For many years, married couples meeting with estate planning counsel have asked a straightforward question: why not simply add a spouse’s name to an existing account? The typical response has been cautious. Attorneys often explained that doing so would not automatically create a tenancy by the entirety (TBE)—a specific form of joint ownership offering important legal protections. Instead, couples were usually advised to open a new account and transfer funds, a process that could feel unnecessarily burdensome.

A recent decision from the Supreme Court of Florida has significantly clarified this issue and may simplify matters for many couples.

Understanding Tenancy by the Entirety

Tenancy by the entirety is a form of ownership available only to married couples. It provides two primary advantages:

• Creditor Protection: Generally, creditors of one spouse cannot reach property held as TBE
• Right of Survivorship: Upon the death of one spouse, ownership passes automatically to the other, avoiding probate

To qualify as TBE, six legal elements—often referred to as “unities”—must traditionally be present:

• Joint possession and control
• Equal ownership interests
• Title derived from the same legal instrument
• Interests established at the same time
• Survivorship rights
• A valid marriage at the time of ownership

Historically, the “unity of time” requirement created a practical obstacle. If one spouse owned an account individually and later added the other spouse, attorneys often warned that this would not satisfy the requirement, meaning TBE status might not apply.

A Shift in Approach

This interpretation frequently led to additional steps, such as opening a new joint account and transferring funds, even when the end result was functionally similar. The distinction was largely procedural, yet it carried real consequences for asset protection.

That framework has now been refined.

The Court’s Decision

On December 11, 2025, the Supreme Court of Florida issued its ruling in Loumpos v. Bank One, N.A., addressing whether converting an individual account into a joint spousal account could still qualify for TBE protection.

The case involved a creditor attempting to collect against a wife who had an outstanding judgment prior to her marriage. Years later, her husband opened a bank account in his own name and subsequently added his wife as a joint owner, designating the account as TBE. The creditor sought access to the funds, arguing that the account did not meet the traditional requirements for TBE ownership.

The Court disagreed. It held that when an account initially held by one spouse is later converted into a joint account between spouses, it may still be treated as having been created in the names of a married couple under section 655.79 of the Florida Statutes. As a result, the account is presumed to be protected from the individual creditors of either spouse, even if the “unity of time” was not satisfied at the outset.

Important Limitations

While the ruling strengthens protections for joint spousal accounts, it is not without qualifications:

• The statutory presumption applies unless the account agreement specifies otherwise in writing
• Financial institutions’ terms should be reviewed carefully before relying on TBE status
• It remains uncertain how broadly this presumption extends beyond deposit accounts, such as to brokerage accounts or other financial instruments

Additionally, TBE protections are not absolute. Transfers made in bad faith, or with the intent to defraud creditors, may still be subject to legal challenge.

Key Takeaway

This decision underscores the strong protections available under Florida law for property held jointly by spouses. It also simplifies a long-standing procedural hurdle, allowing couples and their advisors greater flexibility when structuring joint accounts.

With proper documentation and careful attention to account terms, the presumption of tenancy by the entirety now offers clearer and more accessible protection than in the past.