Inheritance Money

MarkyBoi30

My 1 year old son was left some money by his Great Grandfather, this money has been sent to me by cheque from the solicitors. I now have a second son, who obviously didn't inherit anything as he was born after my grandfather passed away. I am now torn legally and morally. My firstborn will be in a much better position financially than my second son, as this inheritance will probably double in value before he turns 18 and I allow him access to it. I feel like it would be fairer if I split the inheritance between the two of them, as I know if my grandfather had still been alive when my second son was born they would both have been left an equal share. On the one hand I think it is the right thing to do as they both get equal financial assistance, there is no way I could afford to save the same amount and give to the second son from my own pocket. On the other hand is it stealing from my firstborn? I would love thoughts and opinions from a legal view and also a moral view. Thanks!

ohnonotgmail

From a legal perspective it is not your money to share with your second child. From a moral perspective it sucks. If the first son decides on his 18th birthday to give half to his younger brother then that would be a nice thing to do. but it has to be their decision not yours.

Peregrinus

This is not your money. You don't get to decide what happens to it. If you don't pay it to your son, you are stealing from him.

Victor

Set up a savings account for the second child and contribute to it for the next 18 years.

walkonby

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118955752#Comment_118955752

It must be a substantial amount, as the OP said they can’t afford to save up the same amount, and it will leave the elder son in a “much better” financial position.

The odds that an 18 year old who has just received a big cash windfall will volunteer to split it with a younger sibling are pretty low. I’d probably avoid ever creating the impression that the younger one really should have had a share. Plenty of apparently mature adult siblings get into very bitter rows about inheritance—imagine the resentment that might develop with a couple of teenagers.

Strumms

There is only one right thing to do… respect the wishes of the person leaving the money.

Dats_rite

Personally i would halve it between the sons when they are 18. If you are sure that is what the grandfather wanted, and it probably is by the sounds of it, I would do that.

MarkyBoi30

Yes, my son was left the exact same amount that was left to me - the maximum amount someone can leave a grandchild or great grandchild tax free. So short of giving my inheritance to my second son there is no way I can financially afford to ensure he has the same amount of money to help him when he turns 18 with college fees / car / house deposit.

If I did split the money now it could be a very awkward conversation if what I did became known to my son and potentially cause a rift in the family. If I leave it as it is then there could be jealousy between the 2 of them. I can't predict how they will be when they are 18, but as walkonby said, it is highly unlikely the older sibling will choose to split the amount with his younger sibling.

I currently put €120 a month into savings account for both my sons which comes out of the funds we receive from the government every month as parents, even if I stopped contributing into my firstborns account and put €240 a month into my second born sons account, it still wouldn't catch up but I guess would make a dent. Maybe that would be the better option as then I am not taking anything from the elder son, I am just choosing to give my younger son more, thoughts and opinions on this are also welcome.

Some may say that is still unfair as I am helping one son financially and I am not helping the other son at all (because he has already been helped by his great grandfather). It is almost like a lose lose situation.

ec18

you aren't giving your first born anything, the grandfather did. Like the above said it's not your money to split life is unfair sometimes be glad that one of your sons has such an advantage in current world with cost of living and housing prices

coylemj

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118956550#Comment_118956550

The second son was not yet born when the great-grandfather died so it's not a question of what he 'wanted'.

What about if the OP has another child - does he then split the inheritance three ways?

OP says he is 'now torn legally and morally', I find this very strange because legally and morally, the money is the property of the elder son, that's all there is to it. If he chooses to confiscate half the money from the elder child and give it to the second son, he will have no legal or moral basis to so do.

Xterminator

had the grandfather left the money to the op and said give it to your child/children that would be one thing. but what actually happened is the family member left a will that gave explicit instructions. the moral thing to do is to honor his wishes. Not OP's wishes

its clear as day that OP should fulfil the wishes of grandparent, and the take whatever action he or she see's fit with their own money.

And yes life is not always fair. when your children go to college there will be people who come from wealthier backgrounds and there will be children who come from less affluent backgrounds. often the children with less income have to get part-time jobs and can not then spend as much time on their studies as they might wish. yet their grades don't take this into account. that's just 1 example they most people would be familiar with.

My advice, don't go against the wishes of the deceased.

MarkyBoi30

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118956614#Comment_118956614

I am approaching this from the point of view of a loving parent who just wants both my sons to have the same financial help. I am posting here as I want to hear other people viewpoints as like I said, I am torn as I'm thinking how he might feel when he turns 18 and his brother get €60k but he gets nothing.

Maybe my viewpoint is clouded. Maybe more parents would agree to split it, and people who don't have kids won't understand where I am coming from. Maybe 90% of people think even considering splitting the money is wrong - always interesting to hear an outsiders point of view.

I could be overthinking this and possibly shouldn't take any view point at all, just put the money into a savings account and give it to my elder son when he turns 18, and not think twice about it.

But then if I did that and tried to balance the scales by putting more money into savings for my younger son, would that also be considered unfair because I am not treating them both equally?

Xterminator

But then if I did that and tried to balance the scales by putting more money into savings for my younger son, would that also be considered unfair because I am not treating them both equally?

you could very easily sit them both down and explain what you decide to do, when they are old enough. Its not actually that complicated. because they are individuals they may not agree with your decision but they can at least respect its your money and you decision to make. just as the grandfather's was.

A2LUE42

If you are talking about a grandchild, then Group B is the tax-free threshold in question, so the amount would be 32.5K

240 per month, by 12 months, by 18 years is almost 51.84K (not doing any compound interest calcs)

So something is not right with the sums here.

As regards the legal/moral part. The allocated funds are clearly for the 1st child and are not yours to decide who gets what.

Pawwed Rig

Splitting it is not your decision to make as you have no say as to what happens to the money. If you wan to you can leverage your will more in favour of the other child(ren) to account for any perceived shortfalls

Whatwicklow

The older son is due today's sum, not the interest or benifits of its value in x years

When the older son turns 18, make sure they get the sum from day 1, the extra earned goes to son 2.

Save and split the Gov money with them the same.

I hope son or daughter #3 or #4 doesn't come along 😂

Princess Calla

You can't split it it's not yours to split.

You have no control over the inheritance it's done.

You can control what happens next.

You could give up your inheritance or a % of it, to the second child though do be mindful you can only gift 3k a year from a revenue perspective.

You could save as much as you can for second child to match the inheritance money.

When child turns 18/21 it shouldn't really matter where the lumpsum comes from (grandparent or parent) they should just be bloody grateful that they got something.

Victor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118956755#Comment_118956755

No. Any income from the lump sum is the heir's.

Donald Trump

I don't think there'd be anything stopping the first born from suing you for stealing his money when he turns 18

MarkyBoi30

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118956755#Comment_118956755

Haha yea there def won't be a third or a fourth!

I was wandering about that - because he has been left X amount and when he turns 18 the amount will hopefully be a lot higher. Is that not still 'stealing' the interest from him?

I have spoken to a financial advisor and the money will probably have doubled by the time he turns 18

Dial Hard

Henry Ford III

Seems straightforward to me. The inheritance and any growth therein belongs to son 1.

Firing money into a savings product for son 2 in an attempt to level things actually isn't fair to son 1.

p.s. It's a pity the will didn't say that the money was for your son or sons.

MarkyBoi30

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118956802#Comment_118956802

So you think it wouldn't be fair to help son 2 more as he is financially worse off?

Ronney

Dial Hard

This is why I think it's bonkers to include grandchildren/great grandchildren in a will. Split the estate between your children and let them make a gesture towards their own children if they want. That's what my parents will be doing as otherwise it's a bit unfair on those who have no children/have fewer kids than others, etc.

Mind you, my parents have also repeatedly warned us not to expect much of an inheritance at all. As far as they're concerned, they worked hard for their money and it's there to be enjoyed while they're alive, which I can't say I disagree with!

Ronney

What ever you do d'ont go having Child 3!

Explain to the child that it would be best and what his granddad would want for him to share with his brother. If he doesnt remind him that you still have control where your estate is left too!

callaway92

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118956822#Comment_118956822

Exactly, it wouldn't be fair to help him, as the money is for son 1. It would be grossly unfair on son 1 to have HIS money stolen from him without him having any say in it.

Claw Hammer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118956550#Comment_118956550

It is not the o/p's to halve it or otherwise divide it. In order to give money to someone not year born a trust would have to be set up with for a category of beneficiaries such as all the children born of the body of x.

MarkyBoi30

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118956847#Comment_118956847

I was actually referring to contributing more of my own money into a saving account for son 2, rather than taking inheritance from son 1 and giving it to son 2. I don't have an obligation to save anything for either of them, it's also my choice if I want to save more for one of them than I do for the other, based on the situation - like a needs based assessment.

If when I die one of my sons is a millionaire and the other one is in a low paid job, I would definitely consider leaving more to the poorer son as he needs it more.

MarkyBoi30

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118956834#Comment_118956834

I definitely agree with you here. I have 4 siblings, none of them have kids yet. So us 5 siblings and my first born all got left the same amount. It was probably more to avoid inheritance tax than anything else - he gifted each of us the max amount he could gift without being liable for inheritance tax. My mother was his only child still alive and she had already used up all her tax free allowance when his wife passed away.

callaway92

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118956878#Comment_118956878

Do whatever you want with YOUR OWN money. Shouldn’t touch Son 1s money though that he got from his GGF. Anything else is fair game obviously

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118956692#Comment_118956692

people who don't have kids won't understand where I am coming from

Teaching children to share isn’t exactly difficult for anyone to get their head around in all fairness.

db

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118956588#Comment_118956588

Why don't you give your inheritance to your second son?

MarkyBoi30

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118956899#Comment_118956899

In theory yes, in practice I think it isn't always that simple. Children are children. Often when they turn 18 and become an adult they still have childish attitudes in certain areas

So you received, presumably, €32.5k and so did your eldest.

If you are torn why not give your 32k to your second son and they are now equal?

MarkyBoi30

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118956902#Comment_118956902

That is definitely an option although I could also do with the money! I would rather try to save more for my second son.

feelings

You are the parent, you decide what is best for *both* of your kids. All this talk of "stealing" money from your kids 🙄.

unkel

If I were you I would explain to your sons very early on that the great grandfather left some money to the older son but had passed away before the younger son was born. That legally the money belongs to the older son. But that you as their parents feel that it would be right to split up the money when he reaches 18, but that it would be his decision. A regular little nudge. Never mention specifically that he will be in for a rough time from you from his 18th birthday onwards if he decides to keep it 😁

MarkyBoi30

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118956982#Comment_118956982

I do like that idea, thanks!

OEP

Is your plan to save more for son 2 not the obvious choice? You can then rebalance it accordingly to make sure they get equal amounts, or as close to equal as you can make it ensuring son 1 gets all of his inheritance and the growth it has accumulated. 240*12*18 is 51840, not including any growth so it's likely they'll end up with similar amounts.

Dodge

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118956966#Comment_118956966

Except this is the legal forum, so pointing out the law isn’t a bad thing

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118956934#Comment_118956934

I think this sums up your problem.

You don't mind taking money from your infant son but you know this isn't legal, while at the same time you have received the same amount yourself but don't want to give that away, so you're looking for moral absolution.

There is no legal matter here, just a moral one.

MarkyBoi30

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118957076#Comment_118957076

Wow, don't hold back whatever you do!

MarkyBoi30

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118957016#Comment_118957016

Yes, I guess the end result would be the same. Put all of the inheritance into son 1's account. Stop the monthly savings from my own pocket into son 1's account and put it all into son 2's account until the balance evens out. That way no one can accuse me of stealing from my infant son while looking for moral absolution, and the end result is exactly the same.

OEP

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118957130#Comment_118957130

Yea exactly. It's none of son 1's business where the money for son 2 is coming from - he doesn't need to know you saved extra for him. And even if he did know, and they were getting the same amount of money, he'd be an awful pr*ck to begrudge son 2 getting the same lump sum as him!

unkel

It's all very easy to say for anyone in here to the OP to just forgo his inheritance and stick that in a similar savings fund as the one for the older son. Or to just save up enough on a monthly basis to match the amount. I get the strong impression the OP can't afford to do so (without it being a major sacrifice). In my view there is no legal or moral obligation at all for the OP to do this. And I'd be pretty sure that would have been the last thing the great grandfather would have wanted to happen.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118956912#Comment_118956912

These are YOUR own children though? I mean, I dunno ‘bout you, but my wife and I always taught my own child to share, and it’s worked out pretty well in practice.

I think I’ve been doing this parenting lark wrong all along, it isn’t just money children inherit from their parents.

MarkyBoi30

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118957206#Comment_118957206

I'm new to parenting and am not as experienced as you, but there is the age old nature vs nurture debate. You can teach your kids everything in the world but they may not necessarily take it in and learn from it and practice what you have taught them. If your kids have taken on board and practice everything you have taught them then you are very lucky - not all parents are that lucky. Sometimes maybe due to bad parenting (nurture), other times not (nature).

OEP

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118957194#Comment_118957194

The OP said he can do the monthly savings thing

unkel

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118957247#Comment_118957247

Yes he can do either, but at a sacrifice. Sure any of us who save x per month could save twice as much per month. And eat beans on toast. Doing so would badly affect his life. And possibly that of his family. And for what?

OEP

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118957263#Comment_118957263

No, he's saving 120 per month for each of them so instead save 240 for son 2 and 0 for son 1