South Dakota Co-Executors: Fee Split?

Q: Do South Dakota co-personal representatives each get their own tiered schedule?

No. SDCL 29A-3-719(c) computes commissions on the personal property accounted for in the estate, not per person serving, so the schedule doesn't multiply by the number of co-personal representatives.

Q: Who decides how the South Dakota default commission is divided among co-personal representatives?

The statute doesn't specify a split; the circuit court would need to allocate the single computed amount based on each co-personal representative's actual involvement, since no default division formula exists.

Q: Does the reasonable-compensation standard in subsection (a) apply per co-personal representative in South Dakota?

Logically yes - factors like time and labor, preclusion of other employment, and the person's experience and reputation are inherently about the individual performing the work, not the group as a whole.

Q: Does the separate real-property compensation get divided among South Dakota co-personal representatives too?

It would follow the same logic - the court fixes a just and reasonable amount for the real property work performed, which would need to be allocated among co-personal representatives based on who actually handled it.

Q: Do South Dakota co-personal representatives need a written agreement on how to split duties?

Not required by statute, but a clear written understanding of who handles which tasks can help support each person's share if the division is later questioned.

Quick answer: No, South Dakota co-personal representatives don't each collect a separate tiered commission with a combined total that grows by headcount. SDCL § 29A-3-719(c) computes the default commission on the estate's personal property, not on a per-person basis — so the single computed amount applies to the administration as a whole, however many people serve. Estimate the underlying default schedule first with the South Dakota executor fee calculator.

One computation, because the base is the estate, not the person

SDCL § 29A-3-719(c): the schedule runs "upon the amount of personal property accounted for by the personal representative" — the base is the estate's personal property, computed once, not a separate base for each co-personal representative. Unlike states with an explicit numbered subsection for multiple representatives, South Dakota's statute says nothing specifically about splitting the tiered amount among co-personal representatives.

The seven reasonable-compensation factors point toward individual assessment

When subsection (a)'s reasonable-compensation standard applies instead of the tiered schedule — for example, when a will sets compensation and no renunciation is filed — several of its seven factors are inherently about the individual: the time and labor involved, the preclusion of other employment, and the person's experience, reputation, diligence, and ability can't sensibly be applied to a group as a single unit. A court weighing these for co-personal representatives would naturally look at what each individual actually contributed.

Real property compensation would likely follow the same logic

§ 29A-3-719(c), final paragraph: the court fixes "just and reasonable compensation for the services performed" on real property accounted for. With co-personal representatives, that determination would naturally need to account for who actually performed the real-property-related work, rather than splitting it automatically.

Real coordination costs, same as anywhere

Co-personal representatives in South Dakota share fiduciary duties, and disagreements about pace, priorities, or how to divide tasks can slow administration or invite disputes — a practical consideration independent of how compensation eventually gets divided.

Worked example

Two siblings serve as co-personal representatives of a South Dakota estate with $500,000 in personal property, producing a $12,585 commission under § 29A-3-719(c) for a sole personal representative.

Co-personal representative	Share of work	Illustrative compensation
Sibling A (primary administrator)	80%	$10,068
Sibling B (occasional support)	20%	$2,517

Illustrative only — South Dakota's statute doesn't specify how to split the computed amount between co-personal representatives; the court decides based on each person's actual contribution, up to the combined $12,585 total.

Facing probate in South Dakota?

A local probate attorney can review your estate — many offer a free consultation.

Talk to a South Dakota attorney

South Dakota co-personal representatives — frequently asked questions

Do South Dakota co-personal representatives each get their own tiered schedule?

No. The schedule computes on the estate's personal property, not per person serving.

Who decides how the South Dakota default commission is divided among co-personal representatives?

The circuit court, based on each co-personal representative's actual involvement, since no default split exists.

Does the reasonable-compensation standard in subsection (a) apply per co-personal representative in South Dakota?

Logically yes — several of the seven factors are inherently about the individual performing the work.

Does the separate real-property compensation get divided among South Dakota co-personal representatives too?

It would follow the same logic, allocated based on who actually handled the real-property work.

Do South Dakota co-personal representatives need a written agreement on how to split duties?

Not required by statute, but a clear understanding helps support each person's share if questioned.

Estimate for general guidance only, not legal advice. Based on SDCL § 29A-3-719. South Dakota has no statutory formula for dividing compensation among co-personal representatives; the illustrative 80/20 split above is not a statutory rule. Consult a South Dakota probate attorney to resolve a specific dispute over compensation between co-personal representatives.

South Dakota Co-Personal Representatives: How Is the Fee Split?