Establishing lifetime trust accounts for young adult children

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have $25 million dollars and you don't want your kids to ask you for help buying a house or a car?

Wow. My dad inspected boilers for a living and my folks never had more than $600K in savings/investments, but they still gave me $15K the first (and only) time I bought a house, with my husband.

What is wrong with rich people?

And you took $15k from your working class parents instead of paying for your own damn house?

What is wrong with YOU?

I did. I had also given my dad $40K to buy a rental property five years earlier. And my dad was the first to say how proud of us he was when we paid off our $500K mortgage in 5 years.

My parents were and are amazing. You're right, that they deserve more than I was ever able to give them. Congrats on the snark.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are worse things that can happen to your kids than “never establishing a career.” As long as they’re doing something meaningful to them and have enough money, does it matter? A lot of careers kind of suck.

I don't know, a lot of the people I know who never established themselves and got parental subsidies aren't really happy loafing around now that they are in their 40s and 50s. And the men are still single because women don't really want to marry someone like that. I knew some of these people growing up and I never would have guessed they would going to end up like this. I have my will set up to not give my kids money until 30 if I die. Honestly I would set it at 35 except that seems like a lot for an executor. If I am alive I would give my kids money in their 20s for specific reasons (med school, down payment) but I would not just give them money for nothing.

+1 the wealthiest trust finder I know is in their 40s and he and his wife seem rudderless outside their kids activities.

A lot of people are unhappy in their 40’s though. It’s not as if only trustfunders are getting divorced, hating their jobs or having other crises.

Yeah but working gives people a sense of purpose. It really isn't great to just be on the dole, even if that dole is a trust fund.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are worse things that can happen to your kids than “never establishing a career.” As long as they’re doing something meaningful to them and have enough money, does it matter? A lot of careers kind of suck.

I don't know, a lot of the people I know who never established themselves and got parental subsidies aren't really happy loafing around now that they are in their 40s and 50s. And the men are still single because women don't really want to marry someone like that. I knew some of these people growing up and I never would have guessed they would going to end up like this. I have my will set up to not give my kids money until 30 if I die. Honestly I would set it at 35 except that seems like a lot for an executor. If I am alive I would give my kids money in their 20s for specific reasons (med school, down payment) but I would not just give them money for nothing.

+1 the wealthiest trust finder I know is in their 40s and he and his wife seem rudderless outside their kids activities.

A lot of people are unhappy in their 40’s though. It’s not as if only trustfunders are getting divorced, hating their jobs or having other crises.

Yeah but working gives people a sense of purpose. It really isn't great to just be on the dole, even if that dole is a trust fund.

This is true for a lot of people, but I’m pretty happy “on the dole.” I like having time to be the primary caregiver for my young kids and time to care for my elderly parents, and to do some creative pursuits and volunteering. I had the kind of job that sounds good at a cocktail party, but I was miserable. I never had time for what felt like my real life and the things that were supposed to be rewarding about work lost their shine. All you get from a salary is a salary. Meaningful work doesn’t always come with cash payments. Ask women. And I absolutely love not being totally pinched at this moment in my life and having time to serve my family and keep myself happy. I know some people will look down on me for not “working” but tbh I don’t need their approval.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are worse things that can happen to your kids than “never establishing a career.” As long as they’re doing something meaningful to them and have enough money, does it matter? A lot of careers kind of suck.

I don't know, a lot of the people I know who never established themselves and got parental subsidies aren't really happy loafing around now that they are in their 40s and 50s. And the men are still single because women don't really want to marry someone like that. I knew some of these people growing up and I never would have guessed they would going to end up like this. I have my will set up to not give my kids money until 30 if I die. Honestly I would set it at 35 except that seems like a lot for an executor. If I am alive I would give my kids money in their 20s for specific reasons (med school, down payment) but I would not just give them money for nothing.

+1 the wealthiest trust finder I know is in their 40s and he and his wife seem rudderless outside their kids activities.

A lot of people are unhappy in their 40’s though. It’s not as if only trustfunders are getting divorced, hating their jobs or having other crises.

Yeah but working gives people a sense of purpose. It really isn't great to just be on the dole, even if that dole is a trust fund.

This is true for a lot of people, but I’m pretty happy “on the dole.” I like having time to be the primary caregiver for my young kids and time to care for my elderly parents, and to do some creative pursuits and volunteering. I had the kind of job that sounds good at a cocktail party, but I was miserable. I never had time for what felt like my real life and the things that were supposed to be rewarding about work lost their shine. All you get from a salary is a salary. Meaningful work doesn’t always come with cash payments. Ask women. And I absolutely love not being totally pinched at this moment in my life and having time to serve my family and keep myself happy. I know some people will look down on me for not “working” but tbh I don’t need their approval.

But obviously if my parents wanted me to be a doctor or whatever they are disappointed. On the other hand, they see their grandkids all the time with me there to help them and know I will help them as they age, get sick and die.

[Anonymous]

Stick to HEMS - health, education, maintenance, and support. Pay for health insurance and medical bills, pay for college for your kids and grandkids (as well as summer camps and educational travel), M&S can mean a lot of things, but you can agree to subsidize rent or offer part of downpayment on a home, agree to a reasonable and safe car (e.g., a Toyota, not an Audi), and pay for family vacations. I would make this contingent upon graduating from college.

[Anonymous]

I had the funds available to me for the following needs: medical, educational or large purchase (car, house). Any withdrawal required trustee approval, till 35.

After 35 I could withdraw the funds without trustee approval.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t start the distributions before age 25 or 30. I was a very mature, responsible kid. Went to an Ivy League law school. Am smart. Got a good job. Aaaaaand paid off my fiancé’s student loans with the distributions my dad gave me. And then two years later my fiancé (by then husband) had an affair and left me. I feel like I would have made better choices if I had been a bit older.

That was dumb, you should not have used extra marital assets to pay of a fiancés loans.

[Anonymous]

Our kids are about 10 years younger and our investment maybe $5M more than yours. I do not believe in leaving significant money to our kids, but I think that is a personal choice.

I think the way your achieve your objective is not giving them cash but an asset to manage. Something that requires some management in their end to give them an income stream. Real estate would seem the obvious choice. Im partial to retail properties but I’m thinking a multi family property (like 100 units in kids far out Virginia) or a strip mall or storage units.

I’d probably start with you owning 90% of the company and then being responsible for managing it (obviously managing the management company). You can guide them. Presuming they do well you can gift them shares with self cancelling notes.

I think this meets your objectives and sets them up for success and a desire to keep the golden goose producing eggs and not trying to slaughter it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Our kids are about 10 years younger and our investment maybe $5M more than yours. I do not believe in leaving significant money to our kids, but I think that is a personal choice.

I think the way your achieve your objective is not giving them cash but an asset to manage. Something that requires some management in their end to give them an income stream. Real estate would seem the obvious choice. Im partial to retail properties but I’m thinking a multi family property (like 100 units in kids far out Virginia) or a strip mall or storage units.

I’d probably start with you owning 90% of the company and then being responsible for managing it (obviously managing the management company). You can guide them. Presuming they do well you can gift them shares with self cancelling notes.

I think this meets your objectives and sets them up for success and a desire to keep the golden goose producing eggs and not trying to slaughter it.

Why? What an odd way to approach this. You’re basically assigning them a property management job, and then if they do well at it they become massively overpaid for it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our kids are about 10 years younger and our investment maybe $5M more than yours. I do not believe in leaving significant money to our kids, but I think that is a personal choice.

I think the way your achieve your objective is not giving them cash but an asset to manage. Something that requires some management in their end to give them an income stream. Real estate would seem the obvious choice. Im partial to retail properties but I’m thinking a multi family property (like 100 units in kids far out Virginia) or a strip mall or storage units.

I’d probably start with you owning 90% of the company and then being responsible for managing it (obviously managing the management company). You can guide them. Presuming they do well you can gift them shares with self cancelling notes.

I think this meets your objectives and sets them up for success and a desire to keep the golden goose producing eggs and not trying to slaughter it.

Why? What an odd way to approach this. You’re basically assigning them a property management job, and then if they do well at it they become massively overpaid for it?

Because this is what it means to be rich. You manage the managers. And since you capital is doing the heavy lifting you are compensated very well. Do it well and your family stays rich for another generation. Do it poorly and the corpus is consumed.

[Anonymous]

This is wealth hoarding. You have more than you can spend. Your kids are fine and have have college and grad school paid for. Why send them to school at all if you are going to pay for all of their needs. Donate (at least some) the money.

[Anonymous]

So this how the rich stay rich. I thought DCUM had told me it's about work ethics and being smart.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our kids are about 10 years younger and our investment maybe $5M more than yours. I do not believe in leaving significant money to our kids, but I think that is a personal choice.

I think the way your achieve your objective is not giving them cash but an asset to manage. Something that requires some management in their end to give them an income stream. Real estate would seem the obvious choice. Im partial to retail properties but I’m thinking a multi family property (like 100 units in kids far out Virginia) or a strip mall or storage units.

I’d probably start with you owning 90% of the company and then being responsible for managing it (obviously managing the management company). You can guide them. Presuming they do well you can gift them shares with self cancelling notes.

I think this meets your objectives and sets them up for success and a desire to keep the golden goose producing eggs and not trying to slaughter it.

Why? What an odd way to approach this. You’re basically assigning them a property management job, and then if they do well at it they become massively overpaid for it?

Because this is what it means to be rich. You manage the managers. And since you capital is doing the heavy lifting you are compensated very well. Do it well and your family stays rich for another generation. Do it poorly and the corpus is consumed.

But why on earth a multi-family property or a strip mall or storage units? That would not be high on my list of investments and it is a crappy job to have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So this how the rich stay rich. I thought DCUM had told me it's about work ethics and being smart.

They stay rich by getting enough dumdums to vote Republican that they can keep taxes on wealth, capital gains, and inheritances low. Seems like many in Gen Z are seeing through the scam.