I’m sorry for your loss!
My understanding if minors are among the heirs, that by default, there is an involvement of “KESB” (Child and Adult Protection Authority). KESB is required to protect the child’s best interest - and that my result in a forced selling of assets or freezing of assets…
edit: see e.g. Wenn Minderjährige erben - Grunder Rechtsanwälte AG (in german)
Indeed the child protection services will be involved. It is my (limited) understanding that the KESB will assign a guardian to protect the children’s financial interests, but should also consider the children’s wellbeing. Bluntly, I have no ability to buy out my children’s share of the house but forcing the sale of the house would be detrimental to their wellbeing. I live on a small village without many options to rent and moving would be very disruptive, especially to my son with autism which requires a lot of support in the school, and whose mental wellbeing is supported by his many friends in the village. Therefore, the KESB should consider that it is best that the house is not sold. Also, although the children collectively own 25% of the house, they are not able to make legal decisions on what to do with their inheritance, hence the guardian from KSEB. This presumably changes when they become legal adults, but with 2 children 2 years apart there can be a disagreement. And as mentioned above, their inheritance should be based on th value of the house today, not when the house may be sold in the future.
TBH, these rules are very confusing to me who is not used to this inheritance system. It raises many complex financial questions which is adding a lot of stress. Just yesterday I found my wife’s life insurance is complete blocked until there is approval form KESB, but this will take a year or more I imagine. If the children inherit half my wife’s estate, then surely that would also include half the debts, like mortgage. But they have no means of paying for their share of the mortgage.
Don’t get me wrong, I am perfectly OK with the children inheriting 50% already and the state protecting their interests, but i find it very confusing and complex. I am used to the much simpler spousal inheritance which doesn’t have any of these complexities and just seems fairer. For example, my wife couldn’t work and the Invalidity insurance decision was delayed due to an error form her employer. So for about 1 year my wife only received a small pension and therefore I paid all bills and burned through 90K of savings. With hindsight, we should have emptied my wife’s savings account firs because now I will only receive half , and the rest will be locked away my children’s protected account, which then just leads to the financial burden and stress.
maybe you’re right about FOMO. to me it feels more like: I’am not too keen to see the house sold, because then its gone and who knows if plans change in a few years and living there could be great. on the other hand to me it would also be an interesting “side hustle” to try myself in renting a house with all its engagements etc. but I am also aware that the house is not a high-return-property. to me I think the main problem still is, that i dont see too clear what is possible in therms of the laws etc (that I also see from the variety of answers and opinions in the forum) to take a solid (emotionless) decision. I will most likely have to discuss this with a notary to be sure about the plan, because from our family members it sounds almost too easy: “we agree on a price, we agree that this price will be payed to the siblings later, we agree in written form with a notary, we agree that I take all the risk of losses and gains, we agree that my siblings later have no entitlement on gains and I have no entitlements to losses etc” and when I analyse the answers here in the forum it might not work that way in the end (and we figure out in 20 years maybe). And I am totally aware that selling is the most simple solution. but not convinced yet that it is also the best
It is difficult to agree on a price today to be paid later: to make this work you should be paying interests on that price to your siblings until the inheritance kicks in, at least your siblings get something out today and not just tomorrow (20 years? while you get rentals out of the house?).
I would also look at how renting the house will work for you: between 2028 and 2030 private debts interests will be no longer deductible, in the case of a rental, you’ll only be able to deduct interests in proportion to your total assets (if the house is 60% of your total assets, whatever they are, then you’ll be able to deduct 60% of the mortgage interests). I don’t know what happens to works deductability, if it stays fully deductable or with a similar rule as interests.
In this respect you might want to open a company to own the house, interests and works fully deducted
Just a remark on the contract side: It is very common to do a inheritance contract with siblings if one takes a house as an advance. A price can be agreed (best to be around market price and if wanted minus a family discount and deferred taxes) and that price is then seen as the advanced inheritance minus mortgage and payments of course. The siblings can also say in that contract that they will be waiving their right to offset even if it concerns their compulsory share. Furthermore, a profit sharing can be agreed, so if you sell the house in the future for a much higher price, they profit from the net proceeds.
As a change in the land registry always has to be notarized as well as a inheritance contract, it would be a good solution to do “two-in-one”. The only difference is, that the siblings also have to come to the appointment with the notary.