Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 139

Take care when assisting parents financially

This article continues from Alex Denham’s, ‘Providing financial assistance to parents’, and is in response to a reader’s request to delve further into this little-explored theme. It focusses on what happens when circumstances change or where financial arrangements are challenged by other family members.

Parents are often giving a ‘leg up’ to their children, whether a gift to put a deposit on a house, guarantee a bank loan for a new business or the like. What happens if the ‘leg up’ is from the child to the parent, particularly in the event of marital or family breakdown? The following scenarios illustrate the main considerations:

Marital breakdown

Suppose a son has supported his parents by purchasing an investment property with them, and he has paid their bills and other essentials on an ad hoc basis. The son’s marriage has broken down. Will his now ex-wife be able to make a ‘claim’ on the assets or money given to the son’s parents?

The answer is mixed. The issue in a marital breakdown is a division of assets based on a number of factors and largely depends on the facts of the marriage, such as length, earning capacity of each spouse, whether there are children of the marriage dependant on one spouse and so on.

The paying of bills ad hoc in this scenario is unlikely to be included in calculating the ‘pool of assets’.

It is arguable that the investment property, as it is held as joint tenants, might not form part of the ‘pool of assets’. However, I am of the opinion it would be difficult if not impossible for the son’s share of the property not to be included in a calculation of the ‘pool of assets’.

This doesn’t give the wife a claim on the property however, when all the assets are being divided. I would be of the view that the value of the son’s share in the property would be included in calculating the pool and may affect how other assets, such as money held in bank accounts, are divided. 

Changes among siblings’ own financial circumstances

Suppose three siblings purchase a property for their parents to live in. What happens if, due to loss of employment, one of the siblings stops making the mortgage payments, or one wishes to exit and be bought out?

To answer these questions, it is essential to examine the agreement when the siblings entered into this purchase.

Unfortunately, few people think about this at the time of purchase but they really should. There should be an agreement in writing and with each party obtaining proper and independent legal advice. This may sound unnecessary in family situations, but it is not uncommon for people’s circumstances to change through no fault of their own, leading to family discord.

As I often say to my clients, if everyone knows the rules beforehand, then disputes later are minimised or avoided all together.

So the answer to these questions will depend on the agreement in place. If nothing is in writing, then what was discussed before the property was purchased cannot be verified. If no discussions were had, then it’s an even bigger mess.

Essentially, if there is a mortgage over the property then all owners will have agreed to be liable for the mortgage, usually jointly and severally, and one or all are liable. So if some siblings aren’t paying the mortgage then the other siblings will need to make up the difference. If the mortgage goes into default, it will affect all of the sibling’s credit rating.

If one sibling wishes to exit the situation, then usually the other siblings will buy their share. It is usually based on a market value of the property at the time of the sale and requires the agreement of all owners.

Can they sell to someone else? Yes, but only with the consent of the other owners. If there is a mortgage, then the mortgagee’s consent will be required as well.

If agreement cannot be reached, then I see little choice but for the property to be sold and the proceeds divided amongst the siblings. The obvious problem is that mum and dad will be homeless.

Planning at the beginning is the key to avoiding headaches and arguments at a later date.

Unequal contributions within the family and inheritance

Another common issue is where one child helps the parents out more financially than the other children. On death, one child may feel entitled to more of the estate. This feeling of entitlement however, is not entirely accurate when it comes to administering the estate.

The parents’ will should largely address these issues. If the child gave money to the parent, then that is a nice gesture, but it was a gift. It is not intended to be repaid by that child inheriting a larger portion of the estate.

If it’s a loan, then the loan should be in writing before death and be reflected in the parents’ will, recording that the estate will repay the loan.

A parent may leave a larger portion to one child over another to reflect the contributions made before death, but this situation usually causes more trouble than it is worth. It is likely that unless there was careful discussion and agreement before death, a claim on the estate by the child with the smaller portion will eventuate, which will lead to unnecessary stress and legal fees.

I again would say planning is the key with prior agreement as to what the money means and whether it will be ‘repaid’ by the estate of the parents.

If property is involved, then the child’s investment or loan to the parents should be reflected in the ownership. For instance, where the child owns a share of the property or there is a mortgage granted over the property in favour of the child, the death of the parents will not affect that child’s investment.

In the absence of documentation to outline the situation, in my view, the money will be treated as a ‘gift’ and recovery from the estate would be difficult if not impossible.

Summary

Not all situations are straightforward and each matter will be determined on the facts. Documents outlining the intention and agreement of all parties may seem unnecessary when family is involved, however, courts are full of family members fighting about money.

If everyone knows their obligations and rights from the beginning, in my experience, most disputes are quickly resolved, or avoided all together.

 

Melanie Palmer is a Partner of Palmers Legal. This article contains general information only and does not consider the personal circumstances of any individual. Professional advice should be obtained before taking any action.

 


 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Providing financial assistance to parents

Estate planning made simple, Part II

The legal fallout when a carer becomes a partner

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

The case for the $3 million super tax

The Government's proposed tax has copped a lot of flack though I think it's a reasonable approach to improve the long-term sustainability of superannuation and the retirement income system. Here’s why.

7 examples of how the new super tax will be calculated

You've no doubt heard about Division 296. These case studies show what people at various levels above the $3 million threshold might need to pay the ATO, with examples ranging from under $500 to more than $35,000.

The revolt against Baby Boomer wealth

The $3m super tax could be put down to the Government needing money and the wealthy being easy targets. It’s deeper than that though and this looks at the factors behind the policy and why more taxes on the wealthy are coming.

Meg on SMSFs: Withdrawing assets ahead of the $3m super tax

The super tax has caused an almighty scuffle, but for SMSFs impacted by the proposed tax, a big question remains: what should they do now? Here are ideas for those wanting to withdraw money from their SMSF.

The super tax and the defined benefits scandal

Australia's superannuation inequities date back to poor decisions made by Parliament two decades ago. If super for the wealthy needs resetting, so too does the defined benefits schemes for our public servants.

Are franking credits hurting Australia’s economy?

Business investment and per capita GDP have languished over the past decade and the Labor Government is conducting inquiries to find out why. Franking credits should be part of the debate about our stalling economy.

Latest Updates

Superannuation

Here's what should replace the $3 million super tax

With Div. 296 looming, is there a smarter way to tax superannuation? This proposes a fairer, income-linked alternative that respects compounding, ensures predictability, and avoids taxing unrealised capital gains. 

Superannuation

Less than 1% of wealthy families will struggle to pay super tax: study

An ANU study has found that families with at least one super balance over $3 million have average wealth exceeding $19 million - suggesting most are well placed to absorb taxes on unrealised capital gains.   

Superannuation

Are SMSFs getting too much of a free ride?

SMSFs have managed to match, or even outperform, larger super funds despite adopting more conservative investment strategies. This looks at how they've done it - and the potential policy implications.  

Property

A developer's take on Australia's housing issues

Stockland’s development chief discusses supply constraints, government initiatives and the impact of Japanese-owned homebuilders on the industry. He also talks of green shoots in a troubled property market.

Economy

Lessons from 100 years of growing US debt

As the US debt ceiling looms, the usual warnings about a potential crash in bond and equity markets have started to appear. Investors can take confidence from history but should keep an eye on two main indicators.

Investment strategies

Investors might be paying too much for familiarity

US mega-cap tech stocks have dominated recent returns - but is familiarity distorting judgement? Like the Monty Hall problem, investing success often comes from switching when it feels hardest to do so.

Latest from Morningstar

A winning investment strategy sitting right under your nose

How does a strategy built around systematically buying-and-holding a basket of the market's biggest losers perform? It turns out pretty well, so why don't more investors do it?

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2025 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.