Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

But if you want to provide to your grandchildren and you divide it among your children, you are favoring the grandchild with less siblings, no? For example let's say grandparents have two kids and want to help with the education of their grandkids, and say child A has one kid and child B has two. They could provide the same amount of money to each kid to pay for college of their kid(s), but then the grandparents have favored child of A over the children of kid B, no? Child of A will have more money for school than the children of B who have to split. I guess it depends on who they are trying to give to--their kids or their grandkids. How does it show favoritism to a child to give the same amount to each grandchild? So if grandparents spend $50 on each grandchild for the holidays, their favoring their kid who had two kids over the one who had one?

We are not talking about small amounts here when it comes to inheritances. Add a few zeros to that $50 gift and it becomes significant. Let's say Child A and his wife decided to limit the number of children they had in order to buy a home, pay for college and fund his and his spouse's retirement. So he only had one child. Child B decided to have two children and, as a result, stayed home and could not pay for college for both children nor fully fund her and her husband's retirement. Their mother decides to leave more to Child B so her family can send both kids to college and have a better retirement. Is this fair? Depends on which child you ask.

But if the kids (not grandkids) know this in advance: I, the grandparent, want to pay for the college education of all my grandchildren--you can factor that in. You say leaving it to Child B to provide to grandchildren. But what if you provide it directly in trust/529 whatever directly to the grandchildren. Child B doesn't get to offset retirement funding failure. It's directly to the grandkids. I get that child A might say you gave B more. But not really. you gave each of your grandchildren the same. You're suggesting that it's unfair to provide for all grandchildren equally and all should filter through the kids? What if I don't want a certain amount to go to the kids but to my grandkids?

I would tell your mom to give the same amount to you and your brother, and set apart X amount of money for your kids.

Anonymous wrote:Haven't read all the responses. Have her do 50/50. I would insist on it. Money does evil things to relationships sometimes. It's worth it to avoid any feuds. She can always set up a 529 for your kids or leave them a little money too. That to me is different than giving you more, but not allocating specifically for the kids.

Just read the other responses. OK so she can't do a 529 now, but I'm sure there is a way to leave some to the kids and her step kids. I would insist that you and your bro get the same amount. He loves his wife and he chose her. Leave her out of it. If she adores her own children and wants to ensure she doesn't cause problems between the 2 of you it must be divided equally. Believe me these things cause big problems. There are stories on both sides on my families spanning back generations when we were pobably lower middle class, far from wealthy. Beautiful relationships ended. I have heard similar stories from friends as well. It's not worth it. Having a good relationship with your brother is priceless.

Haven't read all the responses. Have her do 50/50. I would insist on it. Money does evil things to relationships sometimes. It's worth it to avoid any feuds. She can always set up a 529 for your kids or leave them a little money too. That to me is different than giving you more, but not allocating specifically for the kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She had wanted to leave 30% to my brother, 30% to me, 30 % to the grandkids and 10% to her stepdaughter and her stepdaughter's kids (my mom remarried in her late 40s--my stepsister is older than both my brother and I am, but we are all pretty close).[/b]

That sounds fine.

The problem with punishing SIL is that your brother is punished as well, which is counterproductive. This is what my parents did to me because they could not stand DH. It still rankles enormously. Although the unconscious thought is perhaps to punish one's child for daring to marry someone they did not approve of.

Also, if the brother ends up divorcing the SIL in his fifties and marrying a younger woman who gives him children, OP's mom may not be able to change her will to include the new grandchildren. A trust can ensure that the money can bypass the SIL and go directly to the grandchildren.

Anonymous wrote:She had wanted to leave 30% to my brother, 30% to me, 30 % to the grandkids and 10% to her stepdaughter and her stepdaughter's kids (my mom remarried in her late 40s--my stepsister is older than both my brother and I am, but we are all pretty close).[/b]

That sounds fine.

The problem with punishing SIL is that your brother is punished as well, which is counterproductive. This is what my parents did to me because they could not stand DH. It still rankles enormously. Although the unconscious thought is perhaps to punish one's child for daring to marry someone they did not approve of.

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.

resentments build up in very odd ways for odd reasons between siblings, irrational reasons that often have roots in childhood jealousy and some issues in the family relationship going back decades. my aunt, very financially confortable, unmarried and childless and in her late 60's, sued my father (her only sibling, married and with three kids, my aunt's only nieces and nephew, basically we were her only family ), after my grandparents died in their 90's and left her 50% of their multimillion dollar estate. she thought she was entitled to 80%. 13 years later (she is now 80) she just agreed to settle for the same a little more of 50% she could have gotten in the first place, and after selling one of the apartments she inherited just to pay her legal bills.

Anonymous wrote:OP here, after a break. THanks for all the input and thoughts, including about scenarios I hadn't imagined. I will talk to my mother, encourage it to be 50/50 and tell her that she also has to discuss it with my brother. She certainly does not want us having issues after she is gone. But she also disclosed some other things, which I had sensed and I think it makes things worse. She really, really does not like her DIL (neither do I, frankly) and finds her selfish and immature. My brother who is mid 40s, has been wanted to have kids for at least 5 years and instead he put wife, who spent the previous 5 years "finding her self" through a top business school. But the deal was that she would be willing to have kids a few years after that, but she's now 36 and says that she doesn't want kids for another 3-4 years (which puts her at 40). My mother thinks that she basically doesn't want kids, but doesn't want to come out and say that, and it will break my brother's heart, but by the time he realizes it he will be too old to have kids with someone else. Unfortunately I think she's probably right and that my SIL's wanting to put it off is more to do about not wanting kids. When she visits us, she essentially ignores our kids totally.

Ugh, what a mess. So in a way, my mom is using money to punish my SIL for not wanting kids and not being straight with my brother about it. Mom also mentioned that SIL will stand to inherit significantly more than either my brother or i, etc and I think my mom simply doesn't want her to have it.

The contributions to a college plan are a great idea, but most of the money is tied up a big house she lives in in a wealthy neighborhood--her income otherwise is modest. It's not like were talking vast sums here, although I'm guessing after taxes a little south of 2 million. She had wanted to leave 30% to my brother, 30% to me, 30 % to the grandkids and 10% to her stepdaughter and her stepdaughter's kids (my mom remarried in her late 40s--my stepsister is older than both my brother and I am, but we are all pretty close).

Then that is what she should do. That sounds fair. It is her money and if she wants some of it going to grandchildren (who otherwise wouldn't see any inheritance money until after the deaths of their own parents) then she should be able to give them some. She also should be able to leave some to her stepdaughter if that is what she wants. 50/50 actually doesn't sound right in your scenario. Inheritance isn't something you are owed, it is something you are gifted. She could choose to give it all to charity if she wanted to.

DH's parents died. Turned out they had been giving their children and grandchildren varying amounts of siginicant sums of money for a variety of reasons (bail outs from poor decisions, gender based college funds, random amounts for guilt). Their money to with what they wanted. Then it got worse. After they died, no will and different beneficiaris on everything they owned.

DH had college paid for and one of our kids got $10K, but the other two got nothing. We're at a point, where other than counseling our two kids that lifes not fair, we could just laugh at the nightmare.

OP here, after a break. THanks for all the input and thoughts, including about scenarios I hadn't imagined. I will talk to my mother, encourage it to be 50/50 and tell her that she also has to discuss it with my brother. She certainly does not want us having issues after she is gone. But she also disclosed some other things, which I had sensed and I think it makes things worse. She really, really does not like her DIL (neither do I, frankly) and finds her selfish and immature. My brother who is mid 40s, has been wanted to have kids for at least 5 years and instead he put wife, who spent the previous 5 years "finding her self" through a top business school. But the deal was that she would be willing to have kids a few years after that, but she's now 36 and says that she doesn't want kids for another 3-4 years (which puts her at 40). My mother thinks that she basically doesn't want kids, but doesn't want to come out and say that, and it will break my brother's heart, but by the time he realizes it he will be too old to have kids with someone else. Unfortunately I think she's probably right and that my SIL's wanting to put it off is more to do about not wanting kids. When she visits us, she essentially ignores our kids totally.

Ugh, what a mess. So in a way, my mom is using money to punish my SIL for not wanting kids and not being straight with my brother about it. Mom also mentioned that SIL will stand to inherit significantly more than either my brother or i, etc and I think my mom simply doesn't want her to have it.

The contributions to a college plan are a great idea, but most of the money is tied up a big house she lives in in a wealthy neighborhood--her income otherwise is modest. It's not like were talking vast sums here, although I'm guessing after taxes a little south of 2 million. She had wanted to leave 30% to my brother, 30% to me, 30 % to the grandkids and 10% to her stepdaughter and her stepdaughter's kids (my mom remarried in her late 40s--my stepsister is older than both my brother and I am, but we are all pretty close).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

But if you want to provide to your grandchildren and you divide it among your children, you are favoring the grandchild with less siblings, no? For example let's say grandparents have two kids and want to help with the education of their grandkids, and say child A has one kid and child B has two. They could provide the same amount of money to each kid to pay for college of their kid(s), but then the grandparents have favored child of A over the children of kid B, no? Child of A will have more money for school than the children of B who have to split. I guess it depends on who they are trying to give to--their kids or their grandkids. How does it show favoritism to a child to give the same amount to each grandchild? So if grandparents spend $50 on each grandchild for the holidays, their favoring their kid who had two kids over the one who had one?

We are not talking about small amounts here when it comes to inheritances. Add a few zeros to that $50 gift and it becomes significant. Let's say Child A and his wife decided to limit the number of children they had in order to buy a home, pay for college and fund his and his spouse's retirement. So he only had one child. Child B decided to have two children and, as a result, stayed home and could not pay for college for both children nor fully fund her and her husband's retirement. Their mother decides to leave more to Child B so her family can send both kids to college and have a better retirement. Is this fair? Depends on which child you ask.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

But if you want to provide to your grandchildren and you divide it among your children, you are favoring the grandchild with less siblings, no? For example let's say grandparents have two kids and want to help with the education of their grandkids, and say child A has one kid and child B has two. They could provide the same amount of money to each kid to pay for college of their kid(s), but then the grandparents have favored child of A over the children of kid B, no? Child of A will have more money for school than the children of B who have to split. I guess it depends on who they are trying to give to--their kids or their grandkids. How does it show favoritism to a child to give the same amount to each grandchild? So if grandparents spend $50 on each grandchild for the holidays, their favoring their kid who had two kids over the one who had one?

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.

I am the poster that said our family did the 705 split 50/50 and the 30% split between grandchildren. because of ages/stages there won't be more than an 18 yr age difference between children so when the first one reaches 18, we will know how many total there are. This wouldn't work for families that have wide age gaps in kids. Also in my grandparents case, the youngest grandchild is currently 34 and has kids of his own - we know there won't be any more grandchildren. Obviously this has to be an arrangement that will work for the individual family. Also our whole family gets along well and is great at sharing as needed. There won't be fights about money.