Have been receiving many beneficiary update requests with spouse as primary and many paragraphs for contingent beneficiary. My custodian has no issue adopting the verbiage for contingent but find many 401k plans and other IRA custodians are wanting either a human or entity not a attached paragraph.
Most of these cases the intent is to create sub trusts for each child due to age disparity but should IRA stretch change to 10 years and there are no spend thrift provisions or specifics on accessibility of the IRA funds then I don't see what would be wrong with simply naming the clients Trust as contingent and assuming it's qualified see-through it to name each bene as their own Bene IRA.
If a trust names the clients 2 adult children as 50/50 bene but per trust language one child's portion is to go into a Special Needs Trust,, is this trust still considered a see-through Trust? All trust beneficiaries must be individuals to qualify as a see-through but always assumed this was more related to charities and not a human's portion going into a trust such as a Special Needs Trust or Spend Thrift Trust.