Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does she think your kids are the only grandkids she will have? Maybe the wife can't have/doesn't want any, but your brother could have kids later with someone else.

This raises an interesting question though, if as a grandparent you want to leave to your grandkids, how do you do so given that it may still be possible for you to have more? Even if you give to your kids 50/50 with the intent that X% go to their kids, one could have more children than the other.

Which is why you should allocate inheritances equally among your children, not among your grandchildren. Your own children and their families will understand that concept. To do otherwise is to indicate favoritism, which might be your intent.

Anonymous wrote:Why does she think your kids are the only grandkids she will have? Maybe the wife can't have/doesn't want any, but your brother could have kids later with someone else.

This raises an interesting question though, if as a grandparent you want to leave to your grandkids, how do you do so given that it may still be possible for you to have more? Even if you give to your kids 50/50 with the intent that X% go to their kids, one could have more children than the other.

Why does she think your kids are the only grandkids she will have? Maybe the wife can't have/doesn't want any, but your brother could have kids later with someone else.

OP: Could there possibly be a big picture that you you are unaware of? We spent a significant amount of money raising our daughter than we did our son. Our daughter never visits and married a guy who has had a significantly negative influence on her. I would say our daughter is not the same person we knew.
We would still go 50/50 because it would break my heart if the inheritance got in the way of their relationship with each other.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What our family did was say that 70% was to be divided 50/50 between the two children. The other 30% was to be divided equally between all living grandchildren and given to them when they turn 18.

I think this is a great approach.

I agree. This is the way to go, because it's conceptually perfectly equal. I might suggest 80-90% split 50/50, and only 20-10% to split among grandchildren. Otherwise, if your brother never has children, it might feel to him like your family collectively got 65% (35% + 30%) of the estate, while his family got only 35%.

The percentage to leave to the grandchildren should be roughly what it might cost them to pay for college. Whether that's 20%, or 10%, or 2%, really depends on the size of your mom's estate.

Only it is NOT equal unless each child has the same number of children at the time of the parent's death. Let's say that OP's brother did not have any children at the time of the mother's death but later had two. Or perhaps he contracteds a serious disease that forces him to stop working and take on large medical expenses. Life has reversed the siblings' financial situations yet the mother's legacy still will favor her daughter's family over her son's. There is no way OP's brother is going to consider this unequal distribution equitable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What our family did was say that 70% was to be divided 50/50 between the two children. The other 30% was to be divided equally between all living grandchildren and given to them when they turn 18.

I think this is a great approach.

I agree. This is the way to go, because it's conceptually perfectly equal. I might suggest 80-90% split 50/50, and only 20-10% to split among grandchildren. Otherwise, if your brother never has children, it might feel to him like your family collectively got 65% (35% + 30%) of the estate, while his family got only 35%.

The percentage to leave to the grandchildren should be roughly what it might cost them to pay for college. Whether that's 20%, or 10%, or 2%, really depends on the size of your mom's estate.

Anonymous wrote:My mom asked me if my DH, a lawyer, would draw up the papers to give my siblings more of her estate. The perfect insult.

Was she being deliberately cruel or just clueless and cheap? What did DH do?

Anonymous wrote:If your mother is sure that she has enough for her lifetime, she can start gifting to the grandchildren now. A 529 can be funded with 5 yrs of gift exclusion, currently $14k x 5 = $70k. That's a nice start towards college.

Resentments build up in odd ways if the will is anything but 50/50.

It's not only the will but also any unequal distributions made while the parents are alive that the other siblings are/become aware of. These could be paying for one child's education/ wedding, giving a large gift or making a loan that is never repaid. The other siblings keep count and there is resentment if the inequalities are not rectified by death.

I recommend you read the book called Beyond The Grave (Condon). Written by an estate attorney and his son, it specifically advises against unequal distribution to siblings in these cases because it will cause resentment and not only poison your relationship with your brother and his wife, but tarnish your mother's memory in your brother's mind forever.
Your brother will feel punished for his success and less loved by your mother. Tell your mother to let the will stand as it is.

I think one of the PP's had a great idea - she could fund the 529's for your kids now at the gift limit, and then split the will 50/50 between you and your brother. If she's uncomfortable gifting money now, than another PP had a good idea - 70% split between you and your brother; 30% to the living grandchildren.

Anonymous wrote:What our family did was say that 70% was to be divided 50/50 between the two children. The other 30% was to be divided equally between all living grandchildren and given to them when they turn 18.

My parents have something similar. Their estate is divided 25% to each of 3 children and 25% to be divided by the grandchildren (there were 3 at the time the will was written but it is now 5).

Well, if she wants your children to have some of the money, I see nothing wrong with setting up the will that way. I do think whatever goes to you and your brother should be equal. So she could say, 30% to you, 30% to your brother, and 20% to each kid. Lots of people do this.

You can suggest that she make it equal, OP, but you can't insist on it - ultimately, it's up to her. I disagree that she should tell your brother now - why poison the relationship? After she passes (which will hopefully be a long time from now!) you can tell your brother that you would prefer to make it 50-50, and deal with it yourself after the estate settles. This really doesn't have to be a conflict.

This will still cause pain and resentment as it indicated favoritism. No matter what OP ultimately does, her brother will know that his mom felt him worthy of less. Mom needs to man up if this is what she is set on doing and tell her son what and why she is making this choice. Even so, it could poison the relationship between the siblings.

You can suggest that she make it equal, OP, but you can't insist on it - ultimately, it's up to her. I disagree that she should tell your brother now - why poison the relationship? After she passes (which will hopefully be a long time from now!) you can tell your brother that you would prefer to make it 50-50, and deal with it yourself after the estate settles. This really doesn't have to be a conflict.

My grandfather's will skipped his kids entirely and split the estate evenly between three grandkids, my cousin, my sibling and me. There has been fighting ever since and the estate is still not completely settled. Hopefully this year. Grandfather died in 1983.

Tread carefully.