When someone makes a Will, they are entitled to leave their estate to however they choose, be that their relatives, friends, charity or even their pets.
An important part of the Wills solicitors job is to ensure that they have fully considered who they might have some moral obligation to included, before they confirm their instructions.
It is often said that money should be left either sideways or downwards. That is to children, grandchildren and sometimes siblings. If parents are included (leaving it upwards), it may be that the parents already have Inheritance Tax issues of their own, so the gift could effectively end up having 40% IHT payable out of it when the parent dies.
Apart from leaving an estate to a surviving spouse (which is the most common clause in a will), where there is more than one child, the conversation with a client is sometimes interesting. Someone with 3 children for example may wish to benefit one less than the others on the premise that ‘they don’t need the money’.
A good starting point in such an instance, is that all children should be treated equally, unless there is a compelling reason not to. A typical reason might be that families do sadly fall out on occasion, and children can become permanently estranged from their parents.
A more difficult area, and one where the Solicitor really earns his fee, is that a parent may think (or even know) that one child is wealthier than the other. The wealthier child though may not view things in the same light when they receive less from the will than their siblings. It’s always an idea to point out to a client what you may want to avoid is creating conflict between your children when you are gone, as one appears to have been favoured over the other.
To someone who has supported charitable causes through their life, or feels connected to a particular cause, incorporating a Charity in a Will benefits the Charity, and also gives the client a sense of moral satisfaction. Charities are often included as backstop beneficiaries, that is they will only benefit if the first (or even second) named beneficiaries fail to survive the client. In such cases the Charity ever actually receiving anything is a rarity. It might be more morally satisfying to rather than potentially giving a Charity 100% of something they are very unlikely to receive, to give them a straight cash gift in the first place through the Will of a more nominal fixed amount. Additionally for someone with IHT issues, their IHT liability can be reduced by a gift to Charity through a government scheme.
A Mackman Group collaboration - market research by Mackman Research | website design by Mackman
