to ask how you plan to protect your children's inheritance

[OrangeMabel]

DD only aged 10 but my main goal is to make sure she has a home for life; with us whilst she's young then a house for herself when she's an adult. So I eventually want to make provision to buy her a house that can't be touched to pay our care home fees, should we need them.

Anyone else got similar goals for their kids and, if so, how to you plan to achieve them?

Anyway, if things in social care continue as they are, it might come to bite you on the backside one day.

Maybe, but I'd rather take my chance and do what I can for my children when I have the chance than set myself up to be bitten hard on both cheeks by not helping them and then not having any benefit to that as well.

overprotection what you are saying is not really logical. What you say is well couple a shouldn't be paying school fees as they may need that money for their old age. Couple b shouldn't buy a new car every year and antiques because they may need the money for their old age. Couple c shouldn't have a sahm/d because they need to earn for their old age. Where do you draw the line on dictating what people should or shouldn't be allowed to spend their money on?

Once again, I am surprised that reasonable intelligent adults have no idea how the UK taxation system works.

*reasonably

Going off at a slight tangent here from some serious issues deserving of attention...but am I the only one who can't get past the breathtaking presumptuousness of the the op??

I have come back to this thread three times tonight, just to make sure I'm not reading too much into it, but no - how much more stealth boastingly, middle class and downright rude can you get than this opening question (and subsequent blatant nosey-ness)?!

To assume that people will have anything to leave, then to assume that people have planned to do anything with it, while saying that you plan to buy you only child a home...wow. Doesn't invite much sympathy from these quarters...

Well, in my mind the taxation system works so that we all have what we need, so we all contribute to that. Some more than others, some not at all. As long as I pay in when I can, I'm happy to take out what I need.

"As long as I pay in when I can, I'm happy to take out what I need."

What you think you 'need' seems to a tad warped though and you cannot take out as and when you feel like it.

We pay a lot of tax. I am in the 40% bracket and DH usually in that bracket. I don't see that entitles us to claim benefits or have the right to hide money away so we do not pay what is fair.

DH is in the next bracket - sorry am on iPad

I think there is a difference between buying things that you need and deliberately trying to shift money about to avoid paying for things you can afford to pay for. If you own your own home you are exceptionally lucky IMO.

Why is it warped to think you need a care home if you do actually need a care home?

I don't get it?

You can't take out when you feel like it, but we can go to the doctors when we need to, we can send our children to school when we need to, we can phone the police when we need to, that's the sort of thing I mean.

I didn't see this thread as stealth boasting. Its a genuine dilemma for some people to arrange their affairs. This thread may not be appreciated, as indeed hasn't been appreciated by everyone. But people can choose to ignore the thread.

I've been quite astonished that there are people that think the op shouldn't spend her money on whatever she choose - if a consequence of that is that she may get state funding for care later in life then so be it.

The money is still in the economy. Just supporting a more worthy cause in the ops mind. If its her own money she can do what she likes with it.

Just like someone on benefits can buy wine / lottery tickets.... Freedom of choice.

OP - I do think you haven't quite thought this one through.

Your DD is 10 and presumably biddable. But gifting her a house when she is an adult is not necessarily the right or repsonsible thing to do.

Help her with a deposit, fine.

But a house? No

This thread had included people purposely looking at ways to avoid paying their way when they are older and that is what's pissed some of us off.

Why not gift her a house though? If OP feels she has done a good job bringing her DD up why not?

Friend of a guy at work lost both his parents in an accident. He used his inheritance to buy a place in London and works with disadvantaged kids earning a pittance of a wage.

Is there an assumption that anyone who receives a sizeable gift would squander the gift as opposed to see the opportunity it brings??

Careful financial planning is purposefully avoiding paying for things we don't have to though. But people who do this generally pay more in taxes / spend more / take less over their lifetime.

Is this wrong? If it is I'm out of a job! (Currently having to reapply for my own job!).

I don't think its a case of you should get back what you paid in but money doesn't disappear. Whether you gift it / spend it / gamble it it is still in the economy.

There was a post flying round Facebook about men in the pub and the poor guy didn't pay for beer and the richest guy paid most. Till they made him pay more and he stopped going the pub....

Detoxlatte - Why would you think I was middle class (I'm not)? Don't you think working class people can get jobs that pay good money that enables them to save? Or do they automatically become middle class if they have a profession, a mortgage and an ISA?

No boasting from me, stealth or otherwise. I will admit to being nosey but am not rude. If we weren't all nosey buggers there'd be no MN. And you wouldn't have opened this thread

Agree with the poster up thread - where do you draw the line with regard to dictating how people spend their income?

Family A who live comfortably with good food, one or two holidays a year, renting because they prefer not to buy - will not have a house to find care home fees and so will be state funded if required.

Family B who choose to save, no holidays (or few, local ones), pay into a mortgage - will have a house to be sold to fund care home fees. Why shouldn't family B choose to spend money on their children and thus have state funded care if needed in the same way as family A?

Or do we go through everyone's bank statement at age 70, judge their every financial decision and then fund their care or not depending on whether overall we approve?

To answer the original question - we have a Family Trust which owns our house. There are listed beneficiaries (our sons, their children should they have any, our immediate relatives) who may benefit from any income to the trust. If our house has to be sold the money will go into the trust - which may approve a house purchase for the boys with any proceeds but should that house be sold (eg due to divorce) the money goes back to the trust. So ex-spouses can't take money away from the family although they may benefit from the use of house and trust money while they are married to the children. And their children will be beneficiaries.

Any use of trust money has to be agreed by a trustee meeting (currently me, DH and our lawyer). If we die, there is provision for the trust to take care of the children including uni education and to provide for a named family member to be their guardian (and support her while she is their main carer).

It sounds more complicated than it is!

Care homes may or may not be needed. If state provision isn't available or appropriate and there is money in the trust, it may approve funding. However all decisions have to be in the entire family best interests - selling the family home to fund care fees for one member wouldn't be authorised.

I fully intend to leave my children with my work ethics and the education and ability to be self sufficient. However I also intend to leave them and their children with a firm financial base.

i thought it was an interesting thread that is why i opened it and because i am nosey and wanted to know what other people would answer , weird how some are being all pc on here saying its wrong to put your house in your kids name or sell it and give them money etc , i dont see a problem with giving my kids my house that i paid for with my money that i earned and payed tax on ,i think its wrong that the tax we pay all our life is wasted , hidden,given abroad ,if it wasnt wasted there would be enough to pay for everyone who needs care in there old age :)

Iteotwawki, your post has interested me as I think the family trust you have may be something similar to the route we old like to go down. I haven't thought too much about it yet, but will need to within the next couple of years.

Do you mind me asking, was it complicated to set up, and is there anything else I should have thought of that I might not have done at this stage?

To assume that people will have anything to leave, then to assume that people have planned to do anything with it, while saying that you plan to buy you only child a home...wow. Doesn't invite much sympathy from these quarters...

Oh FFS, so now we can't discuss anything that has the potential to offend someone who can't afford it? That puts an end to those parents with prams spaces threads because someone might not be able to afford a car. And no more debating rude visitors because someone might not have a spare bedroom. In fact, we can't even share some recipes because some people might not be able to afford food. Better just shut the internet down because some people might not be able to afford that.

Do kindly go and fuck yourself, please.

Clouds - not complicated at all. The only difficulty you may come across is that your family trust is a separate legal entity to you / your partner, even though you're the same people. So if you are paying the mortgage but your trust owns the house, you have some extra paperwork to sort out (the trust has no income so can't get a mortgage, so you guarantee to the bank that you will pay it - all sorted by a solicitor).

Also means that if I get hit by lightning, my boys will benefit from my earnings & insurance payout and not some gold digging head turning floozy who would obviously snap DH up :)

Snort. What inheritance!? I haven't got a pot to piss in let alone leave my four kids a house each.

I live in council housing, and have no savings. Ill be leaving the kids with nothing except hopefully the ability to be independent, educated and able to help themselves.

Saying that though I do intend to start saving for driving lessons for them when I get sorted, that will help them to get a job, move out and if my plan works buy their own house just a little bit quicker