| |
 |
|
|
Finance & Stock Groups Forum Index » Financial Planning » Home Ownership by Two People
Page 2 of 2 Goto page Previous 1, 2
|
| Author |
Message |
| kastnna |
 Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 6:51 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jun 21, 5:45 pm, "Elizabeth Richardson" <erich...@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:
Quote: Well, if the survivor has to prove they already own something, then it isn't
a "right" is it? Rights are embedded in the law. Spouses have rights
regardless of a legal will, or the absence of one. This is what the
arguments now pro/con civil unions and same sex marriages are all about. One
of the primary arguments is about inheritance, or rights of survivorship.
Regardless, Guy A and Gal B CAN enter into a JTWROS ownership
arrangement even if they are not married (although I am not
recommending that they do). Under a JTWROS ownership arrangement upon
the death of one owner, their undivided interest passes to the
remaining owner(s). It does not go through probate and does not pass
to the heirs of the deceased via ordinary legal succession lines.
The "right embedded in the law" is one of succession. The "proof" of
contribution requirement is one of taxation. Even if the non-spouse
owner cannot prove that they contributed 50%, they still have the
right to inherit the ownership interest over the heirs. HOWEVER, if
they cannot prove their contribution claim, the entire value of the
jointly owned asset can be included in the taxable estate of the
deceased. Ownership transfer does not change.
There is a special priviledge extended ONLY to married couples that's
called Tenants by entirety (TBE). This ownership arrangement protects
an owner's share of an asset from the creditor claims of the other
owner(s). I believe it is unfortunate and unfair that civil unions and
same sex marriages cannot take advantage of this, but their arguements
are more commonly about taxation than inheritance. They do not get the
unlimited marital deduction, TBE, and Family limited partnership
preference among many others. All are about reducing taxes, not who
gets what. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Elizabeth Richardson |
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 8:29 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"kastnna" <kastnna@auburnalum.org> wrote in message
news:1182480655.682878.119720@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
Quote:
There is a special priviledge extended ONLY to married couples that's
called Tenants by entirety (TBE). This ownership arrangement protects
an owner's share of an asset from the creditor claims of the other
owner(s).
As another poster has suggested, this may be according to state law, while I
believed this was universal. I know that tenants by the entirety does not
exist as a way to title real estate in all jurisdictions, as I worked in the
title industry on the west coast for several years. However, Joint Tenancy
in those jurisdictions is reserved for married couples only, and it is the
only way for title to pass automatically and without probate in those
jurisdictions.
Elizabeth Richardson |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| kastnna |
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 5:34 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jun 21, 11:29 pm, "Elizabeth Richardson"
<erich...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
Quote: As another poster has suggested, this may be according to state law, while I
believed this was universal. I know that tenants by the entirety does not
exist as a way to title real estate in all jurisdictions, as I worked in the
title industry on the west coast for several years. However, Joint Tenancy
in those jurisdictions is reserved for married couples only, and it is the
only way for title to pass automatically and without probate in those
jurisdictions.
Elizabeth Richardson
Very possibly so Elizabeth. I could not accurately speak for all the
states. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Rich Carreiro |
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2007 7:13 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Elizabeth Richardson" <erichktn@worldnet.att.net> writes:
Quote: As another poster has suggested, this may be according to state law,
It absolutely is state-law dependent.
Quote: I know that tenants by the entirety does not
exist as a way to title real estate in all jurisdictions, as I worked in the
title industry on the west coast for several years. However, Joint Tenancy
in those jurisdictions is reserved for married couples only,
Not in MA. Tenancy-by-the-entireties is allowed in MA (and reserved
to married couples). But as far as I've been able to tell, JTWROS
is available to anyone.
--
Rich Carreiro rlcarr@animato.info |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Elle |
| Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 1:05 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"HW "Skip" Weldon" <skip5700removethis@hotmail.com> wrote
Quote: On the assumption that A and B are in the same generation
and that Gal
B is truly serious about having her "eyes wide open", I
would want her
to explore the reason why one of the parties has more
financial
security than the other (at least measured by home
equity). My
experience is that despite a host of feel-good reasons,
our current
situation is the cumulative result of all of our previous
choices/decisions, and can be linked to our values and
priorities.
Understood and agreed. B's investing priorities have been
significantly different and yet I would say not reckless. I
would say Guy B actually has more financial security than
Gal A. Guy B has had a retirement plan in place for some
years and it seems reasonable, though his strategy is not
the one A (again, myself) favors. Still, compatibility of
values and priorities is important here.
I am certainly thinkings about our differences and whether
co-ownership of any kind is a good idea, given these
differences. Anecdotal observations suggest not being on the
same page financially is a recipe for a failed marriage,
partnership, etc. of any kind.
Thanks for all the additional input, folks. I have skimmed
it all so far and will keep studying what's been posted here
(as well as what is written elsewhere) for ideas. No hasty
decisions will be made. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Page 2 of 2 Goto page Previous 1, 2
All times are GMT
The time now is Sat Jan 10, 2009 2:00 am
|
|
|