Inheritance one - what’s morally correct

[Threebear]

My MIL 70 has just inherited 1.85M net. She was given another house when in her twenties which due to where it was in the world ended up having to be abandoned, though means she has never paid rent or mortgage in her life. She did only have 50k to her name previous to this big windfall. She doesn’t have access to a pension (mistakes in her life / living in the wrong places).

She has 2 children, 37M, 43M. The youngest has a 5yr old child (her only GC). Relationship positive with both.

37M owns a property but in reality only owns the mortgage (340k mortgage). He doesn’t struggle but retains 2 jobs at once in order to live a nice life and have a nice property.

43M is mentally ill, has never retained a proper job, cannot access many benefits where he lives and has a wife who comes from a very poor country with no career herself. They live on the breadline if not lower.

MIL has declared that she is going to keep the full inheritance for herself however will gift each child with 50k as a present.

Firstly I’m fully aware there is a huge difference in thinking between the generations. As a millennial I cannot morally understand the decision. I would never in a million years do this to my beautiful child. I’m so aware of the struggles we have had and can only imagine the struggles in his thirties to get on the property ladder. My hope is we can buy him a small property when he’s older so he can be mortgage free from starting point, all of this to be done with our own investments and money.

The moral question has actually nothing to do with money. If she had none no one would care, if she only got 100k and wanted to keep it, it wouldn’t be questionable as she needs it.

However and big however, she’s just been lumped with 1.85M tax free, and it just doesn’t compute that she believes the relationship with her children and GC will continue if she chooses to do this. The decision is hers and hers only but for anyone who believes she’s morally correct, why I ask would you think your children would ever be ok, forgive you or want to spend anytime ever again with you?

It’s hers to make, but it’s selfish without a doubt. Keeping 95% of that money for her to spend Willy nilly seems crazy while thinking she can retain a relationship with the people she has hurt in this equation.

Personally I think she deserves a nice home, a good investment portfolio but that can all be done within 1.5M no problem at all. If she shared just 350k between her 2 children she would change their lives, they would forever be incredibly grateful, and it would promote to showing how much she cares for them and for a very positive relationship until her death.

The question is simply anyone who agrees with her, are you aware of the rupture and consequent lonely rest of life you would live in your million dollar home as your kids will now likely abandon you?

thanks!

Shes not going to spend that much if shes 70 unless she's going to go absolutely nuts on expensive wine, cruises and strippers. That said you have a shit attitude no wonder she doesn't want to pass money on and I hope she spends the lot.

It’s her inheritance. She is being generous giving children £50k each. Just because she’s 70 doesn’t mean she can’t enjoy what she has inherited! You sound very grabby.

You have no idea what care looks like where they live. They migut not need to pay fur care. They might be expected to care for her themselves, regardiess of the amount of money she has.

And in England, many people will actively find ways to give that money to their dcs so it doesn’t all disappear in care cost….

I started a very similar thread about my MIL, and was shot down too Op.

MIL has a few million, pensions, and around 8 properties she rents out. She's almost 80 and my DH and BIL are in their 50's. She did well in life, not least because her won parents gifted her a property and a business when they were still alive. Then when they died she got a huge inheritance. Guess what? Not one penny has been dripped down to DH & BIL. Effectively she pulled up the ladder after her.

We do okay for money, however BIL is on the breadline. He lives in a really rough area where drug deals go on etc, and MIL lives in a Mansion, takes regular long haul trips in business class etc.

DH and BIL will be (I think) in their 70's before they inherit - it's too little, too late.

In your shoes, I would take the £50k, and do not change your relationship with MIL, as you risk being cut out of her will. The money invested would pay almost £7k a month in interest, meaning the Capital will still be there when she dies. Your Partner will inherit well over a Million. You're very lucky, as not many people have that kind of money coming to them! I guess he will be in his 50's by then, but it'll facilitate early retirement.

I mean, I would have given them both £400k now, and kept a Million, but hey, what can you do?

Fx sake OP, I don't know how many other ways we can keep saying this.

It'S nOt YoUr MoNeY

Pouting and sulking because you want to use access to yourselves and your grandson as leverage to get your hands on more money, just because in your own personal estimation, the person whose money it is doesn't need it but you really want it, IS MORALLY WRONG.

YOU ARE WRONG.
YOU ARE UNREASONABLE.

No, people in England don’t always do that. Some of us might think it very moral and appropriate to pay for care if there are means available and not rely on the taxpayer and hard-pressed state funding.

Sorry OP but you sound incredibly greedy and self absorbed.

"I mean, I would have given them both £400k now, and kept a Million, but hey, what can you do?"

Isn't it funny how generous people are with hypothetical money.

It's kind of funny how you are trying to claim the moral high ground by asserting your DP will have little to do with his mother because she's only gifting him £50k, but if she upped it to £350k he would continue a much closer relationship!

I think you need to do some sums. I have already said that if MIL invested all her money then after tax she would receive about 50k in the UK return on her investments ( because of her age she cant invest in anything risky).
If MIL gave away half her inheritance Then she would be left with £925,000. After purchase of a small home for say £400 then MIL will be left with £525.00. This will produce a return of about £18,325 per year. This would be difficult to live on.
MIL needs to have some contingency in her old age. She may require long term care. Her own mother lived until 103!
Something else that struck me is that OP didn’t quote £s. She is not in the UK so she probably means dollars.
FWIIW: We are old and go through our finances regularly. If we think we have some extra that we think we won’t need then we give equal amounts to our children. But at our age, in an uncertain world, we have to be super cautious. We have to allow for care home fees.

So you would cut her from your life for not giving you more of her money right now?

Of course it would be nice if she was to give it to you now but f you are as entitled as you sound, I actually don't blame her.

Honestly your attitude isn’t great.

She may plan to give more later in her lifetime.

70 is not that old and if she’s no reserve she could have big plans and also big worries about care costs.

I get that it sucks that relative living standards and wealth are declining but it’s not her fault.

@Threebear say your MIL is not financially savvy.

Does she think that the £50k is going to go further than you do? Does she believe she's set her boys up for life?

And has anyone helped her take financial advice to ensure money doesn't get lost in tax that could be gifted?

it’s about the moral idea of living in riches while your children struggle and expecting them to be ok with it despite the fact you could have helped.

Well she is helping, to the tune of a not inconsiderable £50k.

Your issue is that you don’t think it’s enough.

The oldest generation in a family having worked all their lives and having built up property and financial assets as a result, while the younger members still building their careers/raising their families have less disposable cash is pretty normal I would think.

My siblings and I are all comfortable but we are all also funding university for all our children which is obviously expensive.

The older generation of the family have considerable assets. While they would of course help if anyone was in extreme distress they’d be pretty non plussed at the notion that they should hand over their life savings because their kids fancy a handout.

You MIL may well have been an inadequate parent but that’s not an excuse for feeling entitled to half her net worth.

Perhaps it’s a test and you’re about to fail it?

No not greedy at all. Just realistic about how I would treat my adult children

Read the Ops posts FFS - she is concerned for her partner and is asking a question - she also explains a lot about the mother which a lot of you don't seem to be reading!

“How can she do this to her child?”

Literally all she is doing to her child is giving them £50k. How can the child think they have any moral right to more?

What I would be doing, however, is encouraging her to talk to a financial adviser asap, so that it doesn’t all disappear on care home fees.

WTF? Consequences? Lonely life? If my parents/PIL inherited that and gave me 50k I'd be happy for them and grateful for the gift, it wouldn't destroy the relationship, especially if I was you, the wife of the man with a mortgage.

I expect your 50k is going straight into investments or savings for your DC? After all, you would never spend money on yourself and leave them to struggle and you're already doing well with that investment you made from your parents money when you were younger. You don't need the money, you just think your DC does. 50k investment now will give him a great start to adulthood.

Most of us are able to draw inferences about what we read instead of taking everything at face value. It's a skill learned in primary school.

That only makes sense if the MIL has no other income and if she wants to basically live only on income generated without spending any actual capital. If you are already in your 70s and you have circa £525k in capital and no mortgage I think you would be mad to live off £18k a year.
You could probably take more like 6% or 7% of your pot annually - and again, with no mortgage.

The idea that you need twice that is nuts.

Your MIL is 70, her DM died at 102, so she's likely to have another 30 years left.

If your DP is prepared to break relationship with his own mother because of money, then this relationship with him is not worth it anyway.

You are sure that your MIL doesn't know that she's not loved - you might be very mistaken. Many people read signals very well, so she might know it.

And in this case she would be correct to keep her money to be able to pay for care when she needs it. This amount can be easily eaten up by care fees.

The question is simply anyone who agrees with her, are you aware of the rupture and consequent lonely rest of life you would live in your million dollar home as your kids will now likely abandon you?

with that attitude, it's amazing she's giving away anything at all!
She messed up somewhere when she raised them, and 50k sounds extremely generous.

What a horrible post.

And OP, you seem to think that ‘moral’ can be interpreted only one way. Lying to her children is clearly wrong, but plenty of people would agree that parents do not have any moral obligation to help their adult children financially, any more than adult children have a moral obligation to help their parents financially. In some cultures this is the expectation, but in many it isn’t. That doesn’t make it immoral.

You say that MIL is disliked by her children already!