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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If youve given your kids every opportunity, paid for college, help with downpayment, yearly assistance to help with tax burden.....what more do you want to give them?

A sizable inheritance, so they can have financial security and because you can’t take it with you.

If 2M plus all that isnt sizeable enough you have a warped sense of the definition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am leaving my kids as much as possible. As climate change makes conditions worse, those with more money will be able to handle it a lot better.

This approach always floors me. You could use some of that money to improve the problem (through research , political donations, NGOs), which would help everyone. Or you can squirrel away money so just your family is immunized against the perils threatening the rest of society.

Are you a Republican?

You think my money is going to solve the problem when all do the countries in the world cannot? Ha. I will do what I can, which is put my kids in as best a condition that I can. Giving $5m or $50m isn’t going to do squat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If youve given your kids every opportunity, paid for college, help with downpayment, yearly assistance to help with tax burden.....what more do you want to give them?

Because accumulating inheritances over generations is how families build wealth

[Anonymous]

Assuming you live a reasonably long life, kids should be in their 40s before this is an issue, no? They aren't going to be "living in poverty" like you fear, they will have stable careers and have launched.

I think the compromise is you do whatever you want with your half, he does whatever he wants with his half. So if you want to split it between 2 kids, each gets 25% of the estate, and 50% goes to charity. Or DH says each kid gets $2m and you say they each get 25%.

[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?

The odds are that he'll predecease you and you can leave everything to the kids. You can separately leave everything in your name to them. You don't even have to tell him. You can write a will after the joint wills are finished and register it at your county court house. The latter will will supersede your earlier will, just tell your kids about it

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If youve given your kids every opportunity, paid for college, help with downpayment, yearly assistance to help with tax burden.....what more do you want to give them?

A sizable inheritance, so they can have financial security and because you can’t take it with you.

If 2M plus all that isnt sizeable enough you have a warped sense of the definition.

I don’t think anyone is arguing that 2M isn’t significant. The point is that it’s a fraction of the parents overall wealth, and many parents would choose to leave their kids and grandkids as much as they had.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If youve given your kids every opportunity, paid for college, help with downpayment, yearly assistance to help with tax burden.....what more do you want to give them?

A sizable inheritance, so they can have financial security and because you can’t take it with you.

If 2M plus all that isnt sizeable enough you have a warped sense of the definition.

I don’t think anyone is arguing that 2M isn’t significant. The point is that it’s a fraction of the parents overall wealth, and many parents would choose to leave their kids and grandkids as much as they had.

then have a trust that gives grandkids money but there is no guarantee that giving kids money means grandkids get money.

[Anonymous]

You need a trust with remainder beneficiaries and specify for them enough to pay for college costs. You do not want the grandbabies or great grandbabies struggling because you don’t know what the world situation will be in the future. Better safe than sorry

[Anonymous]

OP, are you and your husband in good health? Do you think either of you would be dying any time soon?

The question isn't whether your children will only have $2 million to spend from ages 0 to 18, the question is, once you die at age 80 to 90, and your children are 40 to 50 years old, how much do you want to leave them?

People will differ on how much to leave their children, but the fear that they will grow up with humble beginnings just isn't relevant if there's a 99% chance that they are already your current age by the time you die.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:2M is plenty. I think there is nothing wrong with his suggestion.

Fully agree. Even after a decade or two of inflation it will still be a great deal of money.

[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.

Agree - my kids each have mental health issues which may limit their earning power even though they each work hard and are frugal. I want them to be able to afford health care and housing so they get everything (except for some small bequests 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?

Be careful of giving your kids too much. They need to have a purpose in life and being a trust fund baby can make for a lot of unhappy people. 2 million is plenty. Look at Bono and Gordon Ramsey giving nothing. Think of how privleged you are thinking 2 million isnt goingvto be enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why would someone earn all that money if not to leave it to kids? seriously

Because the husband also sees the value in leaving some to charity. Sad that you can't understand this motivation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am leaving my kids as much as possible. As climate change makes conditions worse, those with more money will be able to handle it a lot better.

This approach always floors me. You could use some of that money to improve the problem (through research , political donations, NGOs), which would help everyone. Or you can squirrel away money so just your family is immunized against the perils threatening the rest of society.

Are you a Republican?

You think my money is going to solve the problem when all do the countries in the world cannot? Ha. I will do what I can, which is put my kids in as best a condition that I can. Giving $5m or $50m isn’t going to do squat.

There's plenty of good you can do in the world, especially on the local level. Excuses.