Financial gifts

Mojisola

saintalan wrote: »

Not my situation - but say at 40 you had a child and saved for them in your own name and at age 60 when it matured you might need to go in to care.

The intent would not have been to deprive. Is that right?

Savings in your name would be counted as your money otherwise everyone could say that their savings were meant for someone else.

I wonder if the people who are keen to be funded by the council have visited a range of care homes to see where they would prefer to spend their last years?

talexuser

saintalan wrote: »

Not my situation - but say at 40 you had a child and saved for them in your own name and at age 60 when it matured you might need to go in to care.

The intent would not have been to deprive. Is that right?

Thanks
Alan

If it's in your name, it's yours and not the childs, so no use. You would have to set up some kind of trust and not have any use of the money for yourself during your life I guess. And the amount you can give tax free is limited.

saintalan

Mojisola wrote: »

Savings in your name would be counted as your money otherwise everyone could say that their savings were meant for someone else.

I wonder if the people who are keen to be funded by the council have visited a range of care homes to see where they would prefer to spend their last years?

Yes they could but the point I was making is - there was NO intent, therefor the rule you state would mean anyone who has ever spent anything that they might need would be liable!

Just saying there should be a clear definition.

On your second point most of the homes I have visited relatives in have a mix of residents.

On another point when do the new rules start?

Thanks

Alan

Mojisola

saintalan wrote: »

Yes they could but the point I was making is - there was NO intent, therefor the rule you state would mean anyone who has ever spent anything that they might need would be liable!

But how could you prove there was no intent?

saintalan

Mojisola wrote: »

Savings in your name would be counted as your money otherwise everyone could say that their savings were meant for someone else.

I wonder if the people who are keen to be funded by the council have visited a range of care homes to see where they would prefer to spend their last years?

Mojisola wrote: »

But how could you prove there was no intent?

Apologies if I have taken this too much off topic, so will make this my last post on it.

But how could anyone prove there was any intent? I submit on the birth of my child (hypothetical) I started saving for her future (age 20) we cut back our spend in other areas in order to do it. I submit it was not my intention to deliberately or otherwise deprive myself of assets in order to avoid care costs.

Believe me I know where you are coming from I just find it a difficult area.

Thanks

Alan

pqrdef

saintalan wrote: »

there was NO intent

It's the intent when you make the gift. Your intention when you saved the money is neither here nor there.

You can't give money away when it looks like you might well need it to support yourself. There may have been a time when you didn't worry about your old age and had different plans, but life often doesn't go the way we hoped.

talexuser

It's not difficult at all. If the money is in your name the whole thing is meaningless in law. If it is in the childs' name there are limits to the tax free amounts you can give away.

atush

Intent in the OP's case would be, money given after the need for care was established (or even likely). Given away earlier, when in good health would have been OK.

As for saving for children, the only way round it is to put it in their name, and even better in a good tax wrapper. If you save in your name, the money is yours for all legal purposes.

saintalan

talexuser wrote: »

It's not difficult at all. ...

talexuser I will try and remember that!

Atush thanks that puts a different slant on it.

Also just to be clear i was just using saving for a child as an example.

Cheers

Alan

atush

Best to open your own thread, as your situation (real or hypothetical) is different to the OP's