In Canada, how much money can I gift a friend or family member without them being taxed on it?
Canada doesn't seem to have a gift tax. http://www.taxtips.ca/personaltax/giftsandinheritances.htm "When you give a gift to another person or receive a gift from another person there is no impact on your taxes. You do not have to report certain amounts in your income, including the following: ...   -most gifts and inheritances; http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs/ncm-tx/rtrn/cmpltng/rprtng-ncm/nttxd-eng.html If you give a gift to a charity or similar organization you can reduce your taxes. It is my recollection that when a family member gives a large amount of money to a child, tax on the income that money earns (typically interest) should be paid by the giver, not the child, but I can't find any publications to that effect on the CRA Site. There is a bit of language about ""Gifts"" from an employer that are really employment income: Gifts and other voluntary payments 1.3 The term gift is not defined in the Act. In common law jurisdictions, the courts have said that a bona fide gift exists when:   •There is a voluntary transfer of property,   •A donor freely disposes of his or her property to a donee, and   •The donee confers no right, privilege, material benefit, or advantage on the donor or on a person designated by the donor. 1.4 Whether a transfer of property has been made voluntarily is a question of fact. In order for a transfer to be considered voluntary, there must be no obligation to make such a transfer. Amounts received as gifts, that is, voluntary transfers without consideration and which cannot be attributed to an income-earning source, are not subject to tax in the hands of the recipient. 1.5 However, sometimes individuals receive a voluntary payment or other valuable transfer or benefit by virtue of an office or employment from an employer, or from some other person. In such cases, the amount of the payment or the value of the transfer or benefit is generally included in employment income pursuant to subsection 5(1) or paragraph 6(1)(a). (See also Guide T4130, Employers’ Guide - Taxable Benefits and Allowances.) Similarly, voluntary payments (or other transfers or benefits) received by virtue of a profession or in the course of carrying on a business are taxable receipts. http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/tchncl/ncmtx/fls/s3/f9/s3-f9-c1-eng.html#N10244 If the people in question are adults who are not related to each other and don't have a business or employment relationship, then you should find that regardless of the amount of the gift, neither giver nor recipient will have a tax consequence." If the person gifting the property owed any debt to Canada Revenue Agency on the date of gift, you may getting a nice letter from Canada Revenue Agency advising you to settle the donor's tax liability with the property gifted.
"Federal taxes are generally lower in Canada.  Canada's top federal income tax rate is 29%; the US rate is 35% and will go to 39.6% when Bush tax cuts expire.  The healthcare surcharge will kick in in a few years, pushing the top bracket by a few more points and over 40%. State/provincial taxes are lower in the US.  You may end up in the 12% bracket in New York City or around 10% in California or other ""bad"" income-tax states.  But Alberta is considered a tax haven in Canada and has a 10% flat tax.  Ontario's top rate is about 11%, but there are surtaxes that can push the effective rate to about 17%. Investment income taxes: Canada wins, narrowly.  Income from capital gains counts as half, so if you're very rich and live in Ontario, your rate is about 23% and less than that in Alberta.  The only way to match or beat this deal in the US in the long term is to live in a no-income-tax state.  Dividends are taxed at rates somewhere between capital gains and ordinary income - not as good a deal as Bush's 15% rate on preferred dividends, but that 15% rate will probably expire soon. Sales taxes: US wins, but the gap is closing.  Canada has a national VAT-like tax, called GST and its rate came down from 7% to 5% when Harper became the Prime Minister.  Provinces have sales taxes on top of that, in the range of 7-8% (but Alberta has no sales tax).  Some provinces ""harmonized"" their sales taxes with the GST and charge a single rate, e.g. Ontario has a harmonized sales tax (HST) of 13% (5+8).  13% is of course a worse rate than the 6-8% charged by most states, but then some states and counties already charge 10% and the rates have been going up in each recession. Payroll taxes: much lower in Canada.  Canadian employees' CPP and EI deductions have a low threshold and top out at about $3,000.  Americans' 7.65% FICA rate applies to even $100K, resulting in a tax of $7,650. Property taxes: too dependent on the location, hard to tell. Tax benefits for retirement savings: Canada.  If you work in the US and don't have a 401(k), you get a really bad deal: your retirement is underfunded and you're stuck with a higher tax bill, because you can't get the deduction.  In Canada, if you don't have an RRSP at work, you take the money to the financial company of your choice, invest it there, and take the deduction on your taxes.  If you don't like the investment options in your 401(k), you're stuck with them.  If you don't like them in your RRSP, contribute the minimum to get the match and put the rest of the money into your individual RRSP; you still get the same deduction.  Annual 401(k) contribution limits are use-it-or-lose-it, while unused RRSP limits and deductions can be carried forward and used when you need to jump tax brackets.  Canada used to lack an answer to Roth IRAs, but the introduction of TFSAs took care of that. Mortgage interest deduction: US wins here as mortgage interest is not deductible in Canada. Marriage penalty: US wins.  Canadian tax returns are of single or married-filing-separately type.  So if you have one working spouse in the family or a big disparity between spouses' incomes, you can save money by filing a joint return.  But such option is not available in Canada (there are ways to transfer some income between spouses and fund spousal retirement accounts, but if the income disparity is big, that won't be enough). Higher education: cheaper in Canada. This is not a tax item, but it's a big expense for many families and something the government can do about with your tax dollars. To sum it up, you may face higher or lower or about the same taxes after moving from US to Canada, depending on your circumstances.  Another message here is that the high-tax, socialist, investment-unfriendly Canada is mostly a convenient myth." "Have you tried registering for social housing?  Rent prices through social housing are typically cheaper than on the free market.  You might be able to jump to the front of the waiting list due to your wife's unexpected handicap.  See this link: http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/huurwoning/sociale-huurwoning-huren To more directly answer your question: I don't think there is any limitation on how your family needs to get the money to lend it to you.  They could lookinto a personal loan (persoonlijke lening), but they might not be able to borrow enough.  The Netherlands does not have a direct equivalent of a Home Equity Line of Credit (HELOC), but your family could potentially get a second mortgage (tweede hypotheek) on their house in order to get the money to lend you. However, be aware that this is a very risky endeavor.  There are lots of unknowns that could leave you unable to pay or your family unable to pay.  Receiving the money as a gift with the intention to repay it but no formal agreement in place may also leave you and your family in a difficult position.  I would encourage you to visit a mortgage advisor together to discuss scenarios. Note that one possible option you may want to explore is a ""family mortgage"" (familiehypotheek).  This is just a fancy way of saying that your family can act as (one of) your mortgage lenders.  You and your family must comply with all relevant rules and regulations to do this, including them charging you interest and them reporting certain things to the tax authorities.  Vereniging Eigen Huis has details on how to set such a mortgage up and how to manage the required reporting: https://www.eigenhuis.nl/webwinkel/hypotheekservice/familiehypotheek/" Of course, you've already realized that some of that is that smaller estates are more common than larger estates.  But it seems unlikely that there are four times as many estates between $10 and $11 million as above that range.   People who expect to die with an estate subject to inheritance tax tend to prepare.   I don't know how common it is, but if the surviving member of a couple remarries, then the new spouse gets a separate exemption.  And of course spouses inherit from spouses without tax.  In theory this could last indefinitely.  In practice, it is less likely.  But if a married couple has $20 million, the first spouse could leave $15 million to the second and $5 million to other heirs.  The second spouse could leave $10 million to a third spouse (after remarrying) and another $5 million to children with the first spouse.  All without triggering the estate tax.   People can put some of their estate into a trust.  This can allow the heirs to continue to control the money while not paying inheritance tax.  Supposedly Ford (of Ford Motor Company) took that route.   Another common strategy is to give the maximum without gift tax each year.  That's at least $14k per donor and recipient per year.  So a married couple with two kids can transfer $56k per year.  Plus $56k for the kids' spouses.  And if there are four grandchildren, that's another $112k.  Great-grandchildren count too.  That's more than a million every five years.  So given ten years to prepare, parents can transfer $2 million out of the estate and to the heirs without tax.   Consider the case of two wealthy siblings.  They've each maxed out their gifts to their own heirs.  So they agree to max out their gifts to their sibling's heirs.  This effectively doubles the transfer amount without tax implication.   Also realize that they can pretransfer assets at the current market rate.  So if a rich person has an asset that is currently undervalued, it may make sense to transfer it immediately as a gift.  This will use up some of the estate exemption.  But if you're going to transfer the asset eventually, you might as well do so when the value is optimal for your purpose.   These are just the easy things to do.  If someone wants, they can do more complicated things that make it harder for the IRS to track value.   For example, the Bezos family invested in Amazon.com when Jeff Bezos was starting it.  As a result, his company could survive capital losses that another company might not.  The effect of this was to make him fabulously rich and his parents richer than they were.  But he won't pay inheritance tax until his parents actually transfer the estate to him (and I believe they actually put it in a charitable trust).  If his company had failed instead, he still would have been supported by the capital provided by his parents while it was open (e.g. his salary).  But he wouldn't have paid inheritance tax on it.   There are other examples of the same pattern:  Fred Smith of FedEx; Donald Trump; Bill Gates of Microsoft; etc.  The prime value of the estate was not in its transfer, but in working together while alive or through a family trust.  The child's company became much more valuable as a result of a parent's wealth.  And in two of those examples, the child was so successful that the parent became richer as a result.  So the parent's estate does count.  Meanwhile, another company might fail, leaving the estate below the threshold despite a great deal of parental support.   And those aren't even fiddles.  Those children started real companies and offered their parents real investment opportunities.  A family that wants to do so can do a lot more with arrangements.  Of course, the IRS may be looking for some of them.   The point being that the estate might be more than $11 million earlier, but the parents can find ways to reduce it below the inheritance tax exemption by the time that they die. "Yes, you as the giver will owe US gift taxes if you give her that sum directly. You can reduce it by taking advantage of the threshold being by person. So, for example, if you and your wife each gave your daughter $17k, you'd individually be under the threshold and wouldn't owe gift tax, even if the money comes from and goes to the same account. Given the time of year, you could give her that now and another $34k in January (next tax year) and avoid the gift tax. If she doesn't need all the money immediately, that's the simplest solution. If she does need it all now, and you don't want to try arranging to  ""launder"" the money through relatives' gift allowances (which I think would be legal and legitimate, actually), the other solution is to set this up as an intra-family loan. Web searching that phrase will find details, but it essentially lets you spread the gift over multiple accounting years and pay income tax on a minimal amount of interest (can be under 0.3%, which you'd also gift her with) rather than paying gift tax. It does require some paperwork to document and track it properly, but it isn't bad. (I did this when making a large ""bridge loan"" to help a relative buy their new house before the old one had sold. In that case it really was a loan, though; I'm being paid back out of the proceeds from the sale.)" "A direct gift to a person is never deductible. The kind relative was confusing this with a charitable gift. Which if to a qualified charity can be deducted as part of your itemized deductions. But there, the $14K doesn't enter the equation.  But, if your wife is a dog lover, you can donate to the ASPCA, and give her a note saying ""in your honor I donated $14K to the ASPCA."" That's a deduction." The United States taxes gifts to the giver, not the receiver.  Thus, in your case there would be no direct tax implications from the receiver so long as you are gifting cash and the cash is in Canada.  If you are gifting capital (stocks, property, etc.), or if you are gifting something that is in the United States (US stock, for example), there may be a tax implication for either or both of you. Your adult child would, however, have to file an IRS form since the gift is so large (over $100k) to create a paper trail for the money (basically proving s/he isn't money laundering or otherwise avoiding tax). See this article in The Globe And Mail which goes into more detail. There are no implications, except that there is a form (IRS Form 3520) that would have to be filed by the U.S. recipient if the foreign gift is over $100,000 (U.S.). But the child would still receive the gift tax-free. The U.S. gift tax would only apply when the Canadian parent makes a gift of U.S. “situs” assets, which are typically only U.S. real estate or tangible personal property such as a boat located in the U.S. For gift-tax purposes, U.S. shares are not considered to be U.S. situs assets. First of all, in the U.S., no Federal gift tax has to be paid by the recipient of  the gift; it is the donor who has to pay gift tax, if any is due. Nor does the recipient have to pay Federal income tax on the gift; it is not considered taxable income.  I do not believe that any states view matters differently for the purposes of state gift and income taxes, but I am always ready to be disabused of any such fondly-held notions. If your parents were required to pay any gift tax, that would have been at the  time the gift was originally given and only if they gifted more than the maximum allowable exemption per person for that year. Currently the exemption is $14K from each donor per recipient per year. Additional gifts were made by your parents to you during your minority when your parents paid any income tax  due on the distributions in your account, but these amounts would unlikely to have been larger than the exemption for that year. In any case, gift tax is  none of your concern. If you have been declaring the income from distributions from the mutual funds all these years, then the only tax due on the distributions from the funds in 2013 is the Federal income tax for the 2013 tax year (plus a special assessment of Medicare tax on investment income if your income is large; unlikely based on your question and follow-up comment).  If you sold all or part of your shares in the funds in 2013, then you would need to calculate the basis of your investments in the fund in order to figure out if you have capital gains or losses.  Ditto if you are thinking of cashing out in 2014 and wish to estimate how much income tax is due. But if you want to just hang on to the funds, then there is no immediate need to figure out the basis right away, though taking care of the matter and keeping in top of things for the future will be helpful. As a final note, there is no tax due on the appreciation of the fund's shares. The increased value of your account because the fund's share price rose is not a taxable event (nor are decreases in the account deductible). These are called unrealized capital gains (or losses) and you do not pay tax on them (or deduct them as losses) until you realize the gains by  disposing of the property. "I transfer all their funds to my bank account Are they paying tax on that transfer?  Gifts under $14,000 are excluded from taxation in the US, but they're going going to have a hard time arguing that it is a gift (since they expect it back).  The taxes are almost certainly going to exceed the amount you can make from your investments in the short term, and if they aren't paid then your ""clients"" are going to be in hot water with the IRS. You need to have something set up that establishes you as merely managing the funds, and not receiving them personally as a transfer.  The other answers have good suggestions."