Mom has a 3 bedroom. Sister and family can move in there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would probably consider having mom sell the current apartment once she's sure she no longer wants to live there and then paying rent to sister and her husband to allow them to afford a larger apartment, if the goal is for mom to live with sister and her husband. No downpayment assistance, though.

Assuming this is an apartment that is paid off except for the monthly fees, though, it's also worth considering whether it's cheaper for her to stay there and have someone to help with the various upkeep tasks. It may well be.

This. Your mother needs her assets to be accessible for her own needs, including long term care. If she needs a nursing home it will be a disaster to have her money tied up in a house.

I think the posters attacking OP are ridiculous. Why should a 70 year old need to subsidize this purchase for her child when she doesn’t have money for herself.

There's a complete disconnect here. You raise valid points regarding whether this is a good ides *for the mother*. But that has nothing to do with why people are attacking OP. Her concern here is pretty apparently only for her inheritance, and what she can get for her kids, not for what is best for her mother. *That* is why she's being attacked.

BINGO!

For those who missed it, the tipoff was when OP said:

Needless to say, I’m deeply concerned about what such an arrangement would do to my future inheritance, and I somehow don’t see my sister’s motivations as 100% altruistic. (I’m sure she’d love $1 million invested in a shared townhouse.). But I can also see how such a living arrangement could be beneficial for my mom.

The conflict here, in OP's own words, is between OP's "deep concern" for her future inheritance vs. a living arrangement that could be beneficial for OP's mom.

Look, there's absolutely nothing wrong with OP wanting clarity on the inheritance point. Although her mother can do what she wants, it's a major family financial issue that affects multiple people. For example - if her sister buys the house and will inherit the whole thing (leaving OP with nothing) then OP likely would be justified in paying a smaller share of her mother's support needs if they arise. It's also important that her mother understand the implications of continuing to have all her assets in real estate, and the inheritance implications. The "say nothing about inheritance" crowd fails to realize that people don't always think this stuff through clearly so it has to be talked about. And, by attempting to stake a claim to their mother's assets now, OP's sister is really the one who started off acting in an entitled way. OP has no moral obligation to remain silent here.

The one who is going to live with and care for the mother is the entitled one? Only on DCUM.

The mother is managing fine on her own per OP.

The sister is trying to convince the mother to sell her long time home in order to fund a down payment on a larger home for sister's family. Sister thinks having her mother move in would be a fair exchange for getting well over a million of down payment money.

Sister should back off and save for her own down payment. If mother needs care down the road she can sell her apartment and go into an elder facility paid for with the proceeds.

I do not see this ending well, and I do not know of families where this has been a good solution.
After a certain age you visit grandparents, do not live with them

What will happen if there is a divorce, is the Grandma young enough to be made the household nanny or babysitter
Can the granny not downsize and get herself her own place
Your sister still has plenty yto buy her own home if she wishes to do so

I’m with the PP who said OP, you and your sister may very well end up with no inheritance. DH and I have been through elder care with a set of grandparents and a set of parents -the money goes super fast when you are paying for care when they are older. And, frankly, there are some adults who absolutely do not want to live with their adult children. This is your mother’s money. Let her live her life. Simultaneously, don’t plan on there being anything substantial left,no matter what she decides. An anticipated inheritance is not a retirement plan.

Op not sure if anyone has mentioned this...but there’s a decent chance you’re not going to inherit anything anyway. You may be counting on an inheritance that won’t exist.

Your sibling who helps your mom very well could inherit it all. This wouldn’t be the first time his has happened.

Secondly, your mom may go through all of her money. Is she in a classic six on the UES? If so I’m assuming the apartment is worth $2.5 million. A lot of money, but not if you require 15 plus years of assisted living in the NY area. I assume she has other money but you did say the apartment is her primary asset. Not to mention there is a flip tax in NY and high costs to selling.

Your mom may be considering moving in with your sister because she financially NEEDS to. It may be the only way you receive any inheritance if she is going to be able to avoid going to an assisted living facility for a number of years.

I know many people from the NE counting on significant inheritances from their parents. They don’t seem to understand the high cost of retirement living their parents are facing. Some of these families pay 40-50k a year just in property taxes! Your mom is an example with paying $36k a year just in coop maintenance! They may have millions in retirement but that’s what it takes to pay those kind of property taxes and maintain the expensive lifestyle they are accustomed to. Then there are the high estate taxes and assisted living and nursing homes are even more expensive in the NE. Your parents or parent in your case needs a networth above $5 million for you to stand to inherit more than a few hundred thousand, especially if you have more than one sibling.

Anonymous wrote:My father died several years ago and my mother lives on her own, where she gets a bit overwhelmed with apartment upkeep, plus monthly building maintenance costs of over $3k. (She lives alone in a three bedroom NYC doorman building apartment, her primary asset.). She’s also a bit lonely.

My sister lives in NYC with her DH and young kids. They are in a rental but hope to buy.

My sister has proposed having my mom sell her three-bedroom apartment and instead buy a place with her and her DH. My sister argues that this arrangement would allow her to take care of our mother in her old-age, and just help more generally. She argues that she and her husband couldn’t afford a large enough place without my mother’s investment.

Needless to say, I’m deeply concerned about what such an arrangement would do to my future inheritance, and I somehow don’t see my sister’s motivations as 100% altruistic. (I’m sure she’d love $1 million invested in a shared townhouse.). But I can also see how such a living arrangement could be beneficial for my mom.

We’d welcome my mom to move in to our home free of charge, but we live in DC, away from her social networks. I cannot see her moving from NYC.

Thoughts? Advice?

OMG...you are a vulture circling thr carcass before it's dead. GROSS.

This is your mothers life and her money. Make your own. Dont worry about your mom's money until her body bbn is cold. Need you be reminded her money is not your money?

Anonymous wrote:I will tell you what would probably be suggested in my family. With first a word of context:
1- my parents have been very open about being super equalitarian between siblings and don't consider their assests as "theirs" but the ones of the whole family. my granparents were the same. burning through your own money to enjoy life and not build next gen assets is seen as selfish. We are French, my American husband's family have completely different standards reflected on this board: each generation is entitled to spend the money they earned and expecting an inheritance is not ok. cultural difference i guess
2- I have no idea about what affects Medicaid here. What we do is try to minimize inheritance taxes.

That being said, in your scenario:
1- My surviving parent would probably downsize to a smaller apartment and share the profit of selling the bigger place between the kids to help downpayment of one and SN kid trust fund of other.
2- if surviving parent would rather live with one sibling, he/she would sell apartment. Donate 30% of profit to DC kid, 30% to the NY kid for downpayment and keep 40% to pay regular rent in house of the NY kid to contribute to mortgage for the 15-20 years they would hopefully live there (or different % depending on amount of profit made, what the rent would reasonably look like..).
3- Once the parent needs actual care, this doesn't fall on your sibling. You are both on the hook to pay for in house support (your sibling can count her hours, you pay time of the caregivers)
4- This works if you parent as iron clad trust that you will do the best by her which is what my parents would think..

And to add: thanks to that type of mentality, my 70 year old parents who are not rich but have saved all their life, including small real estate inheritance from grandparents, were able to help their 3 kids with 200K downpayment on their homes during their lifetime, despite their teacher salaries. But it meant that they have to give away and restrict their own choices. I am happy to plan the same for my kids, I can forego a bigger home for me and enjoy the prospect of seeing my kids able to own a home too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would probably consider having mom sell the current apartment once she's sure she no longer wants to live there and then paying rent to sister and her husband to allow them to afford a larger apartment, if the goal is for mom to live with sister and her husband. No downpayment assistance, though.

Assuming this is an apartment that is paid off except for the monthly fees, though, it's also worth considering whether it's cheaper for her to stay there and have someone to help with the various upkeep tasks. It may well be.

This. Your mother needs her assets to be accessible for her own needs, including long term care. If she needs a nursing home it will be a disaster to have her money tied up in a house.

I think the posters attacking OP are ridiculous. Why should a 70 year old need to subsidize this purchase for her child when she doesn’t have money for herself.

There's a complete disconnect here. You raise valid points regarding whether this is a good ides *for the mother*. But that has nothing to do with why people are attacking OP. Her concern here is pretty apparently only for her inheritance, and what she can get for her kids, not for what is best for her mother. *That* is why she's being attacked.

BINGO!

For those who missed it, the tipoff was when OP said:

Needless to say, I’m deeply concerned about what such an arrangement would do to my future inheritance, and I somehow don’t see my sister’s motivations as 100% altruistic. (I’m sure she’d love $1 million invested in a shared townhouse.). But I can also see how such a living arrangement could be beneficial for my mom.

The conflict here, in OP's own words, is between OP's "deep concern" for her future inheritance vs. a living arrangement that could be beneficial for OP's mom.

Look, there's absolutely nothing wrong with OP wanting clarity on the inheritance point. Although her mother can do what she wants, it's a major family financial issue that affects multiple people. For example - if her sister buys the house and will inherit the whole thing (leaving OP with nothing) then OP likely would be justified in paying a smaller share of her mother's support needs if they arise. It's also important that her mother understand the implications of continuing to have all her assets in real estate, and the inheritance implications. The "say nothing about inheritance" crowd fails to realize that people don't always think this stuff through clearly so it has to be talked about. And, by attempting to stake a claim to their mother's assets now, OP's sister is really the one who started off acting in an entitled way. OP has no moral obligation to remain silent here.

The one who is going to live with and care for the mother is the entitled one? Only on DCUM.

Absolutely. It's not clear if OP's mother even wants or needs the sister's help at this point. Apparently the mother is basically fine in her apartment, but the sister (substantially for her OWN benefit) wants her to move out and buy new property together. It's absolutely fair for the child who does the bulk of the eldercare work to get a bigger share of the inheritance, but it's not at all clear that that's what's going on here. And it's premature too. Who knows if the sister will actually do the work when the time comes.

If the mom doesn't want to do it, then this is really much ado about nothing. What's the point of the whole thread if the mom isn't interested in making the move? What "advice" could OP need to navigate such a total nonstarter.

I will tell you what would probably be suggested in my family. With first a word of context:
1- my parents have been very open about being super equalitarian between siblings and don't consider their assests as "theirs" but the ones of the whole family. my granparents were the same. burning through your own money to enjoy life and not build next gen assets is seen as selfish. We are French, my American husband's family have completely different standards reflected on this board: each generation is entitled to spend the money they earned and expecting an inheritance is not ok. cultural difference i guess
2- I have no idea about what affects Medicaid here. What we do is try to minimize inheritance taxes.

That being said, in your scenario:
1- My surviving parent would probably downsize to a smaller apartment and share the profit of selling the bigger place between the kids to help downpayment of one and SN kid trust fund of other.
2- if surviving parent would rather live with one sibling, he/she would sell apartment. Donate 30% of profit to DC kid, 30% to the NY kid for downpayment and keep 40% to pay regular rent in house of the NY kid to contribute to mortgage for the 15-20 years they would hopefully live there (or different % depending on amount of profit made, what the rent would reasonably look like..).
3- Once the parent needs actual care, this doesn't fall on your sibling. You are both on the hook to pay for in house support (your sibling can count her hours, you pay time of the caregivers)
4- This works if you parent as iron clad trust that you will do the best by her which is what my parents would think..

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I grew up in a mother-daughter house, and now my ILs live with me. In all cases, there were other siblings involved.

In both cases, the siblings NOT living with their parents basically gave up their right to the house/proceeds. This was bc, in both cases, the sibling living with the parents also took on most expenses related to that arrangement, whether it be food, or transportation. or medical care. Any money remaining in the estates, outside of the house, was split among all siblings.

That said, we have not yet run into a case where a parent needed serious medical care that drained down assets. Nor did anyone have to go to assisted living/nursing home. So that burden has not yet hit.

I'm not OP, but I can see something like this in my future. In the end, it seems to be a matter of trust in the parents and siblings to do the "right thing." And to hope all agree on what that means in terms of any residual assets. A "first world" problem of course. But when parents show favoritism or what one child views as poor judgment along the way, it affects that trust. Plus as people age, their once clear judgment can change, especially if illness or dementia is a factor. Likewise, when siblings always seem to have their hands out in their 30's, 40's, 50's, that isn't a pattern that's likely to change. I've seen a sibling "hide" money in a divorce settlement and then live with my parents expense free, so financially speaking, I have reason to doubt my sib's altruism when the time comes to address my parents' care and/or estate.

YEP. It's extremely hard to trust when you have a toxic combination of parents who make irresponsible/unethical financial decisions; sneaky, greedy sibs; and then the sib suddenly claiming "I'm going to help!!" in a way that puts money into their own pockets. My response to this situation in my own life has been to completely nope out. I disinherited myself, told my parents I would not be giving them any money unless/until they showed me they literally were about to be homeless, and told the sib exactly what I thought of them. What makes this decision easier is that I also have another set of relatives who need help (or who are helping me) who act in a forthright, reasonable and honest manner about all of this stuff. So my time, energy, and money goes to them, not the crazy liar ones.