[Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Non-investing personal finance issues including insurance, credit, real estate, taxes, employment and legal issues such as trusts and wills
Post Reply
Topic Author
markfaix
Posts: 235
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2008 5:47 pm

[Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by markfaix » Tue Jan 07, 2020 1:56 pm

DW and I are updating our estate plans. My question is about how simple or complicated we should make things in leaving our estate to our children after we both pass.

Background: We are 49/50 yrs old. First/only marriage for both. Three kids ages 19, 12, 8. Total assets $2.5 million. Good health.

Upon 1st spouse to die, all assets go to the surviving spouse. With 2nd spouse to die, all assets go into a trust for the benefit of the kids since they are still young.

Which scenario:

1) Simpler: Give the money to each child outright from the trust over time, e.g., at age 25, each child can take out 1/3 of his/her share of assets; at age 30, 1/2; age 35, the rest of his/her share. Then the trust terminates.

2) More complicated: Keep trust(s) long term. As proposed by bsteiner and others on this forum, we could also have the kids’ trust(s) continue long term for protection from ex-spouses, creditors, Medicaid, etc. However, this introduces more complexity and greater expenses in the form of annual trust returns and corporate trustee fees if a good personal trustee can’t be found.

I know of nightmare scenarios for both. My sister, a Princeton economics graduate, became disabled in her 30s, so giving her an inheritance outright would have been problematic. On the other hand, I had a wealthy acquaintance who died and left most of his assets to his wife in a (credit shelter?) trust. The trust was managed by a close friend who was too busy/uncooperative to give timely disbursements to the widow.

Either way, because of the kids' ages, we have to include a trust to hold assets until they’re older. The question is how complicated it should be. I generally err on the side of simplicity, because complexity is guaranteed headache and expense for uncertain gain. The attorney is pushing for the more complex trust, which has a much higher up front cost, and I can see the potential benefits.

Thoughts and suggestions?

retiringwhen
Posts: 1512
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 10:09 am
Location: New Jersey, USA

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by retiringwhen » Tue Jan 07, 2020 2:34 pm

2 is best, we have first experience with the option 1 and it is not really any simpler, in fact it is messier and some of the reasons bsteiner suggests #2 came to pass in this situation...

In both cases you will need to find competent trustees. can't get around the problem.

User avatar
FIREchief
Posts: 3798
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2016 6:40 pm

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by FIREchief » Tue Jan 07, 2020 2:39 pm

markfaix wrote:
Tue Jan 07, 2020 1:56 pm
However, this introduces more complexity and greater expenses in the form of annual trust returns and corporate trustee fees if a good personal trustee can’t be found.
This isn't necessarily true. If the trust allows the beneficiary to serve as their own trustee, and trust investments are simple, than there won't necessarily be any meaningful expenses (see my signature).
I am not a lawyer, accountant or financial advisor. Any advice or suggestions that I may provide shall be considered for entertainment purposes only.

NotWhoYouThink
Posts: 2811
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2014 4:19 pm

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by NotWhoYouThink » Tue Jan 07, 2020 3:13 pm

You won't necessarily see a consensus on this board. I've read recommendations here for years to leave the money in trust, and have decided to leave it to both kids outright after they turn 30. Simpler, cleaner, cheaper. Some additional risk (although trusts don't necessarily prevent losses to creditors or ex-spouses, they just provide a little added protection), definitely avoids some cost in managing the trust (higher tax rates cut in earlier, separate tax accounting for trust and personal accounts.)


In reality, it is unlikely we'll die before they are in their 40s of 50s, unlikely that if we did leave them money they would encounter an event where a trust was highly preferable to a direct inheritance, and clearly possible that our money won't be enough to affect their lifestyle anyway, they could be quite successful and we could spend our portfolio down, who knows?

Do what you feel comfortable with for now. When they are old enough to have opinions on the matter you could ask them if they would like you to change the plan, and why.

Hockey10
Posts: 670
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2016 12:20 pm
Location: Philadelphia suburbs

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by Hockey10 » Tue Jan 07, 2020 5:17 pm

I would go for the simpler option now and review your plan again in 5 years. That gives you 5 years of Boglehead estate planning threads to read. My wife and I updated our plan 2 years ago and will look at again 3 years from now.

User avatar
Sandtrap
Posts: 8701
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 6:32 pm
Location: Hawaii No Ka Oi , N. Arizona

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by Sandtrap » Wed Jan 08, 2020 12:02 pm

The larger the estate and the more beneficiaries are involved:
Seek legal counsel (estate planning) to find what fits "your needs".

#2 Whatever the cost for effective estate planning, is negligible compared to what could happen with poor estate planning.

Everyone is different when it comes to trusts, wills, etc.
j :happy
Wiki Bogleheads Wiki: Everything You Need to Know

Broken Man 1999
Posts: 3790
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 11:31 am

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by Broken Man 1999 » Wed Jan 08, 2020 12:29 pm

Our estate plan is currently for any inheritances for DDs to go into trust with their being trustee. I hope they keep it in trust for lots of reasons, but it is their decision. The grandchildrens will be in trust for them, with DDs being trustees.

Trusts are useful, and don't necessarily cost a lot. Trusts can help address a lot of issues that life seems to dish out without regard for our carefully considered plans. Deaths, divorces, financial reverses, remarriages.... all the things we think can't/won't happen to OUR children. Well, good luck with that! Hope is a poor substitute for planning.

Broken Man 1999
“If I cannot drink Bourbon and smoke cigars in Heaven than I shall not go. " -Mark Twain

Murgatroyd
Posts: 318
Joined: Sun Jan 21, 2018 8:23 pm

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by Murgatroyd » Wed Jan 08, 2020 1:33 pm

Strangers cannot answer this question. It all depends on how levelheaded (for want of a better term) you believe the children are, or will be, in terms of handling these sums. Do you have a read on each of them? Particularly the younger two? Another consideration is you can’t know just yet what the future may bring. For example, What if one or more of them falls in with unsavory friends?

You have too many unknowns right now. Make your best decision for now covering the short term. And remember, you can always change the specifics of the trust as situations change.

Find a lawyer you believe you can work with over time.

Regards,

Leesbro63
Posts: 6093
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 4:36 pm

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by Leesbro63 » Wed Jan 08, 2020 1:40 pm

Be careful that the surviving spouse knows to “elect portability” of the deceased spouse’s estate tax exemption. With all the different scenarios being discussed regarding future estate tax exemption amounts, it’s prudent to file the paperwork for this should one spouse die soon...hopefully not.
Last edited by Leesbro63 on Wed Jan 08, 2020 2:08 pm, edited 2 times in total.

J295
Posts: 2246
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 11:40 pm

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by J295 » Wed Jan 08, 2020 2:05 pm

Number one is our personal choice. We think it’s prudent to follow the distributions in 1/3 increments as you have suggested. For a variety of reasons we are not interested in option 2 and trying to control things from our graves. Ymmv.

User avatar
FIREchief
Posts: 3798
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2016 6:40 pm

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by FIREchief » Wed Jan 08, 2020 2:14 pm

J295 wrote:
Wed Jan 08, 2020 2:05 pm
For a variety of reasons we are not interested in option 2 and trying to control things from our graves. Ymmv.
If done correctly, #2 is more like letting the heirs "control things" better from above God's green earth. 8-)
I am not a lawyer, accountant or financial advisor. Any advice or suggestions that I may provide shall be considered for entertainment purposes only.

User avatar
Peter Foley
Posts: 5014
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2007 10:34 am
Location: Lake Wobegon

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by Peter Foley » Wed Jan 08, 2020 2:26 pm

I would think that factors to be considered would be what assets are included in the trust and what the relative values are of those assets?

For example, if a couple had most of their net worth in IRAs, then one option might be preferable to another. Another example would be a high net worth couple with a lot of taxable assets.

SECURE Act provisions might also be a factor - I've not followed the discussions on SECURE Act implications for existing trusts and type of trusts.

Bobby206
Posts: 185
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2018 4:01 pm

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by Bobby206 » Wed Jan 08, 2020 2:34 pm

A continuing trust provides protections, when set up right, that can not be had in any other way. Continuing trust 100% except for small trusts (defined differently by different people). I would always want my kids to have creditor and divorce protection. The hassle is minimal, to non-existent, if things are set up right.

JBTX
Posts: 5768
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2017 12:46 pm

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by JBTX » Wed Jan 08, 2020 3:21 pm

Ours will both be in trust. Neither would be able to responsibly manage that type of money.

Lexi
Posts: 127
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 10:28 am

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by Lexi » Wed Jan 08, 2020 3:43 pm

I generally believe that equals should be treated equally unless strong reasons suggest otherwise. One such reason would come from the range of ages and the possibility that the second spouse could die after the oldest child was an adult but the younger 1 or 2 were still minors. In that situation I think the first priority would be to support the minors until adulthood. That leads to the need for a trust for some period of time at least.

exces6
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 2:09 pm

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by exces6 » Wed Jan 08, 2020 3:45 pm

We just went through this process ourselves and elected your option (2), keeping the assets in trust until each child reaches 35, at which point they become the trustee and can decide what to do with it.

We wanted to protect funds from any future divorces and other life events, and we didn't like the idea of forcing a large income event for them just because they reached a certain age. That gives them the flexibility on how to distribute the income and plan for taxes instead of dropping a large lump sum on them during a tax year that might not be advantageous for their stage of life (I'm thinking of the scenario where we die young and they get a few million in life insurance + 30 years of growth). I can also think of (unfortunate) scenarios where someone might try to hang onto a poor marriage because they know a trust will disburse soon and be considered assets in the divorce.

Ultimately, we hope to raise our children with a similar financial outlook to our own, and by 35 they should have enough life and practical experience to do whatever they want with the money, so why not give them the most flexibility? Trying to control more than that from beyond the grave just seems like more of a headache than anything, and either way, neither my wife or I will be around to see it.

J295
Posts: 2246
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 11:40 pm

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by J295 » Thu Jan 09, 2020 5:19 am

OP. Retired lawyer here. Reading a few of the comments, once again I see non-lawyers giving incorrect information, including not understanding the impacts of their own situations they describe. FWIW

User avatar
JoeRetire
Posts: 4527
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 2:44 pm

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by JoeRetire » Thu Jan 09, 2020 6:17 am

markfaix wrote:
Tue Jan 07, 2020 1:56 pm
I know of nightmare scenarios for both. My sister, a Princeton economics graduate, became disabled in her 30s, so giving her an inheritance outright would have been problematic.
Why would that have been problematic?

IMHO, estate planning isn't a DIY adventure. I see too many suggestions here that don't make much sense. And worrying only about the distribution of your assets, without including your childrens' life situation, seems problematic. Have you determined guardians for your young children upon your demise? Does any money go to them for the care of your children? How about college expenses - are they on their own to fund their education? Will there be inheritance taxes? What about spouses? What about future grandchildren? What if one of the children dies while awaiting the distribution? What about charities? And so on...

Work with a good estate attorney, preferably in conjunction with a financial planner. They will help explain the alternatives including some you wouldn't have thought of, help you decide how to achieve your goals, and help set up the paperwork to get you there.

Be prepared to review whatever you end up choosing on a periodic basis, or whenever your life situation or the estate/tax laws have changed. Estate plans need to be modified to fit into changed contexts.

(If you want to see some really wacky ideas for your estate planning, read "Beyond the Grave: The Right Way and the Wrong Way of Leaving Money to Your Children (and Others)" by Jeffery L. Condon. I don't recommend that you actually follow any of his thoughts, but it does show you the wide range of possibilities)
Very Stable Genius

Topic Author
markfaix
Posts: 235
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2008 5:47 pm

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by markfaix » Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:52 pm

JoeRetire wrote:
Thu Jan 09, 2020 6:17 am
markfaix wrote:
Tue Jan 07, 2020 1:56 pm
I know of nightmare scenarios for both. My sister, a Princeton economics graduate, became disabled in her 30s, so giving her an inheritance outright would have been problematic.
Why would that have been problematic?

IMHO, estate planning isn't a DIY adventure. I see too many suggestions here that don't make much sense. And worrying only about the distribution of your assets, without including your childrens' life situation, seems problematic. Have you determined guardians for your young children upon your demise? Does any money go to them for the care of your children? How about college expenses - are they on their own to fund their education? Will there be inheritance taxes? What about spouses? What about future grandchildren? What if one of the children dies while awaiting the distribution? What about charities? And so on...

Work with a good estate attorney, preferably in conjunction with a financial planner. They will help explain the alternatives including some you wouldn't have thought of, help you decide how to achieve your goals, and help set up the paperwork to get you there.

Be prepared to review whatever you end up choosing on a periodic basis, or whenever your life situation or the estate/tax laws have changed. Estate plans need to be modified to fit into changed contexts.

(If you want to see some really wacky ideas for your estate planning, read "Beyond the Grave: The Right Way and the Wrong Way of Leaving Money to Your Children (and Others)" by Jeffery L. Condon. I don't recommend that you actually follow any of his thoughts, but it does show you the wide range of possibilities)
Disabled sister inheriting outright would have disqualified her from Medicaid, which provides decent coverage in her state.

Yes, of course, we have determined guardians and have assets + life ins to fund their education and other needs. Our situation is more 'straightforward' at least for now with only one marriage and 3 healthy children. We understand those other issues you raised.

The main ? is whether to provide in a short-term, self-terminating trust, or a more complicated semi-GST trust. The attorney gets more money for the latter, and the administrative hassle and costs are guaranteed, while the purported benefits of asset protection etc are uncertain. Hence the question.

User avatar
JoeRetire
Posts: 4527
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 2:44 pm

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by JoeRetire » Fri Jan 10, 2020 5:39 pm

markfaix wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:52 pm
Disabled sister inheriting outright would have disqualified her from Medicaid, which provides decent coverage in her state.
Got it. The nightmare of a disabled sister who doesn't get as much help from taxpayers due to an inheritance making her less poor.
The main ? is whether to provide in a short-term, self-terminating trust, or a more complicated semi-GST trust. The attorney gets more money for the latter, and the administrative hassle and costs are guaranteed, while the purported benefits of asset protection etc are uncertain. Hence the question.
Yup. A question for the attorney.
Very Stable Genius

JBTX
Posts: 5768
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2017 12:46 pm

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by JBTX » Fri Jan 10, 2020 7:14 pm

JoeRetire wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 5:39 pm
markfaix wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:52 pm
Disabled sister inheriting outright would have disqualified her from Medicaid, which provides decent coverage in her state.
Got it. The nightmare of a disabled sister who doesn't get as much help from taxpayers due to an inheritance making her less poor.
The main ? is whether to provide in a short-term, self-terminating trust, or a more complicated semi-GST trust. The attorney gets more money for the latter, and the administrative hassle and costs are guaranteed, while the purported benefits of asset protection etc are uncertain. Hence the question.
Yup. A question for the attorney.
There are times when Medicaid could have vastly superior coverages to private insurance, especially for certain special needs or disability situation, so it is completely understandable you wouldn't want a moderate inheritance to blow it up. That's generally the whole point of a special needs trust.

J295
Posts: 2246
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 11:40 pm

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by J295 » Fri Jan 10, 2020 8:59 pm

FIREchief wrote:
Wed Jan 08, 2020 2:14 pm
J295 wrote:
Wed Jan 08, 2020 2:05 pm
For a variety of reasons we are not interested in option 2 and trying to control things from our graves. Ymmv.
If done correctly, #2 is more like letting the heirs "control things" better from above God's green earth. 8-)
Perhaps I wasn’t clear.
#1 is our preference.
#2 is IMO unreasonable and unnecessary control from the grave in the typical situation. Ymmv

User avatar
FIREchief
Posts: 3798
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2016 6:40 pm

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by FIREchief » Fri Jan 10, 2020 9:57 pm

J295 wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 8:59 pm
FIREchief wrote:
Wed Jan 08, 2020 2:14 pm
J295 wrote:
Wed Jan 08, 2020 2:05 pm
For a variety of reasons we are not interested in option 2 and trying to control things from our graves. Ymmv.
If done correctly, #2 is more like letting the heirs "control things" better from above God's green earth. 8-)
Perhaps I wasn’t clear.
#1 is our preference.
#2 is IMO unreasonable and unnecessary control from the grave in the typical situation. Ymmv
No, your post was clear. It seems that although being a lawyer, you have little appreciation for providing your heirs with the very valuable gift of asset protection; which enables them to "control" who may wind up with assets that you intended to belong to them. Not sure why my post wasn't clear. :confused I'm guessing that you are not an estate attorney.
I am not a lawyer, accountant or financial advisor. Any advice or suggestions that I may provide shall be considered for entertainment purposes only.

illumination
Posts: 345
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2019 6:13 pm

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by illumination » Fri Jan 10, 2020 10:59 pm

My vote is option 1. Err on the side of simplicity.

I don't know what this estate will be worth when this inheritance is passed on, but likely smaller as there will be a drawdown through the retirement years.

But even if we're going to say it's the same value as it is today through two people retiring, each adult child getting around $800k, I think that amount of money can be handled without a lot of complications on their own as adults. The "lower" fees from corporate trusts is a relatively recent phenomenon (and even lower fees are still a decent sized cost that most Bogleheads would flip out over if a financial institution tried to charge, something like $15,000 a year) Also, who knows if the big players abandon this lower priced loss leader because of lack of profitability, you're looking at 1-2% per year in fees like it "used" to be just a few short years ago. Now it's like $24k-$48k a year. There's also the higher tax rates depending on how it's structured and passed through. And sometimes there's butting of heads on how it's managed or when a distribution is warranted, etc. Also, it's going to mean more engagement with estate attorneys over everyone's life that is effected. No offense to some of our helpful Estate attorneys here, but it's amazing how simple things can become expensive in a hurry.

Some of the concerns of protection, at least in my state there are many already there, like when it comes to spouses/ex-spouses with respect to inheritance.

For larger estates, I can see the case for option 2.

bmelikia
Posts: 580
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 9:23 pm

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by bmelikia » Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:29 pm

FIREchief wrote:
Wed Jan 08, 2020 2:14 pm
J295 wrote:
Wed Jan 08, 2020 2:05 pm
For a variety of reasons we are not interested in option 2 and trying to control things from our graves. Ymmv.
If done correctly, #2 is more like letting the heirs "control things" better from above God's green earth. 8-)
How do you figure?
"I would rather die with money, than live without it...." - Bogleheads member Ron | | "The greatest enemy of a good plan, is the dream of a perfect plan." | -Bogle

User avatar
FIREchief
Posts: 3798
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2016 6:40 pm

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by FIREchief » Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:55 pm

bmelikia wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:29 pm
FIREchief wrote:
Wed Jan 08, 2020 2:14 pm
J295 wrote:
Wed Jan 08, 2020 2:05 pm
For a variety of reasons we are not interested in option 2 and trying to control things from our graves. Ymmv.
If done correctly, #2 is more like letting the heirs "control things" better from above God's green earth. 8-)
How do you figure?
As our experts have recommended, let the trust beneficiary have the option to serve as their own trustee at a designated point in time. That gives them the control, not a judge in a divorce or bankruptcy scenario.
I am not a lawyer, accountant or financial advisor. Any advice or suggestions that I may provide shall be considered for entertainment purposes only.

Royal Blue
Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 4:07 pm

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by Royal Blue » Mon Jan 13, 2020 7:44 pm

My wife and I have four kids, between the ages if 14 and 7. We have set up two trusts for each child.

Trust A: is for their college education, help with a down payment of 1st home, and a reasonable first vehicle upon college graduation. We have been contributing our 30K annual gift to Trust A. It's not designed to last past 30 yrs of age.

Trust B: Each child has received an initial 1.5Mil in a GST Trust that will grow until they're 40yrs old, at which time 75% of the income will pass to them. They do not ever get the principle, the principle will pass to their children, rinse and repeat. We may contribute an additional gift of up to 5 Mil but no more than that. We have Northern Trust as co-trustee (A real fiduciary), and they become co-trustee at 25. Even though they won't get the money for a while afterwards.

We also max out their Roth IRA's (until two years until they get established in their career.) Then they will be responsible for that contribution on their own.

The balance of our estate will go to a family foundation, which the kids will hopefully get involved as they get older and develop a passion of philanthropy like my wife and I have.

After a lot of research we have come to the conclusion that the worse thing you can do is give your kids too much money too early. After college it's very important that they establish themselves on their own accord. They need to experience the achievement of standing on their own two feet. It's vital that they experience a level of struggle and accomplishment, if not money will cripple their self-esteem for life.

My wife and I also tell the kids our family story of entrepreneurship, living below our means, our view of debt, risk-reward, sacrifice and set-backs. It's important to pass along the values and stories of where the wealth came from, and how easy it is to squander.

Leesbro63
Posts: 6093
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 4:36 pm

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by Leesbro63 » Tue Jan 14, 2020 8:13 am

BocaEli wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 7:44 pm
My wife and I have four kids, between the ages if 14 and 7. We have set up two trusts for each child.

Trust A: is for their college education, help with a down payment of 1st home, and a reasonable first vehicle upon college graduation. We have been contributing our 30K annual gift to Trust A. It's not designed to last past 30 yrs of age.

Trust B: Each child has received an initial 1.5Mil in a GST Trust that will grow until they're 40yrs old, at which time 75% of the income will pass to them. They do not ever get the principle, the principle will pass to their children, rinse and repeat. We may contribute an additional gift of up to 5 Mil but no more than that. We have Northern Trust as co-trustee (A real fiduciary), and they become co-trustee at 25. Even though they won't get the money for a while afterwards.

We also max out their Roth IRA's (until two years until they get established in their career.) Then they will be responsible for that contribution on their own.

The balance of our estate will go to a family foundation, which the kids will hopefully get involved as they get older and develop a passion of philanthropy like my wife and I have.

After a lot of research we have come to the conclusion that the worse thing you can do is give your kids too much money too early. After college it's very important that they establish themselves on their own accord. They need to experience the achievement of standing on their own two feet. It's vital that they experience a level of struggle and accomplishment, if not money will cripple their self-esteem for life.

My wife and I also tell the kids our family story of entrepreneurship, living below our means, our view of debt, risk-reward, sacrifice and set-backs. It's important to pass along the values and stories of where the wealth came from, and how easy it is to squander.
The second trust, especially, sounds like it could have a tax problem. It needs to be invested for future income to be 75% paid out. But in the meantime that in one will be taxed at the high trust tax rate. And if you invest in non-income producing assets, they may have to be sold with big capital gains later to get income producing assets, once the beneficiaries demand income.

Royal Blue
Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 4:07 pm

Re: [Estate planning] Simplicity: Inherit outright vs trusts for kids?

Post by Royal Blue » Tue Jan 14, 2020 8:55 am

Leesbro63 wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2020 8:13 am
[quote=BocaEli post_id=4952056 time=<a href="tel:1578962694">1578962694</a> user_id=155140]
My wife and I have four kids, between the ages if 14 and 7. We have set up two trusts for each child.

Trust A: is for their college education, help with a down payment of 1st home, and a reasonable first vehicle upon college graduation. We have been contributing our 30K annual gift to Trust A. It's not designed to last past 30 yrs of age.

Trust B: Each child has received an initial 1.5Mil in a GST Trust that will grow until they're 40yrs old, at which time 75% of the income will pass to them. They do not ever get the principle, the principle will pass to their children, rinse and repeat. We may contribute an additional gift of up to 5 Mil but no more than that. We have Northern Trust as co-trustee (A real fiduciary), and they become co-trustee at 25. Even though they won't get the money for a while afterwards.

We also max out their Roth IRA's (until two years until they get established in their career.) Then they will be responsible for that contribution on their own.

The balance of our estate will go to a family foundation, which the kids will hopefully get involved as they get older and develop a passion of philanthropy like my wife and I have.

After a lot of research we have come to the conclusion that the worse thing you can do is give your kids too much money too early. After college it's very important that they establish themselves on their own accord. They need to experience the achievement of standing on their own two feet. It's vital that they experience a level of struggle and accomplishment, if not money will cripple their self-esteem for life.

My wife and I also tell the kids our family story of entrepreneurship, living below our means, our view of debt, risk-reward, sacrifice and set-backs. It's important to pass along the values and stories of where the wealth came from, and how easy it is to squander.
The second trust, especially, sounds like it could have a tax problem. It needs to be invested for future income to be 75% paid out. But in the meantime that in one will be taxed at the high trust tax rate. And if you invest in non-income producing assets, they may have to be sold with big capital gains later to get income producing assets, once the beneficiaries demand income.
[/quote]

It’s in a private company which we own, my wife and I plan on paying the long term gains tax when we sell that asset. So the kids will have the upside and no tax liability. Once that asset is exited, we will have to consider tax consequences moving forward. While the estate gift is so high it was a good time to transfer assets for them. You’re able to apply hefty discounts to value because it’s private etc...

Post Reply