Abstract
There is a substantive distinction between accessories who do, and those who do not, undertake to serve the beneficiaries of a fiduciary function. Where the access of accessories to beneficiary assets is limited, they are directly accountable as fiduciaries to the beneficiaries. Today that distinction is not widely understood. Many seem to assume that the accountability of accessories is defined exclusively by the law of knowing (dishonest) assistance. Understanding the distinction should clarify the nature of both forms of accountability.