giving money away

Steve_xx

atush wrote: »

No, they didn't mention it.

But as the person giving the money is over 80- it is a Relevant fact and the consequences should be discussed?

It isn't a relevant fact in this instance. The relevant facts are those supplied by the original poster. That poster did not mention that his mother was about to need state supported care, nor did he say that he'd encouraged or was about to encourage her to play the stock market. It's best to stick to the facts rather than inventing issues that simply are not there.

willywonka1

Steve_xx wrote: »

What I'm saying is that you have read more into the original question than was/is there. The question was not relating to the methodology used to make the money. The question was, is it ok to mum to give it to her son, and are there any tax implications for mum or son in doing so.

You've introduced a whole new ball game into the equation and this has been borne out of whatever is in your mind rather than anything to do with what the poster originally asked about.

Thank you.

Wayne

The_Earl_of_Streatham

Steve_xx wrote: »

What I'm saying is that you have read more into the original question than was/is there. The question was not relating to the methodology used to make the money. The question was, is it ok to mum to give it to her son, and are there any tax implications for mum or son in doing so.

You've introduced a whole new ball game into the equation and this has been borne out of whatever is in your mind rather than anything to do with what the poster originally asked about.

It's such a comfort to know that there's someone in charge hereabouts.

atush

Steve_xx wrote: »

It isn't a relevant fact in this instance. The relevant facts are those supplied by the original poster. That poster did not mention that his mother was about to need state supported care, nor did he say that he'd encouraged or was about to encourage her to play the stock market. It's best to stick to the facts rather than inventing issues that simply are not there.

Sorry but 3 people agree with me that deprivation of assets could be a factor as the OP was skimpy with the facts of his mother's health. Her age would be an indicator of possible need in the next decade and yes the council would look to this transaction.

I am not inventing the issue here, you are being an ostrich?

Steve_xx

atush wrote: »

Sorry but 3 people agree with me that deprivation of assets could be a factor as the OP was skimpy with the facts of his mother's health. Her age would be an indicator of possible need in the next decade and yes the council would look to this transaction.

I am not inventing the issue here, you are being an ostrich?

Yes, you're right, deprivation of assets is an issue, but not in this case. The OP did not give mention of any impending condition with his parent. You are effectively answering questions that have not been asked. It's better to stick to the facts as they are presented rather than trying to embellish the original question from what it actually is to what you think it should be.


Age is not an absolute indicator of the need for healthcare.

mike88

Steve_xx wrote: »

Yes, you're right, deprivation of assets is an issue, but not in this case. The OP did not give mention of any impending condition with his parent. You are effectively answering questions that have not been asked. It's better to stick to the facts as they are presented rather than trying to embellish the original question from what it actually is to what you think it should be.


Age is not an absolute indicator of the need for healthcare.

I'm sorry but you are wrong again. If you play the role of thread monitor you must get your facts right. In post #9 bowlhead said he'd only mentioned deprivation of assets in his initial response because the OP's only other thread was one about whether their ISA or ISA income would affect benefits.

AndyT678

Steve_xx wrote: »

Yes, you're right, deprivation of assets is an issue, but not in this case. The OP did not give mention of any impending condition with his parent.

But that doesn't mean that there won't be one! OP does not have perfect knowledge of the future. It's not unreasonable to consider that an 80 year old might have some sort of need in the next 10 years.

bowlhead99

AndyT678 wrote: »

But that doesn't mean that there won't be one! OP does not have perfect knowledge of the future. It's not unreasonable to consider that an 80 year old might have some sort of need in the next 10 years.

It's not unreasonable to consider it. It would be imprudent not to. Clearly, OP's mother should consider what her needs might actually be, before giving away the £10 or £100,000 or £150,000, or whatever the OP has settled on as being the number he really wants to ask about.

However, there is no automatic expectation that a healthy 80 yr-old with £200k should keep back £100k for care home fees on the offchance they need them over the next few decades; I have a relative of 99 and she is still in her own home being broadly self sufficient (though I think there is now some sort of non-means-tested attendance allowance/ carer's allowance going on).

So, while it's not "unreasonable to consider" your needs before making a gift, the OP didn't ask for a 50- post thread about what needs an 80yr-old might have. I can completely see where Steve is coming from in saying, if it's not asked for, why not stop banging on about it; and the OP has thanked him for saying so...

mike88 wrote: »

Steve_xx wrote: »

You are effectively answering questions that have not been asked. It's better to stick to the facts as they are presented rather than trying to embellish the original question from what it actually is to what you think it should be.

I'm sorry but you are wrong again. If you play the role of thread monitor you must get your facts right. In post #9 bowlhead said he'd only mentioned deprivation of assets in his initial response because the OP's only other thread was one about whether their ISA or ISA income would affect benefits.

My comments about deprivation and about IHT in post #2 was because OP had not given any insight into the motive for the transaction at all. So all we knew was, here was a person who wanted for some reason to take a pile of cash between £10 and £100,000 (later clarified as £150,000) from his parent as a gift, and would it be taxable.

As most adults in this country know that you don't pay income tax on receiving things that are not income (i.e. things which aren't earned from employment or a business or as a return on savings or investments), and yet the OP was asking about paying tax on receiving an outright gift - perhaps a £10 birthday present or perhaps a £100,000 life-changing cash pile - then presumably the OP was referring to taxes other than the basic income tax that most people are familiar with.

When people of adult age are getting chunky sums of money from a parent and enquiring in general terms about the fiscal implications, the most common motivations for enquiring are -

(a) how it might affect the remaining estate for inheritance taxes: answer being it will hopefully reduce the size of the estate but in some circumstances the cash could still be deemed part of the death estate and taxable on the recipient if there were insufficient funds elsewhere, see full IHT rules for details;

(b) how it might affect tax credits / benefits of the giver: answer being it would not necessarily reduce that person's deemed capital or income for the purposes of means testing of such benefits, see full rules for details;

(c) how it might affect tax credits / benefits of the recipient: answer being that having a pile of extra cash will generally reduce entitlement to benefits which are linked to the amount of capital a person has, see full rules for details.

The OP only had one other set of posts on the forum which were about whether someone could claim tax credit or universal credit if they had £5,000 or perhaps up to £60000, or £15000 or £17000 in their ISA and whether £500 of income made inside an ISA was relevant for telling the taxman in the context of tax credits or UC even though it is outside the scope of actual income tax due to ISA protection.

They started this separate thread "And another One..." implying that this new train of thought about moving large amounts of money from mother to son was perhaps tangentially linked to some planning following the previous week's enquiries, and therefore some info about what tax or tax credits might be payable or receivable, on whom, as a result of the transfer, would be welcome.

In that context it doesn't seem at all unreasonable to mention tax credit/ universal credit / other benefits deprivation rules, or inheritance taxes, in the answer, even if we don't know whether the giver has an estate anywhere near big enough for IHT or has any expectation of ever needing care or benefits. Otherwise if we are genuinely only looking at whether receiving a gift incurs income tax, the answer is a simple "no, of course not" and the thread doesn't need to be more than 4 words long let alone 40+ posts long.

They've confirmed that they now do "get it"- that a gift is not income or subject to tax other than IHT and they have said that the amounts involved are not going to be in scope for IHT. Presumably they have no further questions about benefits either, which they didn't explicitly ask for on this particular thread, but may have found the information useful. Either way, it's all sorted now, end of thread?