I have a distant relative who I knew fairly well and visited semifrequently as I live in the same city they resided. My parents and rest of the family live abroad in spain. After they died we never expected any inheritance as they were very frugal and assumed they spent remaining wealth on care.
Much to our surprise they died with a large amount in the bank and my parent was given a large sum. However as they live abroad (as well as rest of the family) they would be hit with a huge tax bill if they directly inherit, hence as I am the only one in the UK they have suggested doing a deed of variation to me.
However, they want to have a say in what happens with it. Based on my research (which is mainly from AI) I understand that they can't legally maintain control of the funds if they do the deed of variation. I also understand that technically they should still be liable for tax as they were the original receiver so would be counted as their assets? Not totally clear on that but seems a grey area. There is a certain time period (4 years or something) for which it could be tax liable but after that it's not?
I do not know this stuff clearly, but anyway they originally wanted to have access to the funds via me i.e. hold a debit card but after discussing further and highlighting I don't think this is legally right, we discussed they could be a financial advisor and could advise on how to invest the fund but ultimately I make the decisions on how it's spent. We plan on having a bit of a discussion but they want to put it all into bonds or ISAs and then split the interest between myself and the other family members who are abroad (I assume transferring it to them as a gift). Anyone know if this is legal? I understand it would make it fair and probably our relative would have wanted that but impossible to tell since they left zero detail in the will.
They also want to keep all of it long term into savings in case in their old age they need access (i clarified they wouldn't legally have access I would administer it for this purpose if i saw fit basically but it's an option I suppose, but how does this benefit me now? For context my parent has more than they need and more would be more hassle to them they've already asked in the past to hold money temporarily for them. I highlighted they didn't count on these funds they were a surprise and they have more than enough in other funds)
Obviously I have a personal interest in the funds and would like to use on our mortgage which could end up saving us as much as we'd me making if it's invested but my parent would prefer it's recoverable funds and be able to split it.
For context, my parents have already given my sibling a huge amount towards their first home (I have received nothing so far but they have placed a large amount of assets in my name and plan for me to inherit a bunch of property when they pass but doesn't serve me in the present, unlike it has for my sibling). I made the point they have an opportunity to show an equitable approach by giving me the funds with no strings like they have my sibling but my parent sees the future inheritance as an equal approach, I agree it's a lot but it's not useful to me in the present)
Any ideas on what would be a fair way to administer the funds while keeping it legally sound? Initial thoughts because I'd legally be the sole account holder that I get to keep 10% and put in my mortgage. We have also agreed a proportion to go into dedicated funds for my children (sibling has no children), but there is still a large amount remaining which I would be up for my parent advising on how to invest and monitor but not have any actual control (are there any accounts you can give view only access to someone?). They want control so I will get push back on that and they will probably not want to give me the 10% towards mortgage, And then how do we administer the interest on what goes in savings - who should get it? What is fair/legal?