clause in a will

[mutantpoodle]

I want to arrange for one particular beneficiary to receive the full IHT nil rate amount..all rest elsewhere
OK currently £325000 (ignore house)
but rather than actually state £325000 is there an acceptable wording that would allow for any changes in that amount, and not cause me to have to keep changing the will??

am certain many have done this, so i not the first

TIA

[Lootman]

I would think that it would need to be phrased in general terms rather than specific amounts. The NRB can be 325K, 500K, 650K or a million under current rules. Or something between those numbers. Or less than 325K if there are PETs less than 7 years old.

And of course the rules and amounts could change in the future.

Leaving aside the often arcane (but necessary?) florid language employed in such matters, the idea would be: "I leave an amount equal to the applicable maximum IHT nil rate band at that time to Johnny"

[chas49]

I think the wording Lootman suggests is along the lines you might be thinking, although the reference to the maximum amount might be a bit vague - and might include the value of the house.

However, if you don't specify an amount but set the amount of the bequest by reference to an external figure which can change, you run the risk that the amount is changed significantly so that it exceeds the total value of your estate and therefore no other beneficiaries remain to pay the IHT - so your one legatee gets the full amount (less IHT). Whether this is a realistic risk is another matter.

If you're intending on putting a clause like this in a DIY will, make sure you *know* that the clause will deliver what you intended. Probably best to get advice (and not from someone like me on the internet). (Obviously if CK comes in to this topic, that's a different matter)

[Clitheroekid]

It is possible to include such a clause, but it's not necessarily a good idea, particularly now that there is also the Residential Nil Rate Band, which may cause confusion.

However, if you have an estate where you're contemplating leaving £325,000 to a beneficiary it would be frankly ridiculous not to take proper, paid for professional advice. The cost in relation to the size of the estate would be minimal, and the consequences of getting it wrong if you attempt a DIY Will could be many times the cost of such advice.

[scrumpyjack]

My Will does have provisions like that, drawn up by a solicitor. I won't quote it as you should get it done properly.

[Lanark]

Heres an example that went all the way to the high court
https://www.taxinsider.co.uk/iht-how-ma ... -giving-ta

The main takeaway point seems to be the usual "Have your will prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced professional"

[scrumpyjack]

Heres an example that went all the way to the high court
https://www.taxinsider.co.uk/iht-how-ma ... -giving-ta

The main takeaway point seems to be the usual "Have your will prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced professional"

The other take away point is never leave the residue to a charity!

[Lanark]

Heres an example that went all the way to the high court
https://www.taxinsider.co.uk/iht-how-ma ... -giving-ta

The main takeaway point seems to be the usual "Have your will prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced professional"

The other take away point is never leave the residue to a charity!

A lot of people leave the residue to a charity so a lot of the court cases involve charities.

If everyone was leaving their residue to the local fish and chip shop, you would probably get a lot of court cases brought by fish and chip shops.

[Kantwebefriends]

The other take away point is never leave the residue to a charity!

A lot of people leave the residue to a charity so a lot of the court cases involve charities.

If everyone was leaving their residue to the local fish and chip shop, you would probably get a lot of court cases brought by fish and chip shops.

There's an idea: I'd do the nation more good by leaving money to F&C shops than to most (all?) national charities.

[mutantpoodle]

re the take away point
I thought that this had been covered many many times....NEVER leave a percentage to charity.
if so desired leave a monetary amount which cannot be contested by charities spending money given by others

**

re my question
the will was drawn by ''qualified' persons

I am updating one section,,,one clause
the amount being paid to an already named beneficiary
at present shown as £xxxx
but I now want to increase that but without the grief of assets other than cash

but am hoping it to be done in a way that does not mean redoing in a few years time..and again

[DrFfybes]

re my question
the will was drawn by ''qualified' persons

I am updating one section,,,one clause
the amount being paid to an already named beneficiary
at present shown as £xxxx
but I now want to increase that but without the grief of assets other than cash

but am hoping it to be done in a way that does not mean redoing in a few years time..and again

A codicil amending the amounts? Although you do need to check it doesn't impact other areas of the will (such as increasing a specific beneficiary then transferring your money to a spouse as you get ill and not leaving enough to meet the bequests).

That's what my dad did to use the NRB as it went up before it was transferrable between spouses.

Paul

[Clitheroekid]

the will was drawn by ''qualified' persons

I am updating one section,,,one clause
the amount being paid to an already named beneficiary
at present shown as £xxxx
but I now want to increase that but without the grief of assets other than cash

but am hoping it to be done in a way that does not mean redoing in a few years time..and again

If the Will was drawn by a qualified person then just go back to them - they'll be able to use the standard wording for this clause that all professionals who prepare Wills have in their precedent bank, and it'll only take a few minutes.

Alterations like this were traditionally done by way of a codicil - a separate document - but nowadays if a client wants to amend their Will I just amend the original that's stored on my computer, which is easier and quicker than preparing a codicil. No doubt the lawyer who prepared your Will can do the same.

[mutantpoodle]

I am aware that a codicil is the way to do it.

its the wording of the actual bequest that I was hoping for assistance with.

the solicitor did it in 2013 and is long gone

[chas49]

Seems to me that the risk here (unless done carefully) is that a clause which said something like:

"I leave to X such amount free of Inheritance Tax as is equivalent to the Nil Rate Band for Inheritance Tax at the time of my death"

would be subject to the risk that the IHT regime is changed and the NRB is replaced with some other name. How would you safely write a clause to capture that possibility? What if the NRB was significantly reduced? Or massively increased? Neither possibility is particularly likely, but the risk is I guess non-zero.

Could you inflation link the bequest?

"Such amount as is calculated by dividing £325000 by the value of CPIH at (insert today's date) and multiplying the result by CPIH at the date of my death"

Do NOT rely on the clause above - it's just an example written by an unqualified person, and is not legal advice.

[mutantpoodle]

FAO Chas49

many thanks indeed
I reckon that sentence will be more than fine.

if NRB changes I can always do another update to the will
it will not be contested as there are no other players in the game

[Clitheroekid]

"Such amount as is calculated by dividing £325000 by the value of CPIH at (insert today's date) and multiplying the result by CPIH at the date of my death"

Have you considered what happens if CPIH is replaced by a different index?

Such a clause would also give a totally different outcome to one linking the legacy to the nil rate band. It could result in a sum that was twice as much, with consequent, possibly drastic, results on the amount of inheritance tax payable and who would suffer the burden of that tax.

If you're happy to accept such a random outcome that's fine, but if a professional will writer used such a clause they'd be dusting off their professional indemnity policy.

[Oswulf]

What happens if IHT is abolished? Then there'll be no NRB and the beneficiary will get zilch.

And don't say you'll update your will when that happens - you may be incapacitated and so unable to do so.

[GoSeigen]

What happens if IHT is abolished? Then there'll be no NRB and the beneficiary will get zilch.

And don't say you'll update your will when that happens - you may be incapacitated and so unable to do so.

Yeah, and what happens if the currency is replaced by the Euro. There will be no more pounds sterling and everyone's wills will fail and no-one will get any inheritance.



Okay some serious points above and I think the OP needs to carefully reread @Chas49's post which states at the end:

"Do NOT rely on the clause above - it's just an example written by an unqualified person, and is not legal advice."


GS

[mutantpoodle]

all points noted with gratitude

I will use Chas49s idea but add in 325000

''I leave 325000 to X or such amount free etc etc''

that should do the trick

thanks again for the ideas and warnings

[uspaul666]

Someone I know had a will with a reference to NRB with the intention to minimise a potential IHT bill. It made no reference to NRB inherited from spouse and no reference to the family home allowance (as it was drafted before such allowances even existed) with the result that there was a large IHT bill likely. The will was updated. I'd encourage people to regularly review and update their will to avoid such unintended consequences.