nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Who’s going to get your dosh? Wills & Inheritance Discussion

[Deleted User]

I’d be interested to hear challenges, solutions stories and thoughts around who you intend leaving your vast wealth and estate to when you leave this mortal coil:D

And also to post general links to current relevant tax thresholds etc

With no children to inherit, wills are not always an easy thing to get right for single people or those with no dependents and often can lead to the tax man getting a fair whack when others whom were dear to you might have benefited in some way.

Whether you’ve no children or loads, I’d also welcome stories from being on the receiving end of a will as beneficiary, say from an aunt or uncle and how you might have done it differently if you were them.

Important we all make a will as it’s a pain in the arse for those left behind to sort your affairs.
A few useful links to start off-feel free to post more where relevant

https://www.revenue.ie/en/gains-gifts-and-inheritance/gift-and-inheritance-tax-cat/index.aspx

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/death/before_a_death/making_a_will.html

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

[Deleted User]

I really don't intend to leave too much money to anyone, hopefully I'll spend my retirement flitering it all away

However, in the mean time, I do have a will because my next of kin are my parents and I will not leave a single penny to my father!
So, if I die young(ish) my mother will get most, plus my siblings and niece & nephew.
I also plan to leave something to my godson and a couple of friends. Also, a few charities will get a bit of cash.

If I live to old age and there is any money left, then niece, nephew and godson will get the leftovers. If there is tax to be paid, they can pay it!

pinkypinky

I was looking into this recently and shocked to discover the tax-free threshold for niblings is €32500, but that's cumulative. So if person A inherited more than that from Aunt A, then Aunt B's bequest would be all taxable as would any subsequent ones.

If I get a point of comfort, I'd plan to gift each nibling €3000 a year under the regular gift tax rules, which wouldn't affect the above.

R.D. aka MR.D

We've decided that we would like our money and assets to go to charity or if we have enough money :rolleyes: maybe a scholarship for some aspect of education that we are passionate about.

I don't plan to have much left as I want to spend as much as possible before I go! But for us, we have so many nieces and nephews between us that we can't see ourselves leaving anything to anyone in particular. It would be better for it to go somewhere there is a hope of it making some difference or impact, honestly even if the taxman does get it, it might go back into the country and support services or whatever. That seems like a better use of money than leaving to family members who have little to no need of it. Neither of our families have been particularly supportive of our life choices so I think that drives us as well.

[Deleted User]

pinkypinky wrote: »

I was looking into this recently and shocked to discover the tax-free threshold for niblings is €32500, but that's cumulative. So if person A inherited more than that from Aunt A, then Aunt B's bequest would be all taxable as would any subsequent ones.

If I get a point of comfort, I'd plan to gift each nibling €3000 a year under the regular gift tax rules, which wouldn't affect the above.

It’s good to hear that your looking and getting informed. I’ve been on the receiving end of a few badly written (solicitors fault) and badly thought out (lack of knowledge on tax implications) wills through the years and you just roll your eyes at the result -especially where the taxman cleans up needlessly but at that point it’s too late.

One such instance an aunt gave most nieces and nephews about 5k each from a pool of about 60k savings ( very nice)?and the remaining 50% of her savings will to a “favourite” niece- favourite my arse, the niece marched her into the solicitors office when she was at least 2 years with mild dementia :P but later the Aunt inherited a further 100k or so- all now with the niece minus inheritance tax- aunt was too far down dementia road to even know no less do anything about it-
So wordings of a will are very important - had the aunt expressed a percentage for each nephew and niece such as 9% it would have meant more money for most people overall and less to taxman and the “favourite” niece would still have done well out of it.

Cherry Blossom

I have 11 nieces and nephews, to spread my little bit wealth between them all theyd get very little each. So I made my will and left it between the two that are my godchildren. If I die tomorrow they’ll have enough to be a help through college years if they decide to go or get them some driving lessons and get their first car on the road if they don’t go to college/uni.

[Deleted User]

So standard inheritance tax free allowance for nephew or niece is currently €32,500
Anything above this level is taxed at 33%

Article in Irish Examiner last year focusing on nieces working for Uncle/Aunt in a business or agricultural setting who could gain considerable additional reliefs- terms and conditions of course apply but might be of interest to some here
https://www.irishexaminer.com/farming/arid-40021115.html?type=amp

[Deleted User]

If someone is lucky enough to get an inheritance, then paying a few quid tax shouldn't matter to them.

pinkypinky

bubblypop wrote: »

If someone is lucky enough to get an inheritance, then paying a few quid tax shouldn't matter to them.

Sure, but planning can help mean that the State is not the primary beneficiary of your estate.

[Deleted User]

pinkypinky wrote: »

Sure, but planning can help mean that the State is not the primary beneficiary of your estate.

Exactly and which is one of the key reasons I set up this thread- from experience many child-free aunts and uncles don’t spend enough time researching the most tax efficient ways of implementing their wishes and end up giving a whole heap to revenue where their intentions were far from that-and that’s the point- your wishes may never be fulfilled if you don’t research the financial and practical implications of what your intentions are.

fair enough if you choose to give great portions of your estate, back to the state, but at least make informed choices- leaving a house to just one person may mean they have to sell it to pay the tax and may never benefit from a “roof over their head” as you may have intended.

magicbastarder

i reckon any inheritance tax paid should be paid at full marginal rate, with no allowance. i know it's a topic that gets some peoples backs up, but unearned income should be taxed to the hilt.
i used to know someone who grew up *quite* well off, and at one point about 20+ years ago was getting IRL£800 a week pocket money from his parents, and paying no tax on it because he'd not yet hit the inheritance tax threshold.
at the time i was the poor schmuck working and earning about 15k p.a. and paying tax on it, while he wasn't paying tax on a 40k p.a. income despite contributing nothing to the economy.

[Deleted User]

Yep, I agree, anyone who inherits money should be happy to get some, and pay the bit of tax.

domrush

magicbastarder wrote: »

i reckon any inheritance tax paid should be paid at full marginal rate, with no allowance. i know it's a topic that gets some peoples backs up, but unearned income should be taxed to the hilt.
i used to know someone who grew up *quite* well off, and at one point about 20+ years ago was getting IRL£800 a week pocket money from his parents, and paying no tax on it because he'd not yet hit the inheritance tax threshold.
at the time i was the poor schmuck working and earning about 15k p.a. and paying tax on it, while he wasn't paying tax on a 40k p.a. income despite contributing nothing to the economy.

This would make it impossible to pass on a family home, as there would be huge tax bill due on the house. The person inheriting would have to immediately sell the house

dublin49

magicbastarder wrote: »

i reckon any inheritance tax paid should be paid at full marginal rate, with no allowance.

Inclined to agree but you'll be waiting.Any politican even mumbling those sentiments under his breadth would be mincemeat at election time.The rich like their inheritances and the poor don't vote.

magicbastarder

domrush wrote: »

This would make it impossible to pass on a family home, as there would be huge tax bill due on the house. The person inheriting would have to immediately sell the house

if you're living in the house, yeah of course you have to make allowances. if not, you've a year to sell it.

slavetothegrind

"the bit of tax" it can be a large chunk.
I have no such inheritance coming but should i be struck down and chose to pass on my few quid to someone, the few quid i ALREADY paid tax on, surely my choice? How the hell can you justify taking another bite?

bb12

this is a personal bugbear of mine. in my opinion the inheritance tax burden on childless people is complete discrimination in this country. i spend my whole life working and paying tax and then paying a mortgage out of the income that is left...all for the taxman to come along and grab another 33% after i'm gone. just because i have no kids. if the system was fair childless people should be able to nominate a couple of people to avail of the same thresholds that people with kids have. it's completely unjust in my view. the taxman must be laughing all the way to back especially with the rise in people not having kids in recent times.

i would love to leave my property to a niece or nephew to help keep it in the family as it was passed down to me...but i would end up leaving them with a huge tax bill and they would probably have to sell it just to settle that bill

completely unfair and unequal in my view and i don't know why this hasn't been challenged more over the years

magicbastarder

slavetothegrind wrote: »

"the bit of tax" it can be a large chunk.
I have no such inheritance coming but should i be struck down and chose to pass on my few quid to someone, the few quid i ALREADY paid tax on, surely my choice? How the hell can you justify taking another bite?

you may have paid tax on it. the recipient didn't. you're - by definition - dead. what tax you paid is irrelevant.
it's unearned income for them.

bb12

magicbastarder wrote: »

you may have paid tax on it. the recipient didn't.
it's unearned income for them.

it's also unearned income for sons and daughters but they get away without having to pay much tax

what's the threshold? circa 350k vs 32k for nieces and nephews?

childless people getting screwed over after they're dead

magicbastarder

bb12 wrote: »

childless people getting screwed over after they're dead

yeah, which is why i would argue for no tax free allowance. that you should be able to leave whatever you want to anyone (bar charities) but they start paying tax on the first euro.

slavetothegrind

So you are saying my money, after tax, is only my money to spend. If i give it to Mary it's now a different money that now becomes taxable again.
This is not just after death btw, if i gave magicbastarder 50k of my after tax savings now whilst i am alive he has to pay tax on it.

If i piss it away in the bookmakers thats fine, or travel the world first class for a month. But if i want to gift my TAXPAID earnings to magicbastarder whoa.....more tax please......

magicbastarder

slavetothegrind wrote: »

If i give it to Mary it's now a different money that now becomes taxable again.

yes, precisely.
if you give it to mary, it's unearned - not even earned - income for her.

mary already pays tax on her earned income. why should she be exempt from tax on her unearned income?

slavetothegrind

because i paid the tax on the income already!

magicbastarder

so? *you* paid tax on *your* income.
why does that exempt her on paying tax on *her* income?

markodaly

bb12 wrote: »

this is a personal bugbear of mine. in my opinion the inheritance tax burden on childless people is complete discrimination in this country. i spend my whole life working and paying tax and then paying a mortgage out of the income that is left...all for the taxman to come along and grab another 33% after i'm gone. just because i have no kids. if the system was fair childless people should be able to nominate a couple of people to avail of the same thresholds that people with kids have. it's completely unjust in my view. the taxman must be laughing all the way to back especially with the rise in people not having kids in recent times.

i would love to leave my property to a niece or nephew to help keep it in the family as it was passed down to me...but i would end up leaving them with a huge tax bill and they would probably have to sell it just to settle that bill

completely unfair and unequal in my view and i don't know why this hasn't been challenged more over the years

Well in fairness, when you retire the services you will be availing off, either the OAP, Health services, free TV licence and all that is paid for by working people. I.E the children of others.

It is just the way the cookie crumbles. It is not like children are free to raise either. People with no children, especially DINKY's are usually much more well off.

slavetothegrind

if you follow it through, if i buy you a coffee at 4 euro, you didn't earn it. You owe 33 percent of 4 euro to the tax man.
Madness!

magicbastarder

slavetothegrind wrote: »

if i buy you a coffee at 4 euro

where are you buying coffees? if you're paying 4 quid a pop, i'm suprised you're complaining about having your money taken off you.

markodaly

magicbastarder wrote: »

yes, precisely.
if you give it to mary, it's unearned - not even earned - income for her.

mary already pays tax on her earned income. why should she be exempt from tax on her unearned income?

Giving it to charity is also unearned. Just saying...
Put it this way, why should the state or a charity, like the RCC, have a right to one's assets more so than a son or daughter or a niece or nephew?

slavetothegrind

I did laugh at that. I was grasping at examples don't drink the stuff :-)

magicbastarder

markodaly wrote: »

Giving it to charity is also unearned. Just saying...
Put it this way, why should the state or a charity, like the RCC, have a right to one's assets more so than a son or daughter or a niece or nephew?

because they enjoy tax free status?
why is this so difficult? i pay tax on my income because i am not a charity. a charity does not, well, because they are a charity.

i will spend that income on things like €4 coffees and nice curtains and beer, whereas deserving charities (which excludes the RCC in my book) will spend it on deserving causes.

bb12

markodaly wrote: »

Well in fairness, when you retire the services you will be availing off, either the OAP, Health services, free TV licence and all that is paid for by working people. I.E the children of others.

It is just the way the cookie crumbles. It is not like children are free to raise either. People with no children, especially DINKY's are usually much more well off.

you mean the pension and services they keep saying we won't have when we retire because there will be no money left in the pot?

by that rationale then kids should also have ther inheritance taxed at the same rate to contribute to society. also by that rationale why should any of my current tax euros go towards any educational or child welfare causes when none of it applies to me?