Deed of Variation – getting it wrong | Withersworldwide.
Referring to the recent case of Vaughan-Jones v Vaughan-Jones, where a deed of variation was effected in the estate of the husband. The will of the husband had left assets both to the wife and also to the children. The amounts left to the children exceeded the Nil Rate Band, and therefore an immediate IHT liability arose on the death. The deed of variation was completed less than a week before the deadline (before the 2nd anniversary of death) but most importantly, failed to contain the election for Inheritance Tax which arguably was the whole point of the document.
The election for Inheritance Tax is the part of the document that enables, for Inheritance Tax purposes, the deed to be considered as if it was the wish of the deceased, rather than the wish of those who actually inherit. To fail to include that election makes the document pretty useless – “ineffective”. The reported case permitted the court to rectify this omission.
The Wither’s article reveals, however, that in the process of arguing the case, it was revealed that the deed of variation was not entered into freely – that the widow (to whom all was transferred so as to secure the 100% spousal relief) and children had participated in the deed in order that the widow would later give the assets back to the children.
A key part of the legistation permitting the election is that it cannot apply where there is any associated financial bargain (or “consideration”) with the election:
142Alteration of dispositions taking effect on death.
(1)Where within the period of two years after a person’s death—
(b)the benefit conferred by any of those dispositions is disclaimed,
(2A)For the purposes of subsection (2) above the relevant persons are—
(a)the person or persons making the instrument, and
(b)where the variation results in additional tax being payable, the personal representatives.
Finance Act 1986 Sch. 19, para. 24,with effect from 18March 1986.
