- This topic has 62 replies, 29 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 3 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
One can set up a trust in US law and stipulate whatever he wishes… he can say that the money can only be used to buy cars for people with blue eyes. He can stipulate that only college grads can benefit form this trust and he can stipulate that only Shomrei Torah Umitzvos can benefit.
SHAPIRA v. UNION NATIONAL BANK 39 Ohio Misc. 28 (Ohio Court of common pleas 1974) holds that you can make a will dependent on whether the kid marries a jewish girl and it is not against public policy.
In re Estate of Feinberg 383 Ill.App.3d 992 (Ill. App. 2008) holds that such a trust is against public policy. But, it was reversed by the IL supreme court in 235 Ill.2d 256.
So, I wouldn’t be too sure that every state will honor such a clause.
Thnak sPopa- A competent lawyer can draft what is needed. The issue is advisability, rights to do so. Soem feel a child is entitled to inheritance even if he rejects his heritage.
The way the money of a deceased person is used can bring great benefit to hte soul of the departed one. Certailny he/she would want or can want to send it where it will more likely be used properly. Assisting one to eat treif, or be mechallel Shabbos or engage in arayos etc. by providing them with a significant inheritance is not a benefit to the former owner of the $$$$$$$
Rabbaim: You didn’t answer my point about Halachah being against your stance.
Sam 2 I appreciate your persistence but I am missing something. I answered already the following
“Sam2- that is what I meant buy going too far. marrying a non Jewish woman or even moving in with a non Jewish woman with an agreement (even de facto) of being in a “permanent” live in relationship. It was just too hard to write it out so I said “going too far”. If one marries out then one is supposed to sit Shiva. I heard this psak from a few Gedolim who were issuing the ruling as Halacha Lmaaseh.”
Which HALACHA did you told me I am violating that I did not address?
Rabbaim: The part about not being M’vaccer the Ben Ha’ahuvah before the Ben Has’nuah.
Pesukim are not sufficient. They are only the beginning.
Look at Seforno
(16-17) ?????? ??”? ??? ????? ??? ?? ???? ??
?? ???? ???? ?? ?? ?????? ?? ??? ?? ?????? ?????. ?? ????? ?????? ?? ??? ????? ???? ?? ?? ???? ?? ??? ?? ???? ?? ???? ???? ??? ????? ?? ???? ?????? ????? ?”? (?”? ??? ?? ??????) ?? ?? ??? ???? ????? ???? ???? ??? ???? ???? ???? ????? ????? ?????? ????? ???? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ?? ?????:
Meaning if the motivation is like/dislike, love/hate then one cannot alter the order. But if it because the son is a Rasha, an evil doer, then it is permissible.
If you look at the Vilna Gaon on the possuk he says it is talking about 2 children from diff wives each one a bechor born at the same time……… not the case in most homes
Thirdly, the possuk speaks of exchanging bechor privileges, not about disinheiritng. It is a din in bechor, not simply rights of Yerusha. I had written previously that one can put into a trust with conditions… that is not quite taking from ne and giving to another and is certainly not challenging the din of Bechor.
Finally, it can all be gifts while one is alive and need not enter the laws of yerusha if one want to set it up that way.
Theres more, but that should address the issue for now. No?
Considering that (and putting aside the entire OTD/rasha situation), how can so many fathers nowadays take away from the b’chor his right to a double portion? L’chora, a father should not take away from the b’chor his double portion.
Gifts take effect one second before the person dies. Matana maychaim. IN that way daughters can inherit as well……. matana, not yerusha
So, then, on that basis it is no kasha even if the father “disinherits” a child based on like/dislike, love/hate, etc., since it really isn’t disinheriting, it is “gifting” to the other children one moment before death.
Just as taking away the b’chor’s double portion or giving a piece to the daughters that would otherwise go to the sons.
I was careful (at least, I think I was) to try and not say there is an Issur in it because we do give them as Matanos before death. My point was that that’s not the attitude the Torah takes. And I do not understand the Sforno’s position. That’s not the way the Gemara explains the Passu (sort of, I can hear a Chiluk but I don’t think it’s Pshat).
My point was that that’s not the attitude the Torah takes.
Sam: I’m sure you are similarly against taking away the b’chor’s double portion or taking away from the sons to give to the daughters, for the same reason you enumerated — “that’s not the attitude the Torah takes.”
And, of course, taking away from an OTD/rasha child is less problematic than taking away the b’chor’s double portion (or even reducing all the sons portion to give to the daughters.)
Sam 2. the Gemara in Bava Basra being quoted by the Sforno seems to be the source of his psaht. Which Gemara is NOT like the one in Bava Basra?
BTW…….. in US many people legally set up trusts to avoid inheritance tax issues. This is a legal loophole to pass wealth to children by transferring the ownership of the trust to them and so there are no taxes on the inheritance. Sort of Gift “maychaim” NOt quite, but a legal similarity.
You can’t avoid estate and gift tax by giving it during life in trust or any other way.
The only way to avoid gift tax is to give less than 13k to one person in a year.
There used to be a trick where you would give it directly to your grandchildren so that it wouldn’t be taxed again when your kids died. But that is closed by the Generation Skipping Tax (GST).
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.