The Act delineates the following individuals as those whom it applies to. It is important to note that the Act applies to the following individuals regardless of whether their power was received or granted before, during or after the effective date of this Act:

This Act also delineates custodians as a category of individuals to whom this is applicable to. However unlike the other categories of individuals this Act only applies to custodians if the custodian resides in the State or resided in the State at the time of the user’s death.

The Act was enacted in order to modernize the weight given to online tools. Following, the North Carolina legislature has given more weight to online tools than other documents. Below are some of the noteworthy changes.

Firstly, a user may use an online tool to direct the level of disclosure of digital assets by the custodian, from limited to full disclosure. If the online tool allows the user to change directions at all times, a disclosure direction via an online tool trumps contrary direction found in traditional documents – namely  a will, trust, power of attorney, or other record. Secondly, should an online tool not be evidenced then a will, trust, power of attorney, or other record may be used to provide digital assets disclosure directions. Lastly, both an online tool and a traditional document trump any contrary provisions in a terms-of-service agreement absent an affirmative and distinct action from an assent to the terms of service.

The legislature, cognizant of the many issues that may arise for a custodian, granted several expansions along with limitations to custodians in order to ease the burden of the position.

In order to ease a custodian’s duty the legislature has given the ability for a custodian to grant limited or full access to one of the following third parties: fiduciary, designated recipient, agent of a principal, trustee that is not an original user of the account or a guardian of the ward. They have expanded on this further by delineating certain documentation requirements that must be met in order for a third party to acquire digital assets from the custodian, while simultaneously, granting discretion to the custodian to request further proof from a select pool of documents.

In addition to the expansion of discretion in granting access to digital assets also comes a limitation to which documents access must be given to if the third party meets all of the requirements. One of the most notable limitations is that a custodian need not disclose a deleted asset. The custodian even has the discretion to disclose partially or deny disclosure of digital assets if the segregation of the assets would impose an undue burden on the custodian. However, this latter ability must be affirmed by a court order.

In order to facilitate requests the legislature has set certain temporal requirements upon the process. The requirements commence once a custodian has received all of the information required in order to fulfill a request of digital assets the custodian must comply with the request. In specific, the custodian has 60 days after the receipt of the required information being provided to disclose the digital assets or terminate an account – all of it depending on the action required. However, a catch all phrase has been inserted at the end of the section to exculpate certain unintentional actions in compliance with the Act. Should a custodian and any attached personnel working for or with the custodian commit an action in good faith they are immune from liability for such acts or omissions.

A further detailed reading including minor differences that apply to third parties requesting access to digital assets and fiduciary duties, can be found here.