IHT and loans

I have heard that it is possible to reduce IHT by making a loan to someone. Can someone explain? Does the loan have to be interest free? What is the position if the person making the loan dies before it is repaid? What is the position if the loan is repaid before death? Can someone please give an example, showing IHT implications?

Thanks

Reply to
Edward Lionheart
Loading thread data ...

You would better utilise the amazing power of this group by posting a few more details. What are you trying to achieve and why?

Reply to
Troy Steadman

I don't think there are in general any IHT implications if there is a loan made by the person whose estate is of interest. If X lends £Y to Z and then drops dead, then whatever Z owed X will instead simply be owed to X's estate. If Z also happens to be a major beneficiary of X's estate, inheriting more than what he owes, then the money may not need physically to change hands twice, but it still counts as part of the estate and will be taxed as such.

There's more scope for fun and games with loans made *to* the deceased (while still alive, obviously).

The heirs might lend their benefactors money with which they could make annual small gifts back to the heirs. That way the heirs could get their hands on entitlement to the money before getting the money itself. Upon death, all the money previously gifted would be outwith the estate because it is a debt. In addition, the heirs could be getting interest (if not excessive).

One of the big bogies is parents gifting their house to the children but continuing to live in them rent-free. These would be "Gifts With Reservation" and as such will be counted as part of the estate, will be valued at date of death rather than of gift, and will probably be treated for CGT purposes as acquired at the time and value of the gift.

Two ways go avoid treatment as GWR are:

1) If the parents pay a market rent to the children for the right to continue living there. 2) If the children actually buy the house at market value off the parents.

I speculate that it might be possible, in case (1), if the parents don't have money to spare to pay this rent, that the children might lend them the money, by letting an account of rent arrears accrue, to be settled from the remaining estate, if any, after death. That should change the GWR into a PET, and might thereby take the house out of the scope of IHT after 7 years.

As for (2), there may be some way the children could borrow money from a third party to buy the house off the parents, the parents would then gift them the money, the children could then repay the third party loan (in fact, the third party could be the parents). That way, although in effect the parents gifted them the house, technically they gifted them a sum of money, and it's not really possible to reserve beneficial interest in a sum of money (or is it?), and so the money would be a PET, not a GWR. Even if it were a GWR, the value would be that of the money itself, not of the house, so if the house appreciates between time of transaction and time of death, IHT would be charged only on the basis of the money at the time it was given, not of the house at death.

I think this could be fine-tuned, so that the children might not get gifted the whole money. The parents would keep enough with which to pay them rent, or buy a lifetime lease.

Reply to
Ronald Raygun

Well, as I said, to reduce IHT. If my father, for example, who has assets of about 500k were to make a loan or loans to his children, would that affect his IHT position? Would they need to be interest free? Say he loans 200k. What would the IHT position be on his demise?

Cheers

Reply to
Edward Lionheart

Put simply Edward, one of you gets the dog, the other one gets the train set.

Reply to
Troy Steadman

Essentially unchanged from what the position would be if he didn't give you the money until after his demise. The children would owe the £200k back to the estate, whether or not interest was charged. The whole estate would then be taxed in the usual way. Then, assuming you are the sole heirs, you would get the money back, plus the rest of the estate, minus tax.

If there is enough liquid money in the £300k from which to pay all the tax due on the £500k (less the exempt amount, currently £255k), you wouldn't actually need to part temporarily with any of the £200k, but if there isn't, and you had spent the £200k, someone will have to borrow the tax money before the rest of the estate is released.

Reply to
Ronald Raygun

A £100,000 tax bill looming, must be pretty much the norm in Middle England! Do any of the children live with their father?

Reply to
Troy Steadman

It's not quite like this. It's possible to set up a trust where the loan is in the form of an investment and the growth on the investment is outside the estate. This means that at the years go by, and if the lender takes back some money from the loan gradually (and spends it), he's reducing the value of his estate little by little.

If he wants make a significant impact on his IHT position immediately he might be better with a discounted gift trust.

Rob Graham

Reply to
Robin Graham

[THINKS] I bet their Father is a divorced 45 year old who plays squash every day. Either that or an 85 year old widower on a geriatric ward awaiting a bypass. Either that or a...
Reply to
Troy Steadman

Is it possible to take out a mortgage on the property, use this to take out an investment bond owned jointly with the children, or in trust, use the income from the bond to fund the interest payments on the mortgage. On death (after seven years / due gift inter-vidos in the meantime for the investment amount), the trust / investment is outside of the estate but the mortgage is in the estate?

Still working through G10 so not sure if I have it exactly right yet. By the way, anyone know of any G10 study groups in the sussex area? sorry to go off topic.

Paul.

Reply to
Paul Baker

My father-in-law set up a "gift and loan trust" (aka "legacy loan trust" if the OP wants to do a web search). I think it allowed him to draw 5% p.a. tax free

Reply to
stuart noble

And remember that you have to pay the IH tax before you get control of the assets. This means, typically, that you have to borrow the money form the bank to pay the tax until you can get probate and therefore the ability to realise the assets and pay back the loan. BUT if some of the money is invested with national savings then you can direct them to pay that money to pay the IHT.

Robert

Reply to
Robert Laws

"stuart noble" >of his estate little by little.

This is fine if he wants to have access to the money and doesn't mind about not having immediate IHT relief.

Rob

Reply to
Robin Graham

I think most financial institutions can pay The Revenue direct from an executor's account.

Reply to
stuart noble

In message , stuart noble

Reply to
john boyle

In message , stuart noble

Reply to
john boyle

Do they have to be only with-profits? Why not-unit linked?

Rob

Reply to
Robin Graham

I think this could work but the mortgage payments would be regarded as PETs back into the estate. You've also got the possibility that the bond withdrawals might be greater than the bond growth as happened with many people in the 80s who took out equity release plans based on this structure and ran into a whole heap of trouble when growth went down and interest rates went up.

Rob

Reply to
Robin Graham

In message , Robin Graham writes

They can be, Its just that IME many existing gift & loan schemes appear to have been used merely as a way of selling a with profits bond which, as you know, is the only form of investment some Financial Advisers use (apart from £7k into an ISA).

Reply to
john boyle

In message , Robin Graham writes

I dont follow this. The mortgage payments are being made by the borrower to reduce his debt.

If the investment bond premium was made as a capital gift to the trust thenn this would be a PET. If a discounted cash gift were made and the withdrawals arranged through an IHT trust that allowed reversion of capital without reservation of interest, then the withdrawals would enable the value of the PET to be discounted. If thePremium was a loan to the trust then the annual withdrawals would be neutral form an IHT point of view.

Reply to
john boyle

BeanSmart website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.