inheritance advice needed

getmore4less

All the people who would inherit under the rules of intestacy must agree.

This is not what HMRC say

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/cto/customerguide/page21.htm

Mojisola

getmore4less wrote: »

All the people who would inherit under the rules of intestacy must agree.

This is not what HMRC say

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/cto/customerguide/page21.htm

I'm sure it's all the people who would be affected who have to agree which makes sense. Why should I, as a beneficiary, have any say if one of the other beneficiaries wants to give their share to someone else?

holly_hobby

Absolutely M. - it is only those whom will be directly affected (ie forfeit of inheritance) as a result of the variation that need to provide their agreement to the exercise.

But really, all this and any questions should be directed to and dealt with by the solicitor ... whose duty it is to ensure that if a variation is effected it is correctly done so.

But I repeat, why pay for any legal fees that may be incurred as a result of the solicitors fee incurred in effected the DOV, when Mum can quite easily write cheques or effect direct bank transfers, post reciept of funds. Why she would want to going through a DOV ( incurring professional fees), which could otherwise be avoided if she simply effected transfer of funds directly from her to her children, would be unnecessary and utter madness in my opinion ..... but then again we're all different !

Hope this helps

Holly x

getmore4less

Another option which might achieve the same desired distribution and leave the solicitor with no option but to distribute as asked, is a disclaimer

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/ihtmanual/IHTM35161.htm

girlatplay

getmore4less wrote: »

Another option which might achieve the same desired distribution and leave the solicitor with no option but to distribute as asked, is a disclaimer

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/ihtmanual/IHTM35161.htm

In this link it says:

A disclaimer must be unconditional and the beneficiary cannot redirect the interest that is being disclaimed. The disclaimed benefit falls back into residue and follows the devolution of the estate accordingly.

getmore4less

girlatplay wrote: »

In this link it says:

A disclaimer must be unconditional and the beneficiary cannot redirect the interest that is being disclaimed. The disclaimed benefit falls back into residue and follows the devolution of the estate accordingly.

Which is why I said "might achieve the same desired distribution"

depending on what other relatives the brother had, the childrem of the sister may be next in line which will achieve what is wanted.

Allthough I did read somwhere in the HMRC that DOV are prevered(better options) over disclaimers.

but all this is specualtion since it may be the mums estate may not have any IHT that can be saved so nothing may need to be done.

girlatplay

safc66 wrote: »

no he hid not leave a will and no she is not the sole beneficiary

I assumed from this comment that there are one or more other siblings.

System

getmore4less wrote: »

Which is why I said "might achieve the same desired distribution"

depending on what other relatives the brother had, the childrem of the sister may be next in line which will achieve what is wanted.

Allthough I did read somwhere in the HMRC that DOV are prevered(better options) over disclaimers.

but all this is specualtion since it may be the mums estate may not have any IHT that can be saved so nothing may need to be done.

I don't know anything about disclaimers but I suppose there is the possibility that a disclaimer might actually stop that inheritance line dead (excuse the pun) so the children would not be next. So there may be the situation that if a disclaimer is used then the estate goes to the crown.

As I said I am not knowledgeable about this but the above scenario is a possibility and needs to be investigated before anything is done.

ETA

Ignore the above. Had a dig and the effect would be as though the OPs mother had died before the brother.

getmore4less

!!!!!! wrote: »

I don't know anything about disclaimers but I suppose there is the possibility that a disclaimer might actually stop that inheritance line dead (excuse the pun) so the children would not be next. So there may be the situation that if a disclaimer is used then the estate goes to the crown.

As I said I am not knowledgeable about this but the above scenario is a possibility and needs to be investigated before anything is done.

ETA

Ignore the above. Had a dig and the effect would be as though the OPs mother had died before the brother.

Thanks, thats what I suspected, but had not done the research to confirm so left it as a possible option.

even so the OP should always take independant advise or do their own research before doing anything.

cashbackproblems

She can put into a portfolio which invests in Business Property Relief assets and after 2yrs that money sits outside her estate and becomes free from the 40% IHT. BPR qualifying companies can be AIM listed (depending on the investment house and company) which might sound risky but they usually obtain steady returns plus you are saving 40% so anything is a bonus. This is a HMRC backed scheme, ask your IFA about it.