AIBU to be hurt and offended by husband suggestion of changing will?

I have a similar fear to your husband.
my husband is awful with admin and budgets. He simply doesn’t know how to do either. I’ve tried to teach him but he doesn’t get it (severe ADHD and left formal education very young).
he is charming and good looking with bags of personality. Whilst it would never be his intention to disinherit his kids if I die first, this could happen by accident. If he met a new partner he would leave all admin up to them. He would merrily sign anything they put in front of him as he would see it as him not having to worry about not understanding or taking responsibility. It would be very easy for this person to make sure she got her hands on half.

i have heard stories of this happening to other people. It’s a legitimate fear even though you are financially astute and understand everything.

I would be, am in fact, exactly of the same thought as you DH.

Even if you trust your spouse implicitly, you have no control over what they will do if you die first. My DH says he wouldn’t remarry, but he can’t be 100% certain of that. He just cannot.

To avoid the regular type of thing you read on MN frequently, of adult children being left zilch (as the new wife cops the lot) I’d say people are VERY naive to assume their spouse will do the right thing on their death. No-one knows how their feelings will change 5, 10, 15 years after their spouses death.

OP you should be doing the same too in case you meet an earlier than expected end.

All the people saying it’s a great idea - he wants to give half. That’s not reasonable for OP given both her contribution and her extra years. They need to have a proper conversation to ensure the surviving spouse will be financially comfortable at the very least. And if I were OP I would begin to question why I’d been subsidising his lifestyle when he has this attitude to their joint money!

whilst a second spouse taking the lot is common - it can be guarded against in different ways than just screwing the surviving spouse over

@FrangipaniBlue · Today 17:45

All the posters saying “but but I trust my spouse implicitly to do the right thing…….”
Yeah. So did my mum.
When my DF died he left half to his 2 nieces and the other half (which technically was the share of the house that my DM had paid for, including putting in money from sale of a house she had before meeting my DF) to his new partner. They weren’t even married or living together, she had her own house.
So go right ahead and implicitly trust your spouses….. at least you won’t be around to see the devastation it causes your DC.

@KeepOffTheQuinoa · Today 17:47* *

3 of my friends have seen their Mum's assets (share of house, money inherited from HER parents etc) disappear to a younger second wife and her children and they have inherited not a bean.
Men seem not to be able to manage on their own, or to act responsibly towards their children in the face of lurve with New Woman. Even if they just forget to remake their will after marriage, meaning that the old will is invalid so everything goes to new wife.
All these were loving husbands and fathers of the ' I would never re-marry / de-prioritise our kids yada yada' type.

Exactly. I was going to say something like this. (In both posts!) Beat me to it. For a start, the best thing you can do in life is to TRUST NO-ONE 100%. Not even your husband.... Some people will say 'awww, that's no way to live!' but you really need to stay guarded, and prepare for the worst case scenario.

Just assume your husband WILL remarry. Then if he doesn't, then great, but the plan can be made in case he does. Because as @KeepOffTheQuinoa said, most men do not do well on their own, and do not like to be alone. They NEED a woman, and many will find one soon after their wife dies. And there IS a chance they will marry. DO NOT TAKE THIS RISK!

It's the grief talking plus all the horror stories about widowed spouses remarrying and having their heads turned. Maybe see an estate solicitor together so it's neutral territory and go through things. They might suggest a trust for the children that does not include the family home that belongs to you equally. The wife 🙄

I’m grateful to my dad for securing his will in his kids and not his new wife. It would’ve been a nightmare.

bizarre to be against this. Life happens and people change.
people very often don’t keep promises to the dead

He is leaving money dorectly
to your shared children. And he is likely to die sooner and it means they could get it without it ending up in care home fees etc.

why is this a bad thing. You could re marry and merge assets with a new DH and the money would be lost. It happens no one can predict the future. So he is securing stuff for your children.

again, why is this a bad thing?

3 of my friends have seen their Mum's assets (share of house, money inherited from HER parents etc) disappear to a younger second wife and her children and they have inherited not a bean.

Men seem not to be able to manage on their own, or to act responsibly towards their children in the face of lurve with New Woman. Even if they just forget to remake their will after marriage, meaning that the old will is invalid so everything goes to new wife.

All these were loving husbands and fathers of the ' I would never re-marry / de-prioritise our kids yada yada' type.

All the posters saying “but but I trust my spouse implicitly to do the right thing…….”

Yeah. So did my mum.

When my DF died he left half to his 2 nieces and the other half (which technically was the share of the house that my DM had paid for, including putting in money from sale of a house she had before meeting my DF) to his new partner. They weren’t even married or living together, she had her own house.

So go right ahead and implicitly trust your spouses….. at least you won’t be around to see the devastation it causes your DC.

Good idea!

@BatchCookBabe Fair point, i think we will have to look at our wills again.

@tartyflette I think I would be putting something way more firm and concrete in place than 'please don't get married if I die before you.' I would get something in writing/do wills/change your wills. So that if one of you dies, your children won't lose out. I would do something like 'everything goes to my husband as long as he stays unmarried. If he marries, then as soon as he remarries, 50% of everything that was mine, goes to my/our children.'

I would not trust ANYone to not get married again 'because you asked them to.'

.

That’s the other thing to remember- once you remarry, the previous Will becomes void.

I have had this conversation with DH after seeing what happened with friend who benefitted vastly when their mother, who remarried after her first husband died.The new DH was much older and died soon after, leaving everything to his new wife, friend's DM.

My friend then inherited everything when her mother died a few years later.
I have not discussed this in detail with my friend other than to express surprise that her stepdad's kids had inherited nothing from him. She could see nothing wrong in this. They were all adults. (As was she.)
I subsequently had a discussion with my husband pointing this out to him and asked him not to remarry if I die first. Fine to meet someone else, live together etc but not marry due to the potentially negative impact on our DC. I have said I would not remary either. (And indeed I see no reason why i would want to but a man could find himself with a younger, even much younger partner with children of her own.)
That's when the risk to our DC's inheritance might arise.

.
duplicated , not sure how.

IHT
-£325k tax free (can include property)
-plus £175k tax free for property (not transferable to cash/other assets, only residential property)

so from parents, you could have IHT-free sum of £1m:
2x £325k
2x £175k

If the total estate is >£2m, you start losing your tax-free allowance.

You seem to be overcomplicating it.

The £325k nil rate band can be for anything. The £175k RNRB is only for property. So, provided the house is left to you and/or your siblings (if any) and is worth at least £175k, he can leave up to £500k before any IHT becomes payable.

You don't mention his wife (assuming he had one). If they were still married when she died and she left everything to him, he also gets her £325k nil rate band and her £175k RNRB. In that situation, he can leave up to £1M before any IHT becomes payable.

I can't be sure as the rules are so damn complex - deliberately so I bet - but he does have a house which is probably just about the threshold of £325K.

I know there is a £500k residence nil rate band allowance but it is not clear whether if the house is worth less than £500k the rest can be made up in cash or whether only the value of the house if over £350 but less than £500k is allowed.

It doesn't really seem fair if one person can pass on a £500k house but someone else with a £325 house plus savings gets a hefty tax bill, however fairness never really seems to come into these policies.

It is actually a perverse incentive for elderly people to move to a larger house.

Agreed.

Leaving a property in trust with your spouse as the lifetime resident is treated for tax purposes as if you had left the property to your spouse. There is therefore no IHT to pay on the property going into trust and the Residential Nil Rate Bandpass to the surviving spouse.

Does your Dad have an expensive house? Are you sure he will actually have to pay inheritance tax?

It’s incorrect.
The residential nil rate passes to the surviving spouse and then to the direct descendents upon the former’s death.

Most people worry about leaving money to their kids and it ruining them, or them wasting it on stupid stuff as they dont have the life experience/long term planning skill in place yet.

If he wants to protect both you/him and the kids if one of you die, you would both be far better off having the money go into a trust on one of your deaths that benefits the surviving spouse and dependents with some designation on what it can and cant be spent on

The trustees would have to agree the sale. That would only be the children if the children had been made trustees. The trustees cannot refuse to agree a move unreasonably - the only grounds on which they could refuse is if OP was trying to sell the house for substantially less than its true value. And they would not be entitled to take their share of the proceeds. OP would be able to use the entire proceeds to buy another house.

Does anyone know if the following statement by messy but fun @14.02 today is correct ? - ‘ Leaving property via a trust does not allow you to claim the additional nil rate band for inheritance tax purposes as assets need pass directly to a descendant.’

It makes no sense not to make full use of your joint allowance as a couple and he has hurt you by suggesting completely the wrong solution, when his concerns can be easily addressed by other means. You need to identify exactly what his concerns are and present him with the most satisfactory and tax efficient way of achieving this.

First you need to point out that you will have to allow for care costs for the pair of you in old age, it's just silly to ignore that this might be needed. The DCs will have to wait for what's left.

Protecting family assets if one of you is widowed and remarries can be done by a clause in the will, if that sets his mind at rest.

I can understand why he might want his recent inheritance to bypass you and go to your DCs in time, I would have thought you could set up a family trust for that, and it would keep the money out of your joint estate.