Good morning,
I’m new here :-)
I hope I have chosen the right category.
I’m not very familiar with this and have a specific question—I hope someone can answer it.
Here’s the situation:
My boyfriend (27)
His brother (24)
Their parents (around mid-50s)
The brother already has a building plot next to the parents’ property. At that time, my boyfriend and I were not asked. It wasn’t possible either, since he finished his training late and simply didn’t have money for a building plot.
The parents want us to move into the house at some point. For me, that’s unthinkable and absolutely out of the question. My boyfriend accepts this.
There has been talk several times about transferring the house ownership. Does that even make sense if you never want to live there yourself? When the parents pass away, won’t all the taxes and fees become due eventually?
Or am I misunderstanding something?
We wouldn’t have to pay out the brother; the parents would cover that.
By the way: we’re not married yet, but plan to be eventually.
Best regards,
Steinbock123
I’m new here :-)
I hope I have chosen the right category.
I’m not very familiar with this and have a specific question—I hope someone can answer it.
Here’s the situation:
My boyfriend (27)
His brother (24)
Their parents (around mid-50s)
The brother already has a building plot next to the parents’ property. At that time, my boyfriend and I were not asked. It wasn’t possible either, since he finished his training late and simply didn’t have money for a building plot.
The parents want us to move into the house at some point. For me, that’s unthinkable and absolutely out of the question. My boyfriend accepts this.
There has been talk several times about transferring the house ownership. Does that even make sense if you never want to live there yourself? When the parents pass away, won’t all the taxes and fees become due eventually?
Or am I misunderstanding something?
We wouldn’t have to pay out the brother; the parents would cover that.
By the way: we’re not married yet, but plan to be eventually.
Best regards,
Steinbock123
I think there is a significant difference between leaving something to my son- or daughter-in-law and creating something together as a couple—sorry.
We are building a house together, and part of that includes my inheritance (because I owned the land and also contributed more equity). We will reflect this in a prenuptial agreement, but aside from that, this is our shared "baby."
I don’t want any part of his inheritance (his parents own an apartment), and my inheritance is mine alone (which is reflected in the fact that I own a larger share of the house). If he ever uses his inheritance later on (although I hope my in-laws live a long time!) to help pay off the house, our shares will shift in his favor.
Everything we earn on top of that will be jointly acquired and equally owned.
I find it odd when in-laws inherit something. You pass assets on to your children, and that is the capital they bring into the partnership. Anything else earned TOGETHER in the relationship is shared fairly. What each person brings into the relationship remains theirs. This only really matters in the event of a separation—otherwise, it doesn’t change anything.
We are building a house together, and part of that includes my inheritance (because I owned the land and also contributed more equity). We will reflect this in a prenuptial agreement, but aside from that, this is our shared "baby."
I don’t want any part of his inheritance (his parents own an apartment), and my inheritance is mine alone (which is reflected in the fact that I own a larger share of the house). If he ever uses his inheritance later on (although I hope my in-laws live a long time!) to help pay off the house, our shares will shift in his favor.
Everything we earn on top of that will be jointly acquired and equally owned.
I find it odd when in-laws inherit something. You pass assets on to your children, and that is the capital they bring into the partnership. Anything else earned TOGETHER in the relationship is shared fairly. What each person brings into the relationship remains theirs. This only really matters in the event of a separation—otherwise, it doesn’t change anything.
I do understand the approach, but the question should always be when a couple actually begins to "build something together." And if it is one partner’s parental home—at what point does one "earn" ownership of it? After having one child? After three? After caring for the in-laws for 10 years?
Edit: I also want to highlight the different perspectives. When you pass something on, it is usually only to your own child. When you inherit, on the other hand, people are generally less strict about it (or at least should ask themselves why they are unwilling to share with their partner).
Edit: I also want to highlight the different perspectives. When you pass something on, it is usually only to your own child. When you inherit, on the other hand, people are generally less strict about it (or at least should ask themselves why they are unwilling to share with their partner).
I still maintain: the inheritance remains preserved for everyone. If you can move together into an inherited house, that is initially a big advantage – you save on rent. That’s already something valuable.
If you live there for a longer period, you will in some way contribute to maintaining it. Whether through labor or capital for necessary upcoming renovations, extensions, or additions, from that point on it becomes a shared asset – even if, for example, only one person “pays” because the other takes on the unpaid family management, especially when children are involved. In case of separation, this share is then paid out equally. Why should someone receive part of the capital that existed before? They didn’t contribute anything for that.
If it were not a house, but valuable jewelry, for example, I wouldn’t say in the event of a divorce: but at least one of the earrings belongs to me now! After all, I had children!
If you live there for a longer period, you will in some way contribute to maintaining it. Whether through labor or capital for necessary upcoming renovations, extensions, or additions, from that point on it becomes a shared asset – even if, for example, only one person “pays” because the other takes on the unpaid family management, especially when children are involved. In case of separation, this share is then paid out equally. Why should someone receive part of the capital that existed before? They didn’t contribute anything for that.
If it were not a house, but valuable jewelry, for example, I wouldn’t say in the event of a divorce: but at least one of the earrings belongs to me now! After all, I had children!
Climbee schrieb:
We are building a house together – part of it comes from my inheritance (because I owned the land and also contributed more equity), and we will also reflect this in a prenuptial agreement, but otherwise, it’s our shared “baby.”
I don’t want anything from his inheritance (his parents have an apartment), and my inheritance is mine (which is reflected in my larger share of the house). If he ever decides to use his inheritance in the future (although I wish my in-laws a long life!) to pay off the house, our shares in the house will then shift in his favor.
Anything we earn together on top of that belongs to both of us equally.
I find it strange when children-in-law inherit something. You pass on assets to your own children, and that’s the capital they bring to the table. Anything else earned TOGETHER in the partnership is divided fairly. What each person brings into the relationship remains theirs. All of this only matters if the couple separates – otherwise, it doesn’t really make a difference.How did you register the ownership in the land registry? Was it 50/50, or did you assign yourself a larger share? If he eventually contributes his inheritance, do you then adjust the shares, or how does that work for you?
steinbock123 schrieb:
There have been several discussions about transferring a house. Does that even make sense if you never plan to live there yourself? After the parents pass away, all the taxes and fees will eventually come due...Being in your mid-50s doesn't mean you're close to death, unless both have a terminal illness that will cause premature passing. But I assume you would have mentioned that?
Between age 55 and death, there could be 2 to 3 generations in between. Typically, employees still need to work about 12 more years at this age, and some only build their house around this stage of life.
If the parents are already talking about it, well, that’s their choice. Many things can be planned for, after all.
But you don’t have to factor in their passing and its consequences right now.
Allowances and inheritance rights aside.
You could tell them that they don’t need to part with all their assets yet, but rather should focus on making the most of their life. If necessary, they can always sell the house—*their* house.