You are not testing whether the lawyer is a bitcoiner. You are testing whether they understand what kind of asset this is, and whether they will tell you honestly when they do not know something.
The single best sign is a lawyer who says "I don't know, but here is how I would find out." The worst sign is confident fluency about something they have clearly never done. Estate law rewards caution, and a lawyer who bluffs in a first meeting will bluff in a draft.
You will not get through twenty questions in a first consultation, and you should not try. Pick five or six from different sections. Section one is non-negotiable: a wrong answer there makes the remaining sections beside the point.
1. Does the lawyer understand the asset?
Four questions. These four are the ones that matter most; a wrong answer to any of them is a reason to keep looking.
If I die tonight, what does my executor actually need in order to access my Bitcoin?
They talk about the private keys, or the seed phrase, and access to the device or backup that holds them. They understand that no institution can be asked to release the funds, and that no court order can conjure the keys back into existence.
They talk about contacting the exchange, or obtaining a court order compelling release, or say the executor will "request the account be transferred". They are describing a brokerage account, not Bitcoin.
Where should my seed phrase be recorded?
They immediately say it must never appear in the will, and they are cautious about it appearing in any document that could be filed, disclosed or read by a third party. Good lawyers pause here rather than answering fast.
They suggest putting it in the will, attaching it as a schedule, sending it by email, or lodging it in their office file. This is the single most common and most catastrophic error in this field. It should end the conversation.
What is the difference between naming the Bitcoin in my will and making it accessible?
They separate the two cleanly: the will may determine who is entitled to it under the applicable succession law, though a will does not necessarily control every asset and does not override mandatory succession or matrimonial property rules where those apply, and a separate mechanism governs how the person actually obtains the keys. They see that a perfect will with no access plan produces a legally flawless loss.
They treat the two as the same problem, or assume that legal entitlement produces practical access. This is the distinction that everything else rests on.
Have you handled an estate containing self-custodied Bitcoin? What happened?
A straight yes with specifics, or a straight no with a plan: what they would research, who they would consult, whether they would bring in a specialist. Honest inexperience with a method is workable.
Vague claims of "several crypto clients" with nothing concrete, or a pivot to how they handle "digital assets" generally, meaning email accounts and photo libraries. Those are not the same problem.
2. Probate, disclosure and privacy
In many jurisdictions a grant of probate, and sometimes the will or an inventory, becomes a public or semi-public record, though what is disclosed and to whom varies widely. Find out whether they have thought about what that exposes.
In this jurisdiction, what becomes publicly visible when my estate goes through probate?
A specific answer about local rules: what gets filed, who can inspect it, whether an inventory of assets is required, and whether values appear. They know the actual local position rather than a generality.
"It's all confidential" without qualification, or visible uncertainty about whether probate filings are public where they practise. This is basic local knowledge.
If I hold a meaningful amount, does a public filing create a physical safety risk for my family, and what do you do about it?
They take the question seriously. They understand a bearer asset in a public document is a targeting problem, not paranoia, and they can name mechanisms that reduce disclosure.
They dismiss it, treat it as fantasy, or make you feel foolish for raising it. A lawyer who cannot take your threat model seriously will not design around it.
What structures could keep Bitcoin out of the probate estate entirely, and what do they cost me?
They name the mechanisms available locally, and they are honest about the trade-offs: cost, complexity, tax consequences, loss of flexibility, and the fact that some structures create new access problems.
One structure presented as the answer for everyone, with no discussion of downsides. Or a hard sell for the most expensive option before they have asked what you hold.
If Bitcoin is held inside a trust or a company, who physically holds the keys, and how does that person get them?
They immediately see that the legal wrapper does not solve custody. Ownership on paper and control of the keys are separate problems, and the second still needs designing.
They treat putting it in a trust as the end of the analysis. This is the most common sophisticated-sounding failure: a beautifully structured entity holding coins nobody can reach.
3. Execution: will this plan actually work?
Most Bitcoin estate plans fail at execution, not at drafting. These questions test whether the lawyer thinks past the signing.
How do we make sure my heirs know the Bitcoin exists, without telling them where it is while I am alive?
They separate knowledge of existence from knowledge of location, and can suggest ways to stage disclosure: a sealed letter, a third party, instructions held by the lawyer that point to something they do not hold.
They see no distinction, or their only answer is to tell everyone everything now. That may be right for some families, but it should be a considered recommendation, not the default.
What happens if my executor is not technically capable of doing this?
They raise appointing a separate technical helper, a co-executor, or written instructions detailed enough for a competent stranger to follow. They ask who your executor is and what they can actually do.
They assume the executor will "get help" without specifying from whom, or assume any competent adult can follow a recovery process. Watch someone attempt a hardware wallet recovery for the first time.
Should we test this plan while I am alive? How?
Yes, enthusiastically. They suggest a dry run with a small amount, or having the heir walk the process with a test wallet. A plan nobody has rehearsed is a hypothesis.
They have never considered testing an estate plan. Understandable for traditional assets, where the bank will still be there. Not acceptable here.
What happens if I lose capacity but do not die?
They raise powers of attorney or the local equivalent, and note that the same key access problem applies, often more urgently, because nobody has authority to act and you cannot grant it any more.
They only think about death. Incapacity is statistically more likely and legally messier, and a lawyer who has not raised it is planning for half the problem.
I use multisig. Does that change your advice?
They ask what the quorum is, who holds which key, and where the backup descriptor or wallet configuration lives. They understand that losing that configuration can be as fatal as losing a key.
They do not know what multisig is and do not ask. If you use it, this is disqualifying. If you do not, note their reaction: curiosity is a good sign, bluffing is not.
If I use a passphrase on top of my seed, how should that be handled?
They understand it is a second secret, that seed and passphrase should usually be separated, and that an heir with one and not the other has nothing. They ask whether anyone else knows it exists.
Blank incomprehension, or treating it as a password that can be reset. Nothing can be reset. If you use a passphrase and they do not grasp this, your plan will fail.
4. Tax and valuation
You are not asking them to be a tax specialist. You are asking whether they know where the line is.
How is my Bitcoin valued for estate purposes, and at what moment?
They name the local rule for valuation date and the practical problem of a volatile asset: which price source, which time, and what happens if the value moves sharply during administration.
They have never thought about which price. With a volatile asset this can be the difference between an estate that can pay its tax and one that cannot.
If the estate owes tax, where does the money come from?
They raise liquidity directly: whether coins must be sold, who has authority to sell, and how to avoid a forced sale at a bad moment. They may suggest holding other liquid assets for this purpose.
They assume the estate can simply sell without asking who holds the keys or who has the authority. Liquidity is where Bitcoin estates break in practice.
Do I need a separate tax adviser for this, and will you work with them?
A clear statement of where their competence ends, and a willingness to coordinate. Ideally they can name someone.
They claim to handle everything, or resist involving anyone else. Nobody is a specialist in estate law, crypto tax and self-custody at once.
5. The lawyer, the file, and the fee
Practical questions people forget to ask, and which turn out to matter years later.
What will you hold in your file, and who at your firm can see it?
A precise account of what they keep, how it is stored, and who has access. They should be actively reluctant to hold anything sensitive.
Casual willingness to hold key material, or no clear idea who in the firm can open the file. Your threat model now includes their filing system and every employee who touches it.
What happens to my documents if you retire, leave, or die?
A real succession arrangement: another partner, a firm policy, a professional body procedure. They have thought about continuity because estate work outlives the lawyer.
No answer. Sole practitioners in particular should have this ready. Your plan may need to survive thirty years.
What does this cost, and what would make it cost more?
A fixed fee or a clear estimate with named variables, in writing. They tell you what would push it up before you have to ask twice.
Evasion, or an hourly rate with no estimate of hours. Also: any fee quoted as a percentage of assets under the plan, which gives them an interest in your balance rather than your outcome.
If you take nothing else from this page, take these. A lawyer who suggests putting your seed phrase in your will, who believes a court order can recover self-custodied coins, or who treats a trust as the end of the access problem, will produce a plan that fails. Not might fail. Will fail, at the exact moment nobody is left to correct it.
What a good outcome looks like
You are not looking for a Bitcoin expert. Those barely exist in estate practice, and the ones who advertise loudest are often the least careful. You are looking for a competent estate lawyer who is honest about the boundary of their knowledge and willing to work at it.
The best outcome from these questions is often a lawyer who says: I understand the legal side, I do not understand the technical side, and I want to work with you or someone you trust to get that part right. That person will serve you better than one who claims to know it all.
Everything here is written to stay true. It explains how the machinery works rather than what today's numbers are, because thresholds, rates and deadlines change every year and a stale legal page is worse than no page at all. Where a current figure matters to your decision, this page tells you how to find it rather than guessing on your behalf.
General information, not legal advice. This site does not provide legal advice, and no professional or advisory relationship is created. Estate, probate and tax law differ substantially between jurisdictions and change over time. This questionnaire is designed to help you evaluate advice, not to replace it. Consult a qualified lawyer licensed where you live.