Honestly, I don’t think it’s worth muddying the water with this discussion since it’s literally exactly the opposite of what the OP is trying to figure out.
There’s a big difference between your mom saying “I’d like to help out with this big expense that you’re going to split with your ex-wife” and your kid saying “I’d like to help out with this big expense that you and mom are going to pay for me”.
If we go down that road I don’t think we’ll make it back to the original question.
I think it’s the exact distinction. The mom isn’t helping out her son, she’s sending her grandson to college. Presumably, even if the son didn’t want the grandson to go to college, or didn’t feel it was his responsibility to pay for it, she’d still give the money to her grandson.
You’re projecting the idea that the mom is giving the money to the son to defray the son’s costs. But they aren’t the son’s costs, they are the grandson’s costs. The son is not in the transaction at all. The money appears to be in some kind of account with the grandson’s name on it. It has never been seen, touched, or processed by the son. So why on earth would it be his money that he is contributing?
We don’t know that to be the case, it’s an assumption.
I have a ‘college fund’ for my daughter, but it’s just a savings account in my name that I have earmarked for her (and brokerage account also in my name, earmarked for her).
If I died today that money would just become part of my estate and would not legally be my daughter’s in any way shape or form. The only way it would end up in her hand’s is if someone went into my financial software and saw her name on it and decided to shuffle it over to her.
What if you found out the kid’s grandma on the other side is kicking in the entire 25K for the mom? I mean, in the case, the mom is actually making money here.
No matter how you look at it, the kid is going to get the money for school, so the OP, IMO, should claim the money as his. It would be wrong of him to ask the mom how much of her half didn’t come specifically from her own pocket and tell her she needs to split that money with him, right? Then he doesn’t need to split money with her that didn’t come out of his pocket.
If he really just wants to put this off for a while he can save up 20K on his own and she hands him a check for $25K when tuition is due he can hand her the 25K that includes the 10K from his mom and the 15K from him and be happy he saved the extra money and put that towards the rest of his kids college tuitions since he’ll need it anyways. If she shows up with with $20K expecting half of the 10K, he’ll have that already since he prepared for it.
It’s a tough situation because she’s probably just assuming she has to come up with the 25K on her own, but if you ask her she might see the opportunity to say “Oh, um, yeah, I was just assuming half of that 10K was mine” and then you just lost 5 grand.
Here, look at it this way. I can be reasonably sure that my ex-wife’s parents are going to pay for half of my daughter’s college education. That’s almost a given. So, does that mean I only have to pay for a quarter of it and my ex has to pay for a quarter of it? NO! sure, they’re doing it because they want my daughter to go to college but they’re also doing to remove some of the financial hardship from their daughter as well.
We are both making assumptions, because we don’t know.
If the grandmother has an account in the grandson’s name, and give it directly to the grandson, I don’t think your argument holds. You seem to be arguing that the grandmother’s only connection to the grandchild is through the son: that she is trying to help out her SON, and that he’s the one helping out his own child. I am arguing that the grandmother has an independent relationship with her grandson that has nothing to do with her son, and that it is her grandson she is giving the money to.
By your logic, if Grandmother gives Johnny a new bike for Christmas, Johnny should thank his dad and his dad should thank the grandmothers for taking over some of the cost of Johnny’s Christmas presents. And this money HAS COME as a series of Christmas and birthday presents. It is the exact same thing.
There are tons of grandparents out there that support/have relationships with grandchildren when they have severed ties with their actual kid. It is quite plausible that grandmother never once has thought “I will put this money aside so that my son doesn’t have to pay so much for my grandson’s education”. Instead, she may very well have been thinking 'I will put this money aside for my grandson so that no matter what, a chunk of his college is paid for". If that’s the case, I just don’t see it as belonging to the son. It was never his.
Manda, there is some reasonable logic behind your points. And I don’t believe there is ever going to be any clear-cut answer on this. But I do think there’s another angle to this that you should weigh when considering the question: namely, that even if it may make sense in a technical legal sense to talk about “the grandson’s costs”, in reality there are no such costs for “the grandson” (my son–let’s call him “Son” in honour of the Michael Shannon movie I just watched on Netflix). His mother and I are legally (and, at least in my case and probably hers, morally) committed to paying all college costs.
Therefore (recalling that 2X is the total cost of college, and Y is the amount in the college fund):
(1) If my mom was just lying these college funds all along, my ex-wife and I each pay half, and Son goes to college without either having to come up with any funds to do so, or incurring any debt. My net worth is reduced by X, as is my ex-wife’s.
(2) If the college funds are real, and they are “taken off the top” before my ex-wife and I split the rest, Son still goes to college without either having to come up with any funds to do so, or incurring any debt. My net worth is reduced by (X - Y/2), as is my ex-wife’s.
(3) If the college funds are real, and they are instead applied to my side of the ledger, Son yet again goes to college without either having to come up with any funds to do so, or incurring any debt. My net worth is reduced by (X - Y), while my ex-wife’s net worth is reduced by X.
So if we get away from technicalities and judge this by what actually happens when the rubber meets the road, this college fund really isn’t impacting Son’s finances at all. It becomes in essence a partial reimbursement of parental outlays: either equally reimbursing her ex-daughter-in-law and me, solely reimbursing me, or reimbursing me more than her (if we go the route, which I again would consider fair, of treating money contributed before and after we split up differently).
And while, as I say, she is not likely to want to go on the record with a specific stand, deep down I feel sure she she is no different from the typical person who is more partial to giving their money to their offspring than to a former in-law.
ETA: Want to quickly add during the five minute edit window that I composed the above after only reading through post 42. I will now read the two posts that popped up in the interim, and add a new comment below if needed.
At the risk of repeating myself, I just have to take specific issue with it being “the exact same thing”. That new bike under the Christmas tree is something Johnny would just not have if Grandmother didn’t purchase it as a present. Right? Because Grandmother bought it for him, he has whatever presents he got from others (including me–and I am always picky BTW about spending the same on every present-giving occasion for every kid every year), plus this shiny new bike.
But in the case of the college education, he’s going to have that whether Grandmother contributes anything or not. The only person or people who will have something more because of the accumulation of the yearly contributions into the fund are either just me, or me and my ex-wife.
ETA: Because of the legal agreement in the divorce decree, it probably makes more sense to think about the cost of college being a kind of debt that my ex-wife and I owe in advance, like before-the-fact PLUS Loans or something.
You say you feel like you are legally and morally obligated to pay for your son’s college costs. But is that true, or is it more that you feel like you have that responsibility to pay for those costs after your son has exhausted his own assets?
I mean, let’s say your son had won some cheesy promotional sweepstakes at 10 that paid out a 10K "scholarship". As these things work, they usually give you a savings bond that matures when you graduate high school. Would you give that to your son in cash for whatever, and still bear the full cost of his college education yourself, or would you assume that since he does have an asset, that should be applied to college first, and you will pay the remainder?
Or, if a random millionaire took a liking to your son and gave him a check for $10K with “For your college education” on the memo line, would you still pay 100% of his college costs, or would you expect your son to apply that $10K to college?
I guess what I am saying is that if you really feel like it’s your ethical duty for you and your ex-wife to pay entirely for college, and your son has no obligation, whatever his assets, then you should pay 50%, your ex should pay 50% and granny’s college fund can go to grad school or a down payment on a house or something.
Awfully hypothetical, but I think that I would lean toward letting my son keep the cash (or maybe splitting it so we both benefit). I really don’t see a random millionaire or some kind of civic booster entity being comparable to my mother though. She always sends birthday cards and whatnot to my house even if his birthday lands on a time when he is with his mother.
Let me fire a different hypothetical back at you. What if my mom went into a coma for five years while my son was attending college? She wakes up just in time to attend his college graduation, where she beams at him proudly from the audience. Afterward, she apologises to him for not having been able to contribute the college fund toward his education as she had promised all those years, due to her coma and all. She tells him that she would be happy to help with grad school, but he feels that the bachelor’s is all he wants to pursue. So she says it could go to pay down his student loans. But he demurs again, telling her his mom and dad already paid for everything. She is intent then on making a reimbursement so she is true to her word.
So: when it is after the fact, a reimbursement, do you still think it is clear that she should split that money equally between her son and her former daughter-in-law? What if my ex paid her half in cash, but I had to go into debt for my half–still the same answer?
I think if your mother were to reimburse you for college costs, it would be up to her to decide if she reimburses just you or you and your ex. And that you don’t get to make any decision there what so ever. Its your mother’s money. If she decides to reimburses just you, that is fine and ethical. If she splits the reimbursement between you and your ex - that’s her business and about all you get to do is whine.
If the account is still in your mother’s name, and she chooses to transfer it to your children through you, then count it. If it skips you, then you weren’t involved at all and you shouldn’t count it. If the account was set up when your kids were little, and money has been trickling in for years for birthdays and Christmas - then it isn’t your mother’s money you are taking, its your kids - and ask your kids if they think its fair that that comes from your contribution only.
And those of us not talking legally are talking about fairness and ethics - not about what an attorney might say - which is also important. You should talk to an attorney - but to do so, you are probably going to need to know how the accounts are set up. You need to talk to your mother and understand that, as well as her wishes - and probably the kids wishes as well.
Your mother has set up an account for your son, not for you. If she decides post-coma that she wants to reimburse whoever paid for his college, how to distribute that money is up to her. Logically, her contribution would be split proportionally among the people who paid, since if she’d been awake and contributing, her contribution would have come off the top. So if you’d paid 75% of the total and your ex paid 20% and an aunt had paid 5%, you’d split your mom’s post-facto contribution in this manner and each pocket your share. I don’t see the source of each person’s contribution coming into play beyond pleading your case that you “should” get more to your mom.
What if your mom’s contributions already exceed the college costs, so she ends up paying the whole thing? Would you feel your ex owed you $25,000? Surely not. The contributions are for the kid to go to college, not to defray your expenses.
Yeah, I don’t see it as any different from the scholarship account my son had or the accounts my kids had when they were little for cash gifts or the ones my mother set up when they were older - they’re all accounts funded by non-parents and belong to the child, not either parent ( ethically and morally regardless of the legality). It’s fine for the parents to decide that the child should contribute those funds to the cost of college, it’s fine for the parents to decide that they will cover the whole cost. What’s not fine is for one parent to decide that “the birthday and Christmas gifts my mother gave you count toward my share”. Presumably, your wife’s parents also gave your son birthday and Christmas gifts. Do you think the value of those gifts count as her share?
That’s only true because you want it to be. My husband and I pay our kids’ tuition in full , and those accounts with the childhood birthday and Christmas gifts and the amount of the scholarship account were turned over to them when they graduated from high school. There’s no reason you couldn’t do the same. I’m not suggesting you have to, but you could.
Abut the reimbursement- at that point your child has refused the gift, and your mother can do whatever she wants with her money.Including spending it on a trip to Europe for herself.
So? Someone else gave your son some money. I don’t see why you have more claim to it because you also have relationship with her. You seem to be arguing that if your mom didn’t like you but was donating to your son’s education, then it wouldn’t count, but since your mom likes you, too, then the money is really for you. I am not at all following why this money is somehow really yours, or why the fact that it came from your mom over the years makes it more your money than if it had come from someone else.
I think she should do whatever she wants with her money.
Well, hold on. Your premise there takes as a given the very thing we have been debating about, and I have not been the only one that disagreed with the idea that it should necessarily come off the top. The majority has said that, granted; but not unanimously. (I also note that the person who most vociferously agreed with my position identified himself as a fellow divorced dad with kids. Are any of the people disagreeing with me divorced with kids?)
This is an interesting angle, thanks.
Sure, but the ambiguity comes in if what she does with the money is to write a check or checks directly to the college. My inclination, obviously, is to look at the statement that the college sends out after that happens and say “oh, look: my mom paid down part of my half, goody” and pay the rest of my half and leave a full half of the original cost for my ex-wife to take care of, or with the help of her parents if they should wish to do so.
I know you can read this through a prism of characterising me as very greedy and petty; but let me just note that if I saw that her parents were putting in twice as much as my mom was putting in, or even all of their daughter’s share, I would absolutely not angle for it to go the other way. I would just think “okay, lucky her” and still pay the balance of my share after deducting my mom’s contribution.
I don’t think you are greedy or petty. I do think you are thinking of your son as a member of your household, not as an independent economic entity. That makes sense now, because he is a child. But the process starts now where he starts to develop an economic identity separate from you and I think it’s important to be cognizant of that.
That isn’t ambiguous at all - if your mother writes the check to the college, the money was never yours. The cost of college that your ex wife and you agreed to split has gone done thanks to your mother - and if I were your ex wife, I’d make a stink about it (and I’m assuming your ex wife will have as much access to the college accounts to find out who and where payments are coming from as you do). If that is the scenario, you really need to make sure to talk to a lawyer, because your ex might. And if I were your kids, I’d think you were trying to weasel out of your agreement - especially if your ex makes a lot of sacrifices to get the kids through college but “Dad just had rich Grandma pay for it.” But I don’t know what your mother or your kids opinions of your ex wife are. Its possible that your mother and your kids will see it the way you do - in which case, have your mother gift the money to you (assuming it is within the IRS gift amounts) and write the checks and your ex never needs to know.
If you two were still married, Grandma’s money would be applied to college, and then the two of you would have to come up with the rest. Now that you’re divorced, Grandma’s money should still be applied to college, and the two of you have to come up with the rest. The only difference is that “coming up with the rest” isn’t a joint enterprise anymore, you have decided to each come up with half of it.
I’ll suggest it again, SlackerInc; if you think the money should count towards “your half,” then you should talk to your mom and have her quit putting the money in a college fund, and just write you a check every month. Problem solved.
The OP should note that if he is going to claim that the grandparent’s contribution to a college fund counts for his half of the payments, then it should be considered as a part of his income as well.
If the college costs are split based on income, or if the OP is paying child support, then his payments might go up.
The only way the OP can get a windfall here is if the agreement states that both parties knew how the grandparent’s contributions to the college fund will be distributed. Otherwise it could be a change of circumstances that could be enough for a Judge to modify the award of college expenses.
Remember, this might not be the case in your jurisdiction, and you should seek the advice of an attorney before acting on any advice you read in this thread.