Thanks again for replies, all very helpful.
As per initial post, the house is currently worth 300k, so nothing underhand being proposed.
Dad is 82 and is finding it difficult to spend his savings at this stage of life and his wishes are to avoid, where possible, the tax man (or Fair Deal) taking his hard earned life savings while his grandchildren struggle to start out on life's journey of starting a home etc.
300k in savings would mean Fair Deal would be a non-runner and the 300k would be gone in 4-5 years on Nursing Home fees. That's difficult for him to accept while his grandchildren are approaching the stage where 30K would make a huge difference in their lives.
His own children are "financiallv fine".
Not necessarily. It's possible in certain circumstances to claim PPR relief for a property occupied solely by a "dependent relative" on a rent-free basis.If Johnny owns it, any gains will be subject to CGT.
The players don’t make the rules.So he wants me (and others) to pay for his time in a nursing home instead! How very altruistic of him.
So he wants me (and others) to pay for his time in a nursing home instead! How very altruistic of him.
It's no different from and as equally legitimate as tax planning. And there is no certainty that the man in question will ever use nursing home care. Most elderly people these days don't.I agree with you Marsupial. There is something wrong with the system whereby someone with €600k of assets can give them away and then get the rest of us to foot the bill.
A bigger question is why an infirm individual is taxed for their treatment but no other type of medical condition incurs a tax.There is something wrong with the system whereby someone with €600k of assets can give them away and then get the rest of us to foot the bill.
Yes, he wants you and me and his other children, via our taxes, to pay for him..... you could call it "re-pay" instead of "pay".So he wants me (and others) to pay for his time in a nursing home instead! How very altruistic of him.
I agree with you Marsupial. There is something wrong with the system whereby someone with €600k of assets can give them away and then get the rest of us to foot the bill.
It's no different from and as equally legitimate as tax planning. And there is no certainty that the man in question will ever use nursing home care. Most elderly people these days don't.
That would indeed be artificial. In reality, nobody engineers their own destitution to avoid a contingency that may never materialise.Disposing of all your assets so that you are impoverished and that you become fully dependent on the state. Seems much more artificial to me.
No. There was no suggestion in that case that the father would be left destitute.But that is what was planned in the thread which gave rise to this discussion!
like most I can see both sides.
You do get fewer benefits throughout your life if you aren’t unemployed, disabled etc. And that continues.
However what galls is that two families with the same income, pay the same taxes etc… one spends and the other saves and the saver ends up paying for long term care.
But of course it’s about need. And we can’t predict what we will need in old age. Getting rid of savings and property to avail of state support makes financial sense it seems in this case.
But it seems morally wrong to me and I’m not sure why, maybe it’s jealousy as my parents would not dream of doing that. So if needed the fair deal will take a chunk of their estate.
They were savers all their lives and have a substantial bank account. Currently it’s being spent on care to keep them in their own home, long may that continue. Their kids aren’t in need, their grandkids.., well yes of course.., the 20/30 year olds could really use a hand but they aren’t going to get it.
I wish my parents had travelled more, treated themselves to better cars, got the house fixed up more often, eaten out more etc. But they didn’t and as a result they have money for home help and nursing homes if needed.
No. There was no suggestion in that case that the father would be left destitute.
End result: Dad has disposed of his 300K cash and his house in tax efficient manner and in >5 years time has Zero assets for "Fair Deal".
Yes, he wants you and me and his other children, via our taxes, to pay for him..... you could call it "re-pay" instead of "pay".
Apart from his old OAP, Dad or his children have never received a cent in welfare from the State. He is one of many of that generation who worked hard, paid their taxes, paid for their own house, educated their children, expected no handouts and saved hard.
Now, in his later years, he finds it hard to accept that his "neighbour", who may not have worked (ever), received free housing, medical card, free education etc and never saved a cent .... would be taken care of (rightly so) for free in their old age by the State (aka you and me).
While he would have to pay for the same care from his hard-earned life savings & potentially lose any money he had managed to save in his life. He believes his care should also be free.
It's a double-whammy and hard to argue against him!
If the system were fair, those of us who foot the bill now would avail of free care when our time comes...... rather than footing the bill now for our elderly citizens and footing the bill again when we ourselves are elderly.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?