What in the name of God is all this about?! Joe put it very well when he suggested backing up the bus, and now I must demand that you stall the digger!
OP this is very simple and straightforward - and you are complicating the life out of it.
What's actually happening here is quite clear - no matter what way you are dressing it up - the parents are giving the house to their son and you, and in return ye are going to give them money, over a period of time. This is consideration; it's a fairly transparent arrangement. It doesn't matter if you call it them gifting you a house and you subsequently gifting them money - that's clearly not what is going on, as there's an understanding that in consideration of them signing over the house to you and hubby, ye will provide for them in their old age.
I'll put it this way - let's say you and hubby decided after the transfer to pull a fast one and that you weren't going to give them a single shekel. Would they have grounds to sue you for the amount agreed? If you think, based on the discussions you've had and agreements made between both couples, that the answer is yes, then there's no gift. For this reason, a deed of covenant will simply not wash either:
"Payments under a Deed must be made without any benefit being received from the covenantee in return, either directly or indirectly."
The correct way to address this IMHO would be something along these lines:
- They transfer the property to ye, and the transfer is subject to a requirement that you pay X amount per annum to the parents, for the remainder of their lives (i.e. as long as either of them survives).
- Now you have two capital amounts that can be valued - the value of the property being transferred, and the value of this obligation to pay X amount annually as long as one of the parents remains alive. This can be valued using prescribed formulae.
- The difference between the two amounts will be a gift from one party to the other.
- Since they are old, one would expect the capitalised value of the X p.a. will be substantially less than the 220k value of the house, so the gift will be from the parents to the child, so no CAT issues there.
- It also leaves you in a position of having substantial equity in the house should you need to borrow against it.
- The payment of X p.a. is now not an annual "gift", but is consideration (i.e. purchase price paid over time) of the house.
- Lastly and very importantly - It also gives the parents security/certainty that they can't be screwed over - now I'm not suggesting that you and your hubby would attempt to do this, but some of the things families do to each other over money/assets are simply unbelievable, and it's simpler if the whole thing is nailed down and everyone knows where they stand.
You'll need proper legal advice, but I don't see why the above couldn't be formulated in an agreement