frenchie
Well-known member
Bez!":3cjni4vm said:
That it is
Bez!":3cjni4vm said:
Provided it is well written and up to date.
making a will
- Thread starter denoginnizer
- Start date
Help Support CattleToday:
That it is
Provided it is well written and up to date.
lakading
Well-known member
Life's simple rules:
Never eat yellow snow
He who fart in church must sit in his own pew
Don't club a baby seal if someone else is watching
Don't take estate planning advice from a cattle message board.
Never eat yellow snow
He who fart in church must sit in his own pew
Don't club a baby seal if someone else is watching
Don't take estate planning advice from a cattle message board.
Conagher
Well-known member
dun":35qefnup said:aplusmnt":35qefnup said:I been putting it off, I can not decide which child to leave all my Bills to?
What difference does it make? You won;t be around for them to complain to.
dun
Not sure how serious dun was with this comment, but think he has a point. I believe it was Thomas Jefferson who said, "Life is for the Living". If I remember correctly he was referring to a mandatory expiration date for any law past, but I think the comment is valid in other areas as well. We have a legacy in my family communicated to me by my father; "I'll leave you the same thing my father left me, the whole wide world to make a living in." And that is exactly what he left us, and I'm probably a better man because of it.
In a related topic, there was a good feedback letter in the last Progressive Farmer about the need for estate taxes.
As always, your mileage may vary.
lakading
Well-known member
Conagher":18p5it0w said:dun":18p5it0w said:aplusmnt":18p5it0w said:I been putting it off, I can not decide which child to leave all my Bills to?
What difference does it make? You won;t be around for them to complain to.
dun
In a related topic, there was a good feedback letter in the last Progressive Farmer about the need for estate taxes.
There is no need for estate taxes.
milesvb
Well-known member
lakading":2emm4t3x said:Conagher":2emm4t3x said:dun":2emm4t3x said:aplusmnt":2emm4t3x said:I been putting it off, I can not decide which child to leave all my Bills to?
What difference does it make? You won;t be around for them to complain to.
dun
In a related topic, there was a good feedback letter in the last Progressive Farmer about the need for estate taxes.
There is no need for estate taxes.
ditto that :x
lakading":1bqemkhy said:
Not even advice that simply states one should look into their estate before they die rather than have the heirs do it after death?
I wish my family had done this before some were written off - you have no idea how bad things were. Lawyers made most of the money.
So -
1. I agree
2. I would not care
3. I would say - do what you gotta' do to make a living
4. I would agree AND disagree
Bez!
lakading
Well-known member
I'm talking about specific advice (i.e. which type of trust, how to title property, etc.). Simply needing to have a will is a matter of common sense. Whether you actually have one or not is a CHOICE.
norriscathy
Well-known member
A6gal":2p2o1w83 said:
A revocable trust is a non entity for tax purposes. The decedent still owns the property; all it does is maybe save a little on probate cost. No matter how clever you try to be, if you still excercise control over the property it is still included in your estate. Most cattlemen I've worked with want to keep control until after the cofin lid is shut!
"norriscathy" wrote:
Hey Cathy N - long time. Your comments are valid and I am going to add to them - maybe - just maybe it will save someone from going through a bad time when it is not really necessary.
The quoted statement above - in itself is so very telling.
Jumping up on my soap box for a minute:
As smart as most ag operators are they are very often - no - usually - idiots when it comes to "succession planning".
And they are by nature cheap. So cheap in fact that the majority never get around to it until they realize they must do something or it will be too late - "gonna' save some money ya know - darned if I will give it to some fancy lawyer, accountant, financial planner or insurance agent!"
Lots do nothing and the whole shebang goes up in paperwork and smoke after the last surviving owner dies.
Or they will listen to Billy-Bob and his horror story rather than spend some time and money to see if there is a better way. You see, the part Billy-Bob never mentions is he went to the discount store to get his financial planning done - and he ended up losing everything.
What they do not ever seem to get through their thick heads is the fact that what it costs today to start this planning is far cheaper than it will cost tomorrow. So go quality planning today - it will seem very cheap tomorrow.
My favourite example.
A cup of coffee 20 years ago cost how much? And how much is it today? Same rules apply to the cost of succession planning.
If the rules and the laws change, a good financial planner, insurance agent, lawyer and accountant can build that possibility into the "risk assessment" portion of the plan. Provided you do not go the Billy-Bob route!
And yeah, if you have a sizeable estate you will need all of the aforementioned folks. It is a team effort. What is sizeable? Well, if you figure that you could not pony up the cash to buy - outright - what you have now - it is sizeable. Everyone has a different definition but that is mine.
Maybe there really is a favoured son / daughter / niece / nephew or whatever that you might want to leave the operation to - and maybe you might want to leave it to them debt free. You would be surprized how many really do - despite the usual chatter about - "No one ever gave me nuthin for nuthin".
I saw all of this happen - or perhaps I should say - all of this not happen - a few years ago and it nearly destroyed my extended family - so to this day I am very blunt about the whole thing.
The best time to start this type of planning is when the first kid is one day old. The whole planning "thing" is far easier to "turn off" should you decide to sell out or whatever - than it is to "turn on".
The best way to hand over is BEFORE you die - that way you can actually experience the satisfaction of seeing your legacy continue on. Plan now - hand off before you die - to the person who will keep the operation running.
Or the person who gets it - after you are dead - may not want it and all your efforts and your ancestors efforts may get erased in the sale to a developer. If you have a sense of family history you might not truly want that to happen. Mind you - if you are dead - who the heck cares?
If you are serious about keeping the home place in the family and you do nothing but sit on your duff moaning about how expensive it is to plan for the future hand over - well, you deserve to lose it. And there is a surprizingly large percentage that do get broken up to cover costs, bills, taxes and other claims against the estate due to poor planning.
Off my soap box.
Thanks for allowing me to vent! :lol:
Bez!
Hey Cathy N - long time. Your comments are valid and I am going to add to them - maybe - just maybe it will save someone from going through a bad time when it is not really necessary.
The quoted statement above - in itself is so very telling.
Jumping up on my soap box for a minute:
As smart as most ag operators are they are very often - no - usually - idiots when it comes to "succession planning".
And they are by nature cheap. So cheap in fact that the majority never get around to it until they realize they must do something or it will be too late - "gonna' save some money ya know - darned if I will give it to some fancy lawyer, accountant, financial planner or insurance agent!"
Lots do nothing and the whole shebang goes up in paperwork and smoke after the last surviving owner dies.
Or they will listen to Billy-Bob and his horror story rather than spend some time and money to see if there is a better way. You see, the part Billy-Bob never mentions is he went to the discount store to get his financial planning done - and he ended up losing everything.
What they do not ever seem to get through their thick heads is the fact that what it costs today to start this planning is far cheaper than it will cost tomorrow. So go quality planning today - it will seem very cheap tomorrow.
My favourite example.
A cup of coffee 20 years ago cost how much? And how much is it today? Same rules apply to the cost of succession planning.
If the rules and the laws change, a good financial planner, insurance agent, lawyer and accountant can build that possibility into the "risk assessment" portion of the plan. Provided you do not go the Billy-Bob route!
And yeah, if you have a sizeable estate you will need all of the aforementioned folks. It is a team effort. What is sizeable? Well, if you figure that you could not pony up the cash to buy - outright - what you have now - it is sizeable. Everyone has a different definition but that is mine.
Maybe there really is a favoured son / daughter / niece / nephew or whatever that you might want to leave the operation to - and maybe you might want to leave it to them debt free. You would be surprized how many really do - despite the usual chatter about - "No one ever gave me nuthin for nuthin".
I saw all of this happen - or perhaps I should say - all of this not happen - a few years ago and it nearly destroyed my extended family - so to this day I am very blunt about the whole thing.
The best time to start this type of planning is when the first kid is one day old. The whole planning "thing" is far easier to "turn off" should you decide to sell out or whatever - than it is to "turn on".
The best way to hand over is BEFORE you die - that way you can actually experience the satisfaction of seeing your legacy continue on. Plan now - hand off before you die - to the person who will keep the operation running.
Or the person who gets it - after you are dead - may not want it and all your efforts and your ancestors efforts may get erased in the sale to a developer. If you have a sense of family history you might not truly want that to happen. Mind you - if you are dead - who the heck cares?
If you are serious about keeping the home place in the family and you do nothing but sit on your duff moaning about how expensive it is to plan for the future hand over - well, you deserve to lose it. And there is a surprizingly large percentage that do get broken up to cover costs, bills, taxes and other claims against the estate due to poor planning.
Off my soap box.
Thanks for allowing me to vent! :lol:
Bez!
frenchie
Well-known member
Joint tenancy in some provinces between a father and son can be an effective tool to transfer land ownership without it having to pass through a will.
Arnold Ziffle
Well-known member
Many good thoughts in that post Bez. And as Norris posted, many wealthy folks (not only cattlemen) are very reluctant to give up control of assets, yet they gripe about estate taxes. I'm sure not in favor of the estate tax, but if it is the law of the land folks need to bite the bullet and try to plan around it. And this is one of those areas where a lot of folks are penny wise and pound foolish. Sometimes they simply need to pay professional fees for qualified professional services in order to do the proper tax planning involving gifting, family ltd. partnerships, trusts, etc. I am frequently bewildered by very wealthy clients and acquaintances that will not take advantage of the $11,000 per year gift exemption, or that don't even want to consider using their transfer tax exemption during their lifetime so that the future appreciation on the chosen assets is removed from their taxable estate.
In the USA the use of certain joint tenancy accounts can work the same way as they apparently do in Canada per frenchie's example, and the use of such accounts (at least in the USA) can be good or bad, depending on many factors. For example, many folks set up joint accounts between a parent and a child, or sometimes with a sibling or trusted friend, without realizing that ownership of the assets in question can pass to the surviving tenant upon death of the original asset owner. With many of those joint tenancies the assets pass automatically, "outside" the will, and are not considered to be a part of the probate estate. Sometimes a parent provides for the disposition of the assets in a certain way in his or her will (for example evenly among all the children); but those will provisions often are nevertheless ignored by operation of law because of the joint tenancy rules, and the assets will in fact only go to the surviving named tenant. Many a fierce family squabble has resulted from situations such as that.
In the USA the use of certain joint tenancy accounts can work the same way as they apparently do in Canada per frenchie's example, and the use of such accounts (at least in the USA) can be good or bad, depending on many factors. For example, many folks set up joint accounts between a parent and a child, or sometimes with a sibling or trusted friend, without realizing that ownership of the assets in question can pass to the surviving tenant upon death of the original asset owner. With many of those joint tenancies the assets pass automatically, "outside" the will, and are not considered to be a part of the probate estate. Sometimes a parent provides for the disposition of the assets in a certain way in his or her will (for example evenly among all the children); but those will provisions often are nevertheless ignored by operation of law because of the joint tenancy rules, and the assets will in fact only go to the surviving named tenant. Many a fierce family squabble has resulted from situations such as that.
frenchie
Well-known member
AZ do you have tenants in common down there as well?
Arnold Ziffle":hcztsz2f said:
Thanks AZ - you are in the biz so have more knowledge than me.
Joint tenancies suck the big one when a long lost gang of relatives show up at the funeral looking for their cut of the action. Lawyers love the outcome and the family loses - all because - as you yourself said - folks will not give up assets or plan around it.
I have seen it and am watching it right now - just back one grid road over. It's a big operation and it will all go to the legal folks and then off to a developer - simply because the old man is too .... hmmm ... - what the heck - STUPID to do the right thing. I even told him that over Christmas when he dropped by. Yeah, we do have a decent relationship - but he figures the gov will get it all anyways - will not believe me - and his whole family is about to jump the remaining son who is on the farm and running the operation. Gonna' be a big war and I am now steering real clear.
Had both him and all of his kids at this table at least once within the past two months - always separate - never together. Nobody is talking to each other now - the old man will be dead within a year with cancer and the vultures are circling.
Truly a shame.
Bez!
Just the thought of the lawyers eating up the estate, through all of the ways they have of "biting off one more bite," I will see that it doesn't happen.
Lawyers like to let things drop on a case for a month, then refile it, and you have to pay the filing fees over and over. It costs you an extra $150 each time they do it.
I absolutely have no respect for the legal ways they have of stealing and yet, they will not govern each other. They will start something to get you moved from one lawfirm to another, but when it comes to trying to get things back from the first one, the second one will tell you he doesn't sue friends. Then he picks up where the first one left off. They make sure a letter comes across their desk they have to "review and file." which costs $45 a letter. A quick phone call is $22.
I will do my best to see that nothing I have goes to a lawyer if I have to file a will that says it all goes to Goodwill.
Even when you are at a lowpoint and need help, they have no heart when it comes to money. I wonder if these people are born this way (greedy and cold) or do they just get conditioned to tearing people down as far as they can.
One small town lawyer seemed to always wind up with estates of widows that he handled. I do not know the details, but it doesn't look good.
Lawyers like to let things drop on a case for a month, then refile it, and you have to pay the filing fees over and over. It costs you an extra $150 each time they do it.
I absolutely have no respect for the legal ways they have of stealing and yet, they will not govern each other. They will start something to get you moved from one lawfirm to another, but when it comes to trying to get things back from the first one, the second one will tell you he doesn't sue friends. Then he picks up where the first one left off. They make sure a letter comes across their desk they have to "review and file." which costs $45 a letter. A quick phone call is $22.
I will do my best to see that nothing I have goes to a lawyer if I have to file a will that says it all goes to Goodwill.
Even when you are at a lowpoint and need help, they have no heart when it comes to money. I wonder if these people are born this way (greedy and cold) or do they just get conditioned to tearing people down as far as they can.
One small town lawyer seemed to always wind up with estates of widows that he handled. I do not know the details, but it doesn't look good.
