Inheritance straight to GC, skipping childless DC

[Shuk]

How would you feel if your parents left money to your nieces & nephews but not you or your siblings, and you don't have DC, but have possibly had more financial support as an adult than your siblings (though not as much as their dc will inherit)

YABU - no one is entitled to anything
YANBU - this isn't fair and likely to cause considerable upset

For context it's not my parents, and I have DC who would benefit. I think this is hugely unfair.

Depends on your financial situation and how happy you are for it to happen.

There’s a strong argument in my family to skip the children and go to dc. I’m financially fucked, so in turn my children will be. By the time I inherit it wont do much good and will get eaten up. If they have it, it can improve their prospects.

I don’t think it’s “fair” but if all parties are ok with it, i can see a logic there.

you can't do this in Scotland as you can't disinheirt your children or spouse

@SpilltheTea

Why is it unfair for the sibling with no children when none of the adults are getting anything anyway?

Because the siblings with dc have in all likelihood been receiving financial support in various ways which the childless sibling won't have received. So childless dc doubly misses out. The siblings with children continue to benefit even if they don't directly receive an inheritance as their dc won't need as much financial support from them.

There most definitely is a tax advantage in leaving the main residence to direct offspring. It is not included fur inheritance tax purposes up to something like £500k.

If you leave it elsewhere it's part of the estate so there is more tax to pay.

Not in the UK. The only person you can leave more than the IHT limit to, without it being subject to IHT, is your spouse.

The only concession for children and grandchildren is that you are allowed to give certain amounts of money to them for significant occasions, such as their weddings, and then these gifts will not be included as potentially exempt transfers, even if you should die within 7 years and leave an estate over the IHT limit.

@WeBuiltThisBuffetOnSausageRoll

There most definitely is a tax advantage in leaving the main residence to direct offspring. It is not included fur inheritance tax purposes up to something like £500k.

If you leave it elsewhere it's part of the estate so there is more tax to pay.

Not in the UK. The only person you can leave more than the IHT limit to, without it being subject to IHT, is your spouse.

The only concession for children and grandchildren is that you are allowed to give certain amounts of money to them for significant occasions, such as their weddings, and then these gifts will not be included as potentially exempt transfers, even if you should die within 7 years and leave an estate over the IHT limit.

Sorry, you are incorrect.

Leaving your main residence to offspring (including grandchildren but not "anyone else") increases the IHT limit to £500k on some sort of sliding scale.

www.gov.uk/inheritance-tax

"If you give away your home to your children (including adopted, foster or stepchildren) or grandchildren your threshold can increase to £500,000."

Realistically, in most families, adult children (and their own families) with more DGC will end up receiving more from their own DPs than their siblings with fewer or no children.

Free childcare and presents are a big part of this - most GPs will spend an equal amount on each of their DGC at Christmas/birthdays/holidays etc. and won't give more to the child with no siblings than to their cousins with four siblings.

I think this is fair throughout their (the DGPs) lifetime; but when it comes to the will, it all (or the bulk) should be left equally to their own children and then left up to them what happens with it and what is passed down from then on.

I get the skipping a generation. In many cases their children have paid off their mortgage as was the case with my parents and in my case there’s no sign of any difference in their lives from the inheritance they received. They sold properties and continue on as before. They’ve most likely stuck all money in an account. Whereas grandchildren are more likely to be struggling with property ladder or are living with children of their own so could do with an upgrade.

Obviously everyone is free to do what they want and it’s traditional to leave to your children and the done thing but if you’re looking at the benefits inheritance brings there is a case for grandchildren but of course all families are different

When my grandmother died (after my grandfather), her will left everything equally to her two sons. One had died so my dad got everything, £250k.

He was 79 and really didn't need it! I was 48. There were no (blood) great grandchildren.

As he got everything, my cousins got nothing. My dad passed some money via a variation of will to me and my siblings which is good because he died four years later so had he simply gifted it then it would have been added to his estate for IHT purposes meaning more tax to pay when my mum dies.

But had my nan's will been rewritten to skip a generation it would have made a lot more sense!

I think people should generally leave to their children and let them decide whether to pass on to grandchildren. My mum has left everything to me, although I said I'd probably give a big chunk to my son if she died right now as it would be useful for a house deposit. She thought that was a good idea, although she was concerned about protecting the money from a partner, but I cant' really see how you can do anything about that.

However, you might leave direct to the grandchildren in trust if you had concerns about your children eg one of them might be addicted to gambling.

As for leaving out a childfree child, I would not do that. If I had 3 children and 2 had children and the other didn't, I'd generally leave it to the 3 children in equal shares. It would be down to the childfree child to decide if they wanted to leave their money to the nieces/nephews or charity or whatever. Not for me to decide to bypass them.

But it always depends on the circumstances. If childfree offspring was really rich and the two with kids weren't, I might not leave it in equal shares, I might spread the funds around a bit, both while I was still alive and in my will. Also, the more you give away and spend before you die, the less IHT there is to pay.

When my grandmother died (after my grandfather), her will left everything equally to her two sons. One had died so my dad got everything, £250k

the mistake there was not saying that if either son had died, the money would go to their children instead. So your dad would have got half and your cousins the other half between them.

When my mum made her will she made it so the estate comes to me and if I have died, my son. If he has died as well, she didn't care. I suppose my cousins would get it then via the intestacy rules - or indeed my uncle if he were still alive.

I think the sentiment of punishing your single or child free adult children for not giving you grandchildren by leaving then out of your will is abhorrent. I can’t believe how many of you are supporting this as reasonable.

I can only assume it’s because you expect to benefit from this and your siblings to lose out. No doubt you would feel differently if your sibling decided to marry someone with 6 children and / or adopt ? Would you then be jumping up and down saying how unfair it was because they were not “ blood”?

There’s some very grasping and unpleasant people here.

@Drunkpanda

If my dc were to inherit from a grandparent, that reduces some pressure on me to save up to help them with uni or deposits etc. So I would absolutely benefit from it, though not quite as much as if I got it directly!

That's absolutely true! We brought up our DC and covered their educational costs and upbringing. The fact that they had their inheritance to help with house purchase and any other adult expenses makes me feel totally free to spend what we have - when we can - on lots of travelling!

I'd do an amount to the children and an amount to the grandchildren.

@VanGoghsDog

When my grandmother died (after my grandfather), her will left everything equally to her two sons. One had died so my dad got everything, £250k. He was 79 and really didn't need it! I was 48. There were no (blood) great grandchildren.

As he got everything, my cousins got nothing. My dad passed some money via a variation of will to me and my siblings which is good because he died four years later so had he simply gifted it then it would have been added to his estate for IHT purposes meaning more tax to pay when my mum dies.

But had my nan's will been rewritten to skip a generation it would have made a lot more sense!

I would have thought that this situation is quite unusual.

In our Wills, if a DC pre-deceases us, their portion will be left to their 'issue', which I understood was a normal thing!

Did the 'Deed of Variation' not include your cousins? I realise that for all sorts of reasons, your DF might have considered that inappropriate, but it does seem sad that they lost their Dad and also the inheritance from their DGM.

@JuergenSchwarzwald

When my grandmother died (after my grandfather), her will left everything equally to her two sons. One had died so my dad got everything, £250k

the mistake there was not saying that if either son had died, the money would go to their children instead. So your dad would have got half and your cousins the other half between them.

When my mum made her will she made it so the estate comes to me and if I have died, my son. If he has died as well, she didn't care. I suppose my cousins would get it then via the intestacy rules - or indeed my uncle if he were still alive.

Yes, of course that was the obvious first mistake, made in about 1970.

Both my mum's and dad's wills were the same - offspring but no provision for if any had died and no replacement of them to go to their issue. That's the main reason I got my mum to change her will - if my sister died before my mum, my niece and nephew would get nothing - same scenario as my cousins.

I got her to change it and she made direct bequests, but also a clause to say if the beneficiary had died, their share to be divided equally between their issue. Except me as I have no issue so for me it would be divided between the other beneficiaries (i.e. fall to residue).

My will covers literally every eventuality. I drew up a spreadsheet to endure it all worked!

@I0NA

I think the sentiment of punishing your single or child free adult children for not giving you grandchildren by leaving then out of your will is abhorrent. I can’t believe how many of you are supporting this as reasonable.

I can only assume it’s because you expect to benefit from this and your siblings to lose out. No doubt you would feel differently if your sibling decided to marry someone with 6 children and / or adopt ? Would you then be jumping up and down saying how unfair it was because they were not “ blood”?

There’s some very grasping and unpleasant people here.

I am fully supportive of skipping a generation, as long as it is discussed and understood and agreed beforehand.

In my family, I have a brother and we both have two DC - it was easy and straightforward.

However, I will ensure that what I leave will be shared between my two DC equally, and if one of them happens to have DC who they would prefer me to leave my Estate to (looking many years ahead!) I would do that. If one of my DC is childless, they would get their share of my Estate no question - what they choose to do with it is up to them.

I would have thought that this situation is quite unusual.

*In our Wills, if a DC pre-deceases us, their portion will be left to their 'issue', which I understood was a normal thing!"

Did the 'Deed of Variation' not include your cousins? I realise that for all sorts of reasons, your DF might have considered that inappropriate, but it does seem sad that they lost their Dad and also the inheritance from their DGM.

My dad hated his brother (to be fair, with good reason!) and, by extension, my cousins. Though in that family uncle was the golden child.

I've not seen the actual deed of variation, I only know for sure that me and my sister got money. No way would dad have left out my brother (he's the golden child, but he and I don't speak) so he will have done too. Dad told me it was done by DOV.

Years later, I asked mum if dad gave any money to the cousins and she said he gave them a small amount. But no idea if that was included in the deed or not. I do need to see it really, but not til mum dies, but I might ask her where it is.

I don't think it was that unusual all those years ago not to include issue, as my parents wills were both the same (they all, grandparents and parents, said "to my issue and if any have pre deceased to the remaining issue" or similar, specifically excluding the next line down, who may not have existed when the will was written of course).

By the time uncle died, grandad had already died (everything went to nan) and Nan was already too far gone to be able to rewrite the will anyway.

My cousins won't have any idea the size of the estate though, they will assume it was all spent on care as Nan was in care for over fifteen years. But it wasn't because my dad managed the money very carefully and she got most of her care paid for by the NHS as it was nursing care. Unless they look up the probate record which I'd say was unlikely really.

Obviously there is all sorts of other history around it, like one of my cousins not being my uncle's kid, as their mum had an affair, which we all knew but she didn't and found out when she was in her fifties via a DNA ancestry check thing, then other cousin told me and I said we all knew (I didn't know they'd never known!).

@MimiDaisy11

I get the skipping a generation. In many cases their children have paid off their mortgage as was the case with my parents and in my case there’s no sign of any difference in their lives from the inheritance they received. They sold properties and continue on as before. They’ve most likely stuck all money in an account. Whereas grandchildren are more likely to be struggling with property ladder or are living with children of their own so could do with an upgrade.

Obviously everyone is free to do what they want and it’s traditional to leave to your children and the done thing but if you’re looking at the benefits inheritance brings there is a case for grandchildren but of course all families are different

But there is nothing to stop the children passing all their share to their own children (with no additional tax involved, as long as it's done the right way).

My sibs and I got left different amounts in our parents' wills, for various reasons, but it was fine as the reasons made sense to us. However, cutting one child out completely is an appallingly hurtful thing to do, which will cause that person immeasurable pain. Your will is a last message to your kids and a last opportunity to show love to them. It's not about how much you leave - the same is true if you have £500 to your name or £5 million.

@VanGoghsDog I think there were certainly 'all sorts of reasons' why your Dad made the decisions he did. All families are different aren't they, which is why no-one can judge others for doing things differently.

Someone earlier in the thread made the comment that anyone who jumps a generation is really controlling, and that they really couldn't love their DC. That angered me so much (over reaction I know!), because no-one could be more loving and less controlling than my Mum was. She wrote her Will based upon what suited us all as a family, and discussed it between us at length.

@SpiderinaWingMirror

It's tricky though if this is your partners family. It's very tricky to alter the will after the fact if minor children are involved. Who speaks for them? Yes, grandma left you £100k but we decided to give it to Uncle Bob? If all siblings feel the same, then should talk to parents together. But I would stay out of it.

You wouldn’t be able to divert money from children to other beneficiaries in a deed of variation. Only adult beneficiaries can decide to divert their inheritance elsewhere.

It is the child’s money. Adults can’t give it away on their behalf.

This is a situation I’m in. Well the DC are.

4 children. The money skips them and straight to the GC.

2 have no children
2 have an uneven mix of children.

I think it’s incredibly unfair. I think it should go to the children not the grandchildren.

@DobbyTheHouseElk

This is a situation I’m in. Well the DC are.

4 children. The money skips them and straight to the GC.

2 have no children
2 have an uneven mix of children.

I think it’s incredibly unfair. I think it should go to the children not the grandchildren.

But it's not your money to give away, is it?

Sometimes I wish those feeling entitled to an inheritance would discover the whole lot is going to Greenpeace. I'd far rather my pasrents blew everything on travel and having a bloody good time than worried about passing money on. They earned it, I didn't.

It is the child’s money. Adults can’t give it away on their behalf.

But the adult can spend it cant they? Especially if it has been left absolutely and not in trust. GC inherit many, many thousands from GPs. DPs decide that the money should be spent on buying a bigger house (so the GC get a bedroom each or some other reason). Not a lot can be done about it.

I voted YANBU as yes it will create resentment. Not sure why it can't be gifted to the children who can then pass it down to their kids if they wish. It does seem unfair to the child-free sibling. The GC will presumably inherit from their parents at some point.

However, it is also YABU as no-one is entitled to anything!

They earned it, I didn't.
Well, often they also benefitted from an inheritance!