
Why more grandparents are tearing up the inheritance rulebook
Are you changing your inheritance tax planning? Let us know at money@telegraph.co.uk
Grandparents are tearing up the inheritance rulebook, choosing to skip a generation and pass wealth straight to their grandchildren.
'People are living longer and dying later, their children are further on in life and usually broadly financially sorted, so don't actually need the money,' says Ian Dyall, of the wealth manager Evelyn.
'Meanwhile, their grandchildren have university debt, are trying to get on the housing ladder and don't have the same pensions. Giving them a financial start in life has more of an impact.'
One in four people over 50 have given substantial cash gifts to family in the last five years, according to the SunLife Life Well Spent report, and 36pc of over 70s. The average amount given is £20,021.
And while children are still the beneficiaries of many gifts, grandchildren are increasingly feeling the benefits of the great wealth transfer.
Some 22pc of over 50s, and 34pc of over 70s, have given large cash gifts to their grandchildren. These included money for a special occasion such as a birthday or Christmas (40pc), to put towards tuition fees (38pc) or to help after the birth of a baby (27pc).
Financial gifts are expected to further snowball after the Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced in her maiden Budget that pensions will be liable for inheritance tax from April 2027.
Savers who had previously planned to leave their pots untouched to pass on to loved ones are now having to consider the best way to spend their money.
'My children don't need any gifts'
Blair Hilton is building a nest egg for each of his five grandchildren.
Hilton, 80, who lives in Thornby, near Liverpool, has a monthly income of about £4,000 after tax from his state pension and a defined benefit pension from his career as a civil servant.
He has set up a bare trust for each of his grandchildren, aged one to 14, and splits any excess money each month, after his bills are paid, between them.
'I didn't discuss it with my children before setting up the trusts, the idea came up when I was talking to my financial adviser, ' says Hilton.
'But when I mentioned it to my children, they seemed happy with the arrangement and thought it was sensible.'
His children will inherit an equal share of his house, worth about £400,000.
'They have their own homes and are working, so they're not in need of any gifts,' he says. 'And while the money is going to my grandchildren, I still expect it to benefit my children because it will go towards university fees that they might otherwise have had to pay.'
Individuals can give away up to £3,000 a year, and this falls immediately outside an estate for inheritance tax purposes, plus as many gifts of up to £250 as you like, as long as they go to people who do not benefit from your main gifting allowance.
But larger sums are subject to inheritance tax unless the donor lives for seven years after making the gift.
Under the surplus income rule, you can give away excess cash inheritance tax-free as long as it does not impact your standard of living.
This must be regular income from certain sources such as employment, rent, pensions or dividends (it can't come from savings) – the donor must keep good records and show a regular pattern of gifts. But it is an underused strategy – only 430 families claimed this exemption in 2022-23, according to official figures.
'When you look at the inheritance tax rules, it is hard to give money away when you don't know how long you will live, so this seemed like a far better option,' says Hilton.
He is single and wants to reduce his wealth so that his family are not left with a large inheritance tax bill after he dies. He has made gifts to family in the past 10 years, but is conscious of the seven-year rule.
'Tax efficiency is the main reason I'm doing it. In the past I have given money away, but it is hard when you don't know how long you will live,' he says.
'I want to get my assets down to the £325,000 threshold, but the amount you can give away per year is fairly limited.'
Hilton invests the money for his grandchildren through his wealth manager, Bestinvest, in the Evelyn Growth Fund Clean, which invests in a portfolio of other funds with the aim of achieving long-term growth. Top holdings include Evenlode Global Income, Fundsmith Equity and Invesco Physical Gold ETC.
It can also be more tax efficient to give money to grandchildren, says Chris Etherington, from the accountancy firm RSM.
'Parents who invest money for their children, other than through a junior Isa, are taxed on any gains above £100. This does not happen when you give money to a grandchild.'
The best strategy depends on individual family circumstances. Etherington gave the example of one recent client with two children, one a high earner and one a lower earner.
'They will leave money to the lower earning child, but skip the high earner and instead pass money to his daughter,' he said.
Far from creating a family drama, Dyall says that parents getting 'skipped over' are often happy for their own children to inherit. In some cases, parents who inherit money use a deed of variation to alter the will and redirect money to their own children.
'I don't need a lump sum'
Cara Sayer has asked for any inheritance she might receive to be left to her daughter Holly, 17.
'I've got my own house, a business that is doing really well, and I'm building a nest egg with my pension – so I don't need a lump sum, ' said Sayer, 53, who founded the baby products company SnoozeShade.
Sayer, who is single, is frustrated that it is harder for those who are not married to pass on money. Under the current rules, a married couple can potentially pass on £1m tax-free between them (as long as their estate is worth less than £2m) – but for a single person, that threshold is just £500,000.
Sayer has asked her mother, Mary, 79, to consider Holly next time she updates her will. She hopes that Holly would use a lump sum to buy a first property.
'She already received a small inheritance and used it to buy her first car, so she would be under strict instructions about what it could be used for – and I like to think that if I did need the money, she would help me.'
She adds: 'Ultimately it's up to my mum, and no one should be told what to do with their own money, but I think we should give more thought to the tradition of just passing everything straight to your children and whether it will actually benefit them as much as you think.'
Avoiding a dispute
But matters of inheritance can be fraught. Some 18pc of people have had a dispute within their family about inheritance, according to a survey of 2,000 adults by Canada Life. It found that 10pc of those aged 55 to 64 were relying on an inheritance from their parents to fund their own retirement.
Yet under English law, individuals are free to leave their money to whoever they choose, says Dyall, meaning that some adult children could be left disappointed.
'We had one case where money had been left to a child under age 18 and the parent was named as trustee, and we were not convinced the money was being used for the child's benefit,' he recalls.
Grandparents concerned about their wishes being carried out could find that giving money away during your lifetime tends to be less contentious, he adds.
An alternative option is to write a discretionary trust, where you can provide a letter of wishes for the trustee, who can be a trusted friend or relative, or a professional, instructing them to prioritise whoever needs the money most.
Dyall adds: 'My advice would be to have the conversation with your children first. Explain that it is not that you don't love them, but that the money could cause them potential tax problems and is likely to benefit the grandchildren more.
'If you don't want to have that talk, then consider writing a letter alongside your will to explain your rationale.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


BBC News
20 minutes ago
- BBC News
Donald Trump doubles US steel and aluminium tariffs to 50%
US President Donald Trump has signed an order doubling tariffs on steel and aluminium imports from 25% to 50%.The move hikes import taxes on the metals - key inputs in everything from cars to canned food - for the second time in three has said the measures, which come into effect on Thursday, are intended to secure the future of the American steel industry. However, critics say the protections could wreak havoc on steel producers outside the US, spark retaliation from trade partners, and come at a punishing cost for American users of the metals. Hours before he hiked the duties, many firms directly affected could scarcely believe the plan was moving forward, hoping it would turn out to be temporary or some kind of negotiating as Trump moved forward with the deal, the UK was granted a carve-out from the measures, leaving duties on its steel and aluminium at 25%, a move Trump said reflected its ongoing trade discussions with the US. "Always the question with Mr Trump is, is this a tactic or is this a long-term plan?" said Rick Heuther, chief executive of Independent Can Co, a Maryland-based business, which brings in steel from Europe and turns it into decorative cookie tins, popcorn boxes, and other said he had put investments on hold and feared the abrupt changes, and price increases would lead his customers to turn to alternatives such as plastic or paper boxes. "There's a lot of chaos," he said. The US is the biggest importer of steel in the world, after the European Union, getting most of the metal from Canada, Brazil, Mexico and South Korea, according to the US his first term, Trump imposed tariffs of 25% on steel and 10% on aluminium, citing a law that gives him authority to protect industries considered vital to national security. But many imports ultimately escaped the duties after the US struck trade deals with allies and granted exemptions to certain imports at the request of ended those carve-outs in March, saying he was unhappy with the way the protections had been weakened. At Friday's rally at the US Steel factory, he said wanted to make tariffs so high that US businesses would have no alternative but to buy from American suppliers."Nobody's going to get around that," he said of the 50% rate. "That means that nobody's going to be able to steal your industry. It's at 25% - they can get over that fence. At 50%, they can no longer get over the fence." Reaction in the UK and Europe As of May, imports and the rate of raw steel production in the US had changed little since last year before Trump raised tariffs, according to the American Iron and Steel Institute. But steel imports fell 17% in April, compared to March. And businesses selling the metals into the US said they expected Trump's latest announcement to lead to an even more dramatic drop. Trump's moves in March had already prompted Canada and the European Union to prepare to hit back with tariffs of their own American products. On Tuesday, Olof Gill, spokesperson for economic security and trade for the European Commission told the BBC the two sides were engaged in intense talks to try to make progress toward an agreement. "We're negotiating hard to try and make good deals," he said."We really hope that the Americans will roll back on this latest tariff threat, as they have done on others, but that remains to be seen." In the UK, Trump's announcement put new pressure on the government to pin down the trade deal in the works with the US, which had been expected to provide some protection from the March metals tariffs. Trade Secretary Jonathan Reynolds met with US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer in Paris on Wednesday. His office said it was "pleased" that the trade talks had protected UK steel from the latest duties. "We will continue to work with the US to implement our agreement, which will see the 25% US tariffs on steel removed," he said. Gareth Stace, director general of UK Steel, which represents steelmakers, told the BBC that his members had already seen orders cancelled and delayed as a result of the 25% tariffs put in place in March. He warned that a 50% tariff would be "catastrophic" for UK exports to the US, about 7% of overall exports."The introduction of 50% tariffs immediately puts the shutters up," he said. "Most of our orders, if not all of them, will now be cancelled." Economists said the US economy is also facing damage, as prices rise as a result of the new measures. A 2020 analysis estimated that Trump's first term tariffs created roughly 1,000 jobs in the steel industry, but cost the economy 75,000 jobs in other sectors, such as manufacturing and York, vice president of federal tax policy at the Tax Foundation, said that she expected to see even more extreme job losses this time. "Some of the strongest evidence is against tariffs on intermediate inputs like steel and aluminium, finding they are much more harmful because they increase the cost of production in the United States," she said. "It's just very foolish to double down on this type of tariff in particular." Chad Bartusek is director of supply chain management at Drill Rod & Tool Steels, a small, family-owned manufacturing business in Illinois, which brings in about 800,000 pounds of Austrian-made steel each year, at specifications he says are not produced in the US. Mr Bartusek said he was currently waiting on three containers worth of steel rod, which would have entered the US without duties at the start of the of last week, he had expected to pay tariff costs about $72,000. Instead, he is looking at a tariff bill of almost $145,000. "I woke up Saturday morning, looked at the news and my jaw dropped," he said of Trump's announcement. Mr Bartusek said business had been steady until a few weeks ago. But his firm raised prices earlier this year by 8% to 14% to help cover the new cost of the tariffs. Now customers have been ordering more cautiously and he has had to cut back hours for workers. "It's one punch after the other," he said. "Hopefully, this settles down quickly."


The Sun
20 minutes ago
- The Sun
Chelsea in shock transfer talks with AC Milan keeper Mike Maignan whose stats shows up Robert Sanchez
CHELSEA are in talks with AC Milan to sign goalkeeper Mike Maignan. The France star, 29, has only a year left on his contract in Italy, with both parties yet to agree on fresh terms. 1 And the Blues have been alerted by Maignan's failure to pen an extension at the San Siro, where AC Milan failed to qualify for Europe. Chelsea boss Enzo Maresca believes the £34million-rated stopper is an ideal option for his possession-based attack. The Stamford Bridge outfit already have five keepers on their books — Robert Sanchez, Filip Jorgensen, Djordje Petrovic, Mike Penders and Kepa Arrizabalaga. But Maignan's potential arrival would see him challenge for the No 1 jersey in another shake-up to the goalkeeping department. Chelsea fans have been calling for a new No 1, with both Sanchez and Jorgensen failing to prove they should be the main man between the sticks. French Guiana-born Maignan helped Lille to the French title in 2021. He won Serie A with Milan a year later. Maignan has amassed a total of 163 appearances for the Italian club and made four errors leading to goals last season, comparing to Sanchez's five. But AC Milan could cash in now amid fears he could leave the club on a free transfer in 2026. Maignan has played 30 times for France and was named in the Euro 2024 team of the tournament. Jadon Sancho shares his Chelsea highlights reel as he says goodbye to fans ahead of Man Utd return Maresca's Chelsea are set to make Liam Delap their first summer signing. The Blues will pay his £30million release clause at relegated Ipswich, who he joined last summer from Manchester City. Chelsea will also welcome youngsters Estevao Willian, Kendry Paez and Dario Essugo to the club. One player leaving the club is Jadon Sancho. Chelsea paid Manchester United £5m NOT to sign him on a permanent basis. And the winger, 25, posted on Instagram: 'Grateful for the experience. Big love to everyone at Chelsea who made me feel at home — teammates, staff and the fans. 'Wishing the club all the best moving forward. Truly grateful. Thank you Blues.'


Daily Mail
21 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Trump ally Lindsey Graham calls out Elon Musk 'bull****' after tech titan throws his credibility under the bus
Senator Lindsey Graham snapped back at billionaire Tesla CEO and X owner Elon Musk, after the tech titan shared a post alleging he was responsible for nearly a million dollars in spending on hotel rooms in Ukraine. Graham, R-S.C., landed in hot water with former top Trump White House ally Elon Musk Tuesday afternoon in a spectacular clash on social media. Musk reposted a tweet which accused Graham of spending $400,000 on hotel rooms in Ukraine. Social media influencer Nick Sortor made the original post with the allegations, which has amassed over 10 million views since just before 11 a.m. Tuesday morning. 'People love whining in my comment section when I say Congress takes a lot of vacations: 'They're not on vacation. They're working in their districts!' 'BULL****. Lindsey Graham was just PARTYING IN UKRAINE on OUR DIME. When did Lindsey Graham become the Senator from Ukraine??!' Sorotor concluded. Sortor's post also included a video of Senator Graham and Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) shaking hands with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy over the weekend in Kiyv. A screenshot of a spending disbursement of $411,634 made by the U.S. Department of State to an organization in Ukraine, the International - Business Center Tov was also included in Sortor's post. Musk reposted Sortor's post, adding 'Why is the hotel bill so high? The room service must be incredible!' Graham fired back at the allegations Tuesday afternoon with his own X post. 'Fake news. More BS. I'm all-in trying to help President @realDonaldTrump end this war — and making sure Putin doesn't win. This isn't a travel expense report. It's a monthly contract between the State Department for U.S. diplomats in a war zone — nothing to do with my trip' Graham tweeted from his official government account. Fake news. More BS. I'm all-in trying to help President @realDonaldTrump end this war — and making sure Putin doesn't win. This isn't a travel expense report. It's a monthly contract between the State Department for U.S. diplomats in a war zone — nothing to do with my trip. — Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) June 3, 2025 Per data available on USA Spending, the International - Business Center Tov has received $8.59 million marked as hotel spending. The group has received money from the American government in 2023, 2024, and 2025. While the allegations continued to gain steam on social media Tuesday, Musk's own Grok AI classified the X boss's claims as misinformation. 'There's no evidence supporting claims of GOP spending on luxury hotels in Ukraine; such narratives may stem from misinformation. The idea that Congress spends 60% of their time on vacation is exaggerated, as they work about 133 days in session, with other time often spent on district duties,' a Grok reply to a post made by X user Matt Van Swol reads. @matt_vanswol is expressing frustration over the GOP's failure to act on proposed spending cuts by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), linked to Elon Musk and the Trump administration. There's no evidence supporting claims of GOP spending on luxury hotels in Ukraine;… — Grok (@grok) June 3, 2025 Senator Graham has been one of Ukraine's most vocal advocates throughout the course of the nation's war with Russia, taking several trips to the country in recent years. Former White House strategist Steve Bannon accused Graham of working against the wishes of President Trump during his trips on an episode of his War Room podcast, which aired Monday. 'The White House has to condemn this immediately and pull all support and tell Lindsey Graham to come home or we are going to put you under arrest when you come home. You're stirring it up,' Bannon said.