Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You've gotten links from people to the form you would have to fill out, which they explained takes no more than 15 minutes. Repeatedly, you have been advised by people who have dealt with SS payments that you do not have to give an itemized accounting of every single dime spent, that "room, board, savings, housing, etc." is good enough, and no government official is going to show up at your house with a warrant to go through your finances.
I received SSI payments from birth to age 18 after my father's death. It was never the big deal you are making it out to be. I didn't need my own account, never had to sign anything, and my mom never had to answer any major questions. The check came to HER, and she spent it as she saw fit. Even after I started working at 16, that was never MY money to claim on my taxes, it was HERS that she used to take care of me. No one ever questioned her on how she spent it.
If you insist on this irrational fear of government retaliation, you have also been given the ridiculously easy option of deducting $1000 from DD2's savings for every $1000 SS check, and putting it into DD1's account. But it really seems like you don't want to make things fair for your first daughter.
As a parent we have the obligation to protect our children from themselves. Even though the money belongs to the child the parent should absolutely make sure the child doesn't do something foolish with the money (like buy $24K of jeans). The parent can make sure the money is for the benefit of the child without allowing the child complete control over the money.
If my son (also 16) had access to $1000 per month he would fill my house with drums.
Yes, I totally get that. It's either for the guardian to control, or it's "her" money. The OP is trying to have it both ways.
And if the OP decides she is going to pay for college with it, then she can put the portion of money she's saved for her daughter's college education that she doesn't need to cover any longer toward her other daughter, for whatever the OP chooses. Then they get the same amount of money. Along the lines of what annaNomus has layed out.
But by doing that, using it for college, instead of what the kid wants, she's effectively "taken" the money.
Yes, I totally get that. It's either for the guardian to control, or it's "her" money. The OP is trying to have it both ways.
And if the OP decides she is going to pay for college with it, then she can put the portion of money she's saved for her daughter's college education that she doesn't need to cover any longer toward her other daughter, for whatever the OP chooses. Then they get the same amount of money. Along the lines of what annaNomus has layed out.
But by doing that, using it for college, instead of what the kid wants, she's effectively "taken" the money.
Even so, to follow the letter of the law, the kid has guidelines on how to use it as well. She needs to use it on her care, not trivialities.
You know, this whole situation is just stupid. This really is just one more way to IT to create animosity between her daughters. I've said my opinion, and am done with this thread.
My point was that those costs are the same with her here or not. Yes, she uses the internet but it would cost me the same if she didn't. She doesn't increase the cost. Ditto with heating the house. Now, toiletries for little miss can't have a hair out of place , that's another story.
Her friend's parents do not make him pay anything towards his support. To my knowledge, the only thing he does is buy his own lunch at school (plus lunch for several friends). He's, constantly, taking all the kids out somewhere. Which has me wondering what is going to happen when that report on how the money was spent comes out. I do know that his mother took the money one month and spent it on herself so he moved in with his dad. I have no idea why anyone would hand a teenager money like this. To my knowledge his parents don't have him paying for anything. I would guess he's on his own for clothes and school expenses though.
No, NO, NOOOO to the prom dress. This girl would be at Kleinfelds in the $10,000 dress section.. She's really smart until it comes to money and then she thinks it just grows on trees. She'll bust her butt for months to save the money to buy a $300 dress for a dance she wears once, while her sister, who has way more money sense, goes to the last season rack and picks up an $85 dress that happens to be on sale for 80% off. I just shake my head. We THOUGHT giving her a clothing budget would teach her to budget. NOPE. She's like her dad. He thinks budgets are for poor people. She does not get that we are not rich.
We'll, definitely have to look into what expenses count if we have to report back to the government on where the money went.
Re: the bold-yes and no. We went over this with our daughter when she lived with us after graduation from college. When she was in college, living in an apt. with roommates, it cost us ~$1000/mo to support her in rent, food, car expenses, clothes, etc. That's a bare bones explanation; I don't want to make this about her. When she lived at home, we provided the home and the food. We saved her (as she was now working) a lot of money. Living at home for a year was like us giving her $1000/mo, even if it really didn't increase the cost (much) for us. This is how you do this kind of accounting. She probably did increase the heat bill a little (we can shut off the register for her room) and the water bill, food bill, etc.
It doesn't matter how her friend's parents handle this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldjensens
IT seems silly to me to try to make everything "fair". This is not a good way to help kids prepare for life. There is no "fair" in life.
True that. However, as someone else said, money causes a lot of family breakups. DH and I raised two. College for one was more expensive than the other's. But we gave them each a college education. We gave DD #1 the max allowable gift to buy a car when she graduated from phyiscal therapy school (doctorate) and simultaneously was moving out of town and needed a new car b/c her old one was unreliable and dad could no longer drop everything to go fix it. DH thought we should give DD #2 some money too, but I pointed out we let her live at our house, not just once, but twice after she graduated from college, each time essentially "giving" her $1000/mo. (See my response above.) I think family finances get dicey when one child gets significantly more than the other, as would be the case in this situation if the parents just let the kid have the $1000/mo from SS to do with as she pleases.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnonChick
How I'm seeing it, from a numbers point of view:
Mom and Dad normally would have $100,000 to spend on their 2 kids' education. That would be $50,000 each, for each of them to live for 4 years in college, in a dorm or apartment, eating dorm food or cooking their own, etc. etc. (Yes I know it's not enough for 4 years but it's a nice even number so let's just go with it).
One sister will be getting a $1000/month windfall, which is $12,000/year for 3 years. That's $36,000.
The family still has $100,000 available to spend, and one sister has almost half of that, before the family spends a dime. So now, the family has $136,000 available to spend, as long as $36,000 of it is spent by the lucky sister.
Well! $136/2=68. $68,000 is certainly better than $36,000. And it's better than the $50,000 the family had originally, before the sister got her windfall. So both sisters can now have $68,000 for 4 years of college life. $36,000 of it is the lucky sister's personal money, and the rest of her $68,000 comes from mom and dad. The entire $68,000 for the OTHER sister's funds, comes from mom & dad.
Basically, Dad is footing the bill for lucky sister. Mom AND Dad are footing the bill for other sister, and adding more to lucky sister's windfall.
I think that's perfectly fair, considering that some kids get nothing for college from their parents, because their parents can't afford to pay anything at all.
Let this be a lesson to the kids on family finances. With serious sit-down discussions, charts and graphics, bank account statements, tax forms, everything. This is the perfect time to teach these kids how to manage their OWN finances - by showing them how you manage the family's finances.
Too many kids grow up these days not even knowing how to count change, or balance a checkbook - they let the computer do everything for them. Simple addition and subtraction is a lost art. Give your kids the gift of knowing how to do this. It will be more valueable and more useful throughout their lives, than the 4 years of college you are offering them.
Great advice. I was ready to rep you until I read the bold. I know this is off-topic, but kids don't really understand financing/running a house until they have to do it themselves. I do not agree with involving the kids in-depth in the family finances. And before you tell me my kids will be utter failures and end up living under a bridge, they are both self-sufficient and one was recently complimented on how well she manages her money.
....." I have kids and I agree with you. I don't even think they should be a write off. The government should not be assuming that people need help nor handing it out like candy just because they had kids. The only write off associated with having kids I can see is the child care tax write off and that's because you need child care to work so it's really a work expense. It makes sense to have this one because you are encouraging both parents to work and pay into the system and the government should be using the funds it has to encourage more tax payers not just hand out tax credits."
Hypocrisy personified. No one should get government money for having kids....unless it you! You were b!itching about a $1000 a year tax deduction for other, but now here you are feeling right fine about getting that EVERY MONTH. And why? Because you had a kid. Well because you had a kid when your husband was old.
You've gotten links from people to the form you would have to fill out, which they explained takes no more than 15 minutes. Repeatedly, you have been advised by people who have dealt with SS payments that you do not have to give an itemized accounting of every single dime spent, that "room, board, savings, housing, etc." is good enough, and no government official is going to show up at your house with a warrant to go through your finances.
I received SSI payments from birth to age 18 after my father's death. It was never the big deal you are making it out to be. I didn't need my own account, never had to sign anything, and my mom never had to answer any major questions. The check came to HER, and she spent it as she saw fit. Even after I started working at 16, that was never MY money to claim on my taxes, it was HERS that she used to take care of me. No one ever questioned her on how she spent it.
If you insist on this irrational fear of government retaliation, you have also been given the ridiculously easy option of deducting $1000 from DD2's savings for every $1000 SS check, and putting it into DD1's account. But it really seems like you don't want to make things fair for your first daughter.
Thank you! I don't understand how the OP does not understand this situation...it's not THAT complicated, especially since several of us who HAVE dealt with minor children and SS benefits have explained how simple it is to honestly account for spending and/or saving the monthly check.
Methinks the OP may be looking for a scapegoat to point to when the elder DD finds out about this whole mess.
"Look, dear, we wanted to do what was fair and right, but unfortunately, our hands were tied. You don't want your dear mother and father to get in trouble with the government, now, do you?"
My younger brother was still in high school when the rest of us were off on our own. Dad's income peaked at that time too. Thus he got more of everything attention, financial support, use of cars, travel etc. I was never jealous about it. He was the last one. Of course Mom and Dad can do more for him alone than they can do for four kids at once. They did not pay anything towards my college, the did for him - great. I am glad they were able to do that.
Being in the middle, I probably got the least, however I am the wealthiest now, even though my younger brother was far more academically accomplished. My older brother is smarter than either of us but he has all kinds of medical and social problems and can barely function in an employment or school situation. Where is fairness in any of that? It just is. Why would anyone get upset about it?
My dad is all concerned about fairness in distributing his eventual estate. He tracks any money loaned to any of us or things he gave us already. He wants to make sure everything is divided equally and fairly. I asked him to please spend whatever he is saving for me and enjoy himself and just leave anything he wants to leave to the other three. Two of them said the same thing. Who cares about fairness? Parents do not "owe" anything to their children, especially adult children. I will eventually re-write my will and probably leave the house to one of the kids. I want it to stay in the family not get sold off so people can buy new cars. So whomever I think is most likely to maintain and live nin the house and pass it down, will likely get the house. The others will get whatever cash I have.
My younger brother was still in high school when the rest of us were off on our own. Dad's income peaked at that time too. Thus he got more of everything attention, financial support, use of cars, travel etc. I was never jealous about it. He was the last one. Of course Mom and Dad can do more for him alone than they can do for four kids at once. They did not pay anything towards my college, the did for him - great. I am glad they were able to do that.
There is a difference between ability and preference.
My younger brother was still in high school when the rest of us were off on our own. Dad's income peaked at that time too. Thus he got more of everything attention, financial support, use of cars, travel etc. I was never jealous about it. He was the last one. Of course Mom and Dad can do more for him alone than they can do for four kids at once. They did not pay anything towards my college, the did for him - great. I am glad they were able to do that.
Being in the middle, I probably got the least, however I am the wealthiest now, even though my younger brother was far more academically accomplished. My older brother is smarter than either of us but he has all kinds of medical and social problems and can barely function in an employment or school situation. Where is fairness in any of that? It just is. Why would anyone get upset about it?
My dad is all concerned about fairness in distributing his eventual estate. He tracks any money loaned to any of us or things he gave us already. He wants to make sure everything is divided equally and fairly. I asked him to please spend whatever he is saving for me and enjoy himself and just leave anything he wants to leave to the other three. Two of them said the same thing. Who cares about fairness? Parents do not "owe" anything to their children, especially adult children. I will eventually re-write my will and probably leave the house to one of the kids. I want it to stay in the family not get sold off so people can buy new cars. So whomever I think is most likely to maintain and live nin the house and pass it down, will likely get the house. The others will get whatever cash I have.
1) Neither of the kids are adults - both still in high school. That is a pretty big difference.
2) If you leave the house to one child and aren't worried about fairness, why not divide the cash by however many kids there are? Why will just the others get cash?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
, that's another story. 
She's really smart until it comes to money and then she thinks it just grows on trees. She'll bust her butt for months to save the money to buy a $300 dress for a dance she wears once, while her sister, who has way more money sense, goes to the last season rack and picks up an $85 dress that happens to be on sale for 80% off. I just shake my head. We THOUGHT giving her a clothing budget would teach her to budget. NOPE. She's like her dad. He thinks budgets are for poor people. 
She does not get that we are not rich.
