from the beneficiary’s directly available resources.
- Trustees may receive clearer recognition that assets they control in a genuinely discretionary arrangement are distinct from assets owned or controlled outright by the beneficiary.
Who Bears the Cost
- AISH administrators must review trust deeds and related evidence to decide whether an arrangement falls within the statutory definition and whether the person has a beneficial interest.
- Trustees and families may face additional documentation and legal-advisory costs to preserve genuine discretion and demonstrate that the trust is not merely nominally discretionary.
- Applicants with fixed-interest, mandatory-distribution, or otherwise non-qualifying trusts would not receive the new exclusion and may face a sharper distinction between their arrangements and qualifying trusts.
- The Alberta government may bear increased administrative complexity because the amendment creates a trust-specific exception without setting out a separate verification procedure.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill seeks to prevent assets that a beneficiary cannot unilaterally access from disqualifying that person under an asset test, while preserving the program’s ability to distinguish genuine trustee-controlled arrangements from trusts designed only to re-label resources the beneficiary effectively controls. A broad exclusion improves planning certainty but may invite disputes over trust design and administration; a narrow interpretation protects the integrity of the test but may deny relief to beneficiaries whose access is restricted in practice.
The bill’s central drafting choice is to protect the trust corpus, not necessarily every payment connected to the trust. Excluding assets held in the trust from the section 3(3)(d) calculation does not expressly determine how a distribution to the beneficiary should be treated under other AISH rules.
That leaves an important practical boundary for administrators, trustees, and advisers to work out under the existing framework.
The definition also creates a classification question. The amendment turns on whether distribution depends on trustee discretion, but it does not specify how much discretion is enough, how to treat trust deeds with mixed mandatory and discretionary provisions, or what evidence administrators must accept.
Because the bill has no cap or anti-avoidance rule, its reach would depend heavily on the legal terms of individual trusts and the consistency of administrative interpretation.
Finally, the amendment applies only to the asset determination in section 3(3)(d). It does not state that a trust interest is irrelevant for every AISH purpose, and it leaves commencement to proclamation.
The result is a focused safe harbour rather than a comprehensive code for disability-related trusts.
There's more to this law than the bill.
Codify Laws traces every connection across the legislative lifecycle.