Types of Will UK (2026): Simple Will, Mirror Will, Trust Will and More — Which Do You Need?

In England and Wales, the different 'types' of will are variations of the same core legal document — a will executed under the Wills Act 1837. They differ in their beneficiary structure, any trusts they create, and who can make them. The main types: (1) SIMPLE WILL (ABSOLUTE GIFT): the most straightforward type. Assets pass outright to named beneficiaries. Example: 'I give everything to my spouse, and if my spouse does not survive me, to my children equally.' No trusts are created. Assets transfer to beneficiaries on death with no ongoing management obligations. Best for: a single person; a person with straightforward assets; a couple where the estate is below IHT thresholds; anyone who wants simplicity; (2) MIRROR WILLS: two separate wills made by a couple (married, civil partners, or cohabiting) that 'mirror' each other — typically 'I give everything to my partner, and if they predecease me, to our children equally' — with each partner's will saying essentially the same thing in reverse. Mirror wills are common but have an important limitation: they are NOT legally binding on each other. After the first death, the survivor can change their will and leave everything to someone completely different. For couples who want certainty that the ultimate distribution cannot be changed after the first death, mutual wills (with a binding agreement) are needed — at significant legal risk and inflexibility; (3) MUTUAL WILLS: mutual wills are a specific legal arrangement where two people agree that their wills cannot be changed after the first death, and the survivor is bound by the original agreement. The court enforces this through a constructive trust over the survivor's estate. Mutual wills are inflexible and generally discouraged by solicitors — circumstances change; families grow; tax law changes. Mirror wills with an LPA giving a trusted person oversight are generally preferable; (4) TRUST WILLS: a will that creates one or more trusts on death to hold assets for beneficiaries rather than transferring them outright. Several sub-types: (a) NRB discretionary trust will: creates a discretionary trust up to the nil-rate band on the first death, maximising the NRB at that point; beneficiaries can be the spouse, children, and remoter descendants; used less often since transferable NRB (2007) made this redundant for many couples; (b) Life interest trust will (IPDI): creates an immediate post-death interest trust; the surviving spouse has the right to income/occupancy for life; capital passes to children on second death; useful for blended families and IHT planning; (c) Discretionary trust will: wide discretion for trustees over timing and quantum of distributions; flexible; appropriate for estates over £1m where IHT planning is complex; (5) PRIVILEGED WILLS: special rules for serving members of the armed forces, sailors at sea, and others 'on actual military service'. A privileged will can be written on a scrap of paper, dictated verbally, or partially informally executed — the strict Wills Act 1837 s.9 signing and witnessing requirements do not apply. Privileged wills are valid regardless of the testator's age (including under 18). Not available to civilians; (6) STATUTORY WILL: a will made by the Court of Protection on behalf of a person who lacks mental capacity to make their own will (MCA 2005 ss.18, 22). The court considers what the person would have wanted if they had capacity. Used where the existing will is outdated or there is no will and the intestacy rules would produce an unsatisfactory result.

A trust will is any will that creates a trust on death. Whether you need one depends on your estate, family structure, and IHT position: (1) LIFE INTEREST TRUST WILL (IPDI — IHTA 1984 S.49A): the most commonly used trust will structure. On the first death, the deceased's estate (or share of the property) passes into a life interest trust. The surviving spouse or partner becomes the life tenant — they receive the income from the trust assets and may have the right to occupy the trust property for life. On the life tenant's death, the capital passes to the named remaindermen (typically children). Uses: (a) Protecting children from a first relationship if the deceased remarries; (b) Preserving assets for the next generation while providing for the surviving spouse; (c) IHT: the IHT spouse exemption applies on first death (assets pass into a qualifying IPDI for the spouse); the assets remain in the surviving spouse's estate for IHT on second death; the RNRB applies at the second death; partial care home protection (trust capital is not assessed in a means test; the life tenant's own assets are); (2) DISCRETIONARY TRUST WILL: on death, assets (or part of the estate) pass into a discretionary trust. Trustees have full discretion over who, when, and how much to distribute from the trust fund. Uses: (a) Flexibility where the family's needs are unknown at the time of making the will; (b) Protecting a vulnerable beneficiary (disability; addiction; debt; marriage risk); (c) IHT efficiency on large estates (periodic charge 10-yearly at up to 6%; exit charge when assets leave — but principal value protected from IHT at the estate level); (3) NRB DISCRETIONARY TRUST WILL (NOW LARGELY OBSOLETE): before 2007, creating a discretionary trust up to the NRB on the first death was a primary IHT planning tool (it 'banked' the NRB). Since the transferable NRB was introduced in Finance Act 2006, this is no longer necessary for most couples. However, it can still be useful where: the estate is over £2m and the RNRB tapers; there are complex business or agricultural assets; there is a risk the surviving spouse will remarry and spend the estate; (4) WHEN A TRUST WILL IS APPROPRIATE: (a) Blended families (children from different relationships); (b) Large estates (over £1m) where IHT efficiency is critical; (c) Young children — protecting inheritance until adulthood; (d) Vulnerable beneficiaries; (e) Second marriages; (5) WHEN A SIMPLE WILL IS ENOUGH: (a) First marriage; single family; estate under the combined NRB+RNRB threshold; (b) Straightforward assets; (c) Children are all adults and financially independent.

Mirror wills and mutual wills look similar but have a fundamental legal difference that can have major consequences: (1) MIRROR WILLS — INDEPENDENT, REVOCABLE: each person makes their own separate will that mirrors the other's intentions. Most commonly: 'I give everything to my spouse; if they predecease me, to my children equally' — both parties making the same provision in reverse. Each will is entirely independent. After the first death, the survivor can change their will at any time — leaving everything to a new partner, disinheriting the children, or whatever they choose. There is no legal obligation to maintain the original intentions. This is the major downside of mirror wills for couples with children from prior relationships or significant assets. Mirror wills are the most commonly made type of couple's will — they are simple, flexible, and appropriate for most situations; (2) MUTUAL WILLS — BOUND BY AGREEMENT: mutual wills are made pursuant to a binding agreement between the two testators that neither will change their will after the other dies. The agreement creates an equity — a 'floating trust' over the survivor's estate that crystallises on the first death. After the first death, if the survivor changes their will in breach of the agreement, the beneficiaries of the original mutual wills can sue the survivor's estate for breach of trust. Courts enforce mutual wills strictly — but only if the agreement is clearly established. The burden of proof is high (Dufour v Pereira (1769) 1 Dick 419; Re Cleaver [1981] 1 WLR 939); (3) PROBLEMS WITH MUTUAL WILLS: (a) Complete inflexibility — the survivor cannot change the will even if circumstances genuinely change (new child; change of address; tax law changes; death of a named beneficiary); (b) IHT inflexibility — the survivor cannot make new tax planning moves; (c) Difficulty proving the agreement — it should be in writing; (d) The survivor's creditors can still take from the estate before the trust is enforced; (4) WHICH TO CHOOSE: mutual wills are rarely recommended. For couples who want certainty about the second-death distribution, better alternatives include: (a) A life interest trust will — the surviving spouse is provided for but capital is bound to pass to children on second death; (b) Regular review of mirror wills with a commitment to each other (non-binding but honest); (c) A Declaration of Trust alongside the mirror wills (for specific property).

A statutory will is a will made by the Court of Protection on behalf of a person (P) who lacks the mental capacity to make their own will (Mental Capacity Act 2005 ss.18, 22-23). Courts make statutory wills only when strictly necessary and in P's best interests: (1) WHEN IS A STATUTORY WILL NEEDED: (a) P currently has no will and the intestacy rules would produce a result contrary to P's apparent wishes or best interests; (b) P has an existing will but it is outdated — for example, made before a significant life event (marriage; birth of children; acquisition of significant assets; divorce); (c) P's estate has grown substantially since the will was made and a new will would produce significant IHT savings; (d) The existing will fails to make proper provision for someone who P would wish to benefit; (2) THE MCA 2005 TEST: the court can only make a statutory will if P lacks testamentary capacity (MCA 2005 s.2 — inability to understand, retain, use, and communicate the relevant information about making a will). If there is any doubt about capacity, evidence from a medical professional is needed; (3) THE APPLICATION: an application is made by a person (the applicant) with a sufficient interest — typically a family member, attorney, deputy, or the Official Solicitor. The application (COP1 + supporting forms) must be served on all persons who might benefit under the proposed will or under the current will or intestacy. All interested parties have the right to be heard. An independent party may be appointed to represent P's interests; (4) WHAT THE COURT CONSIDERS: the court's test is what the person would have decided if they had testamentary capacity — it does not simply apply what the applicant wants. The court considers P's known views (before loss of capacity); P's relationships; P's existing estate plan; any IHT savings that P would have wanted; (5) COST AND TIMELINE: statutory will applications are expensive (typically £5,000–£15,000+ in professional fees) and time-consuming (6–12 months). They should not be used as a substitute for making a proper will while capacity exists. If a person is diagnosed with a condition that may affect capacity, they should update their will immediately; (6) PRIVILEGED WILLS (DISTINCT): military personnel on active service can make informal wills without the usual signing and witnessing formalities. This is not the same as a statutory will.

No — a 'living will' is a colloquial term for an advance decision to refuse treatment (ADRT). It is not a will in the legal sense at all, and it has no effect on how the estate is distributed after death: (1) WHAT A LIVING WILL (ADRT) IS: an advance decision is a written document made under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (ss.24-26) by a person who has capacity, specifying medical treatments they refuse if they lose capacity in the future. A valid ADRT is legally binding on healthcare professionals. Example: 'If I suffer a terminal illness and have no reasonable prospect of recovery, I refuse cardiopulmonary resuscitation and mechanical ventilation'; (2) WHAT A LIVING WILL CANNOT DO: it cannot direct how your estate is distributed; cannot name an executor; cannot appoint a guardian for children; cannot give away property; has no effect on IHT planning. It is entirely distinct from an estate-planning will; (3) AN ADRT AND A WILL WORK TOGETHER: a comprehensive estate plan has both — the will distributes assets after death; the ADRT (and the Health and Welfare LPA) directs care while alive. Neither substitutes for the other; (4) AN ADRT MUST BE IN WRITING FOR LIFE-SUSTAINING TREATMENT: to refuse life-sustaining treatment, an ADRT must be in writing, signed and witnessed (MCA 2005 s.25). The document must state explicitly that it applies even if life is at risk. A verbal statement about not wanting to be kept alive is not a valid ADRT for life-sustaining treatment purposes; (5) ADVANCE STATEMENT (DISTINCT FROM ADRT): an advance statement is a non-binding statement of preferences and wishes about care and treatment — what the person would like (not refuse). It is taken into account but is not legally binding on healthcare professionals. Often made alongside an ADRT; (6) HEALTH AND WELFARE LPA AS AN ALTERNATIVE: a registered Health and Welfare LPA (LP1H) gives a trusted attorney authority to make all welfare and medical decisions (including whether to consent to or refuse treatment) on the donor's behalf if they lack capacity — provided the LPA specifically authorises refusal of life-sustaining treatment. This is often more flexible than an ADRT because the attorney can respond to specific circumstances.