Parental or otherwise inheritance

[ForgettingMeNot]

I only have one surviving parent who is currently fit and well and this isn't directly about them but in discussion with said parent this morning where I asked them to instead of leaving anything to me, to leave it to my children instead otherwise they have no hope of ever getting on the property ladder.

Digressing from this, it occurred to me that these days I know no one that inherited more than a modest sum. Parents funds seem to end up funding care home fees which whilst I don't necessarily disagree with, it is just making it even harder for my kids generation to get on the property ladder.

At a time where property prices are increasing faster than salaries, we will reach a point no one will be able to afford to buy. Probably my grandkids generation so won't directly affect me but was wondering what will happen then. I guess initial assumptions are property prices would crash but that would destabilise the country.

Not sure what this thread is about directly, just the pondering of a normally absent mind!

Leaving it to gc is actually a good idea. As long as you agree to it.
Not that many ppl need a care home though. If prices of homes crash, I would hate to think how those who recently bought will feel…

I have thought this for quite some time.
as the boomers get older and frailer, with more of them requiring increasing medical care for longer due to increased life expectancy (but much of that is in poor health according to statistics) and the increasing lack of family members able to provide care, I suspect that more and more of their much-discussed wealth will disappear into care home fees and domiciliary care as many of them will have too much wealth to be eligible for any state support. It doesn't take long to burn through the inheritance tax threshold, just 3 years in the average nursing home.

Only about 10% of elderly people end up in a care home though, and a % of those will be state funded because they've never owned a property or have already spent the money on care.

There will be a lot that are getting by with family carers still - my neighbours stagger onwards with a combination of their daughter and us neighbours supporting.

And don't forget pensions are different now. Defined contribution rather than defined benefit. Mine is a pension pot which doesn't have to be used to buy an annuity which are poor value at the moment, it can just stay as a pot and be used for income drawdown. Either I'll end up living on that until it runs out or the pot will be used to pay for care as it'll be viewed as another asset. Anyone who doesn't use it to pay for care or use it all will have that pot of money to pass on to children or gc.

I hadn't that only 10% end up in care.

It's increasingly common to leave to GC. Normally a % rather than all of it. But it really helps them get a start on the property ladder

It's from the census in 2021. 10.8% of over-85s are in care homes, a decrease from 2011.

It gets really interesting over 90 years old though. 10% of male over 90s are in care homes, whereas just over 20% of female over 90s are.

www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/ageing/articles/olderpeoplelivingincarehomesin2021andchangessince2011/2023-10-09

Annuities are high ATM in comparison of where they were in the past.

Annuities are up again more recently but were very low indeed for quite a while.

But pensions until relatively recently didn't need to involve buying an annuity (and taking all the risk yourself). They were defined benefit so amount of pension guaranteed and all
the risk sat with the employer. And that amount of pension was far higher in a final salary scheme than you'd get from an annuity.