mother wishes to gift to children
Options
Comments
-
The family will carry out daily care as we all live within 10mins drive. We'll then move he into one our properties should she decline further.
Will 2 members of family be available 24x7? If she becomes unsteady it might require one person to hold her up whilst another deals with the business end of toileting. It cannot be safely done by 1 person in this scenario.
If she cannot make safe decisions I.e. might wander off or set fire then she might need 24/7 care.
Are they willing to deal with incontinence (she might not want male relatives undressing her or cleaning her private parts if she is unable).
Are they all willing to do this if she becomes vile? (Middle stage of dementia).
Do you all have room in your bathroom for a wheelchair, hoist and 2 carers in addition to her?
Will you have the knowledge and equipment to detect infections? A nursing home will so you are possibly doing her a disservice by not allowing her 24/7 access to nursing care (for good motives I’m sure).
This is why people go into residential/nursing care.0 -
I think this is all pretty irrelevant if the main driver is to avoid IHT (and OP's post is asking specifically about that). If her total estate is worth £360k, there won't be any, regardless of when any gifts were made.
How is it irrelevant if later on it might be decided that it is deliberate deprivation?0 -
As the estate is not going to be paying IHT tax mitigation cannot be used as the primary reason for asset disposal.0
-
How is it irrelevant if later on it might be decided that it is deliberate deprivation?
I think what Brynsam means is that if the sole driver is to avoid IHT, she should hang on to her money. Whether the OP and his family should or should not act as amateur carers is a different question they didn't ask. And also a bridge they can cross when they come to it. If the sole driver was IHT then it is irrelevant who is going to care for the mother as she would have no reason to give away the money either way.
However, if the driver for the proposed gifts is not IHT but the mother simply wanting her family to enjoy the money, she can knock herself out. If she later went into care and it was assessed as deliberate deprivation, whoever she gave her money to would become liable, but they have their mother's gift to meet that liability with so nobody is worse off - unless they have spent it all.
If the mother gave most of her money away in the hope of reducing an actual IHT bill then ipso facto it wouldn't be deliberate deprivation. However in this position she doesn't have an IHT bill, so if the family said to the local authority "she gave us all that money to reduce her IHT bill" the local authority's repsonse will be "lol no".0 -
It is a question they didn’t ask but from what they’ve said it doesn’t look like they realise what can beinvolved and how difficult it might be, for example requiring assistance of two, there are scenarios where amateur care is not an option unless two people live in.
Yes agreed there is an issue if people spend it or whatever it is invested in losses value. In most cases the idea of passing it on (as you’ve said) is for people to enjoy it or make use of it in some way.
Oddly enough I’m the recipient of a share of a property in trust to avoid care fees (IHT not involved). The people involved have acute health issues and are less likely to need long term care, however I am not expecting a share and will fight my siblings if necessary to get them into a decent care home if it comes to it. I believe they’ve been badly advised which is interesting as posters are often advised on here to get professional advice.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards