Bitcoin Inheritance Behavior After Wallet Migration
Inheritance Drift After Wallet Migration
This memo is published by CustodyStress, an independent Bitcoin custody stress test that produces reference documents for individuals, families, and professionals.
What Wallet Migration Means
A Bitcoin holder changes wallets. The holder moves Bitcoin from one place to another. The holder may do this multiple times over the years. Each migration changes where Bitcoin lives. Inheritance materials may not keep up with these changes.
This memo describes how bitcoin wallet migration inheritance scenarios differ from static custody scenarios. It examines what happens when wallet changes occur but inheritance preparation does not update. It treats migration as an ongoing lifecycle event that affects inheritance readiness.
The memo applies when a wallet migration has occurred and inheritance materials still reflect an earlier custody state. It models behavior when documents, instructions, or assumptions point to wallets that are no longer current. It remains descriptive of observed patterns without providing guidance.
What Wallet Migration Means
Wallet migration means moving Bitcoin from one wallet to another. The holder may change hardware wallets. The holder may switch software. The holder may move from exchange to self-custody. The holder may upgrade from single-sig to multisig. Each is a form of migration.
Migration is common over time. Holders do not keep the same wallet forever. Technology changes. Preferences change. Security understanding changes. The holder adapts by migrating to new wallets. This is normal custody behavior.
Migration creates a break between old and new. The old wallet held Bitcoin. Now it does not. The new wallet holds Bitcoin. The old wallet still exists but is empty or abandoned. The break separates what was from what is.
Bitcoin Wallet Migration Inheritance: The Drift Problem
Bitcoin wallet migration inheritance involves a drift problem. The holder migrates. Inheritance materials do not migrate. A gap opens between what the materials say and what is actually true.
Wallet migrations often occur without corresponding inheritance updates. The holder focuses on the technical migration. Move the Bitcoin. Secure the new wallet. Confirm the transfer. The holder completes the custody task. The holder does not complete the inheritance task.
Inheritance materials decay in place. The letter to heirs mentions the old wallet. The seed phrase backup is for the old wallet. The instructions describe the old wallet. The materials sit unchanged while the custody system changes around them.
Drift accumulates over time. One migration creates one gap. Multiple migrations create multiple gaps. Years of custody evolution may separate current reality from documented reality. The drift grows without being noticed.
Bitcoin Wallet Migration Estate: Outdated References
Bitcoin wallet migration estate scenarios frequently show heirs relying on outdated wallet references. The profile frequently shows heirs relying on outdated wallet references. The heir finds documentation. The heir follows it. The heir reaches a dead end.
Outdated references point to empty wallets. The heir restores a seed phrase. The heir sees a wallet with zero balance. The heir does not understand. The Bitcoin was here. Where did it go? The heir does not know a migration happened.
Outdated references may point to closed accounts. The heir has exchange login credentials. The account was closed years ago. The holder withdrew everything and migrated to self-custody. The heir cannot access what no longer exists.
Outdated references create confusion rather than access. The heir has information. The information is obsolete. The heir cannot tell the difference between wrong information and right information for an old system. Obsolete materials look the same as current materials.
Wallet Change Bitcoin Inheritance: Continuity Illusion
Wallet change bitcoin inheritance reveals a continuity illusion. Apparent continuity hides structural breaks between old and new wallets. The heir assumes Bitcoin custody is stable. The heir does not know the system has changed multiple times.
The holder experienced continuity. The holder moved Bitcoin from wallet A to wallet B. The holder's experience was seamless. The holder still owns the same Bitcoin. The holder sees continuity because they made the changes.
The heir experiences discontinuity. The heir has materials from wallet A. The Bitcoin is in wallet B. The heir's experience is a broken path. The heir sees discontinuity because they lack the migration history.
The illusion persists because the holder sees their own continuity. The holder believes things are in order. The holder does not see that their continuity does not transfer to heirs. The holder's view and the heir's view are completely different.
Bitcoin Custody Migration Risk: Mismatched Assumptions
Bitcoin custody migration risk includes mismatched assumptions about where Bitcoin lives. Recovery in the scenario becomes constrained by mismatched assumptions about where Bitcoin lives. The heir assumes one thing. Reality is another thing.
The heir may assume Bitcoin is on an exchange. The holder migrated to self-custody years ago. The heir contacts the exchange. The exchange has no Bitcoin. The heir is looking in the wrong place.
The heir may assume Bitcoin is in a single-sig wallet. The holder upgraded to multisig. The heir restores one seed phrase. The heir cannot move the Bitcoin. The heir does not know other keys are required.
Mismatched assumptions delay recovery. The heir pursues wrong paths before finding right paths. Time passes. Effort is wasted. The heir must unlearn false assumptions before learning true conditions.
Failure Dynamics: Reference Decay
Documents point to wallets that no longer hold funds. Reference decay describes this pattern. The documents were accurate when created. Migration made them inaccurate. The documents did not update themselves.
Reference decay is invisible to the holder. The holder knows where Bitcoin is. The holder does not need the old documents. The holder does not notice that the documents are wrong because the holder does not use them.
Reference decay is discovered by heirs. The heir uses the documents. The heir follows references. The heir reaches wallets with no Bitcoin. The heir discovers the decay when it matters most.
Each migration creates new decay. The holder migrates. The old references decay. The holder may create new references for the new wallet. The holder may not. Either way, old references remain decayed.
Failure Dynamics: Access Breakage
Credentials exist but no longer unlock the active wallet. Access breakage describes credentials that worked for old wallets but not for new ones.
The heir has a seed phrase. The seed phrase was for wallet A. The Bitcoin is in wallet B with a different seed phrase. The heir has valid credentials. The credentials access nothing of value.
The heir has a password. The password was for old software. The holder now uses different software with a different password. The heir has a valid password. The password opens nothing useful.
Access breakage looks like access failure. The heir may think they are doing something wrong. The heir may think the credentials are incorrect. The heir may not realize the credentials are correct but obsolete. The breakage mimics other problems.
Failure Dynamics: Migration Opacity
Successors cannot reconstruct the migration path. Migration opacity describes the heir's inability to trace how Bitcoin moved from place to place over time.
The holder knows the migration history. Exchange to hardware wallet A. Hardware wallet A to hardware wallet B. Hardware wallet B to multisig. The holder lived this history. The holder can trace every step.
The heir does not know the migration history. The heir finds materials from different points in time. The heir cannot connect them. The heir cannot determine which is current. The heir cannot reconstruct how the holder's custody evolved.
Migration opacity prevents systematic recovery. The heir cannot work backward from current state because the heir does not know current state. The heir cannot work forward from old documents because the heir does not know what changes followed. The heir is lost in the middle.
Inheritance After Wallet Migration: Split Recovery
Inheritance after wallet migration may involve split recovery paths. Some Bitcoin moved, some left behind, creating split recovery paths. Partial migration creates partial inheritance state.
The holder may not have moved all Bitcoin. The holder migrated most Bitcoin to a new wallet. The holder left some Bitcoin in the old wallet. Reasons vary. The result is Bitcoin in multiple places.
The heir may recover one portion but not another. The heir has materials for the old wallet. The heir recovers Bitcoin there. The heir does not know about the new wallet. The heir misses the larger portion.
Split recovery is worse than single-path recovery. The heir must find and execute multiple recovery paths. Each path has its own requirements. Partial success may look like complete success, causing the heir to stop searching.
Failure Dynamics: Knowledge Loss
Migration rationale exists only in the holder's memory. The holder knows why each migration happened. Security concerns. Better features. Changed circumstances. The reasons made sense at the time.
Reasons are not recorded. The holder does not write down why they migrated. The holder does not document the decision process. The reasons live in memory only. When the holder dies, the reasons die too.
Lost rationale creates confusion for heirs. The heir finds evidence of multiple wallets. The heir does not know which matters. The heir does not know why changes were made. Without rationale, the heir cannot prioritize or interpret what they find.
Knowledge loss compounds with each migration. Each migration adds history the heir will not know. Each migration adds context the heir will not have. The more migrations, the more knowledge exists only in the holder's mind.
Observed Pattern: Migration Without Inheritance Update
The holder migrates custody without updating inheritance preparation. The migration is complete. The inheritance preparation is obsolete. The holder does not connect these two facts.
Migration and inheritance feel like separate domains. The holder thinks about migration as a custody task. The holder thinks about inheritance as an estate planning task. The holder does not see migration as an inheritance event. The connection is missed.
Time between migration and death allows drift to persist. The holder migrates. Years pass. The holder does not revisit inheritance materials. The drift remains unaddressed until the holder dies. Then it becomes permanent.
What Migration Does Not Change
Migration does not change Bitcoin ownership. The holder still owns the Bitcoin after migration. The Bitcoin moved addresses but not owners. Legal ownership persists through technical changes.
Migration does not change inheritance rights. Heirs still inherit. Legal entitlement persists. The heir has the right to the Bitcoin regardless of which wallet holds it. Migration changes access paths, not legal standing.
Migration does not erase old wallet information. Old seed phrases still restore old wallets. Old wallets still exist on the blockchain. They are just empty. The information persists even when the Bitcoin does not.
What Does Not Change
This memo does not evaluate migration decisions. Different holders migrate for different reasons. Different migration paths suit different circumstances. This page examines inheritance effects without assessing migration choices.
This memo does not provide guidance on updating inheritance materials after migration. It does not describe what holders might do. It does not address documentation practices. Such guidance would be prescriptive and outside the memo's scope.
This memo does not promise that any approach prevents inheritance drift. Drift occurs when custody changes and inheritance does not. The memo describes the pattern without guaranteeing any prevention method.
This memo applies to any migration type. Exchange to self-custody. Single-sig to multisig. One hardware wallet to another. The inheritance effects are similar regardless of migration direction.
Summary
This analysis addresses how bitcoin wallet migration inheritance scenarios differ from static custody. Bitcoin wallet migration estate outcomes depend on whether inheritance materials reflect current wallet state. Wallet change bitcoin inheritance reveals a continuity illusion where the holder sees seamless transitions but heirs encounter broken paths.
Bitcoin custody migration risk includes mismatched assumptions that constrain recovery. Failure dynamics include reference decay, access breakage, migration opacity, and knowledge loss. Inheritance after wallet migration may create split recovery paths when Bitcoin exists in multiple places.
Migration often occurs without inheritance update, allowing drift between custody reality and documented state. The drift persists until death makes it permanent.
This memo examines modeled inheritance behavior after wallet migration. It remains descriptive, scenario-bound, and non-prescriptive. Outcomes depend on whether inheritance materials align with the wallet that actually holds Bitcoin at the time of death.
System Context
Examining Bitcoin Custody Under Stress
Bitcoin for Beginners Inheritance
Custodial vs Non-Custodial Bitcoin and Survivability
For anyone who holds Bitcoin — on an exchange, in a wallet, through a service, or in self-custody — and wants to know what happens to it if something happens to them.
Start Bitcoin Custody Stress Test$179 · 12-month access · Unlimited assessments
A structured, scenario-based diagnostic that produces reference documents for your spouse, executor, or attorney — no accounts connected, no keys shared.
Sample what the assessment produces