i wonder if the taxation will follow the more liberal distribution of the inheritance. Even if it becomes possible to allow a bigger part of the inheritance to your common law partner (not married or registered under Swiss law) the taxation would still be higher.
Hello, This is the first time I have ever joined a forum on the internet so I apologize in advance if I make anyone groan at my posts. I have an inheritance law question which I did not see anyone else ask so far. I am an American married to a Swiss man who has 2 children. If all of our assets are in my name only, do his children still have the inheritance right to 50% in case my husband dies before me?
To go further, they have rights to 50% of shared assets only, but nothing that is not shared. Also, inheritances are never considered shared, regardless of your marriage regime.
Thank you Tom! As of now, all assets are in both of our names. Just so I understand correctly, if we would put them in my name only, they would no longer be considered shared and therefore no longer fall under the inheritance law?
I'm not convinced that Tom has that completely correct.
When he mentions your husband's children having no rights to assets that are not shared, I assume he means assets that are not shared in your marriage. Under Swiss law, assets that are accumulated during your marriage are shared assets, regardless of whether they are owned jointly or individually. Assets owned by each of you individually prior to and up to the time of your marriage remain individually owned and are not joint assets.
So your husband's children have no claim on any assets you, Ms Andress, owned individually before marriage, as they are not part of your marital estate. However, individual "ownership" of assets acquired during marriage does not protect you from your husband's children's rights to inheritance.
Tom is also correct that "inheritances are never considered shared, regardless of your marriage regime", but this applies the other way around -- if as a married spouse you inherit something, that inherited asset does not become part of the marital estate (although any interest or other income you may earn from it does!). Non-sharing of inheritances doesn't apply when it's the parent or step-parent who dies (and doesn't make much sense anyway).
Thanks so much for this! Even if we would transfer any liquid assets to the US and put it in my name only, do you know if the Swiss law would still apply in the US?
What is the definition of acquired? if you bought shares with money you already had or from selling other shares or from the sale of a house in your case
Or does the money to buy the assets have to be acquired during the marriage?
Exactly, how do they differentiate what is acquired Do you know if it is correct that the pension fund goes solely to the widow or is that also part of the estate?
You'd need to be able to track the money arising from your individual premarital assets that you subsequently used to buy other assets while you were married, very, very carefully and precisely, to prove its provenance and stake your claim that these are premaritally acquired assets. Without that trail, you're toast. This applies, obviously, as much for divorce as it does for inheritance issues.
Pro tip: Before marraige buy a car, any car, even a crappy wreck for CHF 1000. It will be part of your own asset. After marriage upgrade it to something better using shared asset. The new car will be still be part of your own asset.
Slightly old thread, but seems to cover everything in a roundabout way - can anyone tell me if this brief summary is correct, or where it is wrong:
In order for a spouse to inherit everything, you must have a will stating this, properly notarised
- there shouldn't be any other complications with tax, ownership etc if this is done
- unless...
Children can challenge this and claim 50% (between them), unless they have also renounced their part, properly notarised
- they can only sign this renunciation from age 18 (?)
Finally - in practice, how is it normally done?
Do people just go with the normal 50% spouse/50% kids allocation; or do people write 100%-to-spouse wills and they aren't challenged, or do they actually go as far as getting the kids to renounce their part?
For me it's a question of tidiness - we want whatever is left to go to the kids eventually, but I can imagine having ownership of the house split up is a pain and potentially very awkward with mortgages etc. Or maybe it isn't, the Swiss way just works?
Maybe it's already been mentioned - another possibility is for the couple to have the property 100% in the name of the children while the surviving spouse inherits the use of the property (usufruct) until the spouse's passing or until they decide to move out, after which the children own it and split the value of the property as allocated in the will.
If the kids are minors at the time...I don't know.
Thanks; problem with that is that the survivor is tied to the house - they can't downsize easily, especially if they want to release equity for expenses as that would go to the kids.