Can beneficiaries refuse to disclose previous gifts to the Executor?

T McGibney said:
https://www.revenue.ie/en/tax-professionals/tdm/capital-acquisitions-tax/cat-part02.pdf Section 4, pages 6-7
Click to expand...
I believe you've misread this.

Overseas beneficiary does not have to appoint a Solicitor in Ireland.

Requirement for appointment of Irish resident Solicitor applies where the personal representative/executor is non-resident; simply as Revenue then otherwise wouldn't have any one on the hook for tax!

"Where there are no Irish resident personal representative(s)......the personal representative(s) must appoint a solicitor holding a practicing certificate in the State"
 
You are of course correct on this point, and thanks for pointing this out.
The main issue here applies regardless.
 
I understand this secondary liability is now a thing of the past except in relation to non-resident beneficiaries, the context of which is discussed here:

Non-resident beneficiary Risk For The Legal Personal Representative

If you are an Executor of a Will, you need to protect yourself against any possible liability. Madden Law, Probate Solicitor, Bryanstown, Drogheda, Co. Louth advise Executors . Video consultations available.
www.maddenlaw.ie
 
Sigh. I posted that already.

non-resident beneficiary does not have to appoint solicitor.

Exec can withhold cash for non-resident beneficiary pending Revenue clearance.

I don't believe exec is responsible for tax payable by resident beneficiary; but if anyone has a reliable source that says otherwise please post it here.
 
from your same document "The resident personal representative(s) and the solicitor are entitled to retain property sufficient to meet the Inheritance Tax liability from any property due to the beneficiary from the estate."
 
Brendan Burgess said:
If I have been left €10k and am in no hurry, can I refuse to provide the information, so as to stop Probate being granted?
Click to expand...
Nitpick: I think this information is only required in relation to beneficiaries who are receiving €12k or more.

But, yeah. It looks to me that, in theory, such a beneficiary can delay matters indefinitely by simply failing to provide the information needed.

It's a flaw in the legislation, I think, that it requires an applicant for probate to provide information that isn't necessarily within their own knowledge or procurement. I suspect the system mostly works in practice because the desire of beneficiaries to receive their inheritance, or the pressure put on them by other family members who want to receive their inheritances, means that people supply the information that the applicant is required to provide.

If these mechanisms don't work, I suppose the executor could approach the Revenue, explain the problem, and see if they will accept a form that names the beneficiary concerned and adds a note that the applicant does not know, and has been unable to discover, what prior gifts/inheritances that beneficiary has received. If that were to happen I imagine the obstructive beneficiary could expect some sustained attention from the Revenue, who will naturally assume that they may have Something To Hide (like previous gifts/inheritances that gave rise to a CAT liability that wasn't reported, self-assessed or paid).

T McGibney said:
A better example is a two-parent family with 2 adult children, Joe and Patricia . . . if she confirms a figure of €100k that it won't be hard for Joe to put two and two together.
Click to expand...
I understand the sensitivities. In fact, they're even more acute that you point out; if Patricia declines to tell Joe about other gifts/inheritances she has received within the threshhold group, it still won't be hard to for Joe to put two and two together, and conclude that Mary has received a material amount of money from one or other of her parents.

But all we're really saying here is that this law is not well thought-out; it's bad policy. It is, nevertheless, the law. As matters stand, Joe isn't excused from providing the information to the Revenue merely because the information will anger him, embarrass Patricia or cause unhappy differences within the family.
 
Hardly.

The basic rule regarding the requirement to file an IT38 (crossing or previously having crossed 80% of the class threshold applicable to the inheritance or gift in question) is very clear and easy to understand.

Unless someone is likely to have crossed that, Revenue would merely be wasting their time devoting "sustained attention" to a taxpayer who has no liability.
 
TomEdison said:
such a beneficiary can delay matters indefinitely by simply failing to provide the information needed
Click to expand...
I disagree here.

I believe Exec can proceed, making sure they have made every possible effort to obtain the details from the beneficiary(ies) and have documented that process.

Revenue have the PPS numbers & they can chase / audit etc.,

IANAL
 
Last time I executed a will I got assurances from the beneficiaries that no previous inheritances (despite knowing someone in the same bracket had died and I'm pretty sure left them money in excess of the threshold), and that they would settle their liabilities with the Revenue directly. Before the estate was distributed the Revenue contacted the beneficiaries and advised them that CAT was due (getting in early, just in case), so I'm sure they cross reference the SA2.
 
"Last time I executed a will I got assurances from the beneficiaries that no previous inheritances". And last time I was a beneficiary I was never asked before probate if I had received any gift from the deceased or any one in the same bracket.
 
Thank you all so, so much for such detailed replies and they're much appreciated indeed.. This thread info will be fantastic for others who find themselves in a similar situation..

I spoke to my sol earlier & apparently sol was contacting Revenue today regarding all this so I'll post that information once I hear back. Seems the office call centre shuts at 1.30pm daily.
 
Does all this paperwork apply when 'granny' leaves niece/nephew/grandchild a small item of jewellry or other item of sentimental value - assume no item worth more than E200.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register