I’m no expert in these matters either, but it seems to me that courts do not honor “loans between spouses”, such as the case of a spouse loaning the other spouse some of his/her inheritance or gift money.
Right. I understand. But I was trying to mostly show in response to the question about a home equity loan taken out in both the spouses’ names, that the couple had agreed to split, turned out in the legal divorce that the wife had to pay the entire home equity loan back and the husband was off the hook for it.
Also, I don’t want to get too into the nitty gritty of that particular case, but just to say that the wife wasn’t loaning the husband inheritance money voluntarily. She was being forced to do it due to the spouse’s actions in giving up his income voluntarily without her knowledge or consent. It is a complicated case.
I’ve seen several cases like sooziet’s friend. 1. Accountant husband picked up a gambling habit and depleted their savings. She had to return to work at age 60, move to apartment.
- Wife's large inheritance was forcibly co-mingled. In their 80's, husband emphasized how poor they were, made her cut out her nice salon, her mani/pedi appointments, shopping. Yet he generously would give kids $100,000 for a condo or help with tuitions. The kids think he is great, neighbors adore him, but few know how financially abusive he is to his wife.
- Like Himom, a former friend was left everything when her spouse died. She is bipolar, and handled the death in an awful way (think drugs and alcohol). Her kids, who use to be her life and one was living with her at the time, tried to get her help. All of her friends did too. At a graduation for a kid from a professional school, she was so drunk and made a scene. The kids were devastated. She was furious and cut the kids off from all the assets. A friend took the 2 living in home in with her family. The children went from being wealthy to being in debt. The housekeeper of 40 years also was kicked out, and the children took her in. In short, her husband, I believe, should have left $ to each person in household.
The scenario could have been that this friend remarried, and spent money on hubby and forgot her kids. I’ve seen that happen, both with men and women.
I am not sure that you can do this. My understanding is that any change in beneficiaries has to include notice to the current beneficiary. Assuming that is the H, he would have to also execute the form acknowledging he had notice of the change.
sooz, that is one horrible situation. Lack of assessment skills on the part of the judge?
All of these decisions hang on the ability to communicate and have needed discussions about end of life. A quick google turned up nothing restrictive about changing beneficiaries on IRAs.
Short marriages and the financial damage - remember when Patty Duke was in a manic episode, married some guy that she gave several million dollars and couldn’t legally get it back? Sad. Dealing with a relative, I am seeing how one does get cut off by the bipolar individual.
It may depend on individual state. In my state, to designate IRA to anyone one other than your spouse, your spouse has to consent.
I personally don’t have a problems keeping inheritance individually. Conmingle it seems too communal to me. I am guessing it’s a habit from the time when the exempt threshold for estate tax was lower and it applied to husband and wife separately. Wasn’t it more advantageous for each to hold at least the exempt amount?
I also have no problem with keeping inheritance separate - for all the reasons cited in this thread.
My inheritance money came at a necessary time for our family. I have kept track of the funds coming in. Since I have survived stage III cancer, I am looking at continuing to enjoy life on this planet. Now am setting up for DDs - have put money into Roth IRAs for them. When H’s parents pass, the only thing inherited will be their home. Most likely, if someone wants it (as retirement place) they will buy out the others. It needs a new kitchen (currently no dishwasher, and cabinets/counter tops from the early 1960’s) and the garage and carport are ready to fall down. House has good bones and lots of good feelings there for over 55 years.
Hugs to all on this thread who need a hug!
I am not sure this is true. I have changed the beneficiaries and did not have to notify the person who was removed. I am also aware of having had someone else take my name off as a beneficiary without having had to notify me before it was done.
In my state, you have to get your spouse agree if the beneficiaries are anyone other than your own spouse.
From what I know, there was a LOT of documentation. There was just one meeting with a judge who spent a short time on it and then decided. I think these cases can be decided quickly because of the judge’s docket schedule, and they likely don’t read all the pertinent prepared information all that carefully. At this court meeting, the judge had two other judges also sit in and then they met with the attorneys to talk in private. I was told that the spouses, sitting in the courtroom, could hear the judges and attorneys laughing through the door in their short meeting to decide the case.
In most/all states, if the funds are community property, then to name someone other than a spouse as beneficiary, you need to have the spouse sign a notarized consent. This was designed to prevent cheating spouses from leaving community property funds to lovers.
We went thru something similar when H retired. Since he opted for me to get 100% survivor’s benefits for his pension, I didn’t have to sign anything. But if he had made any other choice (75%, 50%, or zero), then I would have had to submit a notarized signed formed agreeing to anything less than 100%.
OK, well, the two examples I gave were not community property. One was a spouse’s inheritance funds in that spouse’s own name. The other was a spouse’s life insurance policy.
The NYT article I linked above explains what is subject to spousal consent and what is not when a beneficiary change is requested.
I was thinking of life insurance beneficiary. That would probably be simpler.
@BunsenBurner I hadn’t read that link, but just did. It says this applies to “certain retirement accounts.” The situations I know of didn’t require consent and one was an inherited IRA and one was a life insurance policy.
Folks, generally:
Pensions and employer retirement accounts are governed by ERISA. Plans governed by ERISA are going to require spousal consent when you take action that affects spousal rights. It’s best to read the Summary Plan Description of your employer plan to see what needs to be done either for inheritance or in the event of a divorce. Spousal consent makes perfect sense because retirement benefits are part of income earned during the marriage. If you do not want an errant spouse to mess with your rights without your knowledge or consent, then be glad for the protection.
IRAs are not governed by ERISA. Whether or not the custodial financial institution requires spousal consent varies. Some do, some don’t. The ones that do want most probably want make sure they do not get sued by an unhappy surviving spouse.
Estate planning is best done with the big picture in mind.
There are good lawyers and bad lawyers. There is good legal advice and poor legal advice. Caveat emptor.
Purely speculative on my part, as there is no end to variation and poor drafting in all variety of legal documents. If your GF’s will provides bequests, it may be written so that heirs are named and there may be a catch-all phrase. Or the devise may provide for “all grandchildren.”
And while I cannot imagine anyone I know rushing to procreate solely for the purpose of receiving a share of a future (i.e., speculative) inheritance, I recall my parents mentioning just such a friend many years ago. There was significant family money that a grandparent wanted to divide among grandchildren. So, this friend ended up having another child to add another number to the numerator. So, it’s not entirely nuts.
I too would expect my H to keep his inheritance separate, as I would expect to.
I’m a lawyer, though, which might explain it.