Why you might want to disinherit your kids

[bclover]

Quote:

Originally Posted by youbet If you don't leave your kids any money as an inheritance ( "we don't plan on leaving them anything"), how will you "we do plan on helping them throughout their lives" ?

They went to college debt free. one is going to law school, no loans. We will gift them with down payments for their house. If they have children, they will go to college debt free.

[Cayman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by haha This is an imbecilic article. If our own children can't make better use of a bequest than some charity we have real problems. Also, I would feel like a fraud if I said to my kids, "I will want and need your help as I get old and perhaps sick. But as to your needs, handle them yourselves you lazy good for nothings!" I don't think so. Ha

+1

We plan to leave our child whatever is left. If she continues to demonstrate a good work ethic and spends her earnings thoughtfully, she'll inheirit it lump sum. If anything comes up to indicate her inheiritance would be best parceled out, we'll arrange a trust or something similar. There is no other person or entity we'd rather entrust those funds to.

Regarding donations to charities --- if you care whether the funds you donate are spent efficiently and effectively, you may want to look hard at how your donated funds will be spent. I've worked in higher ed and the NP sector for very respected institutions and can't believe the wasteful practices of many NPs. That is a topic for another post.

[Mdlerth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cathy63 How often do "kids" actually inherit while they're young enough for this to be a concern? My parents were each over 60 before their last living parents died. DH and I are in our 50s

I fear my family is about to run the test. Mom and Dad, mid-80s, are rapidly crumbling, physically and mentally. Both likely heading for the last roundup.

The will says to divide their estate among the five of us, who range from 50-60. My two sisters still rely on monthly supplements from M&D; this has been going on for decades. If the girls were disinherited to any extent, they'd be crushed emotionally AND financially.

[OddGuy]

Twenty years ago, my parents assembled us together and revealed their plans for passing on their estate. We were all in our 30's at the time.

The intervening years have been that much easier, psychologically, knowing that this financial windfall is on the horizon. For me, personally, I've been able to take reasoned business risks I might otherwise have avoided. Nothing crazy, just standing my ground at times (and being rewarded for it) when I might have otherwise been super-conservative, as well as weathering lean times in starting up my own business.

We now receive monthly statements, and my sister and I are named as executors. We will also handle disbursement of the other 3rd of the estate to two grandchildren and act as their trustees - children of our sibling who passed.

[CaliKid]

Generally speaking it's not good to generalize. Each situation is different and each person unique. Do what works for you.

[kcowan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blue Collar Guy I was all proud thinking we would leave him a 5 million dollar plus estate(todays value)Till a few months ago he said something about wanting to retire in 1 or 2 years with 6 million in the bank. He wanted my thought on it. After the initial shock wore off I told him I thought 7 million was more secure. He said "OK a cushion is not a bad idea, Ill stay a little longer"...

If he lives in NYC, that might be a little marginal. If you could leave him half, then you will feel good about your charitable work and cover him off.

[rodi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelB On this last point DM and I don't agree on how to dispose of her assets. My view is those that need help should get it, she has always felt an even split is best, regardless of need. It's her money, so her wishes will be respected. In the case of my family, though, I think helping my children while we are all still alive is a better approach.

What we've done in our family and what DH and his sister plan in their family is to change what they *do* with the money once received.

My dad had disinherited my brother (for a variety of legitimate/emotional reasons). My brother and dad both had a terminal disease and died within a few months of other. My sister and I used some of our inheritance from dad to make sure that my brother's debt was reduced and medical bills paid. We didn't have to... but it seemed right to use some of our inheritance to do this.

My grandfather died and his will left my dad (who had died a few months previously) some money... which poured through to us. He also left some money to my aunt. My sister and I both chose to take our inheritance from our grandfather and gift it to my aunt. She is retired without a big nest egg and this gave her more of a safety net. Again - grandpa's will was honored... and we were able to help a family member who needed it more.

DH has a brother who will likely need cash infusions throughout his life. (He's on disability). DH and his sister have both agreed that any inheritance they receive for themselves will be used to provide these cash infusions as needed. MIL has divided things even, despite a significant difference in needs.

[RunningBum]

How about what this Michigan lumber baron did, he split it among heirs, 21 years after the last grandchild died.


Millionaire's heirs get inheritance after 92 yrs - CBS News

[Blue Collar Guy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RunningBum How about what this Michigan lumber baron did, he split it among heirs, 21 years after the last grandchild died. Millionaire's heirs get inheritance after 92 yrs - CBS News

I wonder how it was invested for the past 92 years?

[meierlde]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RunningBum How about what this Michigan lumber baron did, he split it among heirs, 21 years after the last grandchild died. Millionaire's heirs get inheritance after 92 yrs - CBS News

Or perhaps set up a trust that pays out at age 50 or more, before that provides for paying tutition health expenses etc. (at the discretion of the trustee, a good lawyer can write this up correctly)

[socca]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dancfo And for heaven's sake, as the author says, don't put family members in-between other family member's money (that they think is "theirs") and the other family members. Disaster waiting to happen.

As sole executor of my mother's estate, I'm standing between my step-brothers and a large inheritance thanks to a QTIP trust set up by my step-father (hopefully mom will live to a ripe old age; she's late 70's now). Am I worried that my step-brothers will lawyer-up when it comes time to settle her estate? Only a little. Both my step-father's trust and my mother's trust contain a clause that automatically disinherits any beneficiary who challenges trust administration. Will this be enough to discourage conflict? Only time will tell.

[Blue Collar Guy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by socca As sole executor of my mother's estate, I'm standing between my step-brothers and a large inheritance thanks to a QTIP trust set up by my step-father (hopefully mom will live to a ripe old age; she's late 70's now). Am I worried that my step-brothers will lawyer-up when it comes time to settle her estate? Only a little. Both my step-father's trust and my mother's trust contain a clause that automatically disinherits any beneficiary who challenges trust administration. Will this be enough to discourage conflict? Only time will tell.

Im going to take a shot in the dark here. Can one infer that your step father has left you the lions share of the trust after your mom passes? Im also thinking that since you used the words"large inheritance" that unless they are getting a nice slice of the trust you can bet they will lawyer up. As far as the no challenge clause, unless its frivolous, the court wont enforce it. I know this last bit of info from one of my friends who married money. They are going thru it now.

[Fedup]

Interesting. I have the same clause in my trust. You mean it's a NOP, an acronym stands for doing nothing in computer programming.

[CaliKid]

No contest clauses are important as they do stop some contests since people are scared to risk triggering it. Each state has different laws on no contest clauses. People definitely have to be careful to not trigger the no contest clause by contesting. What is "contesting" will depend on state law and the words of the document. There are some actions that might seem like a contest that are not and this is for good reason. For example, if a person changes their will when they are 102 years old shouldn't a person be able to petition the court if they feel the person who made the changes late in life was not mentally competent. This might be allowed and not be a contest. Another common one is asking questions, or actually filing a petition in court to contest an accounting. That is not a contest generally as you are contesting the accounting rather than the decedent's document. Also, it's not automatic as someone suggested above. It generally requires some type of action to be filed in the court and probably a Judge declaring the no contest clause was triggered.

[socca]

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaliKid Also, it's not automatic as someone suggested above. It generally requires some type of action to be filed in the court and probably a Judge declaring the no contest clause was triggered.

My step-father's QTIP trust gives my mother the power to disinherit any of my step-brothers for any reason. Compared to this, the 'no contest' clause seems 'automatic'. If, as executor of my mother's estate, I try to use the 'no contest' clause to disinherit one of my step-brothers, it's not clear why I would need to get the court system involved. Of course, the disinherited step-brother would probably sue me over the application of this clause, so the whole mess would land in the court system anyway. In any case, I would get the advice of a lawyer before proceeding. As you point out, the main value of the clause may be as a psychological deterrent.

[athena53]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Al in Ohio I could never consider anything other than an even split myself regardless of circumstance. My parents make it clear they would not either. I cannot believe anything less would be fair. Why punish the wise.

I've got only one son and no other obvious heirs (siblings all doing well on their own) but I could see leaving a bigger share based on need to a child who's in an honorable but low-paying profession (e.g. social work) or who had a bad setback in life such as a messy divorce that required them to start over, or maybe even one who didn't have the marketable skills the others did and was never able to get into a well-paying job. I'd want to discuss this with them beforehand so it wasn't a surprise.

[splitwdw]

We have no children but I don't understand the attitude "leave more to a child that isn't doing as well as their siblings". I would feel like you are playing favorites and you probably favored this child all along. My husband and I are making my nieces and nephews our heirs. All of them are still in school and whatever job they end up with will be "honorable".

[garyt]

My wife and I tell our parents on both sides not to save anything for us, have fun spending your money. We're all fine on our own.

[Dancfo]

My previous comment of, "And for heaven's sake, as the author says, don't put family members in-between other family member's money (that they think is "theirs") and the other family members. Disaster waiting to happen." is based more on my observations of family dynamics vs. being sued or having legal issues. Of course, there are plenty of situations and families that are harmonious and can move through this process with no problems.

On the other hand, there are multiple situations where even the best intentions are not sufficient, and deep, permanent family discord is the result. Perhaps it can be thought of as just being careful, like wearing a seat belt or buying insurance. Most of the time things will be fine, but when they're not, they can be really bad.

[growing_older]

Quote:

"And for heaven's sake, as the author says, don't put family members in-between other family member's money (that they think is "theirs") and the other family members. Disaster waiting to happen." is based more on my observations of family dynamics vs. being sued or having legal issues.

If one child is named as trustee for the trust, with power to grant or deny requests for support from the trust (a very common arrangement) then even if the intent of the trust is equal distribution, the children who must ask often grow resentful. The trustee may be trying to make the trust last for the benefit of a next generation, but those who want to spend now just want "their" money as soon as possible. A surefire recipe for family discord and acrimony.