Central ND | HuskerJ - 3/28/2024 09:26
What's fair isn't equal, what's equal isn't fair.
I know of an example of where there were both farming and non-farming kids.
Now, one argument would be that the parent's assets should be equally divided.
However, what about the kids that worked for the farm. What if Mom and Pop only were able to buy the farm across the road because of the free labor provided by the kids who stayed home to farm? Had they left as well, maybe the estate would only be half what it was.
I know of instances where the non-farm kids wanted their full share, but when times were tough, they were not the ones working 14 hour days and eating peanut butter sandwiches because there were land payments to make.
Conversely, I know of instances where all the land and machinery was left to the farming heir, and the in town kids who took care of mom & pop in their old age didn't get much of anything, either.
Every case is different, and very few of us know enough details about someone else to know what was the best thing to do.
All great points that are very true in so many terms.
But if a person looks at a farm as business, a farm needs to keep all the equity it can to be able to compete in today's situations. Giving up that equity and moving it outside of the "farm scope", seems to me like it can cripple a farm or put it in a tough spot for expansion, land sales, equipment improvements, etc.
Just some random thoughts I've had lately as I see different families around us go through some transitions. Thanks for your insight! |
How to wrap my head around generational transitions/equity?
