This chapter reviews the sophistication of the trust mechanism as compared to the new two-pronged adult guardianship system (AGS) employed in Taiwan. It compares the AGS’s effectiveness in showing greater respect for the exercise of personal residual abilities to its inadequacies in protecting the interests of a ward and in respecting a ward’s intent. It looks into the legal basis for the application of the trust mechanism and explores the reasons for the limited use of trust in the community and the issues pertaining to the law and regulations to the application of trusts in the AGS, including the selection of trustees, the selection of trust supervisors and the termination of trust deeds. It is argued that the statutory mechanism utilised in the AGS is limited and suggests that a shift from voluntary to mandatory trusts in the AGS and the use of voluntary guardianship system would better combine the trust system with the AGS in Taiwan to safeguard the financial security of disabled persons and elderly.

This chapter reviews legal instruments and avenues available for planning support for people with cognitive impairments in Australia, including adult guardianship, durable powers of attorney, representative payee and nominee appointments, and special needs disability trusts; the associated public institutions such as guardianship tribunals, office of the public advocate, and public trustees; and their interaction with service delivery programs such as the National Disability Insurance Scheme and social security. It is argued that the configuration of planning instruments, and the timing of their introduction, reflects adaption to the architecture of its welfare state, including its somewhat unique combination of extensive access to tightly means-tested income support (and reforms to overcome tax minimisation or avoidance), the absence of any expectation of family support, and acceptance of state responsibility for funding of services for disabled people least able to care for themselves.