‘I'm cash-poor but don't want to sell my home. Will my inheritance plan work?'
Patricia Lowe finds herself in a position many other pensioners are bound to recognise – asset-rich and cash-poor.
The 79-year-old wants to give £250k to her sons to spend now rather than as part of a future inheritance, but her pensions only pay a combined income of around £40k per year.
One solution might be to downsize – the former adoption social worker first moved into her seven-bedroom home in Shropshire in 1981. With its striking red-brick Victorian architecture, sizeable garden and convenient walking distance from the heart of Shrewsbury, the property is worth around £800k.
There's just one problem, as Ms Lowe explains: 'I don't want to move, that's the bottom line. I love this house. My children were three and five when we arrived so they really can't remember anything else.
'Obviously I could downsize, but that doesn't keep the house in the family. It would be very nice to achieve my objective of giving my children some money and giving myself some money without having to lose my home.'
Ms Lowe's decision to give money to her sons is twofold: She wants to limit the burden of inheritance tax for her children and also wants the choice of giving money to her sons when she thinks they would benefit most, rather than after she dies.
She says: 'I want to make sure they have money at a time of their life when it is of most use. I think usually when you get it [through inheritance], you are past the great point of needing it.'
But Ms Lowe is wary of using equity release – a means by which homeowners aged 55 and over can access the equity in their homes as tax-free cash while retaining ownership of their property – because of the high interest repayments.
She says: 'My mother lived to 97, well that would be 18 years' worth of interest for me. That's a hell of a lot of interest and it would completely outweigh the benefits of having given some money now because they would lose it all at the end.'
One creative solution she is keen to explore is whether her sons could purchase a part of or the entire property via a limited company, after which she could then pay them rent to cover the mortgage repayments.
Doug Brodie, financial planner and chief executive, Chancery Lane
Ms Lowe is sitting on a goldmine owning a home worth £800k that is mortgage-free. Although she is concerned about compound interest, today's equity release products are not what they once were. Lifetime mortgages now include drawdown facilities, voluntary repayments, fixed interest rates and inheritance protection guarantees.
Modern plans offer flexibility and control, allowing people to downsize their equity, not their home. A retirement interest-only (RIO) mortgage could be ideal. Ms Lowe would borrow the lump sum she needs and make interest-only repayments, with no compound build-up.
Assuming a 5-6pc interest rate on a £250,000 loan, monthly repayments would be £1,040- £1,250 – well within her pension income. The capital would only be repaid when she enters care or dies, i.e. when the house is sold.
Ms Lowe's own solution to let her sons buy the home through a limited company is a creative idea but it's overthinking the options. Often people take technical solutions and try to apply them to their personal positions without realising that those solutions are designed either for commercial operators or families with multi-million amounts of dormant assets. The legal and tax complexities will definitely outweigh the benefits here.
With seven bedrooms, Ms Lowe could consider taking in a lodger through the rent-a-room scheme. This would mean a tax-free income up to £7,500 per year, minimal disruption and it could provide a steady gift to her sons.
While not a solution for unlocking a lump sum, it could supplement her pension and boost savings – with seven bedrooms there might also be an option for Airbnb lettings.
The best solution will simply be to stay away from complex products and costly over-engineered solutions. A competent equity release broker can remove anxiety in that area, and simple cash agreements with the sons will solve the rest of the quandaries.
Nick Mendes, mortgage technical manager; John Charcol; and Nick Sutton, sales director, Retirement Solutions
Ms Lowe's concerns around equity release are completely valid, particularly when it comes to the potential for interest to compound over time. If Ms Lowe were to borrow £250,000 against her £800,000 home, the current best rate available as of today is a 6.4pc monthly equivalent rate (MER), or 6.59pc annual equivalent rate (AER).
If she chose not to make any repayments, the balance after 15 years would grow to approximately £651,261. This gives her the cash now without the need for monthly payments but does of course mean a significant reduction in the value of the estate left behind.
There are ways to mitigate that compounding interest. If Ms Lowe feels able to cover the interest payments each month, there are products offering discounted rates while those payments are being maintained. The best currently available sits at 6.23pc MER or 6.41pc AER, which would equate to monthly payments of £1,298 to cover the interest. This would prevent the debt from growing over time, protecting the remaining equity.
Depending on whether Ms Lowe wanted the full £250k immediately, a drawdown facility could make a great deal of sense. She could, for instance, take £150k to give as an initial gift to her sons, and retain a further £100k as a pre-agreed reserve to access later if needed, perhaps for future care costs.
Ms Lowe's idea for her sons to purchase the property via a limited company is innovative but it presents several practical and financial hurdles.
Company mortgages, sometimes referred to as limited company buy-to-let mortgages, attract higher rates and fees than standard residential products. Lenders often require larger deposits, and the fact that one son lives in Germany and both already hold mortgages complicates matters further.
Given the tenant is a family member, the lender will consider this as a regulated deal – which will narrow the options.
There are tax implications too. Selling her own home to her sons would trigger stamp duty, including the 3pc second property surcharge, and potentially capital gains tax further down the line.
Additionally, Ms Lowe would lose her principal private residence relief, meaning any future sale of the property by the company would be liable for corporation tax on any gains.
She'd also be paying rent to her sons' limited company, and that's income the company has to declare and pay tax on. It might feel like a workaround to unlock funds, but realistically it's unlikely to be more cost-effective or administratively straightforward than an equity release or retirement interest-only mortgage.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
16 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Rachel Reeves says she cannot rule out autumn tax rises after ‘damaging' week
Rachel Reeves has said it is impossible for her to rule out tax rises in the autumn budget and insisted she never thought about quitting despite a turbulent week for her and the government. In an interview with the Guardian, the chancellor said 'there are costs' to the watering down of the welfare bill and acknowledged it had been a 'damaging' week for Downing Street. The chancellor's tears in the Commons on Wednesday spooked the financial markets and raised questions about her future in the job, but No 10 quickly weighed in behind her, saying she and the prime minister were in lockstep. Reeves said she had never considered resigning her position, despite being the focus of some Labour backbench anger over her handling of the economy, saying: 'I didn't work that hard to then quit.' She said she regretted going into prime minister's questions in tears after a 'tough day in the office' but hoped that people 'could relate' to her distress. 'It was a personal matter but it was in the glare of the camera. And that's unfortunate, but I think people have seen that I'm back in business and back out there,' she said. 'I went to prime minister's questions because I thought that was the right thing to do, because that's where I always am at lunchtime on a Wednesday. You know, in retrospect, I probably wished I hadn't gone in … [on] a tough day in the office. But, you know, it is what it is. But I think most people can relate to that – that they've had tough days.' Her challenging moment in parliament came in the same week that a backbench rebellion forced the government to drop key welfare cuts, which leaves Reeves with a £5bn black hole to fill in the country's finances. 'It's been damaging,' she admitted. 'I'm not going to deny that, but I think where we are now, with a review led by Stephen Timms [a work and pensions minister], who is obviously incredibly respected and has a huge amount of experience, that's the route we're taking now. 'That's the right thing to do. It is important that we listen in government, that we listen to our colleagues and listen to what groups outside are saying as well.' Timms is working with disability groups to reform the personal independent payments (Pip) system, which had been the target of government cuts until the huge backbench rebellion drove the government to drop them. Reeves said the government had learned lessons about bringing MPs and the country along with them in the run-up to what is widely expected to be a difficult budget this autumn ahead. 'As we move into the budget for the autumn, I do want to bring people into those trade-offs,' she said. Asked whether she was prepared to rule out tax rises, she said: 'I'm not going to, because it would be irresponsible for a chancellor to do that. We took the decisions last year to draw a line under unfunded commitments and economic mismanagement. So we'll never have to do something like that again. But there are costs to what happened.' While tax rises could be on the table, Reeves signalled that her fiscal rules would remain and that 'we'll continue to keep that grip on the public finances'. But she stressed the need to accompany this with a strong explanation of how the Treasury's choices fit with Labour values. 'I'm not going to apologise for making sure the numbers add up,' she said. 'But we do need to make sure that we're telling a story, and a Labour story. We did that well in the budget and the spending review, we increased taxes on the wealthiest and businesses. In the budget last year, I made it really clear that priorities in that budget were to protect working people, to invest in the NHS and to start rebuilding Britain.' Some within government and the Labour party have been pushing for either a reconsideration of the fiscal rules or rethinking the remit of the Office for Budget Responsibility, which produces two forecasts and rulings a year on whether the rules have been met. Asked whether she would consider one forecast instead of two, Reeves said: 'We are looking at how the OBR works, but I think it is really important to have those independent economic institutions, because if you start undermining those … and getting rid of the checks and balances on a government, I do think that is risky. But the International Monetary Fund have made some recommendations about how to deliver better fiscal policymaking. And obviously I take those seriously.' The IMF has suggested that while the OBR could still produce two forecasts, it could be possible to only have one annual assessment of whether the chancellor is hitting her fiscal rules. However, government sources suggested that any changes could be more along the lines of more regular exchange of information to reduce last-minute changes like those in the spring statement. Reeves also spoke of her drive to reduce child poverty but she would not be drawn on whether she would lift the two-child benefit cap. Keir Starmer has said the government 'will look at it' but experts have warned it could be more difficult given the hole left by the U-turn on the welfare cuts. The chancellor said she wanted to reduce child poverty but was 'not wedded to any specific policy', adding: 'I think people can see how serious I am about making sure that all good kids get a good start in life by what we did in the spending review just a few weeks ago.'
Reuters
17 minutes ago
- Reuters
Sterling heads for weekly loss as fiscal concerns loom
July 4 (Reuters) - Sterling was poised for a weekly loss on Friday, marking a lacklustre end to a week that saw fiscal and political uncertainties rattle investor appetite for UK assets. The pound was flat and last fetched $1.36, while against the euro it inched 0.1% lower and was last at 86.26 pence. Gilt yields were broadly steady in late morning trading. However, on a weekly basis, cable was down 0.4% against the greenback, while it had fallen about 1% against the euro, marking its biggest one-week drop against the currency since U.S. tariffs on world economies took effect in early April. UK stocks, bonds and cable witnessed a selloff earlier in the week, after the government's welfare reforms were not well received by ruling Labour Party members and stirred speculation about the future of finance minister Rachel Reeves. Some analysts even drew parallels between this week's market reaction and the rout during former Prime Minister Liz Truss' premiership in 2022. With the Keir Starmer-led government completing one year in power, uncertainties prevail over the options it has to balance public accounts. "There is speculation that given the difficulties the government has faced in finding savings from welfare budgets, tax rises are likely in the Autumn Budget," said Susannah Streeter, head of money and markets at Hargreaves Lansdown. "Bets are rising that the Bank of England will cut interest rates more quickly with a reduction in August increasingly on the cards. So, that's kept a bit more downwards pressure on sterling." Traders expect the Bank of England to lower borrowing costs by 25 basis points next in September and are anticipating another interest rate cut by the same amount before the year ends, data compiled by LSEG showed. Further, top ratings agency S&P said the inability of Britain's government to make modest cuts to welfare spending this week underscores that it has very limited budgetary room to manoeuvre. Despite the week's developments, the pound is at a near four-year high against the dollar and is up about 9% so far this year, having benefited from broader dollar weakness and as a U.S.-UK trade deal offered some relief on the tariff front.
Reuters
17 minutes ago
- Reuters
Chelsea given huge fine for breach of financial rules
July 4 (Reuters) - Chelsea have been fined 31 million euros ($36.50 million) by UEFA for breaches of its financial rules, while Aston Villa, Barcelona and Olympique Lyonnais were also levied with large fines, UEFA announced on Friday. The punishments come with the potential for far harsher fines down the road, with Chelsea risking being hit with a further 60 million euros if they do not get their finances in order. Barcelona must pay a 15 million euro fine, with UEFA fining Lyon 12.5 million and Aston Villa five million. The teams agreed to settlement agreements which cover periods of two, three or four years, with the clubs' final targets to be fully compliant with the football earnings rule by the end of their specific settlement period. Additionally, Lyon agreed on an exclusion from the 2025/26 UEFA club competitions should the French authority (DNCG) confirm the club's relegation to Ligue 2. ($1 = 0.8493 euros)
