Equality vs Equity

[Anonymous]

No way. Money is too equated to love/favortism. Do not do this to kid number 1.

[Anonymous]

I want my inheritance to be equally meaningful to all my kids. The marginal value of an inheritance is roughly inversely proportional to net worth. That means my richest child will get a lot more money than the poorest child.

[Anonymous]

OP - 8 figures is a very wide range. most posters here are assuming that means $10m. It could just as easily mean $99 millon.

Where do you fall in the 8 fig range?

[Anonymous]

How can an individual save $77 tax free annually? Is she a contractor and saving in a SEP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How can an individual save $77 tax free annually? Is she a contractor and saving in a SEP?

SEP is the main way.

[Anonymous]

Wait, what? With so much going on for all of you, why can't you do down the middle unless one has health problems/SN. Are you looking for trouble?
Both of them should know how to invest whether their careers pan out of not. You have enough money to have gotten both of them involved in investing since they were pre-teens.
Why make them think that money comes from work and then let them know that you see the difference in their pay.
Both should know how $200k becomes a million in 5 years. One of them thinks tax deferred is a good idea and so do you. The government will get them sooner or later and so will the fees for the next 40+ years. Their RMD is going to get them, and how are they going to learn to invest if it's done for them probably in a fund.
The money should have been going into Roth every year they were eligible or do backdoor if possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How can an individual save $77 tax free annually? Is she a contractor and saving in a SEP?

If a company offers mega backdoor roth, you can invest 70K (including employer match). Suppose employer match is $6.5K. You contribute $23.5K and another $40K as after-tax contribution which can be rolled over into a Roth. You can also contribute $7K into a Roth outside of work for a total of $77K savings into tax-deferred/tax-free accounts, each year. This is based on 2025 numbers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If your intent is to permanently damage their sibling relationship, then sure, leave them different amounts.

Yep.

The only parent who would do that (barring a disabled child) is one who really hates their kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If your intent is to permanently damage their sibling relationship, then sure, leave them different amounts.

+1 Can't stress this enough. My father plans on giving all of his money to my lazy brother because he "needs it more." I already told my brother that I will terminate our relationship if he doesn't give me an equal share. I also have mixed feelings about my father doing something like this.

It's also complicated because your stance on equality vs equity is likely influenced by political ideology. My father is very far to the left and I think that is a factor.

I agree.

Equity is making a political ideological decision about your kids that will sever their relationship forever. Even if the favorite sibling in turn splits their inheritance equally, the snubbed child will always have the tangible reminder that their parents loved them less.

What a selfish thing to do to your children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Spilt it absent disabilities - that amount is in the (high end of the) sweet spot of being significant even when split to be a very generous inheritance/safety net - but not so significant that flat out greed/dynastic wealth kicks in.

Regarding giving $$ to grandchildren - do they have kids yet? Do they have a similar number of kids? More kids on the way? Stepkids? That can be a landmine for many reasons (child with more kids might feel entitled to more, child with no kids might feel it’s unfair, etc etc)

Grandchildren inheritance gets complicated. You have one family 3-4 grandkids and one family with 0-1. “My brother the financial planner is pushing my parents to leave their money to the grandkids.” Can you guess who has the most kids? Imagine what it can do to the sibling and cousin relationships.

If they are giving it equally to the grandkids, I disagree. That is fine, as long as there is money set aside in case grandkids are born later, like a trust that sets aside a block amount to be divided equally between all gradchildren after the youngest grandchild turns 21.

[Anonymous]

I grew up in a family that communicated about everything openly and honestly. Starting shortly after college, parents asked the 3 siblings what we each thought should happen to their money (we all independently said split it 3 ways). They asked, what if one of us had a SN child or something else that might require more money. Our answer was always to discuss it at the time.

They kept talking to us as we got married, had kids, and they started aging. They are in their mid- and late- 80s and I don't think they will be here 5-10 years from now, and they still discuss it with us. We all continue to be consistent with our answers, split whatever is left between the 3 of us, and please, spend it on yourselves for whatever you need - it's your money

[Anonymous]

I would give them each the same.

[Anonymous]

The overwhelming consensus seems to be to divide what's left equally.. Playing Devil's advocate here..

- How do you deal with the obvious difference in spend between Kid 1 and 2 for college? That alone would compound over decades into a large sum, no?

- How do you treat kids who take care of parents old age vs. not as much. In this situation, it appears that Kid 2 is likely to be around closer to the parents. In-state educated kids tend to gravitate towards cities within the state.

- If any of these are factors and the parents still divide equally, wouldn't it upset Kid 2?

[Anonymous]

^^ pp, you give each kid what they need for college. One stays in state, one goes to expensive private, it doesn't matter you are paying for a degree, not an amount.

#2 is irrelevant, you divide equally. If the one doing the caretaking is spending their own money, they get reimbursed for that while doing the caretaking, not after death

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If your intent is to permanently damage their sibling relationship, then sure, leave them different amounts.

+1 Can't stress this enough. My father plans on giving all of his money to my lazy brother because he "needs it more." I already told my brother that I will terminate our relationship if he doesn't give me an equal share. I also have mixed feelings about my father doing something like this.

It's also complicated because your stance on equality vs equity is likely influenced by political ideology. My father is very far to the left and I think that is a factor.

So if I was your brother I would probably say…”well, have a nice life”.

Doesn’t sound like you two are close so why would he care about your ultimatum?