Helping Well: Money, Family, and the Question of "Enough"
Warren Buffett is often quoted on many aspects of wealth, but one observation resonates particularly strongly with parents:
“Give your children enough to do anything, but not enough to do nothing.”
It’s a great line, but it gestures toward a much messier reality. For families with resources, deciding how - and when - to help children financially is rarely straightforward. The challenge isn’t generosity versus restraint; it’s finding a balance that supports opportunity without unintentionally narrowing it.
Money can open doors. It can also, in subtle ways, change how those doors are approached.
When support becomes substitution
Financial writer Morgan Housel has written thoughtfully about how money interacts with behaviour. One of his recurring themes is that certain lessons - relating to effort, risk, and recovery - are difficult to learn second-hand.
When discussing his own children, Housel has said he plans to help with education and to ensure they are not weighed down by unmanageable debt. At the same time, he is careful about not underwriting a lifestyle they haven’t built themselves.
It’s not an argument against help. It’s an argument for targeted help - support that removes structural barriers without removing agency.
There’s a meaningful difference between backing someone and bypassing the process entirely.
Why so few fortunes last
History suggests that wealth preservation is harder than wealth creation.
In The Missing Billionaires, Victor Haghani and James White show that if just 25% of the roughly 4,000 millionaire households in America in 1900 had invested sensibly in a diversified stock portfolio and spent conservatively, there should be over 16,000 billionaire families today.
Instead, according to Forbes in 2022, there were just over 700 (or roughly 730) billionaire families in the United States (and most don’t trace back to 1900).
In other words, most large fortunes are relatively young.
The Vanderbilt family remains the best-known example. Cornelius Vanderbilt was the wealthiest man in the world when he died in 1877. By the 1970s, not one of his many descendants was a millionaire.
Markets weren’t the primary problem. Behaviour was.
That doesn’t mean wealth inevitably disappears, but it does suggest that money alone is rarely enough to sustain itself across generations.
Legacy beyond the balance sheet
A different perspective comes from the life of Herman Sandler, co-founder of the investment bank Sandler O’Neill.
Sandler was a devoted father to his three daughters, fiercely protective of family time despite the demands of his career. He died, tragically in the September 11 attacks while at work.
Despite operating at the highest levels of finance, Sandler rarely brought work home. A Fortune magazine shortly after his death quotes his daughter, “My dad never brought a briefcase home, my dad believed in having fun.”
That likely doesn’t mean he never worked late or avoided trade-offs - any demanding career requires them. But it does underline a broader point: children absorb values less from what parents say or leave behind, and more from what they consistently do.
And this is where theory meets reality.
These things aren’t easy. There are times when the briefcase does need to come home to keep the show on the road. My eldest daughter had “BlackBerry” as one of her first words, she was born at a time when I was starting a new business, and long hours were an absolute requirement.
But as you progress in your career, that trade-off becomes starker (do I need to swap as much of my time for money). For me, it’s something I still need to work on - less time, perhaps, but more focused time at work, and more time with family and friends.
That tension never fully disappears. What changes is our awareness of it, and the choices we make once financial pressure eases. In many ways, that awareness may be one of the most valuable by- products of improved financial security - not the ability to stop working, but the ability to choose how and where we spend our energy.
The Irish reality: flexibility with responsibility
Ireland offers families considerable flexibility when it comes to financial support to children.
The Group 1 CAT threshold allows substantial lifetime transfers to children, and the annual small-gift exemption enables gradual, tax-efficient support over time.
These rules create opportunity - but they don’t answer the harder question: what is helpful, and at what stage?
The small gift exemption is currently €3,000 per person so in the case of 2 parents they could gift €6,000 to each child without impacting their thresholds. Individuals will sometimes invest these assets for the child’s benefit. Is this generally a good idea?
On the face of it, it can make sense but if you dig into it further there might be some unintended consequences. The main drawback with this type of gifting is that the kids will have access to the money at age 18 (up to that it is effectively controlled by the parents via a bare trust). As most people will agree getting a large inflow of money at age 18 probably isn’t a great idea. A frequently cited argument is that they won’t tell the kids, however these days with the viral nature of information all it takes is one kid in the group to get wind of this type of product and all the kids will be ringing providers at age 18 to see if they have an account. Regardless of this argument, is this type of gifting necessary? The answer is probably not.
Instead, maybe use the €3,000 per annum when kids are more established. It could also be expanded to help with expenses for grandkids (for example school fees). A couple gifting €24,000 per annum (2 parent gifting to 2 adults in a couple and 2 kids) will reduce the estate by €480,000 over 20 years which when considered together with the Group 1 threshold of €400,000 is quite a significant level of gifting to one child (€880,000 in total).
What helping often looks like in practice
In reality, most parents aren’t trying to eliminate challenge from their children’s lives. They’re trying to prevent unnecessary hardship.
That often means supporting education or retraining, helping through genuine transition points, reducing the risk of long-term damage from short-term setbacks, and providing security without guaranteeing comfort.
Perhaps most importantly, it means modelling judgement, restraint, and perspective. Children tend to notice patterns more than principles.
Experiences, not just assets
One area where support tends to feel less fraught is shared experiences.
Holidays, meals, time together - these rarely distort incentives in the way unrestricted capital can. They build connection rather than dependency, and memory rather than expectation.
That doesn’t mean extravagance is required. Often, the most valuable experiences are modest and repeated, rather than exceptional and expensive.
Presence, again, tends to matter more than price.
Can I afford to give?
It is important that someone is very sure they have the resources to give. As a parent it is important to retain some “just in case” resources where possible. Unexpected things happen all the time so make sure you are certain you can afford any gifting, no matter how targeted it is.
Don’t let tax alone drive your decisions
Just because you can doesn’t mean you should. Giving money to say a 20-year old because it is tax efficient may not be life efficient. Tax is important but is a secondary rather than primary consideration.
Finding the middle ground
There is no formula for getting this right.
Used thoughtfully, wealth can create opportunity, resilience, and peace of mind. Used without structure or intent, it can unintentionally crowd out growth. Most families live somewhere between those two outcomes, adjusting as they go.
The most productive approach is often ongoing conversation - within the family, and with trusted advisors - rather than a single, fixed plan. It is a journey not necessarily a destination.
Helping well is rarely about doing more or less. It’s about doing things with intent.
Every family is different. Every child is different. Circumstances change, sometimes quickly.
The aim isn’t perfection.