A container you put property into during life so it can pass at death without a court - useful, oversold, and useless if left unfunded.
A revocable living trust is an arrangement created during life in which a person (the settlor) transfers property to a trustee to hold under written terms. In the ordinary case the settlor is also the trustee and the beneficiary during their own lifetime, so nothing about daily control changes: they buy, sell, spend and change the terms exactly as before. The document names a successor trustee who takes over on incapacity or death, and it is that provision, rather than any tax effect, that does the real work.
The reason to use one is procedural. Property titled in the trust at death is not part of the probate estate, so it is distributed by the successor trustee under the trust terms rather than by a court-supervised administration. That matters most where probate is slow or costly, where real property is owned in more than one state (which would otherwise require a separate ancillary probate in each), where privacy is valued because a probated will becomes a public record and a trust generally does not, and where a smooth handover on incapacity is wanted without a conservatorship. Alongside it, a pour-over will is normally signed to catch anything never transferred in.
The failure mode is the same one every time: the trust is signed and never funded. A trust controls only what has actually been retitled into it. A house whose deed was never changed, a brokerage account never re-registered, a rental property bought after signing - each of those passes as if the trust did not exist, and the family ends up in the probate the trust was bought to avoid, having also paid for the trust. Funding is a series of separate acts: new deeds, changed account registrations, updated beneficiary designations where appropriate, and a schedule of assets kept current.
It is also worth knowing what a revocable trust does not do, because it is marketed as if it did. It gives no income tax benefit - the income is reported by the settlor exactly as before. It gives no federal estate tax advantage by itself, since revocable trust assets remain in the taxable estate. It does not protect assets from the settlor's creditors during life, precisely because the settlor can take the property back at will. And it does not displace the substantive law: elective share rights, homestead protections and Medicaid estate recovery reach trust property in many states. Retirement accounts in particular should generally not be retitled into a trust, because doing so can trigger immediate tax consequences; those pass by beneficiary designation instead.
The useful conversation is not "should I have a trust" but "what would happen to each thing I own if I died tonight" - asked asset by asset, with the current deed and the current beneficiary designations in front of you. A trust is worth its cost most clearly where there is real property in more than one state, a strong privacy interest, a beneficiary who should not receive money outright, or a business needing continuity. If you already have one, the highest-value review is a funding audit: pull the deed for every property and the registration for every account and confirm each is actually titled as the plan assumes. Be sceptical of a trust sold at a seminar, sold as a tax or Medicaid strategy it cannot deliver, or sold as part of a package with an annuity - trust mills are a documented elder-fraud pattern and state bars and attorneys general have warned about them repeatedly.
These directory pages each list at least one currently published law firm. The list is generated when this page loads, so a page whose listings have lapsed drops out rather than becoming a dead link.