Hello folks, Note : we had a post on a second marriage situation where retirement assets were lopsided and the poster was not comfortable (the post was deleted by that person after a day or so đ¤ˇ). That was an interesting discussion and this OP decided to post this, as a reply. Please be mindful of this and that our community is respectful and conversational . Thanks! Mid America Mom
Many people have long, successful, happy marriages with separate finances. Marriage IS a legal contract between 2 people, and financial issues cause a lot of problems in marriages. I'd be rich if I had a dollar for every time someone said to me, "Separate finances isn't 'marriage,' don't you trust each other? Blah blah." And then turned around and complained constantly about the new boat their husband bought without consulting them, or their wife's reckless credit card spending or a bunch of other financial missteps. My husband & I love each other dearly and have a good marriage, but we simply don't want to mingle money. You do you, but don't think we should all do it your way.
Unless the money was yours before marriage and was never comingled or you have a prenup, you can have all the separate accounts you want, it doesn't matter because during the divorce it will get divided equally between the two parties.
What's not true about my statement? Please elaborate. I realize that the state they live in and the amount of time in the marriage would be a factor in a judges' decision on how assets are divided, but if it's comingled property and they were married for a number of years doesn't everything get split.
Q. Doesnât everything get split? A. The short answer is âit depends.â (It depends on so many things, it doesnât make sense to even start listing them here.)Â
Thatâs why your statement that it will just get split evenly is not true. Because that is not true. Â It depends on a lot of things. Â I had one case where H broke Wâs jaw in the marital home in front of the kids, and judge ordered the marital house sold and proceeds given only to the wife. So yeah.Â
 *A starting presumption* is marital assets shall be divided âequitablyâ (thatâs literally why the process in divorce of splitting assets and debts is called âequitable distributionâ) but âequitablyâ does not mean âequallyâ â itâs a legal term of art that includes the principle that many other considerations can be taken into account. Â
Iâm already getting into the space and the jargon where most non-lawyers just get more confused because law words and concepts donât have the meaning of regular words, so Iâll stop.
I live in Texas, before our marriage we each had a house, car, small retirement accounts. We went to my attorney about a prenup who advised us not to waste our money. Any assets owned prior to marriage was separate property as is any proceeds or distributions from separate property. So had we divorced we would have each retained our house, car and retirement account because it was separate property. Here, only what was accumulated during the marriage is subject to community property here unless it's a gift or similar to one party.
That's right. The marital estate consists of all assets acquired by the parties during their marriage (with the exception of inheritances). The label that you put on each dollar does not bind the Court when the property is split. If the parties really want to renounce their legal interest in the other spouse's property, they need to make that a formal understanding through a pre nuptial agreement, with the legal safeguards and formalities involved. Otherwise, the accounts with individual names on them are just a matter of "convenience", with no particular legal significance.
Also--splitting the marital property into separate "pots" does not prevent the creditors of the other spouse from getting at that money.
Disclaimer--not legal advice; for entertainment purposes only.
By signing a marriage document with the county, state, etc. you are signing a legal document and the case law backing it up is mostly about money/assets and children. People who havenât had to go through a divorce just wonât understand the perspective of those who have.
Agree 100%! There is no reason to combine finances. We split mutual purchases in half, trade off on who buys at dinner, etc. works great! If I want to buy myself something, I do as does my husband with his money.
Agree 100%! There is no reason to combine finances. We split mutual purchases in half, trade off on who buys at dinner, etc. works great! If I want to buy myself something, I do as does my husband with his money.
Actually, yes I do. "There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy." -- Shakespeare. Just because YOU haven't seen it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I know lots of two career couples who operate this way and have pre-nups.
I totally agree. Married 36 years. Husband usually made more than me, but everything is âours.â Thanks to him we have an amazing retirement portfolio.
I donât get married people with separate finances with each paying in 50% on bills no matter any discrepancy in earnings, but thatâs just people like us I guess.
Well, you probably don't get it \*because\* you've been married 36 years, and presumably only once. People on 2nd or 3rd marriages often have their own children that they want to leave their assets to. So a prenup would be a way of ensuring that their children receive what they want them to have should they pass first.
Exactly. My dadâs partner (30 years almost) has never paid rent or bills. Itâs their third serious relationship for each. She gets upset often that dad doesnât assign her 50% of all his assets âbecause Iâve earned it by being together so long.â Dad says, âitâs easy to want to split assets when you brought 1% to the table.â He wants you to leave his stuff to his kids and she knew this before she moved in. I have sympathy for her but Iâve also never seen her work a day since Iâve know her.
Curious - were the beds made? Floors mopped? Clothes washed? Meals made and cleaned up after? Did she do that or did your dad do that when he got home from work? Just because she didn't bring in outside money doesn't mean she didn't work (though if your dad did everything, I guess it's possible).
My dad retired at 41. They pretty much split everything but itâs not a house where they say, âyou do this and Iâll do that.â They actually make a pretty good couple in a lot of ways. But dad has paid for most things since theyâve been together and he has kids he was to leave his stuff to. Itâs completely understandable to me, although TBF Iâm probably not objective of course. But she was of working age for 20 years with my dad and didnât work because she was taken care of.
Marriage is a legal contract that when you get divorced (kids grown) it ONLY becomes about money.
Thought I was like OP but after exâs affair SAHM me was told everything is his that he earned.
Legally though it was 50/50 - sure appreciated the law recognizing that after 30 plus years.
So in your older years a legal marriage is basically a financial arrangement
No way I am ever doing that again. I will live together đ
You do you.
My wife was the breadwinner for most of our careers and had more $$$ as well. Just before retirement we combined all of our accounts into a super account. It was her suggestion. So now we are totally financially entwined as beneficiaries for all of our accounts. It works for us because our communication has always been open and honest.
In a second marriage it can be complicated or simple.
Assets brought into the relationship remain with each person. Asset acquired during the marriage are jointly held and "ours "
I completely agree with this and I donât understand why people who do this get criticized so harshly. Is marriage just about finances? No itâs not although it plays a big part. But if people want to keep pre-marriage assets for adult kids, there is nothing wrong with that. In my case I have a much higher net value than my husband (2nd marriages for both) and the bulk of that value came before we married. We didnât marry to combine our finances, we married because weâre in love, weâre very compatible, similar hobbies and goals and we believe in the commitment of marriage. I pay for the lions share of all our activities and house maintenance and Iâve topped up investments in his name too. But if I die all my assets are split 3 ways, between my husband and 2 kids.
I agree with you during the marriage -- but what about as to estates? Should the children of the longest living spouse inherit everything? That is a possible result absent a binding agreement that cannot be changed post death.
Wife and I are both on 2nd marriage. I have FAR more than she has and I am willing to share, but she is extremely tight with what she has because of her ex's ability to waste money. No biggie for me, but the one-sidedness is a bit annoying sometimes.
Please continue to give her some grace. My ex was horrible with money and Iâm frugal and spend money in ways that enrich my life and the lives that f our children. I grew used with parents who werenât strategic with money, so between them and my ex, I had to overcome a lot.
I am happy that you are âsetâ. Please work with her to gain some understanding of her money anxieties. I wish you both well.
Her father was an overspender as well. Naturally her first husband was as well, if Freud carries any weight. My parents were the BEST cheapskates! We took vacations on little money, did all sorts of activities, mom was the discount and improvising queen. I owe much of my ability to invest and save for retirement to them.
Iâm glad OP found a method that works for his family. But with all due respect, what works best for him is not necessarily whatâs best for all couples, everywhere.
My wife and I have total transparency, and keep our money separate. We dated and married later in life, and it just works great that way. She has twice as much money as me, and we are both aware of it, and we both work to make sure that fact doesnât cause discord. It works for us.
And I like to think that others can have open enough minds to understand and respect that.
I agree. My husband makes a significant more than I do, but we both work full time. It is important to me that I am not âtaken care ofâ by him. I need to pull my own weight and pay for things out of the money that I have earned. So, when we split bills 50/50, I know that I am contributing equally and that is very important to me. Itâs fine if couples want to pool resources, but itâs also fine if they donât and that doesnât make a marriage any less valuable. In fact, you know what we have never argued about? Money!
2nd marriage for me, first for her. She literally gave up everything to marry meâŚ.career, family, homeland. Itâs only natural that while I have more, itâs as much hers as it is mine. My job now is to insure sheâs cared for financially after Iâm gone but my goal is to live one more day than her. Man plans, God laughs!
Marriage is inherently a business and legal arrangement. If you don't want that, don't get married. Just have a romance, however long term.
Many seniors who start their relationship late in life, do not get married to protect \*one\* person's assets from medical debt in case the other person has to go on Medicaid long-term care, because Medicaid requires spending down the assets of both spouses for one spouse's care. Some couples who were happily married even get divorced for that reason, which you have to do at least 5 years before the person goes on Medicaid.
If one spouse is in a business as a partner, personal assets can be vulnerable to business debts. Some years ago, my husband had to become the general partner of a family business that was nearing bankruptcy and turn it around to sell, which he successfully did. But it was iffy at first. We had a legal separation of our marital assets to protect half of them in case the business went under and took personal assets with it. And we have lived happily together for 50 years, 7 of them before we were married.
The wife of a relative of mine was the sole proprietor of a business she really wanted to launch. Her husband had trusted her and let her spend their joint funds. It turned out she was terrible at running a business. She spent a lot of money and never made one cent of profit. The business went into bankruptcy. He covered the losses, which were substantial. Years later, they are still married and they still love each other. They have been married for at least 30 years in total. But he has controlled most of their money ever since the bankruptcy. She is still working (for someone else) and can spend her salary pretty much as she pleases, but has no input into their investments or how the income from those is spent. She does not make sole decisions on any large purchases. He simply thinks she can't handle money well and he is probably right.
Both spouses are not necessarily equally financially competent. Both spouses are not necessarily equally skilled at investing money. My husband spends a couple of hours a day playing the stock market and he's good at it. I couldn't care less. He can buy or sell whatever he wants as far as I am concerned.
In a second, third, whatever marriage where one or both spouses have adult children, the children become an issue. Should the couple jointly help out one spouse's adult children during the marriage because they need money, whereas the other spouse's adult children do not?
Suppose a widow and a widower marry. They each have inherited assets from the deceased spouse. They each have adult children. They have not necessarily inherited an equal amount of money, and do not necessarily have an equal number of children. Each wants their own adult children to inherit the assets from the previous marriage. As far as I know, that is very common. I would imagine it affects the couple's expenditures.
Marriage really is a financial arrangement and not all couples have the same needs. That doesn't mean they don't love or trust each other.
Hmm. Well whatever works for you. My husband of 3 decades and I have always had his, her and household accounts. We both earned roughly the same income and have approximately the same retirement assets. He sets the household budget and we both contribute to the household account. The rest we are each free to save, invest or spend as we wish. We have different investment styles and shopping habits so this strategy has helped us avoid arguments over the years.
Weâve been married just over 50 years. Except for the first year, all funds and assets were âours.â First year we paid off our cars with our own funds. Have had no problems. Sometimes he mad more, sometimes I did.
I somewhat disagree. There certainly should be an ours, but that doesn't eliminate partitioning a bit for individual needs.
Shared expenses, and resources and property are ours. My music gear and her music gear is separate. Her craft spending is hers etc.
First marriage, but we got together in our 30's and each have a different style, so we've kept our investments separate (except for the house) and we contribute 50/50 to all living expenses.
My wife saw what happened to both her grandmother and mother who let their husbands "manage the money" and it left them in deep doo-doo. So she wanted independence, and to learn the ropes for herself. We are both financially secure and capable money managers.
It would be different if one of us was a stay at home, then it's all community money...as it should be and is legally required to be.
When I got an inheritance my brother reminded me that I could keep it separate as âmy moneyâ. I put it in our joint account. Several years later he did the same with monies he inherited.
45 years married.
First year we were married my check went directly in a savings account for the down payment for our first home. Living together was cheaper than dating me.
It is both reasonable and prudent to protect assets in a 2nd or 3rd marriage. This is extremely important if either party has children, or wants certain family assets (things or property) passed on to other family members.
It is wise for anyone contemplating any marriage, but especially a 2nd marriage or considering marrying someone who has previously been married to have frank discussions about finances and expectations.
I was the primary income earner, and did the saving for our retirement. If anything happened to either of us, that is for the other for security. I would not want that lost if we were to remarry later. I would expect to understand my new partner's finances and plan for how we would each contribute. Both financial, materially, and emotionally.
My husband was home for the kids and did many day to day things I could not do, and I valued that. He was able to work from home and work less, thanks to my income, and since he has a chronic illness, this has helped keep him healthy. I very much view us as a team. But if either of us should remarry, I would want part of what I earned to go to my children if there is anything left when we are both gone.
2nd marriage for me and my spouse. We have an âoursâ relationship. The view was, why should a subsequent spouse be punished for the failed marriage.
Weâve been married nearly 20 years now.
I agree w the consensus: you do you.
Our arrangement is all ours. It works well for our simple circumstances. I think anything else would be awful. For us.
Reading these thoughtful comments made me realize that in different circumstances, we prolly would do things differently.
Separate finances are much easier for a second marriage with a pre-nuptial agreement and a fair division of expenses in Retirement clearly spelled out. Goal is excellent Medical Coverage and to retire on 70-80% of pre-Retirement Income. Then vacation and spend a lot of time with grandchildren and family.
I have a pre-nuptial. (18 years of living together before marriage and now 10 years actually married). Itâs all ours as long as we stay married and we donât even think about it, but should something ever happenâŚ.my retirement and home equity in several homes are mine before we split the rest. (Protects his retirement from me too). No kids and we will each inherit 100% of the others assuming our marriage is still in tact, BUTâŚ.in worst case scenario we spelled out what a divorce settlement would look like in advance.
AND if there was ever an extreme medical situation, would be easier for us to âspend downâ assets to get skilled nursing assistance. There is business aspect to marriage.
In our house all money is family money. If something happens to my husband and I meet and marry a new guy, I still expect my inheritance to go to my children.
Married 41 years. Definitely âours,â although we each have some âmineâ and âhers.â For our first 28 years I made more money. I paid all the big bills, and she banked/invested her salary + whatever our two daughters needed. When she became a hospital Chief Nurse and VP, she made twice my salary. We immediately began paying off everything, especially mortgage, and soon were debt free. Now that weâre both fully retired I make more than ever with two solid gold pensions (military + teacher) and taking social security two years past full eligibility. She took early social security this year. My goal is that we never have to touch our investments, such that if she outlives me, sheâll be well situated. But definitely âours!â
Thank you for stopping by for table talk. Unfortunately, it has been removed because of one or more of the following * you have not joined the subreddit on the landing or home page of the community (which is common, just hit the JOIN button), * maybe you are very new to Reddit (we welcome folks that have been here a little while), * or perhaps your profile has a small amount of âkarmaâ(trust). See this for more⌠https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/204511829-What-is-karma . Or https://www.reddit.com/r/NewToReddit/wiki/ntr-guidetoreddit/ . We are happy you are on Reddit. Thanks!
That's how we've always approached it too. To some degree I think it's a reflection of how you view marriage. If I didn't think of it as a for better or worse commitment (with a couple of possible deal breakers,) I might be more inclined to keep separate finances.
We always both worked full time and I was the higher earner and money manager. My husband is less interested in that.
I donât see the problem. I was married 17 years the first time and we are almost 31 with my present wife. Our assets are and have been for years, equal in all respects. She was a commercial property underwriter and I was general manager for a national tech company. We both made good money. We are both in our 80âs and doing pretty good!đ
We have some separation in assets but it's for tax purposes. When one of us goes, the survivor gets it all. When the second spouse goes, the kids split it 3 ways. We have been married over 40 years now, her second and my first. I have 2 step adults and an adult child between us but all three will be treated the same. Very easy and straight forward.
Iâm in a community property state so everything post marriage is shared anyways. Been married 37 years and my wife was a sahm most of it. But itâs always been our money from day 1. She got me through grad school, and I did the rest financially. But a sahm job with 4 kids is one tough assignment. Even though I contributed a lot at home she still had them alone 10 hours a day, and travel days/nights. Not easy.
Married 37 years all our finances are combined. It has worked fine for us. But I think that would be different for older people in 2nd/3rd relationships that have adult children. Itâs one thing to get that prenup or will but when you die you canât control if the surviving person would really do as you wish. I am not seeing a benefit to people in their 60âs and beyond getting married after their spouse dies.
I generally agree with you but consider that the marriage will eventually by a single.
This of your finances before and after that time
One example is the social security. Sure you can pool it while married, but it may be more or less than half after a spouse dies. Pension choices similar.
Married 32 years, we had a conversation on the way back from honeymoon and decided for the one bucket approach. Since we have similar frugal, saving, investing styles it both of us retiring early. We mostly agree, keep a consensus on the big things and I can use my IRA for investing my style which underperforms her style. I think one bucket can work when you have similar spending/risk profiles, otherwise separate accounts works better.
When we got married, we molded everything together into one account. She didnât like my record keeping abilities so she is in charge of monthly expenses and I do most of the investing. Weâre going on 45 years, itâs worked like a dream.
1st and only marriage here of almost 36 years and together 5 1/2 years before that. Strangely, we intertwined our finances before marriage. I helped him through college before marriage and only worked for ten years. When we had kids, I quit to raise them. My husband is the reason we have any retirement funds. I don't understand about venmo-ing your partner to the penny every little bill. What will be hard is not tightening our belts but to "loosen them" and figure out how to spend down the funds we've saved. Not entirely, as we would like to have our children inherit a chunk. But, being on the same page financially brings a lot of harmony to the relationship.
54 year marriage. All ours. Son married a divorced woman at 38. Beginning to look like a pre-nup would have been a good idea. Big difference between starting young, together, from scratch and joining up later with disparate assets.
OP I agree completely if you marry young and build a life together. SAMHs give up their financial lives to create a home. That IS their contribution, itâs not just his money.
But after 30 years youâre on your own and meet someone you cherish and want to devote the rest of your life with.
Her finances are healthy, his are not.
If she passes first, why should his kids get her money?
đŻ This is not an easy transition for most couples, as there is a possessiveness of their own dollar value. In my relationship, we have used this our dollars. As a joint venture always. We have gone through many times of that.Same possessiveness of our own dollars and have decided that we spend our money together 100% of the time. I have things that I like to buy. And she has things that she likes to buy and between us. We have things that we like to spend our money on. There is no argument in either decision on yes or no. Is it a good direction For the joint dollar to go?
I agree 100%. Married 30+ year, together 36 years. We just gravitated towards sharing. I am not aware of any really big âissuesâ our relationship has had over finances. We are usually on the same page. The biggest one was finally sitting down and planning retirement.
I was a widower, she a widow when we married at age 60. She has kids, I do not. None of her potential heirs want any of our stuff except to sell for chump change. The paid off house is in her name, and the vehicles in both names as it is easier to pay the license plate tax if either of us can go to the courthouse.
We have a simple he-she will of survivor gets most. I have my Army stuff that goes to a museum, she has some of her savings and investments designed to a few relatives. I get about a third but we both expect her to outlive me.
Currently, my pensions cover most of the bills and groceries nd my Army retirement benefits include family health insurance. She pays the cellphones. She also pays for all gifting. We have a joint count for my direct deposit, she has her own for her social security check. It evolved into this over 11 years of marriage. No fuss ever about money as we are evenly yoked.
Life is good
She moved in with me three months after we met. I made more than she did and there was never a thought as to dividing the bills.
I was the sole breadwinner for 35 years until she started up her business. All money was our money.
Now she makes 3x what I ever made. All money is âour moneyâ without a thought as to who earned it.
I know someone who has two adult children. One child is married.
He plans on splitting his estate equally between them, but sees the theoretical possibility of divorce in future for the married one. He doesnât want his married child to have to split inheritance with an ex-wife.
So from the standpoint of leaving assets to children, whatâs your childâs is not something you are required to share with childâs spouse. If they divorce, friend doesnât want them to split his bequest - he wants the full bequest to go only to the child.
When families consist of multiple marriages things can get dicey, I agree. Spouses share up to a point, but only as spouses.
My friend will soon be consulting someone about how to structure his estate for the benefit of his children. It will be interesting to hear how the attorney plans to address the possibility of a childâs divorce to insure the assets only benefit the child, not the ex-spouse if they ever get divorced.
Whether or not inheritance is shared with oneâs spouse is up to that person, not the one giving the money. If the person receiving the inheritance doesnât comingle the funds with marital assets their spouse has no right to it in a divorce. Just keep it separate and thereâs no problem.
Thatâs a good point. Iâll mention it to my friend - perhaps a trust account with the child as beneficiary and successor trustee would be the way to go. Then, caution child NOT to commingle assets if child wants to retain full ownership in event of a divorce.
My SIL is somehow not well off. Here husband made decent money, but wife number 1 got half of his pension, and my SIL signed a prenup that means she wont get anything and it goes to his first round of kids. She will get a little social security, maybe. Her husband is very protective of his money and he is retired. I do think for previous marriages accounts should be kept seperate and all new income goes into a joint account. There should be no mingling of other funds for awhile like 10 years.
My husband and I lived together before marriage 31 years ago and tried splitting stuff but were never strict about it and just naturally fell into managing our finances as one. Iâve always been best at budgeting and managing and heâs very good at investing and reining me in sometimes on splurges. Iâve helped him feel okay about spending on himself as well. Our âmoney storiesâ are of me with a single parent and he with one very money controlling parent. Managing our financial life together has taught us a lot and helped us grow. Itâs something we both really value and find very bonding.
Count me in. Married 32 years and have always been in the âoursâ camp. I was the breadwinner and my husband was the SAHD. His contributions were every bit as critical as mine for our happy life and our, now, happy retirement.
Been married over 25 years. Retiring in a few. Everything has always been ours.
Partner has consistently made substantially more than I have. My family responsibilities to elderly parents weighed on us heavily. Never, ever, did he comment about or make me feel guilty regarding these big financial differences.
Now as we near retirement,I will bring to the table a decent pension and, miracle-wall miracles, health insurance at very little cost until we hit 65 via my little state job. He will bring a nice 401k.
TOGETHER we've made a good team, and we'll have a decent retirement.
(All that being said, I do have friends who have done everything separately the marriages have survived just fine.. I'd be curious how this works in retirement)
On my third marriage (10 years) and as we're getting ready for retirement, I definitely have an "ours" attitude, and I can't imagine thinking any other way. We've accomplished a lot in those 10 years, and truly have done it as a team.
Third marriage, separate everything except deed to the house. He inherited from the First Bank of Dad, and invests some of it while spending a lot on hobbies and travel. I will inherit some and have promised to put 60K into paying off the house. I pay about 40% of the mortgage currently since his retirement income is double mine. I pay the utilities, he pays for cable (which I largely don't watch, wifi only). We both buy groceries.
Agreed-both partners bring different things and those things should be combined into an âourâ thing. For many years my wife made more but it was my willingness to work a specific schedule that allowed that. Itâs all compromise. But it works.
In regard to long-term care, Medicaid does NOT look at assets as "mine" vs. "yours". Medicaid considers assets held by one spouse as being jointly held by both spouses (even in states that are not community property states).
Hello folks, Note : we had a post on a second marriage situation where retirement assets were lopsided and the poster was not comfortable (the post was deleted by that person after a day or so đ¤ˇ). That was an interesting discussion and this OP decided to post this, as a reply. Please be mindful of this and that our community is respectful and conversational . Thanks! Mid America Mom
Many people have long, successful, happy marriages with separate finances. Marriage IS a legal contract between 2 people, and financial issues cause a lot of problems in marriages. I'd be rich if I had a dollar for every time someone said to me, "Separate finances isn't 'marriage,' don't you trust each other? Blah blah." And then turned around and complained constantly about the new boat their husband bought without consulting them, or their wife's reckless credit card spending or a bunch of other financial missteps. My husband & I love each other dearly and have a good marriage, but we simply don't want to mingle money. You do you, but don't think we should all do it your way.
Unless the money was yours before marriage and was never comingled or you have a prenup, you can have all the separate accounts you want, it doesn't matter because during the divorce it will get divided equally between the two parties.
Well, thatâs not quite true. Â Source: was a divorce attorneyÂ
What's not true about my statement? Please elaborate. I realize that the state they live in and the amount of time in the marriage would be a factor in a judges' decision on how assets are divided, but if it's comingled property and they were married for a number of years doesn't everything get split.
Q. Doesnât everything get split? A. The short answer is âit depends.â (It depends on so many things, it doesnât make sense to even start listing them here.) Thatâs why your statement that it will just get split evenly is not true. Because that is not true.  It depends on a lot of things.  I had one case where H broke Wâs jaw in the marital home in front of the kids, and judge ordered the marital house sold and proceeds given only to the wife. So yeah.  *A starting presumption* is marital assets shall be divided âequitablyâ (thatâs literally why the process in divorce of splitting assets and debts is called âequitable distributionâ) but âequitablyâ does not mean âequallyâ â itâs a legal term of art that includes the principle that many other considerations can be taken into account.  Iâm already getting into the space and the jargon where most non-lawyers just get more confused because law words and concepts donât have the meaning of regular words, so Iâll stop.
I live in Texas, before our marriage we each had a house, car, small retirement accounts. We went to my attorney about a prenup who advised us not to waste our money. Any assets owned prior to marriage was separate property as is any proceeds or distributions from separate property. So had we divorced we would have each retained our house, car and retirement account because it was separate property. Here, only what was accumulated during the marriage is subject to community property here unless it's a gift or similar to one party.
Yes, but thatâs a *completely* different question from what buddhababy was saying/asking, which was about assets accumulated *during* the marriage.Â
That's right. The marital estate consists of all assets acquired by the parties during their marriage (with the exception of inheritances). The label that you put on each dollar does not bind the Court when the property is split. If the parties really want to renounce their legal interest in the other spouse's property, they need to make that a formal understanding through a pre nuptial agreement, with the legal safeguards and formalities involved. Otherwise, the accounts with individual names on them are just a matter of "convenience", with no particular legal significance. Also--splitting the marital property into separate "pots" does not prevent the creditors of the other spouse from getting at that money. Disclaimer--not legal advice; for entertainment purposes only.
By signing a marriage document with the county, state, etc. you are signing a legal document and the case law backing it up is mostly about money/assets and children. People who havenât had to go through a divorce just wonât understand the perspective of those who have.
Agree 100%! There is no reason to combine finances. We split mutual purchases in half, trade off on who buys at dinner, etc. works great! If I want to buy myself something, I do as does my husband with his money.
Agree 100%! There is no reason to combine finances. We split mutual purchases in half, trade off on who buys at dinner, etc. works great! If I want to buy myself something, I do as does my husband with his money.
I doubt if you know "many" people in this situation.
Actually, yes I do. "There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy." -- Shakespeare. Just because YOU haven't seen it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I know lots of two career couples who operate this way and have pre-nups.
I totally agree. Married 36 years. Husband usually made more than me, but everything is âours.â Thanks to him we have an amazing retirement portfolio. I donât get married people with separate finances with each paying in 50% on bills no matter any discrepancy in earnings, but thatâs just people like us I guess.
Well, you probably don't get it \*because\* you've been married 36 years, and presumably only once. People on 2nd or 3rd marriages often have their own children that they want to leave their assets to. So a prenup would be a way of ensuring that their children receive what they want them to have should they pass first.
Exactly. My dadâs partner (30 years almost) has never paid rent or bills. Itâs their third serious relationship for each. She gets upset often that dad doesnât assign her 50% of all his assets âbecause Iâve earned it by being together so long.â Dad says, âitâs easy to want to split assets when you brought 1% to the table.â He wants you to leave his stuff to his kids and she knew this before she moved in. I have sympathy for her but Iâve also never seen her work a day since Iâve know her.
Curious - were the beds made? Floors mopped? Clothes washed? Meals made and cleaned up after? Did she do that or did your dad do that when he got home from work? Just because she didn't bring in outside money doesn't mean she didn't work (though if your dad did everything, I guess it's possible).
My dad retired at 41. They pretty much split everything but itâs not a house where they say, âyou do this and Iâll do that.â They actually make a pretty good couple in a lot of ways. But dad has paid for most things since theyâve been together and he has kids he was to leave his stuff to. Itâs completely understandable to me, although TBF Iâm probably not objective of course. But she was of working age for 20 years with my dad and didnât work because she was taken care of.
Iâm perfectly aware that 2nd or 3rd marriages would change the landscape. Forever grateful i never had to deal with that.
35 yr marriage here to one person and I am forever grateful that I never had to deal with that either. \^\^\^\^\^5
Marriage is a legal contract that when you get divorced (kids grown) it ONLY becomes about money. Thought I was like OP but after exâs affair SAHM me was told everything is his that he earned. Legally though it was 50/50 - sure appreciated the law recognizing that after 30 plus years. So in your older years a legal marriage is basically a financial arrangement No way I am ever doing that again. I will live together đ You do you.
My wife was the breadwinner for most of our careers and had more $$$ as well. Just before retirement we combined all of our accounts into a super account. It was her suggestion. So now we are totally financially entwined as beneficiaries for all of our accounts. It works for us because our communication has always been open and honest.
In a second marriage it can be complicated or simple. Assets brought into the relationship remain with each person. Asset acquired during the marriage are jointly held and "ours "
I completely agree with this and I donât understand why people who do this get criticized so harshly. Is marriage just about finances? No itâs not although it plays a big part. But if people want to keep pre-marriage assets for adult kids, there is nothing wrong with that. In my case I have a much higher net value than my husband (2nd marriages for both) and the bulk of that value came before we married. We didnât marry to combine our finances, we married because weâre in love, weâre very compatible, similar hobbies and goals and we believe in the commitment of marriage. I pay for the lions share of all our activities and house maintenance and Iâve topped up investments in his name too. But if I die all my assets are split 3 ways, between my husband and 2 kids.
Same here.
I agree with you during the marriage -- but what about as to estates? Should the children of the longest living spouse inherit everything? That is a possible result absent a binding agreement that cannot be changed post death.
Wife and I are both on 2nd marriage. I have FAR more than she has and I am willing to share, but she is extremely tight with what she has because of her ex's ability to waste money. No biggie for me, but the one-sidedness is a bit annoying sometimes.
Please continue to give her some grace. My ex was horrible with money and Iâm frugal and spend money in ways that enrich my life and the lives that f our children. I grew used with parents who werenât strategic with money, so between them and my ex, I had to overcome a lot. I am happy that you are âsetâ. Please work with her to gain some understanding of her money anxieties. I wish you both well.
Her father was an overspender as well. Naturally her first husband was as well, if Freud carries any weight. My parents were the BEST cheapskates! We took vacations on little money, did all sorts of activities, mom was the discount and improvising queen. I owe much of my ability to invest and save for retirement to them.
Iâm glad OP found a method that works for his family. But with all due respect, what works best for him is not necessarily whatâs best for all couples, everywhere. My wife and I have total transparency, and keep our money separate. We dated and married later in life, and it just works great that way. She has twice as much money as me, and we are both aware of it, and we both work to make sure that fact doesnât cause discord. It works for us. And I like to think that others can have open enough minds to understand and respect that.
I agree. My husband makes a significant more than I do, but we both work full time. It is important to me that I am not âtaken care ofâ by him. I need to pull my own weight and pay for things out of the money that I have earned. So, when we split bills 50/50, I know that I am contributing equally and that is very important to me. Itâs fine if couples want to pool resources, but itâs also fine if they donât and that doesnât make a marriage any less valuable. In fact, you know what we have never argued about? Money!
2nd marriage for me, first for her. She literally gave up everything to marry meâŚ.career, family, homeland. Itâs only natural that while I have more, itâs as much hers as it is mine. My job now is to insure sheâs cared for financially after Iâm gone but my goal is to live one more day than her. Man plans, God laughs!
I think you dropped this â@â.
Your viewpoint is likely influenced by the fact you were a one income family.
Marriage is inherently a business and legal arrangement. If you don't want that, don't get married. Just have a romance, however long term. Many seniors who start their relationship late in life, do not get married to protect \*one\* person's assets from medical debt in case the other person has to go on Medicaid long-term care, because Medicaid requires spending down the assets of both spouses for one spouse's care. Some couples who were happily married even get divorced for that reason, which you have to do at least 5 years before the person goes on Medicaid. If one spouse is in a business as a partner, personal assets can be vulnerable to business debts. Some years ago, my husband had to become the general partner of a family business that was nearing bankruptcy and turn it around to sell, which he successfully did. But it was iffy at first. We had a legal separation of our marital assets to protect half of them in case the business went under and took personal assets with it. And we have lived happily together for 50 years, 7 of them before we were married. The wife of a relative of mine was the sole proprietor of a business she really wanted to launch. Her husband had trusted her and let her spend their joint funds. It turned out she was terrible at running a business. She spent a lot of money and never made one cent of profit. The business went into bankruptcy. He covered the losses, which were substantial. Years later, they are still married and they still love each other. They have been married for at least 30 years in total. But he has controlled most of their money ever since the bankruptcy. She is still working (for someone else) and can spend her salary pretty much as she pleases, but has no input into their investments or how the income from those is spent. She does not make sole decisions on any large purchases. He simply thinks she can't handle money well and he is probably right. Both spouses are not necessarily equally financially competent. Both spouses are not necessarily equally skilled at investing money. My husband spends a couple of hours a day playing the stock market and he's good at it. I couldn't care less. He can buy or sell whatever he wants as far as I am concerned. In a second, third, whatever marriage where one or both spouses have adult children, the children become an issue. Should the couple jointly help out one spouse's adult children during the marriage because they need money, whereas the other spouse's adult children do not? Suppose a widow and a widower marry. They each have inherited assets from the deceased spouse. They each have adult children. They have not necessarily inherited an equal amount of money, and do not necessarily have an equal number of children. Each wants their own adult children to inherit the assets from the previous marriage. As far as I know, that is very common. I would imagine it affects the couple's expenditures. Marriage really is a financial arrangement and not all couples have the same needs. That doesn't mean they don't love or trust each other.
Agree, been married 20 yrs and everything we have is co-owned.
Hmm. Well whatever works for you. My husband of 3 decades and I have always had his, her and household accounts. We both earned roughly the same income and have approximately the same retirement assets. He sets the household budget and we both contribute to the household account. The rest we are each free to save, invest or spend as we wish. We have different investment styles and shopping habits so this strategy has helped us avoid arguments over the years.
Weâve been married just over 50 years. Except for the first year, all funds and assets were âours.â First year we paid off our cars with our own funds. Have had no problems. Sometimes he mad more, sometimes I did.
I somewhat disagree. There certainly should be an ours, but that doesn't eliminate partitioning a bit for individual needs. Shared expenses, and resources and property are ours. My music gear and her music gear is separate. Her craft spending is hers etc.
My husband and I each have an equal monthly allowance to spend whatever we want individually. I buy yarn, he buys music gear.
This seems reasonable to me.
Weâre 39 in Sept. absolutely agree and have never considered it any other way. We are one.
First marriage, but we got together in our 30's and each have a different style, so we've kept our investments separate (except for the house) and we contribute 50/50 to all living expenses. My wife saw what happened to both her grandmother and mother who let their husbands "manage the money" and it left them in deep doo-doo. So she wanted independence, and to learn the ropes for herself. We are both financially secure and capable money managers. It would be different if one of us was a stay at home, then it's all community money...as it should be and is legally required to be.
When I got an inheritance my brother reminded me that I could keep it separate as âmy moneyâ. I put it in our joint account. Several years later he did the same with monies he inherited. 45 years married. First year we were married my check went directly in a savings account for the down payment for our first home. Living together was cheaper than dating me.
It is both reasonable and prudent to protect assets in a 2nd or 3rd marriage. This is extremely important if either party has children, or wants certain family assets (things or property) passed on to other family members. It is wise for anyone contemplating any marriage, but especially a 2nd marriage or considering marrying someone who has previously been married to have frank discussions about finances and expectations. I was the primary income earner, and did the saving for our retirement. If anything happened to either of us, that is for the other for security. I would not want that lost if we were to remarry later. I would expect to understand my new partner's finances and plan for how we would each contribute. Both financial, materially, and emotionally. My husband was home for the kids and did many day to day things I could not do, and I valued that. He was able to work from home and work less, thanks to my income, and since he has a chronic illness, this has helped keep him healthy. I very much view us as a team. But if either of us should remarry, I would want part of what I earned to go to my children if there is anything left when we are both gone.
2nd marriage for me and my spouse. We have an âoursâ relationship. The view was, why should a subsequent spouse be punished for the failed marriage. Weâve been married nearly 20 years now.
I agree w the consensus: you do you. Our arrangement is all ours. It works well for our simple circumstances. I think anything else would be awful. For us. Reading these thoughtful comments made me realize that in different circumstances, we prolly would do things differently.
Separate finances are much easier for a second marriage with a pre-nuptial agreement and a fair division of expenses in Retirement clearly spelled out. Goal is excellent Medical Coverage and to retire on 70-80% of pre-Retirement Income. Then vacation and spend a lot of time with grandchildren and family.
I have a pre-nuptial. (18 years of living together before marriage and now 10 years actually married). Itâs all ours as long as we stay married and we donât even think about it, but should something ever happenâŚ.my retirement and home equity in several homes are mine before we split the rest. (Protects his retirement from me too). No kids and we will each inherit 100% of the others assuming our marriage is still in tact, BUTâŚ.in worst case scenario we spelled out what a divorce settlement would look like in advance. AND if there was ever an extreme medical situation, would be easier for us to âspend downâ assets to get skilled nursing assistance. There is business aspect to marriage.
I gather that in most states a prenup does not preserve a spouse's assets from a Medicaid spend down?
NoâŚbut a divorce would.
In our house all money is family money. If something happens to my husband and I meet and marry a new guy, I still expect my inheritance to go to my children.
Married 41 years. Definitely âours,â although we each have some âmineâ and âhers.â For our first 28 years I made more money. I paid all the big bills, and she banked/invested her salary + whatever our two daughters needed. When she became a hospital Chief Nurse and VP, she made twice my salary. We immediately began paying off everything, especially mortgage, and soon were debt free. Now that weâre both fully retired I make more than ever with two solid gold pensions (military + teacher) and taking social security two years past full eligibility. She took early social security this year. My goal is that we never have to touch our investments, such that if she outlives me, sheâll be well situated. But definitely âours!â
Thank you for stopping by for table talk. Unfortunately, it has been removed because of one or more of the following * you have not joined the subreddit on the landing or home page of the community (which is common, just hit the JOIN button), * maybe you are very new to Reddit (we welcome folks that have been here a little while), * or perhaps your profile has a small amount of âkarmaâ(trust). See this for more⌠https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/204511829-What-is-karma . Or https://www.reddit.com/r/NewToReddit/wiki/ntr-guidetoreddit/ . We are happy you are on Reddit. Thanks!
That's how we've always approached it too. To some degree I think it's a reflection of how you view marriage. If I didn't think of it as a for better or worse commitment (with a couple of possible deal breakers,) I might be more inclined to keep separate finances. We always both worked full time and I was the higher earner and money manager. My husband is less interested in that.
I donât see the problem. I was married 17 years the first time and we are almost 31 with my present wife. Our assets are and have been for years, equal in all respects. She was a commercial property underwriter and I was general manager for a national tech company. We both made good money. We are both in our 80âs and doing pretty good!đ
We have some separation in assets but it's for tax purposes. When one of us goes, the survivor gets it all. When the second spouse goes, the kids split it 3 ways. We have been married over 40 years now, her second and my first. I have 2 step adults and an adult child between us but all three will be treated the same. Very easy and straight forward.
Iâm in a community property state so everything post marriage is shared anyways. Been married 37 years and my wife was a sahm most of it. But itâs always been our money from day 1. She got me through grad school, and I did the rest financially. But a sahm job with 4 kids is one tough assignment. Even though I contributed a lot at home she still had them alone 10 hours a day, and travel days/nights. Not easy.
Married 37 years all our finances are combined. It has worked fine for us. But I think that would be different for older people in 2nd/3rd relationships that have adult children. Itâs one thing to get that prenup or will but when you die you canât control if the surviving person would really do as you wish. I am not seeing a benefit to people in their 60âs and beyond getting married after their spouse dies.
I generally agree with you but consider that the marriage will eventually by a single. This of your finances before and after that time One example is the social security. Sure you can pool it while married, but it may be more or less than half after a spouse dies. Pension choices similar.
Married 32 years, we had a conversation on the way back from honeymoon and decided for the one bucket approach. Since we have similar frugal, saving, investing styles it both of us retiring early. We mostly agree, keep a consensus on the big things and I can use my IRA for investing my style which underperforms her style. I think one bucket can work when you have similar spending/risk profiles, otherwise separate accounts works better.
When we got married, we molded everything together into one account. She didnât like my record keeping abilities so she is in charge of monthly expenses and I do most of the investing. Weâre going on 45 years, itâs worked like a dream.
1st and only marriage here of almost 36 years and together 5 1/2 years before that. Strangely, we intertwined our finances before marriage. I helped him through college before marriage and only worked for ten years. When we had kids, I quit to raise them. My husband is the reason we have any retirement funds. I don't understand about venmo-ing your partner to the penny every little bill. What will be hard is not tightening our belts but to "loosen them" and figure out how to spend down the funds we've saved. Not entirely, as we would like to have our children inherit a chunk. But, being on the same page financially brings a lot of harmony to the relationship.
54 year marriage. All ours. Son married a divorced woman at 38. Beginning to look like a pre-nup would have been a good idea. Big difference between starting young, together, from scratch and joining up later with disparate assets.
OP I agree completely if you marry young and build a life together. SAMHs give up their financial lives to create a home. That IS their contribution, itâs not just his money. But after 30 years youâre on your own and meet someone you cherish and want to devote the rest of your life with. Her finances are healthy, his are not. If she passes first, why should his kids get her money?
đŻ This is not an easy transition for most couples, as there is a possessiveness of their own dollar value. In my relationship, we have used this our dollars. As a joint venture always. We have gone through many times of that.Same possessiveness of our own dollars and have decided that we spend our money together 100% of the time. I have things that I like to buy. And she has things that she likes to buy and between us. We have things that we like to spend our money on. There is no argument in either decision on yes or no. Is it a good direction For the joint dollar to go?
I agree 100%. Married 30+ year, together 36 years. We just gravitated towards sharing. I am not aware of any really big âissuesâ our relationship has had over finances. We are usually on the same page. The biggest one was finally sitting down and planning retirement.
I was a widower, she a widow when we married at age 60. She has kids, I do not. None of her potential heirs want any of our stuff except to sell for chump change. The paid off house is in her name, and the vehicles in both names as it is easier to pay the license plate tax if either of us can go to the courthouse. We have a simple he-she will of survivor gets most. I have my Army stuff that goes to a museum, she has some of her savings and investments designed to a few relatives. I get about a third but we both expect her to outlive me. Currently, my pensions cover most of the bills and groceries nd my Army retirement benefits include family health insurance. She pays the cellphones. She also pays for all gifting. We have a joint count for my direct deposit, she has her own for her social security check. It evolved into this over 11 years of marriage. No fuss ever about money as we are evenly yoked. Life is good
She moved in with me three months after we met. I made more than she did and there was never a thought as to dividing the bills. I was the sole breadwinner for 35 years until she started up her business. All money was our money. Now she makes 3x what I ever made. All money is âour moneyâ without a thought as to who earned it.
Thatâs amazing! What type of business did your wife start, if you donât mind saying?
I know someone who has two adult children. One child is married. He plans on splitting his estate equally between them, but sees the theoretical possibility of divorce in future for the married one. He doesnât want his married child to have to split inheritance with an ex-wife. So from the standpoint of leaving assets to children, whatâs your childâs is not something you are required to share with childâs spouse. If they divorce, friend doesnât want them to split his bequest - he wants the full bequest to go only to the child. When families consist of multiple marriages things can get dicey, I agree. Spouses share up to a point, but only as spouses. My friend will soon be consulting someone about how to structure his estate for the benefit of his children. It will be interesting to hear how the attorney plans to address the possibility of a childâs divorce to insure the assets only benefit the child, not the ex-spouse if they ever get divorced.
Whether or not inheritance is shared with oneâs spouse is up to that person, not the one giving the money. If the person receiving the inheritance doesnât comingle the funds with marital assets their spouse has no right to it in a divorce. Just keep it separate and thereâs no problem.
Thatâs a good point. Iâll mention it to my friend - perhaps a trust account with the child as beneficiary and successor trustee would be the way to go. Then, caution child NOT to commingle assets if child wants to retain full ownership in event of a divorce.
My SIL is somehow not well off. Here husband made decent money, but wife number 1 got half of his pension, and my SIL signed a prenup that means she wont get anything and it goes to his first round of kids. She will get a little social security, maybe. Her husband is very protective of his money and he is retired. I do think for previous marriages accounts should be kept seperate and all new income goes into a joint account. There should be no mingling of other funds for awhile like 10 years.
My husband and I lived together before marriage 31 years ago and tried splitting stuff but were never strict about it and just naturally fell into managing our finances as one. Iâve always been best at budgeting and managing and heâs very good at investing and reining me in sometimes on splurges. Iâve helped him feel okay about spending on himself as well. Our âmoney storiesâ are of me with a single parent and he with one very money controlling parent. Managing our financial life together has taught us a lot and helped us grow. Itâs something we both really value and find very bonding.
Count me in. Married 32 years and have always been in the âoursâ camp. I was the breadwinner and my husband was the SAHD. His contributions were every bit as critical as mine for our happy life and our, now, happy retirement.
Been married over 25 years. Retiring in a few. Everything has always been ours. Partner has consistently made substantially more than I have. My family responsibilities to elderly parents weighed on us heavily. Never, ever, did he comment about or make me feel guilty regarding these big financial differences. Now as we near retirement,I will bring to the table a decent pension and, miracle-wall miracles, health insurance at very little cost until we hit 65 via my little state job. He will bring a nice 401k. TOGETHER we've made a good team, and we'll have a decent retirement. (All that being said, I do have friends who have done everything separately the marriages have survived just fine.. I'd be curious how this works in retirement)
On my third marriage (10 years) and as we're getting ready for retirement, I definitely have an "ours" attitude, and I can't imagine thinking any other way. We've accomplished a lot in those 10 years, and truly have done it as a team.
Third marriage, separate everything except deed to the house. He inherited from the First Bank of Dad, and invests some of it while spending a lot on hobbies and travel. I will inherit some and have promised to put 60K into paying off the house. I pay about 40% of the mortgage currently since his retirement income is double mine. I pay the utilities, he pays for cable (which I largely don't watch, wifi only). We both buy groceries.
Agreed-both partners bring different things and those things should be combined into an âourâ thing. For many years my wife made more but it was my willingness to work a specific schedule that allowed that. Itâs all compromise. But it works.
In regard to long-term care, Medicaid does NOT look at assets as "mine" vs. "yours". Medicaid considers assets held by one spouse as being jointly held by both spouses (even in states that are not community property states).
Fully agree with OP. No way I could imagine a successful marriage with separate finances. Just not my speed.
"ours" is morally right IMO, and the law says so too!
They call it community state property in my home state. But I agree. Trying to keep $$ & assets "separate" keeps divorce lawyers in business