Who, theoretically would want a "revocable trust"?

Who, theoretically would want a "revocable trust"?

I can identify two types of clients for whom a revokable living trust would be the appropriate vehicle for their estate plan. The first would be a person who wishes to avoid probate altogether. And the more property that the person has, the higher the probate cost because everything is a function of how much the estate is worth, most notably the compensation to the personal representative and the attorneys. So as a general matter there are many clients who would rather pay up front the cost of establishing a revokable living trust and funding that trust then having their estate, later on, pay the higher costs of probate. The second type of individual for whom a revokable living trust is additionally valuable is anyone who owns out of state real property. This is not uncommon in this day and age. The fact of the matter is that if a California resident client owns property out of state, that property will be subject to local probate settlement with all of the attendant costs. If that property instead is in a California living trust and, to my understanding and in my experience, there is no U.S. state, no U.S. jurisdiction that does not accept that form of title, the client can avoid multiple probates.