Daughters Inherit $20 Million — With Strings Attached
Options
2stepz_ahead
Guests, Members, Writer, Content Producer Posts: 32,324 ✭✭✭✭✭
https://www.yahoo.com/parenting/daughters-inherit-20-million-with-strings-125282666637.html
A Manhattan millionaire left a generous fortune to his daughters in his will, but the money comes with strings.
Maurice Laboz, owner of real estate management firm Regal Real Estate, died earlier this year and left his two daughters — Marlena, 21, and Victoria, 17 — $10 million each (his entire estate was worth $37 million). And while the money is supposed to roll in when each girl turns 35, Maurice set up conditions for the payouts to start earlier, according to the New York Post, who exclusively reported the story on Monday.
For example, Marlena can receive half a million when she gets married, “but only if her husband signs a sworn statement promising to keep his hands off the cash,” the paper reports. She’ll also receive a lump sum of $750,000 for graduating from an accredited university, and writing a paragraph about what she intends to do with the money. Both daughters will receive three times the income listened on their personal tax returns if they earn a good living by 2020, and if they have kids and don’t work a traditional job, they’ll earn 3 percent of the value of their trust every year. That is, so long as the child is “born in wedlock.”
Yahoo Parenting was unable to reach either of the daughters for comment.
The conditions read like helicopter parenting from the beyond, and estate planning lawyer Brian Esser says that’s what it amounts to. “It really is about control. When you see these things, it’s about ways for parents and grandparents to control what happens after they die,” Esser tells Yahoo Parenting. “I highly discourage my clients from trying to do things like that. You never know when you will pass, how old kids will be when you die, and if you’re putting a lot of conditions in your will, entangling the estate, you’re creating a lot of difficulty for the executor and the other people involved. You want to draft things cleanly and simply.”
STORY:529s Are Here to Stay: How To Save For Your Kids’ College
It’s also not financially practical. “Even with clients who want to keep money in trusts for their kids until they are age 30, I remind them that trusts aren’t free,” he says. “There is quarterly tax filing and other costs associated with paying investment advisors. If you are tying up money for your children, you are increasing the costs and decreasing the money they are going to get.”
According to Esser, this practice isn’t especially common, though he’d expect it more from wealthier individuals. “It’s something you are more likely to see with people who have a lot of assets,” he explains. “These numbers that are being kicked around — three times somebody’s salary or a lump sum of $750,000 — the average American estate is around $1 million, so most people can’t make stipulations like this.”
Overall, Esser says the practice isn’t good parenting, so he’s happy he doesn’t see it more often. “There are parents who want to control their kids with money, like this dangling carrot, but I’ve never drafted a will that imposes a lot of conditions on children from the grave,” he says. “If anything, my clients are more interested in making sure their children’s needs are met after they’ve passed. They err on the side of making more money available at a younger age.”
And who knows if these conditions will even hold up. Laboz’s will is already being contested by his wife, Ewa, who he was in the process of divorcing and to whom he left nothing. According to Post, Laboz left the rest of his fortune to charity.
A Manhattan millionaire left a generous fortune to his daughters in his will, but the money comes with strings.
Maurice Laboz, owner of real estate management firm Regal Real Estate, died earlier this year and left his two daughters — Marlena, 21, and Victoria, 17 — $10 million each (his entire estate was worth $37 million). And while the money is supposed to roll in when each girl turns 35, Maurice set up conditions for the payouts to start earlier, according to the New York Post, who exclusively reported the story on Monday.
For example, Marlena can receive half a million when she gets married, “but only if her husband signs a sworn statement promising to keep his hands off the cash,” the paper reports. She’ll also receive a lump sum of $750,000 for graduating from an accredited university, and writing a paragraph about what she intends to do with the money. Both daughters will receive three times the income listened on their personal tax returns if they earn a good living by 2020, and if they have kids and don’t work a traditional job, they’ll earn 3 percent of the value of their trust every year. That is, so long as the child is “born in wedlock.”
Yahoo Parenting was unable to reach either of the daughters for comment.
The conditions read like helicopter parenting from the beyond, and estate planning lawyer Brian Esser says that’s what it amounts to. “It really is about control. When you see these things, it’s about ways for parents and grandparents to control what happens after they die,” Esser tells Yahoo Parenting. “I highly discourage my clients from trying to do things like that. You never know when you will pass, how old kids will be when you die, and if you’re putting a lot of conditions in your will, entangling the estate, you’re creating a lot of difficulty for the executor and the other people involved. You want to draft things cleanly and simply.”
STORY:529s Are Here to Stay: How To Save For Your Kids’ College
It’s also not financially practical. “Even with clients who want to keep money in trusts for their kids until they are age 30, I remind them that trusts aren’t free,” he says. “There is quarterly tax filing and other costs associated with paying investment advisors. If you are tying up money for your children, you are increasing the costs and decreasing the money they are going to get.”
According to Esser, this practice isn’t especially common, though he’d expect it more from wealthier individuals. “It’s something you are more likely to see with people who have a lot of assets,” he explains. “These numbers that are being kicked around — three times somebody’s salary or a lump sum of $750,000 — the average American estate is around $1 million, so most people can’t make stipulations like this.”
Overall, Esser says the practice isn’t good parenting, so he’s happy he doesn’t see it more often. “There are parents who want to control their kids with money, like this dangling carrot, but I’ve never drafted a will that imposes a lot of conditions on children from the grave,” he says. “If anything, my clients are more interested in making sure their children’s needs are met after they’ve passed. They err on the side of making more money available at a younger age.”
And who knows if these conditions will even hold up. Laboz’s will is already being contested by his wife, Ewa, who he was in the process of divorcing and to whom he left nothing. According to Post, Laboz left the rest of his fortune to charity.
Comments
-
That ? is dumb.
-
Ungrateful ? .
Dude should've just left that money to charity and only gave them $1 million a piece.
Then again, those comments weren't from the kids.....so maybe they should get the benefit of the doubt. -
Good. ? that lawyer. Let that man raise his children from the grave as he pleases.
-
id take the accredited university route
-
ha ha, that ? nuts, dont no what too say, jheeze
-
what he's doing is humbling them.money destroyed alot of people.a fool and money soon depart.maybe he's looking out for them
-
At the end of the day it's his money and he can do whatever he wants with it
-
MasterJayN100 wrote: »what he's doing is humbling them.money destroyed alot of people.a fool and money soon depart.maybe he's looking out for them
i need to redo my ? again.....
they may be thinking like my son, that hes gonna be paid when i die ...so why try to do anything.
put some ? like that for them to earn the money.....either you want it or you dont.
the man is trying to give the morals and ethics from the grave. -
i agree that that guy is just trying too instil some morals & good judgement on his seeds from the grave but i just think he's taking it a little bit too far wit all some of the extra-ness, some points is valid, but i think he's overdoing it wit others, but like peeps said, its his money, he can do what the ? he wants wit it, i'm gone
-
If I was in his position, my standards would bee specific forms of financial education... like investing classes and the accredited schooling....
-
Good for dad.
-
Good ? , my mom did the same thing I don't have access to all the money I get a yearly pay out and if I become a ? up it goes to my kids
-
Mo power to him. All that ? is to make sure they do what they have to do. They can easily not do ? and live there lives. If they want the money, Just make good decisions.
-
He knew his daughters was ?
-
This is wonderful
-
as long as they not doing dumb ? like bragging to every ? they ? that their dad was loaded, they shouldn't have any issues....
but if they're entitled...they ain't never gonna be happy -
If he didn't instill morals and values to the oldest daughter while he was alive its his fault.
-
I dont mind having strings attached to a kid's inheritance, especially those put in place to help them or to make them aware of certain things, but this ? is convoluted as ? .
-
Was I the only one expecting that the conditions be that they got with someone of their own race or didn't ? with ? ? Maybe that's just me tripping by myself before I've eaten anything for breakfast lol.
-
So he's making them earn the money by forcing them to work for it and value the choices that they make in life? I see nothing wrong here.
-
FAIR
-
Shizlansky wrote: »If he didn't instill morals and values to the oldest daughter while he was alive its his fault.
This. His kids are 21 and 17, they should already want to work hard for their own money and not feel entitled to live off of his.
-
? that.....give them the money and find out if you raised your kids right or wrong. hopefully you can see where they turn out at
-
Shizlansky wrote: »If he didn't instill morals and values to the oldest daughter while he was alive its his fault.
This. His kids are 21 and 17, they should already want to work hard for their own money and not feel entitled to live off of his.
You...cant be serious -
IF I had 20 million dollars at 21 i would have wasted a large portion of that ? . when you make money you want to keep that ? in your bloodline for as long as possible.