Not everyone lives on average line, so you can't treat everyone same. Sliding tax-rates based on income is one way tax-man doesn't think everyone should be treated same. You are disagreeing with tax-man, so that's fine.OK unless I missed something in your OP that's not what was mentioned. It changes things quite a bit. In this case the daughter rightly has no right to the payments. So, I am confused, why do you think any payment to the daughter should not be fairly taxed in the exact same way than any other inheritance (in case your dad decides to write a will for those accumulated payments to benefit his grand daughter) or gifting? As mentioned tuition may be exempt from taxes. What other benefit are you seeking that everyone else is not benefitting from and where everyone else pays their fair share? Why do you think your family should be treated differently?
Here's one example, let's say my brother was to live another 10-15yrs and earn same amount as settlement. He ends up paying much, much less to tax-man than daughter would if settlement went from my dad's account to her.
Note that gift-taxes is owed by giver and paid by giver based upon giver's tax-bracket, not receivers. So even if my dad was to split up settlement into 10-15 pieces for each year, taxes he would have to pay is higher than what my brother would've paid on those exact same earnings. How is that "fair"?
How would you structure things so that total tax-amount paid is same as my brother's income-taxes for those 10-15 years? Would you consider that "fair"?
Last edited: