Transfer of property from mother-in-law to me and my wife

"The transfer of assets against payment of consideration payments or equalization payments is qualified for gift tax purposes as a mixed gift. The consideration or equalization payments are therefore qualified in the relationship between the transferor and the transferee (so-called cover relationship) as consideration from the transferee, which, given the usually higher value of the transferred asset, establishes a mixed gift.

The equalization payments themselves are not to be regarded as voluntary transfers from the transferee to his renouncing siblings, but from the transferor to his other children. This is usually also more favorable for gift tax purposes. The renouncing children must declare the received amounts as debt gifts from their parent for tax purposes."

Scherer/Feick in Bonefeld (et al.): The Specialist Lawyer for Inheritance Law, para. 139f to chap. 23 Advance Inheritance

The son-in-law should just keep quiet and let the family be because he only married into the ex-farming family

32.5 from husband to wife. Property from parents to daughter. 65 from daughter to parents. 1/2 property from wife to husband. 65 from parents to another child.

In the constellation of marriage, it is relatively irrelevant whether he, she, or both are listed on the land register, as long as the property is transferred after the marriage.

A special case is formed by gifts from parents and parents-in-law in the equalization of accrued gains. In principle, the “financial injections” would also be covered by the equalization of accrued gains, but according to recent case law, they can be reclaimed within the statute of limitations and thus excluded from the equalization claim.

Young couples often receive financial start-up assistance into their joint married life, for example when parents, grandparents, or parents-in-law help with the financing of household goods or support the purchase of a property. Jurisprudence assumes that such endowment gifts are regularly made due to the existing marriage. This applies especially to gifts aimed at a lasting securing of the livelihood, such as a property with a residential building or company shares. This is mainly intended to support one’s own offspring in their way of life. Support of the partner is generally only of secondary importance. Therefore, the Federal Court of Justice ruled that gifts to the married child from their partner can be reclaimed due to the cessation of the basis of the transaction (BGH, judgment of February 3, 2010, case no.: XII ZR 189/06). However, the repayment claim must be asserted within the statutory limitation period (BGH, order of December 3, 2014, case no.: XII ZB 181/13). The period begins upon the finalization of the divorce and lasts ten years for property gifts (three years for all other gifts).

It would simply be unfair if the spouse of the child were to benefit from a marriage-related gift despite the divorce. Therefore, the gift amount is added to the final assets, but at the same time also the “negative item” of a repayment obligation to the parents-in-law. Thus, the gift practically cancels itself out. The claim can also be assigned to the own child before the divorce proceedings. The Federal Court of Justice clarified again in its cited ruling that a repayment should only be possible if it is unreasonable for the (parents-in-law) to hold on to the gift. In this case, they could demand the disputed amount in money – and only exceptionally the return of the contractual object itself (e.g., the property).