The average personal home is absolutely not placed in a trust. It can be but moving your residence into a trust for estate planning purposes is not a common thing.
It depends on the state. california is known for expensive probate and has a lot of turnkey trust attorneys with strong marketting. I still don't know that 'the average personal home' is in a trust there, but there are lots of 'average personal homes' held in trust, not just big fancy houses.
OTOH, California recently added a transfer on death deed that may provide a simpler way to avoid probate on homes, which may reduce the number of trusts formed just for that.
A lot of people leave California and still think they need a trust in other states, so trusts in other states are growing in numbers as well.
My parents did it on advice of their financial advisor. Is it common, probably not, most people don't have a financial advisor but setting up a revokable trust as part of an estate plan is not something that only the ultra-wealthy can do. It can make a lot of sense if you have any postive net worth to pass along to heirs. A lot of people don't, and if you are going to "die broke" (by intent or by happenstance) there's no point.
I did not intend to imply write average personal home is placed in a trust.
>It’s why you see even average personal homes placed in trusts.
This statement meant to convey that people with average levels of wealth, such that tax liability is low enough such that tax avoidance is not necessary, can also benefit from spending a couple thousand dollars with an estate lawyer.
Technically, their heirs benefit because they don’t need to deal with probate court.
I know plenty of average person homes placed into irrevocable trusts for avoiding the medicaid seizure by parents doing so many years ahead of time as they get old.
