Washington: Certification of Trust Requirements
The short answer
Washington lets a trustee give a nonbeneficiary a certification instead of the trust instrument. It must contain seven listed trust, trustor, trustee, relevant-power, revocability, cotrustee-authority, and naming or titling facts plus a no-change statement; any trustee or an attorney for the trust may authenticate it. Dispositive terms may be omitted, but the recipient may demand both targeted excerpts and any other reasonable information; good-faith reliance is enforceable, and a bad-faith full-instrument demand may produce damages including reasonable attorney fees.
Ask Ezel about your situation
This is the general rule in Washington. Ezel applies current Washington law to your specific facts and answers with citations to the statutes.
| Governing law and availability | RCW 11.98.075; general certification of trust authorized |
|---|---|
| Permitted use and recipient | Trustee may furnish to a person other than a beneficiary instead of the trust instrument (RCW 11.98.075(1)) |
| Trust identity and party contents | Must state trust existence + execution date, trustor identity, and current trustee identity + address (RCW 11.98.075(1)(a)–(c)) |
| Authority, status, and title contents | Must state relevant powers, revocability/revoker, cotrustee authority, trust name or property titling, and no-change representation (RCW 11.98.075(1)(d)–(g), (3)) |
| State-specific required contents | No taxpayer-number, governing-law, situs, or separate state-specific item beyond the listed core (RCW 11.98.075(1), (3)) |
| Signer, authentication, and acknowledgment | Any trustee or an attorney for the trust may sign or otherwise authenticate; no certification-specific oath, acknowledgment, notary, or witness rule (RCW 11.98.075(2)) |
| Dispositive terms and permitted excerpts | Dispositive terms may be omitted; recipient may demand trustee/transaction-power excerpts and any other reasonable information (RCW 11.98.075(4)–(5)) |
| Reliance, enforcement, and improper demands | No-knowledge protection + fact assumption; good-faith transaction enforceable; bad-faith full-instrument demand creates damages incl. reasonable attorney fees; judicial access preserved (RCW 11.98.075(6)–(9)) |
| Recording and real-property effect | RCW 11.98.075 states no certification-specific recording permission, requirement, or real-property effect |
Compare this rule across all 50 states + DC →
Requirements one by one
Washington requires seven fact groups and a no-change statement
Under RCW 11.98.075(1), the trustee may give a person other than a beneficiary
a certification instead of the trust instrument. It must state the trust's existence and
execution date, the trustor's identity, the current trustee's identity and address,
relevant trustee powers, revocability and any revocation-power holder, cotrustee
authority, and either the trust's name or the titling of trust property.
Subsection (3) adds the statement that no revocation, modification, or amendment
makes the representations incorrect. The section does not list a tax identification
number, governing law, or situs as a required item.
A trustee or the trust's attorney may authenticate
Section 11.98.075(2) permits any trustee or an attorney for the trust to sign or
otherwise authenticate the certification. The certification section states no separate
oath, acknowledgment, witness, or notarization form.
That signer rule is separate from subsection (1)(f), which requires the certification
to state cotrustee authority and whether all or fewer cotrustees must exercise trust
powers.
The recipient's information right is broader than excerpts alone
Section 11.98.075(4) says the certification need not contain dispositive terms.
Subsection (5) permits the recipient to require excerpts from the original instrument
and later amendments that designate the trustee and confer transaction power.
Washington then adds “or any other reasonable information.” A certification form or
summary that describes only the excerpt right leaves out that broader statutory phrase.
Reliance is protected, and bad-faith demand damages include fees
Under RCW 11.98.075(6), a person relying without knowledge that the certification
is incorrect is protected from liability and may assume its facts without inquiry.
Possession of all or part of the instrument does not alone establish knowledge of its
terms.
Subsection (7) makes a good-faith transaction enforceable against trust property as if
the certification were correct. Subsection (8) makes a court-determined bad-faith
demand for the full instrument liable for damages, including reasonable attorney
fees. Subsection (9) preserves access in a judicial proceeding concerning the trust.
The certification section states no recording effect
RCW 11.98.075 permits the certification to identify how trust property is titled, but
it does not itself authorize or require recording or assign a recorded certification any
notice, priority, conveyance, or other real-property effect. A separate deed or other
transaction instrument may have its own rules.
What trips people up
- An attorney for the trust is an authorized signer. Subsection (2) is broader than
statutes that restrict authentication to one or more trustees. - The recipient may ask for more than targeted excerpts. Subsection (5) adds
“any other reasonable information”; omitting that phrase understates the recipient's
statutory request right. - Attorney fees are express here. Subsection (8) includes reasonable attorney
fees within bad-faith-demand damages, unlike statutes that say only “damages.”
Common questions
Must the certification include a taxpayer identification number?
Not under RCW 11.98.075. A tax number is not among subsection (1)'s seven listed
fact groups, though a separate lawful transaction request may still matter.
Does possessing the trust instrument prove knowledge of an error?
No. Subsection (6) says knowledge of the trust terms may not be inferred solely
because the relying person holds all or part of the instrument.
Can the complete instrument be obtained in court?
Potentially. Subsection (9) preserves the right to obtain a copy in a judicial
proceeding concerning the trust.
Statutes and sources
- RCW 11.98.075(1)–(5) — required contents, trustee-or-attorney
authentication, no-change statement, omitted dispositive terms, excerpts, and other
reasonable information. Official Revised Code of Washington
(accessed 2026-07-31). - RCW 11.98.075(6)–(9) — knowledge-based reliance, good-faith
enforceability, bad-faith demand damages including reasonable attorney fees, and
judicial access. Official Revised Code of Washington
(accessed 2026-07-31).
Source links
Every statute quoted above, linked, with the date we checked it.
Get the answer for your situation
You just read how Washington handles this in general. Ezel applies current Washington law to your facts and answers your specific question, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.