Husband doesn't want to leave our kids much in inheritence

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:#RichPeopleProblems

Meanwhile, many of us are stressing that our kids will be able to afford a house someday. I cannot imagine not wanting to leave them as comfortable/safe, financially, as possible. But, you have a different perspective when you grow up poor and have had financial instability for much of your life. Doing well'ish now but those fears never leave you. I guess maybe if I had the money some of you seem to have but that is not the case. So I do not understand the OPs DH and people who agree with him.

If you're at the point where it is multiple millions and think it is too much for the kids, why would you not set up your future grandkids??? If there are no grandkids, remainder can go to charity w/ whatever else you are giving in that regard.

Warren Buffet has said he won't leave anything to his kids or grandkids (though one of his kids does run his charitable arm). Not surprisingly, the attitude is more prevalent among self-made rich people from modest or poor origins vs old money folks (where most of their wealth was inherited wealth).

He's full of it. He has given his kids plenty of money. For one, he gives them money to start businesses, which is a common trust provision. He put them all through college and grad school. etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:#RichPeopleProblems

Meanwhile, many of us are stressing that our kids will be able to afford a house someday. I cannot imagine not wanting to leave them as comfortable/safe, financially, as possible. But, you have a different perspective when you grow up poor and have had financial instability for much of your life. Doing well'ish now but those fears never leave you. I guess maybe if I had the money some of you seem to have but that is not the case. So I do not understand the OPs DH and people who agree with him.

If you're at the point where it is multiple millions and think it is too much for the kids, why would you not set up your future grandkids??? If there are no grandkids, remainder can go to charity w/ whatever else you are giving in that regard.

Warren Buffet has said he won't leave anything to his kids or grandkids (though one of his kids does run his charitable arm). Not surprisingly, the attitude is more prevalent among self-made rich people from modest or poor origins vs old money folks (where most of their wealth was inherited wealth).

He's full of it. He has given his kids plenty of money. For one, he gives them money to start businesses, which is a common trust provision. He put them all through college and grad school. etc.

Well, he did have a grand daughter on welfare...maybe he is willing to give money for very specific things, but seems like he is also fine with providing little help as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:#RichPeopleProblems

Meanwhile, many of us are stressing that our kids will be able to afford a house someday. I cannot imagine not wanting to leave them as comfortable/safe, financially, as possible. But, you have a different perspective when you grow up poor and have had financial instability for much of your life. Doing well'ish now but those fears never leave you. I guess maybe if I had the money some of you seem to have but that is not the case. So I do not understand the OPs DH and people who agree with him.

If you're at the point where it is multiple millions and think it is too much for the kids, why would you not set up your future grandkids??? If there are no grandkids, remainder can go to charity w/ whatever else you are giving in that regard.

Warren Buffet has said he won't leave anything to his kids or grandkids (though one of his kids does run his charitable arm). Not surprisingly, the attitude is more prevalent among self-made rich people from modest or poor origins vs old money folks (where most of their wealth was inherited wealth).

Why do people keep bringing him up? He's given his heirs LOTS of money and set them up nicely, even if there will not be an inheritance at the end. Those people have had a running start on life and finances since day 1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of charities don’t really do anything.

As opposed to people with inherited wealth, the heroes of America's story.

The number of charities who don't really do anything is vanishingly small. Mostly they are staffed by idealistic young people and they do their best for half the salary you earn (if that.)

So because the people who work for charities make less money than I do, I shouldn't give to charity?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We are in the process of updating our estate documents and it has become very tense. Current investments are around $14M and our only debt is $400K mortgage and we will owe income taxes when we exercise our stock options (probably around $1.2M or so in taxes). Bottom line, we aren't going to run out of money based on our current spending so there will be a substantial amount left when we die.

My husband only wants to leave each of our 2 kids $2M each and the rest to charity. My concern is $2M seems like a lot of money, but when you consider inflation, who knows what it will be in 20 or 30 years. He keeps telling me he doesn't want his legacy to be making his kids wealthy. I am struggling with leaving them such a small percentage of our estate. Both my husband and I came from very humble background, and he basically wants our kids to have our same or similar struggles in life. I am at a loss at how to counter this.

Anyone else grapple with this?

We are approaching things similar to your husband. We paid for our kids' education and helped them with the downpayment on their first homes. We also set aside money for the grandkids' education. Each kid will end up with the equivalent of $2.5m in today's $$. The rest will go charitable causes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of charities don’t really do anything.

As opposed to people with inherited wealth, the heroes of America's story.

The number of charities who don't really do anything is vanishingly small. Mostly they are staffed by idealistic young people and they do their best for half the salary you earn (if that.)

So because the people who work for charities make less money than I do, I shouldn't give to charity?

No, it's fine to give to charity. And it's a good idea as long as you keep up with what they are doing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are in the process of updating our estate documents and it has become very tense. Current investments are around $14M and our only debt is $400K mortgage and we will owe income taxes when we exercise our stock options (probably around $1.2M or so in taxes). Bottom line, we aren't going to run out of money based on our current spending so there will be a substantial amount left when we die.

My husband only wants to leave each of our 2 kids $2M each and the rest to charity. My concern is $2M seems like a lot of money, but when you consider inflation, who knows what it will be in 20 or 30 years. He keeps telling me he doesn't want his legacy to be making his kids wealthy. I am struggling with leaving them such a small percentage of our estate. Both my husband and I came from very humble background, and he basically wants our kids to have our same or similar struggles in life. I am at a loss at how to counter this.

Anyone else grapple with this?

He has the "Bill Gates" syndrome. Gates kept announcing that he will leave 'only' $10 mil to each of his kids. Nevermind that the daughter has her own multi-acre equestrian estate, a fancy $25mil+ house in NYC and god knows what else. Buffet claims to be doing something similar but his kids are on the board of charities that pay them hefty salaries. The point is, the rich talk out of both sides of their mouth. Tell him not to emulate them.

As others pointed out, of the $14 mil, $7mil is yours to leave to whoever you want and you should leave that to your kids. He doesn't need to know.

I'm not sure I believe Bill Gates. The returns from a $10 million inheritance wouldn't even pay for the upkeep on his kids' estates. There's more to the story than he's telling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are in the process of updating our estate documents and it has become very tense. Current investments are around $14M and our only debt is $400K mortgage and we will owe income taxes when we exercise our stock options (probably around $1.2M or so in taxes). Bottom line, we aren't going to run out of money based on our current spending so there will be a substantial amount left when we die.

My husband only wants to leave each of our 2 kids $2M each and the rest to charity. My concern is $2M seems like a lot of money, but when you consider inflation, who knows what it will be in 20 or 30 years. He keeps telling me he doesn't want his legacy to be making his kids wealthy. I am struggling with leaving them such a small percentage of our estate. Both my husband and I came from very humble background, and he basically wants our kids to have our same or similar struggles in life. I am at a loss at how to counter this.

Anyone else grapple with this?

He has the "Bill Gates" syndrome. Gates kept announcing that he will leave 'only' $10 mil to each of his kids. Nevermind that the daughter has her own multi-acre equestrian estate, a fancy $25mil+ house in NYC and god knows what else. Buffet claims to be doing something similar but his kids are on the board of charities that pay them hefty salaries. The point is, the rich talk out of both sides of their mouth. Tell him not to emulate them.

As others pointed out, of the $14 mil, $7mil is yours to leave to whoever you want and you should leave that to your kids. He doesn't need to know.

I'm not sure I believe Bill Gates. The returns from a $10 million inheritance wouldn't even pay for the upkeep on his kids' estates. There's more to the story than he's telling.

It's basically the inheritance version of the CEO who proudly proclaims that he only takes a $1 salary, while conveniently leaving out the millions in stock options and bonuses that he gets.

Bill Gates's kids are already rich thanks to all the money their father made. At this point, any extra from an inheritance is just gravy. Or frosting. Or whatever food metaphor you want to use.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kid was diagnosed recently with a chronic disease. Ask him how he’d feel if he didn’t leave money to a child in that situation. I will try to leave my kids every penny I can because you never know what can happen.

This. I had to leave my career to care for my special needs child who will be unlikely to ever hold anything beyond, maybe, a part time minimum wage job. For a while my DH also dealt with chronic illness and we were unsure if he would be able to keep his job. For the past few years our lifestyle, which is not extravagant, has been possibly solely due to the inheritance his grandfather left him. How awful if you missed the chance to support your kids and future grandchildren in a similar way.

Terrible things can happen to people we love.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Don’t stress about this until you find out how much long term care you will both need.

Oh please. Any level of long-term care can be comfortably supported without touching the principal of $14m.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are in the process of updating our estate documents and it has become very tense. Current investments are around $14M and our only debt is $400K mortgage and we will owe income taxes when we exercise our stock options (probably around $1.2M or so in taxes). Bottom line, we aren't going to run out of money based on our current spending so there will be a substantial amount left when we die.

My husband only wants to leave each of our 2 kids $2M each and the rest to charity. My concern is $2M seems like a lot of money, but when you consider inflation, who knows what it will be in 20 or 30 years. He keeps telling me he doesn't want his legacy to be making his kids wealthy. I am struggling with leaving them such a small percentage of our estate. Both my husband and I came from very humble background, and he basically wants our kids to have our same or similar struggles in life. I am at a loss at how to counter this.

Anyone else grapple with this?

We are approaching things similar to your husband. We paid for our kids' education and helped them with the downpayment on their first homes. We also set aside money for the grandkids' education. Each kid will end up with the equivalent of $2.5m in today's $$. The rest will go charitable causes.

again why did you earn it (no doubt at great sacrifice to your family) if you don’t want to give it to your family? don’t tell me you were effective altruists all along. I think people like you are frankly greedy and controlling about money and want to maintain that control from beyond the grave. it’s one thing to set up trusts to ensure the money is used wisely but another to go through life amassing a fortune then keeping it away from your kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With that amount of money why not create a trust for your children (and descendants?)

You can give them $2 million each in inheritance and the remainder can go in the family trust to be used for college tuition or medical expenses for biological or adopted children.

But why limit it?

Smart plan is to gift to kids starting with paid for college and graduate school, fully funding their retirement, first car, downpayment assistance, etc. Best bang for the buck.

Why not just fully support your kid for everything in their life? Why stop at all of this...pay for their food, kids' private school, going on vacations, utility bills... you name it.

I mean, fully funding their retirement? Wouldn't that mean giving them all your money right now?

we gift them $36K/year to take advantage of the tax free gifting. Feel we pay max taxes for years now, they might as well take full advantage of the Roth IRA and max their 401K. By time they are 30, they will have enough in their tax free retirement accounts to stop contributing and have $2M+ at age 65. They will obviously continue to contribute, but it will be a great start. They would still be able to save 40-50% of that without our assistance, and be doing better than most their age. But why not maximize the tax free saving potential?

rather than giving them $10M+ in 20+ years, why not gradually give it to them now?

FYI---our kid would still be saving 50% of what they are on their own accord/budget without any assistance. This way they just maximize the tax savings and also continue to save more on their own.

Giving then $36k per year is different than "fully funding their retirement". Not sure why you used that phrase.

$36K per year is more than enough to max out their retirement yearly. It leaves them with extra to just save on their own. So they can $7K Roth and then at most $23K for 401k. They only make $70K, so they might be doing $14/15K total. With our help they do $30K. The compounding advantage is huge, along with the current and future tax benefits (no taxes on growth) They still live on their $70K, and live in an place they can afford and still save on their own for retirement. Just not at $30k/year levels.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All very alien. It is human nature to support your children however you can.

DH and I each are leaving everything to our kids and nothing to each other (except primary residence). Will help avoid state, possibly federal estate taxes as well.

That's not how taxes work.

It is how most state estate taxes work--no portability. See DC. Also, if I receive assets from DH, the growth from that could trigger federal estate tax thresholds, whereas if the children receive the assets, the growth is theirs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:#RichPeopleProblems

Meanwhile, many of us are stressing that our kids will be able to afford a house someday. I cannot imagine not wanting to leave them as comfortable/safe, financially, as possible. But, you have a different perspective when you grow up poor and have had financial instability for much of your life. Doing well'ish now but those fears never leave you. I guess maybe if I had the money some of you seem to have but that is not the case. So I do not understand the OPs DH and people who agree with him.

If you're at the point where it is multiple millions and think it is too much for the kids, why would you not set up your future grandkids??? If there are no grandkids, remainder can go to charity w/ whatever else you are giving in that regard.

Warren Buffet has said he won't leave anything to his kids or grandkids (though one of his kids does run his charitable arm). Not surprisingly, the attitude is more prevalent among self-made rich people from modest or poor origins vs old money folks (where most of their wealth was inherited wealth).

Why do people keep bringing him up? He's given his heirs LOTS of money and set them up nicely, even if there will not be an inheritance at the end. Those people have had a running start on life and finances since day 1.

This 100%. It's like the Bill gates is leaving his kids each only $10M. Well the oldest got Stanford, MPH, and Medical school paid for, while living in a posh NYC worth $76M. She has a pretty nice farm/estate in upstate NY as well. So yes, she might only inherit $10M ultimately, but she has been set up well for life with all these advantages and first homes.

Also, she has done well for herself. You dont' survive Stanford if you are not intelligent. You dont go onto medical school and survive either based on your parents money---she's smart and motivated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t stress about this until you find out how much long term care you will both need.

Oh please. Any level of long-term care can be comfortably supported without touching the principal of $14m.

Not if you want that care to be in-home, top quality, 24 hour specialized nursing care. That can run you $300k+/year. If both of you require that, then $600K+. That's just for the nurses, you still have to maintain the home and have food and other items provided