The Money Mustache Community
Learning, Sharing, and Teaching => Ask a Mustachian => Topic started by: Buckeye in TX on March 15, 2015, 02:27:59 PM
-
I hear of/know married couples that keep their money in separate accounts and divvy up expenses (e.g. he pays for rent, she pays for utilities). We've been out to dinner where there is a discussion on who is paying (between the two of them). I'm curious, why do people do this? My wife and I look at our money as one big pot and I can't imagine doing otherwise. Granted, we make similar amounts so maybe that makes it easier, but I would think that having separate accounts would cause unnecessary arguments and breed resentment.
-
I can't imagine all the money being in one pot and the arguments that would come from each judging the other's expenditures. :-)
We got married late in life, we already have all our own things and accounts. Just don't see any reason to go and combine them when having them separate works so well.
-
I just find it easier to keep track of things if they are separate.
-
Because both parties prefer it that way.
-
No problems here. You just divy up the expenses and try and make them proportional. We each had our own accounts before we were married and never saw a reason to change. If my wife needs to buy some new clothes she can do so without guilt, and same for me. If there are trust issues in the relationship then I can see why one joint account would be better but since we don't have those and are both frugal no problems here. If her account is running low for some reason she just tells me and I give her some money to help. Same team!
-
We have combined finances for all shared things.
But we also each have a discretionary budget amount each month.
-
We combine everything.
-
We combine everything.
G R E A T 2A username
-
We got married in our 40's and have separate money.
I make more and write her a check monthly since most bills are paid from her account except my credit cards. (She had this house first.) I send in extra principal payments since I am trying to pay off the house.
We each have a 401K with about the same amount.
She does not buy much for herself so I didn't fuss about Invisalign $$$$.
I did tell her she does not need to switch from a Civic to an SUV just to haul sleds to the school 2X per year. I said I don't want us to have a monthly payment just after the house is paid off.
-
Having things separate has prevented resentment, not added to it. I had a lot of partners and family use me for my money a long time. It makes me more comfortable to divvy up.doesn't stop me from spoiling him when I feel like it.
Also, when it's the same pot,how can presents be special?
-
In a relationship where both parties have the same goals and habits, and spend equally, there would be no reason to separate. The real world just doesn't always work like that. Separate finance means zero "can we afford this" conversations. It doesn't mean you don't value your SO or wouldn't do things for them, or wouldn't even split all the bills, it's just that it creates a buffer for avoiding arguments. Divorce is a very real thing.
The real question is, why WOULDN'T you have separate finances?
-
If there is no attitude of "I earned this money and you earned that money" I can imagine some organizational value in having separate accounts. But if there is a separation of funds because of who earned it, the clock has started ticking toward a separation of the relationship.
-
We've always had separate finances. It's just easier for us. We tally up our accounts at the end of each month to see where we're at, but otherwise we do our own thing. We both like feeling independent, I guess, and there's never been any money conflict or argument, so it's never been a problem. The concept of joint accounts has just never really come up. I don't really see what the advantage would be to having one.
-
I'm not married, and have only been living with my boyfriend for around six months, but I definitely like keeping our discussions about money more at the high-level goals/major shared purchases level and less at the "is it really a good idea to spend so much on that video game console/opera season ticket/fancy makeup/basketball ticket" level, and I feel like having our money separate facilitates that. I don't actually think either of us would make significantly different decisions, but it just feels easier. I certainly don't hide any of my purchases from him, and I have trouble imagining him doing anything with his money that I would really worry about (well, I can imagine him putting lots of it in a non-interest-bearing savings account, but aside from that...).
I'm going to guess that a lot of people keep their finances separate because they're used to it? Especially if you're in your later 20s or 30s or older when you get married, you're just used to splitting things up, and to having control of your money. And if both members of a couple make around the same amount of money, there's very little difference between splitting all the bills and putting all the money into the same pool. I don't really get how families with a SAHP or substantial differences in income manage it, but it does seem like there are people who even make that work.
-
One issue that comes up at the bank I work for is inquiries about the mates account. "What do you mean I can't get his balance!?! He's my husband!" It always makes me want to say "Well there's gotta be SOME reason he didn't want you on the account!"
-
... I don't really get how families with a SAHP or substantial differences in income manage it, but it does seem like there are people who even make that work.
My DH makes about 10 times what I make. His salary has gone up over the years, as mine has gone down. When we met, our salaries were about the same. This is one of the reasons I DONT want joint accounts... I don't want access to that much money anymore, or I will be tempted to spend it! I'm used to managing a certain amount myself, and I don't want or need more. I went through lifestyle inflation, and then began a path of lifestyle deflation. :) DH has far more self control than me, and is quite frugal.
But to be fair, we definitely don't pay for everything 50/50. He pays our house expenses and for extras like restaurants, entertainment, and most travel. I pay for groceries and whatever household things I may need. I also pay for all my own business related expenses. But yeah, we do it this way a) because we're used to it and it works for us and b) because we like our independence and have similar spending habits, so we rarely run into any conflicts.
-
I've never shared finances with anyone and have no desire to do so.
My GF and I are common law because of local laws. We are just signing an agreement that legally separates our money and property.
I've never had any relationship issues around money operating this way. I can't see any good reason to change.
-- Vik
-
I just find it easier to keep track of things if they are separate.
I concur!
-
I don't really understand why people do it either. We don't feel resentment for each other in spending money because it's all in a budget. There's no need to separate it out if you've agreed on how to spend your money that month. I make roughly twice as much as DH, but would never consider a separate account.
-
I don't really understand why people do it either. We don't feel resentment for each other in spending money because it's all in a budget. There's no need to separate it out if you've agreed on how to spend your money that month. I make roughly twice as much as DH, but would never consider a separate account.
Question: why do you think having two accounts implies not having one budget? Also, why do you assume two accounts means resentment? People with separate accounts can also just as easily agree on a budget, and share in decisions equally...
-
We married later in life (early 40s ish). We have separate bank accounts because of laziness (we both hate paperwork!). But... we operate as a single pool of money. It's much more efficient that way. It also feels like we are a solid team. Shared debts, shared resources regardless of whose name was originally attached to it.
A previous LTR I was in had separate expenses and separate money for most of the relationship until we bought a house together. In hindsight, the separate money should have been a major red flag for me to have left the relationship 15 years before I did. At a deep level we never fully trusted each other nor was a team who had each other's backs.
My marriage now feels like we're both all in. Previous relationship there was always part of us each holding back. The separate expenses was a symptom of that, not the cause.
-
The "how"--
My account handles my income (direct deposit) and all expenses that have a bill attached (they are all set up for auto drafting). I also keep a small petty cash fund that I replenish monthly to an agreed upon small amount. Monthly I transfer an amount to her account to balance her side of the expenses, and the rest goes to an investment account.
Her account handles her income (direct deposit) and all expenses that do not have a bill attached, e.g. groceries, clothing, doctor visits, gifts, vacations, etc. She also has a small petty cash fund that is replenished monthly to an agreed upon amount. Her account is for expenses only, no savings contributions.
The "why"--
I can live off nearly nothing for a year and when I spend money outside a budget, it is for a larger-priced item that I have researched forever, waited for more than a year to buy, and usually found on Craigslist for 40-60% of the new price. Eleven of twelve months each year would be almost identical for me, and the other month would also be in line except for one larger purchase. On the other hand, the DW will trickle money like a dripping faucet, in $5s, $10s and $20s all over town every month. Previously, tracking and planning was a nightmare. To be fair, she'll give $50 away on a gift more quickly than she'll spend $50 on herself, but the end result is still $50 that is gone even if we've already given to charity or church for the month. Our system took several years to iron out, but now we're in sync. She has agreed money to spend as she wishes within a limit (and she looks harder for bargains since we've agreed she can have the extra there as well--i.e. family commission). And now I have consistent monthly numbers I can use to plan for the future.
Bottom line--Any system that keeps financial arguments out of the marriage while intelligently providing for the overall financial well-being of the family strengthens the marriage.
-
Husband and I are wrapping up our first year of marriage and are already moving from seperate to combined finances because honestly, he is too disorganized with money and it was a bigger issue to be transfering money for bills every month. I guess it depends on the people. for us its just easier to manage if its combined, we have similar spending habits so that helps too.
-
I don't really understand why people do it either. We don't feel resentment for each other in spending money because it's all in a budget. There's no need to separate it out if you've agreed on how to spend your money that month. I make roughly twice as much as DH, but would never consider a separate account.
Question: why do you think having two accounts implies not having one budget? Also, why do you assume two accounts means resentment? People with separate accounts can also just as easily agree on a budget, and share in decisions equally...
Because people have already commented to that very effect in this thread and it's a common theme among couples in my own experience.
The number one cause of divorce are money fights- and I'd turn the question around- why is it beneficial to keep separate accounts? There really isn't a reason for married people to not have joint checking accounts unless one doesn't trust the other person with "their" money (which is ridiculous because there is no such thing as "my money" in a marriage). In that case, marriage counseling is probably in order if one can't trust the other.
-
I don't really understand people's need to judge/tell other couples how to run their finances.
DH and I at first kept our finances totally separate because: a) he was shitty with money and I wasn't; b) he had an ex-wife who was trying to bleed him dry; c) I had an inheritance that I didn't want his ex to get her hands on.
Now, many years later, we still have no common accounts. That said, we pay any and all bills from whatever account has money, we freely transfer savings from one to the other, etc. the accounts are separate in theory, but in actuality we run our lives together. We are beneficiaries on one another's accounts. It works for us, and his money is mine, and vice versa.
-
If there is no attitude of "I earned this money and you earned that money" I can imagine some organizational value in having separate accounts. But if there is a separation of funds because of who earned it, the clock has started ticking toward a separation of the relationship.
This sums it up perfectly. I knew a couple where one person would pay all the bills and then invoice the other at the end of the month for half. What a joke
-
Because we are in different places, financially. I have a job making 4x what she does, and a mortgage that preceded our marriage. She has a desire to be independent and unaccountable to me for what she spends.
So, she pays her bills with money from her job, and I pay my bills with the money from mine (to include mortgage and utilities). It's simple and it works.
-
This is the second marriage for both of us, and it took us a long time to combine accounts because of: 1) terrible experiences with money in our first marriages and 2) different attitudes towards money initially. So we went on for years with divvying up the expenses. When we moved states and my credit union had no offices in our new state, he opened his checking account to me. By that time we understood each other. We also each have side checking accounts in our own names. Mine is for my pay and business expenses to filter through, since there is often a timing mismatch, and in any given month I can look much richer or poorer than I actually am. His is for his "slush fund" - an agreed-upon amount he can spend on technology each year. Having that fund makes him feel all fuzzy inside, and interestingly, he rarely spends all of it.
-
Because different things work for different people. There's no right or wrong way to handle money as long as both parties are happy. The division system they use indicates nothing about their relationship on its own.
Sharing money would drive me nuts, personally.
-
if there is a separation of funds because of who earned it, the clock has started ticking toward a separation of the relationship.
The old Get Rich Slowly blog had a long-running discussion about separate vs combined accounts, with J.D. (the blogger) always arguing in favor of keeping everything separate.
Two years later it turns out he wanted everything separate because he was planning to ditch his wife.
What's the first advice this forum always give people who have marital problems? Set up separate accounts immediately and start protecting your assets.
Combined finances, like living in the same house and having the same children, is part of melding your lives together. I think that any effort to keep your money separate is a either a sign of uncertainty about your relationship's longevity or the scar of some past emotional problem, like a profligate ex-partner who dragged you into bankruptcy.
I don't know why anyone would insist on separate accounts for any other reason. I'm open to suggestions, though. Haven't seen any good ones here thus far.
-
I don't know why anyone would insist on separate accounts for any other reason. I'm open to suggestions, though. Haven't seen any good ones here thus far.
I think it depends on what you mean by "separate." DH and I pay our bills from a joint account, but we each have our own bank account where we keep an agreed-upon portion of our paycheck to spend on what we like. The "separate" part means that we can't see what the other person is spending mad money on and can't pass judgment. I don't think this means we're headed for divorce.
-
Also, when it's the same pot,how can presents be special?
To me a good present from DH is not about the money he spent, but rather the time he spent in planning the gift and thinking about what I would like. It doesn't matter to me what "pot of money" it came from.
-
I don't know why anyone would insist on separate accounts for any other reason. I'm open to suggestions, though. Haven't seen any good ones here thus far.
I think it depends on what you mean by "separate." DH and I pay our bills from a joint account, but we each have our own bank account where we keep an agreed-upon portion of our paycheck to spend on what we like. The "separate" part means that we can't see what the other person is spending mad money on and can't pass judgment. I don't think this means we're headed for divorce.
I think the separate part means that there is a severe form of "his money" and "her money." the separate accounts helps keep things more legally separate, if any, but it's the extreme mentality of "this is MY money, and this is YOUR money" that can ultimately lead marriages towards divorce.
However a married couple physically organizes their finances doesn't matter as much as how they manage it as a unified team. I do think it's healthy to have his and her categories in the budget on a small, reasonable scale, but to have near or total separation of the budget could be a huge indication of a lack of trust. As long as you're working together as a team, making decisions together, and communicating with one another, you're on the right track.
ETA:
If a married couple isn't working together to manage their finances, something I think we all can agree is an essential part of life, then what other essential aspects of their marriage are they not working on?
-
I don't know why anyone would insist on separate accounts for any other reason. I'm open to suggestions, though. Haven't seen any good ones here thus far.
Isn't "because both members of the couple are happy with it" a good reason? Why would you need a reason to begin with? Why isn't this kind of thing in the category of "do what works for you", like every other aspect of relationships?
-
Why isn't this kind of thing in the category of "do what works for you", like every other aspect of relationships?
Because this particular example involves keeping secrets from your partner? "Do what works for you" isn't good advice if "what works for you" is detrimental to your relationship. In some cases, you just might not know it yet.
My wife and I were both well into our 30s when we got married. We both had a home, and a job, and a bank account, and credit cards. We kept stuff separate at first just out of habit, but as our marriage became a real union it became clear that separate accounts were an unnecessary complication, like having separate cars or separate silverware. Some things in a family are best managed as belonging to the family.
-
Why isn't this kind of thing in the category of "do what works for you", like every other aspect of relationships?
Because this particular example involves keeping secrets from your partner? "Do what works for you" isn't good advice if "what works for you" is detrimental to your relationship. In some cases, you just might not know it yet.
My wife and I were both well into our 30s when we got married. We both had a home, and a job, and a bank account, and credit cards. We kept stuff separate at first just out of habit, but as our marriage became a real union it became clear that separate accounts were an unnecessary complication, like having separate cars or separate silverware. Some things in a family are best managed as belonging to the family.
Why should "separate finances" = "I have no clue what my partner is doing"? You can have separate finances but still discuss things, show each other your balances, etc. You can have separate accounts but not keep secrets from each other.
If a couple has a happy, functioning relationship and manages their finances in a way that's different from how I do, I would not assume they're headed for disaster. Couples manage their finances is a wide variety of ways. If what they're doing works for them, I don't see any problem.
-
The old Get Rich Slowly blog had a long-running discussion about separate vs combined accounts, with J.D. (the blogger) always arguing in favor of keeping everything separate.
Two years later it turns out he wanted everything separate because he was planning to ditch his wife.
What's the first advice this forum always give people who have marital problems? Set up separate accounts immediately and start protecting your assets.
Combined finances, like living in the same house and having the same children, is part of melding your lives together. I think that any effort to keep your money separate is a either a sign of uncertainty about your relationship's longevity or the scar of some past emotional problem, like a profligate ex-partner who dragged you into bankruptcy.
I don't know why anyone would insist on separate accounts for any other reason. I'm open to suggestions, though. Haven't seen any good ones here thus far.
I see the same (invalid) argument being made about marriage. "If you're not married, then your partner could leave without legal or financial consequences. So if they are unwilling to get married, it must mean they are not committed".
I don't want my partner to be worried about external consequences that would result from ending the relationship. I don't want them to be worried about losing their money etc. if we break up. I want it to be easy (in terms of external consequences) to end the relationship.
That way, I know that if we are together, it's because we both truly want to be. Not for any other reason. That's how I know that we are more committed than if we did have external ties weighing us down - because we would have no reason to be together if we weren't committed.
It's the same for separate finances. My partner and I keep finances separate primarily for other reasons, but the reasoning above also applies.
-
I just find it easier to keep track of things if they are separate.
I concur!
What is it that you find important to keep track of that separate accounts facilitates?
I understand the idea of separate accounts as a contrivance to track monthly "personal allowances" as part of a budget line item. Or if you are just keeping fully separate accounts out of convenience to avoid the hassle of opening yet another [joint] account. But why is it important to delineate who had "contributed" a certain amount to certain expenses such as the rent check? It seems like extra work. Why not just transfer money as needed when one account gets too low?
-
Why should "separate finances" = "I have no clue what my partner is doing"?
Because that's what "separate" means?
I have no problem with maintaining multiple accounts. But if you're using multiple accounts to conceal your financial life, then I think your relationship has a problem.
I also have no qualms with having multiple bedrooms, unless you're using your private bedroom to do something your partner wouldn't approve of, then I think that's a problem. Same deal.
You can have separate finances but still discuss things, show each other your balances, etc. You can have separate accounts but not keep secrets from each other.
Sure. In that case, I wouldn't consider your finances separate. Maybe just inadequately unified. It just facilitates problems, though I concede it doesn't necessarily create them.
The problem arises when you each consider some funds as belonging to you, because that opens up the possibility of resentment or power struggles over who pays for what, or a sense of entitlement that one person should be able to spend "their" money however they want to. I don't think that's healthy in a marriage.
-
We have always had separate finances. There is no lack of trust. We are both retired and our finances are still divided. We are both frugal and we both have rather more in retirement than is necessary - a WR of about 1%. We have very different investment styles, and it would drive each of us crazy if we were committed to a single strategy for investment. I have made rather more from my investments over the years than he has, but he has been very comfortable in the way he has invested. This has worked for us for well over 30 years with NO FIGHTS.
Originally we didn't know what the other had and if one of us needed a loan from the other we got it. Now we do know each other's worth and we have joint accounts that we each pay our own bills from.
-
I hear of/know married couples that keep their money in separate accounts and divvy up expenses (e.g. he pays for rent, she pays for utilities). We've been out to dinner where there is a discussion on who is paying (between the two of them). I'm curious, why do people do this? My wife and I look at our money as one big pot and I can't imagine doing otherwise. Granted, we make similar amounts so maybe that makes it easier, but I would think that having separate accounts would cause unnecessary arguments and breed resentment.
OP, I also think that when one person cuts down on their income to raise a child, for example, having all the money in one pot helps avoid resentment. We do most of our shopping together (we don't shop much), but can you imagine having to do a transfer to your spouse when they go out to buy groceries?
-
I don't really understand why people do it either. We don't feel resentment for each other in spending money because it's all in a budget. There's no need to separate it out if you've agreed on how to spend your money that month. I make roughly twice as much as DH, but would never consider a separate account.
Question: why do you think having two accounts implies not having one budget? Also, why do you assume two accounts means resentment? People with separate accounts can also just as easily agree on a budget, and share in decisions equally...
Because people have already commented to that very effect in this thread and it's a common theme among couples in my own experience.
The number one cause of divorce are money fights- and I'd turn the question around- why is it beneficial to keep separate accounts? There really isn't a reason for married people to not have joint checking accounts unless one doesn't trust the other person with "their" money (which is ridiculous because there is no such thing as "my money" in a marriage). In that case, marriage counseling is probably in order if one can't trust the other.
Hm, I feel like I've mentioned all our reasons for keeping separate accounts, and why it works for us. It's clear that people have their own preferences. It's crazy to me that some people here think separate accounts = headed for divorce! That is like saying two sinks in the ensuite bathroom = headed for divorce. We like having separate accounts because that's the way we're most comfortable, we have open communication, similar spending habits, and it doesn't cause us any problems. It is in no way a sign of mistrust, and it simply shows your ignorance and closed mindedness to be making this association. There's no "my money" and "his money" in marriage, but we have separate accounts because there's no reason NOT to. It's just a matter of convenience. Separate accounts does not mean that the money is divided separately. It's just a clerical thing and doesn't make the money his or hers, just as two sinks in the bathroom doesn't mean the water only belongs to one person.
If joint accounts were all it took to prevent divorce then everyone would be doing it. Life is not that simple. I'll leave it at that :)
Eta: I will add that trust doesn't come from a bank statement, shared or otherwise. Trust comes from knowing that my partner and I are on the same page, and sharing the same path. A bank statement can't help you trust someone. Think about that.
-
I can't imagine all the money being in one pot and the arguments that would come from each judging the other's expenditures. :-)
We got married late in life, we already have all our own things and accounts. Just don't see any reason to go and combine them when having them separate works so well.
Exactly this.
-
I can't imagine all the money being in one pot and the arguments that would come from each judging the other's expenditures. :-)
We got married late in life, we already have all our own things and accounts. Just don't see any reason to go and combine them when having them separate works so well.
Exactly this.
+1
-
you had separate money and your own way of managing it before marriage. In our case we lived together. Why change a system that has been working just b/c you put some label on your relationship.
-
I just read Sols post. Ok, now we are getting into some ridiculous nitpicking in semantics.
My DH and I have separate accounts in the sense that we do not have a joint account. Isn't that what everyone means by keeping "separate accounts"? I assumed that was what we all meant. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Neither of us has a secret account on the Cayman islands, if that's all of you people's definition of "separate." What I assume we all mean by separate accounts is the fact that he has his own bank accounts, I have mine, and we do not have a joint account. We still talk about our finances often, and I know what is in his accounts, as he knows what's in mine. The money that's in our accounts is still "our money" even though we prefer to have our own bank accounts because quite honestly that's the way it's always worked for us and we are happy with our banks etc. If that's not "separate", then what do we want to call it here for the sake of clarity?
Eta: has it ever occurred to you guys that people with joint bank accounts can also have secret accounts and not trust each other with their spending habits? Just because a married couple shares one bank account does not mean that they can't have secrets. Trust is trust. Communication is communication. Lack of trust and communication is what causes conflicts that can lead to divorce. Not something as trivial as whether or not they have a joint account.
-
The old Get Rich Slowly blog had a long-running discussion about separate vs combined accounts, with J.D. (the blogger) always arguing in favor of keeping everything separate.
Two years later it turns out he wanted everything separate because he was planning to ditch his wife.
What's the first advice this forum always give people who have marital problems? Set up separate accounts immediately and start protecting your assets.
Combined finances, like living in the same house and having the same children, is part of melding your lives together. I think that any effort to keep your money separate is a either a sign of uncertainty about your relationship's longevity or the scar of some past emotional problem, like a profligate ex-partner who dragged you into bankruptcy.
I don't know why anyone would insist on separate accounts for any other reason. I'm open to suggestions, though. Haven't seen any good ones here thus far.
I see the same (invalid) argument being made about marriage. "If you're not married, then your partner could leave without legal or financial consequences. So if they are unwilling to get married, it must mean they are not committed".
I don't want my partner to be worried about external consequences that would result from ending the relationship. I don't want them to be worried about losing their money etc. if we break up. I want it to be easy (in terms of external consequences) to end the relationship.
That way, I know that if we are together, it's because we both truly want to be. Not for any other reason. That's how I know that we are more committed than if we did have external ties weighing us down - because we would have no reason to be together if we weren't committed.
It's the same for separate finances. My partner and I keep finances separate primarily for other reasons, but the reasoning above also applies.
I am in this exact school of thought. SO and I have been cohabiting for 4 1/2 years. If/when we get married I prefer keeping our finances just the way they have been thus far. We have different risk tolerance, different spending values, and she is not as gung ho about FIRE as I am. I want her to feel no pressure to have to do what I think is best. I don't want to have to justify myself either. Different strokes for different folks.
-
When we married, we had -- between us -- $200, 2 college educations, 2 jobs, and a brand-new mortgage. So we pretty much started from zero.
It seems to me that if you're assuming that marriage is forever, your finances must blend with your lives. At times our input into the marriage hasn't been equal: For example, when our children were born, I took relatively lengthy maternity leaves. He "carried me" then. However, my work-based retirement investments outpace his; thus, we put away a greater proportion of my salary for the future, and we live on more of his now. Yet we consider all the money "ours".
How would you do anything else? Would you ever say to your spouse, "Well, I'm going to retire now. Too bad you can't." or "I'm planning a cruise next summer -- can you afford your ticket?" I doubt it. In the end, you're putting all the money together anyway. Why create artificial boundaries in the meantime?
Having said that, I can imagine that people who are married late in life -- especially if they have children -- would not fit this bill. For example, if I were to lose my husband now, then I remarried, I think it would be right to maintain HIS assets to be passed on to HIS children. And ditto for any stepchildren who might come into the marriage -- they should be entitled to anything left to them by their real mother. That gets kind of sticky.
-
When we married, we had -- between us -- $200, 2 college educations, 2 jobs, and a brand-new mortgage. So we pretty much started from zero.
It seems to me that if you're assuming that marriage is forever, your finances must blend with your lives. At times our input into the marriage hasn't been equal: For example, when our children were born, I took relatively lengthy maternity leaves. He "carried me" then. However, my work-based retirement investments outpace his; thus, we put away a greater proportion of my salary for the future, and we live on more of his now. Yet we consider all the money "ours".
How would you do anything else? Would you ever say to your spouse, "Well, I'm going to retire now. Too bad you can't." or "I'm planning a cruise next summer -- can you afford your ticket?" I doubt it. In the end, you're putting all the money together anyway. Why create artificial boundaries in the meantime?
Having said that, I can imagine that people who are married late in life -- especially if they have children -- would not fit this bill. For example, if I were to lose my husband now, then I remarried, I think it would be right to maintain HIS assets to be passed on to HIS children. And ditto for any stepchildren who might come into the marriage -- they should be entitled to anything left to them by their real mother. That gets kind of sticky.
+1000.
I think the key point is it is all "our money" when you're married. How do you fill out your taxes every year? At some point, you're going to have to open the books to the other person, so I don't see the point in a non-transparent accounting scheme the rest of the year.
There may be many legal / logical reasons to have numerous accounts, but there needs to be one budget and a consensus on how the family finances (current cashflow and long term goals) are run, along with discussion on the 'what-if' scenarios. Any accounting system can work as long as both parties agree to it and are flexible when 'real life' happens.
It is impossible to have separate finances when you're married. Even if you're going with the 'head-in-the-sand, do what you want with your money, I'll do what I want with mine, as long as the mortgage and bills get paid every month' approach, at some point (birth of a child, loss of a job, medical issue, etc.) an issue is going to arise where you are going to need access to the other's pile of funds. If you haven't agreed on what the expectations are for that, it's going to be an eye-opening experience. That's why I don't buy the "this way we never argue about money" argument for keeping his/her piles. I would much rather have had that discussion about how things will go PRIOR to getting married then have to deal with 'combining finances' during a time of stressful crisis. How many posts are on here where one partner suddenly finds MMM and the other partner isn't on board, causing resentment on both sides?
Heck, I would LOVE to see what happens when partner A writes a check from their account to Little Johnny for half of his college tuition, but partner B doesn't have the funds or flat out refuses to do the same for Little Johnny. I'm guessing Thanksgiving dinner just got a whole lot more interesting!
-
This is something my SO and I are talking about. We are planning to get married next year, have a baby this year, and buy a house. I am late 30's and he is early 40's. Both of us are high earners and were well established in our (pretty good) money habits before dating. He is not as mustachian as I am but he has been coming around slowly (paid off his student loans), but has a car loan.
On one hand I like the idea of combining finances because we have combined lives and it would make it easier to pay everything out of one pot then me write him a check for my share. On the other hand, we don't argue about money. We split all communal costs down the middle, but we spend (or not spend) the rest of the money as we want. We both save and max out our 401ks, but he spends a little more on hobbies than I do. We pretty much keep a budget together and talk to each other before making any large purchase (over $200). We also consider any debt each other has as "our debt".
Maybe when we get married next year and think about joint filing we will merge the bank accounts, but as of right now everything is working well.
-
We keep separate checking accounts but we both spend so little that it doesn't even matter. I don't care about the very little household expenses and who is paying for what. I care about the investment accounts and that we are getting closer and closer to FI every day. The most important thing is maxing the ROTHs, maxing 401's, and sending thousands to Vanguard each month. Who buys the milk is irrelevant.
If you have a spouse who isn't as frugal or doesn't earn as much income, it may be different.
-
I find it surprising that so many keep separate accounts. When you get married, unless there is a prenuptial agreement, legally all assets are shared 50-50. It doesn't matter who makes more, or who has more debt, if a divorce happened, it's going 50-50. Most expenses are shared, why complicate things by having separate accounts? I could see each person having a main account where everything is deposited, and then having a small amount withdrawn into two separate accounts for free spending if that is a concern, but other than that it seems to make everything more complicated.
And to the presents comment, if each person is working, each are contributing money, so I don't see how it becomes less special if it's from a shared account, the spouse is still using hard earned money to give something thoughtful.
-
I find it surprising that so many keep separate accounts. When you get married, unless there is a prenuptial agreement, legally all assets are shared 50-50. It doesn't matter who makes more, or who has more debt, if a divorce happened, it's going 50-50. Most expenses are shared, why complicate things by having separate accounts? I could see each person having a main account where everything is deposited, and then having a small amount withdrawn into two separate accounts for free spending if that is a concern, but other than that it seems to make everything more complicated.
And to the presents comment, if each person is working, each are contributing money, so I don't see how it becomes less special if it's from a shared account, the spouse is still using hard earned money to give something thoughtful.
Exactly! Thank you for saying this. This is my feeling for having separate accounts -- no matter who pays the bills, everything would be split 50/50 in a divorce, anyways.
We each have our own investment accounts, because they are registered. DH pays into my TFSA and he pays most of the bills so that I can invest my income in a taxable account. It's a form of income splitting, as a workaround. If he were to give me money to invest in my name, in a taxable account, then he would be taxed himself at his higher tax rate, as per attribution rules in Canada. If he pays all the bills and allows me to invest my own income, then I pay taxes at my lower rater. For us, it works. As you say, the money is shared, anyway. But since we are not legally allowed to do income splitting as a married couple with no kids and very different incomes, this is what works best for us financially.
Whatever works, people! Different strokes.
-
In the past, I had a bad situation with a live-in girlfriend stealing all my money from a joint bank account so I decided I would never risk that again -- no matter the circumstances. My wife and I have separate accounts at the same bank and a joint account into which we transfer our share of expenses and from which we pay our bills. It is much easier that way and we have never argued about money.
-
After doing some research (thanks, Wikipedia) I see that in the US you are allowed to split incomes if one spouse earns significantly more. This may be where some of the confusion here is coming from! I'm not sure if the people here in the separate income camp tend to be non-Americans, but this could be part of the issue. In Canada we all file taxes separately, and until very recently the government did not allow income splitting at all. We still don't, technically, although Harper has passed some bill recently that allows couples with kids to do some sort of income splitting. I haven't looked into it because it does not apply to us. But now it makes sense why people don't get the purpose of separate accounts! It really makes no difference in Canada. There's no financial reason to have a joint bank account, since even when married, we pay income taxes based on our individual incomes. And in marriage all assets are 50/50.
-
My parents have separate accounts, and mostly shared finances. They have a rough idea what the other has in their accounts of course, and divide up the financial responsibilities between the two of them.
They recently celebrated their 35th wedding anniversary and appear quite happy with each other so something must be going right:)
They have always counselled me to keep separate accounts. Not to keep secrets, nor as 'insurance' against a divorce (doesn't work anyway) but because it's easier to delegate responsibility that way. They argue that it means you don't need to feel like every detail of something that's your responsibility is examined by the SO. That sort of energy, they argue, is better invested eslewhere in teh relationship.
When (if? ) I marry, it will likely be separate accounts, separate responsibilities. And with the transparency thing? The most likely groom-to-be and I know what each other's financial situations and bank accounts look like anyway.
-
Please confirm with your own state law regarding divorce and assets. NOT all assets are 50/50 when you get married. Many states allow you to maintain the assets that you "brought into the marriage" upon divorce.
It doesn't matter what other people do. I think you find a system that works for you and your spouse and you use that system. Don't compare yourself to others ever!
-
My parents have separate accounts, and mostly shared finances. They have a rough idea what the other has in their accounts of course, and divide up the financial responsibilities between the two of them. . .
They have always counselled me to keep separate accounts. Not to keep secrets, nor as 'insurance' against a divorce (doesn't work anyway) but because it's easier to delegate responsibility that way. They argue that it means you don't need to feel like every detail of something that's your responsibility is examined by the SO. That sort of energy, they argue, is better invested eslewhere in the relationship.
I don't understand this. If you are married, you both have financial responsibility for everything and all financial decisions should be joint decisions.
And several people have said they maintain separate accounts because they don't have the same financial philosophy, investment risk tolerance, retirement goals, or spending habits. That's illogical - when you get married, you have to agree on spending, investments and retirement goals. You can't just do your own thing because you have different habits, or whatnot. You both should be intimately aware of each other's spending, etc.
If you feel like you would be scrutinized or uncomfortable by having joint accounts, that is a whole other issue that needs to be addressed. In marriage, you always need to be on the same page financially. That's your future and the future of your children, if you have them.
-
I don't know why anyone would insist on separate accounts for any other reason. I'm open to suggestions, though. Haven't seen any good ones here thus far.
I think it depends on what you mean by "separate." DH and I pay our bills from a joint account, but we each have our own bank account where we keep an agreed-upon portion of our paycheck to spend on what we like. The "separate" part means that we can't see what the other person is spending mad money on and can't pass judgment. I don't think this means we're headed for divorce.
+1. I'm 46. My SO is 51. We don't live together but if we did, we'd have one joint account from which all household bills and joint expenses (eating out) are paid and to which we each contribute equally (yes, we have discussed this). But we would also each maintain the bank accounts we currently have and our paycheck would be deposited there. Our financial goals are aligned and we cheer each other on "Look at my 401k balance!! Good job, honey!"
That said, we each have fairly entrenched habits around managing money flow. I use Mint and Quicken. I download transactions and reconcile nearly every day. I input all my anticipated payments for the coming month at the end of the current month.
He likes YNAB. He doesn't use Quicken because he has a program that his bank offers (which mine doesn't).
I have a spreadsheet that I love. He has one that he loves, with a different format that drives me nuts.
How and why would we try to scrap what works for each of us as individuals just because we're together? [rhetorical] We wouldn't argue over financial goals, but I could sure see arguing over Mint v. YNAB and I don't see any upside to changing habits that I've had since I got divorced 12 years ago.
-
I feel the way and my wife handle our finances would be considered separate my many. It's what we have always done and it is what works for us. We split all bills 50/50, discuss large purchases, and have to cover our own discretionary spending. I've attached a flow chart to help visualize how our separate accounts are handled. Overall, we have 2 joint accounts and a couple joint credit cards. Other than the joint accounts we do not have access to each others accounts. We do have a system in place in case one of us is incapacitated in some form where the other would need access to the accounts.
In the grand scheme of things I feel this helps us to discuss and be more open about our finances. We periodically sit down and discuss where we are at, how much we spent, how much we saved, how much cash we have..etc etc. We don't really care what the money was spent on as long we are hitting our targets (within reason of course, hookers may be frowned upon). This has more to do with our relationship than the system of how we handle our money.
I agree that there is a difference between having separate accounts as I detailed above vs keeping financials secret/hidden from each other.
-
My parents have separate accounts, and mostly shared finances. They have a rough idea what the other has in their accounts of course, and divide up the financial responsibilities between the two of them. . .
They have always counselled me to keep separate accounts. Not to keep secrets, nor as 'insurance' against a divorce (doesn't work anyway) but because it's easier to delegate responsibility that way. They argue that it means you don't need to feel like every detail of something that's your responsibility is examined by the SO. That sort of energy, they argue, is better invested eslewhere in the relationship.
I don't understand this. If you are married, you both have financial responsibility for everything and all financial decisions should be joint decisions.
And several people have said they maintain separate accounts because they don't have the same financial philosophy, investment risk tolerance, retirement goals, or spending habits. That's illogical - when you get married, you have to agree on spending, investments and retirement goals. You can't just do your own thing because you have different habits, or whatnot. You both should be intimately aware of each other's spending, etc.
If you feel like you would be scrutinized or uncomfortable by having joint accounts, that is a whole other issue that needs to be addressed. In marriage, you always need to be on the same page financially. That's your future and the future of your children, if you have them.
I'm in the same camp as you! It is so often discussed in case studies that one should be aware of where each dollar is going each month, but so many seem to be using separate accounts, separate spreadsheets, etc. Sounds like some are sharing information, but at that point what is the real purpose behind having separate accounts? If you plan to spend your life with someone, you should have an mutual understanding and agreement of where you both want to be, and each person should be 100% committed to those goals and objectives.
-
A former CW told me this story. He was away on a business trip and tried to take money out of an ATM. The request was declined. He found there was no money in any account at that bank. He wife took $30K out and then left him. It never got counted against her.
People may think things are split 50/50 in divorce, but this isn't necessarily the case. If DH is working and his 401K has grown a lot during marriage. A QDRO will give 1/2 of the increase to the DW possibly. In some states if someone takes a lot of money before they leave, that could be counted against them once finally in court. However, the amount divided up in divorce here is what is available once finally in court. So if someone sells the house and uses the money to pay attorneys fees or to bury their brother, the other person might not get half.
I didn't get a credit report from my ex before marriage and found out later that she had been siphoning off family money to pay pre-marriage debt she hadn't told me about.
It is too late in life for "a friend" to risk that his current DW who is menopausal, on oxicontin after surgery, and acting hateful as can be could be trusted.
(edit) Here's a URL about a spouse using a home equity line of credit before divorce:
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1990-01-29/business/9001080686_1_home-equity-credit-line-director-of-consumer-lending
Kudos to you in wonderful marriages. A word to the wise to the rest of us.
-
I feel the way and my wife handle our finances would be considered separate my many. It's what we have always done and it is what works for us. We split all bills 50/50, discuss large purchases, and have to cover our own discretionary spending. I've attached a flow chart to help visualize how our separate accounts are handled. Overall, we have 2 joint accounts and a couple joint credit cards. Other than the joint accounts we do not have access to each others accounts. Though this is taken care of in a will if one of us were to die.
In the grand scheme of things I feel this helps us to discuss and be more open about our finances. We periodically sit down and discuss where we are at, how much we spent, how much we saved, how much cash we have..etc etc. We don't really care what the money was spent on as long we are hitting our targets (within reason of course, hookers may be frowned upon). This has more to do with our relationship than the system of how we handle our money.
I agree that there is a difference between having separate accounts as I detailed above vs keeping financials secret/hidden from each other.
I dig it!
I am sure many here know who the MadFIentist is. I listened to a very good podcast episode where he talked about why him and his wife have separate finances. He wants to pursue FI, she wants to continue practicing optometry. They have a system that works, sure in the eyes of the law its all shared money. But why should anyone conform to what someone else thinks is normal in terms of anything, let alone finances and marriage.
-
We do this but not for any other reason than laziness. We both know eachother's account names/passwords. But we set up online bill pay through one or the other account and don't want to have to copy over the information to another one!
It's not really splitting the cost either, it's just picking which account to pull from. We use YNAB so it's all one big fund anyways. If we're making a big purchase, we just take from whichever account has more money in it. We don't care about where it's coming from for any other reason than convenience.
-
You both should be intimately aware of each other's spending, etc.
While I agree with your statement that couples need to be on the same page financially, this statement bugs me quite a bit. Do you suggest I comb over everything my wife spends to see what she is spending money on...and her mine?
-
Why should "separate finances" = "I have no clue what my partner is doing"?
Because that's what "separate" means?
I have no problem with maintaining multiple accounts. But if you're using multiple accounts to conceal your financial life, then I think your relationship has a problem.
I also have no qualms with having multiple bedrooms, unless you're using your private bedroom to do something your partner wouldn't approve of, then I think that's a problem. Same deal.
You can have separate finances but still discuss things, show each other your balances, etc. You can have separate accounts but not keep secrets from each other.
Sure. In that case, I wouldn't consider your finances separate. Maybe just inadequately unified. It just facilitates problems, though I concede it doesn't necessarily create them.
The problem arises when you each consider some funds as belonging to you, because that opens up the possibility of resentment or power struggles over who pays for what, or a sense of entitlement that one person should be able to spend "their" money however they want to. I don't think that's healthy in a marriage.
Ok, well, this is getting a little ridiculous. If you're not keeping secrets from each other you don't actually have separate finances, despite the fact that you don't have a single account with more than one name on it?
I disagree that it facilitates problems. For me, joint finances would facilitate a whole heap of stress and problems that I see no reason to have, particularly when we have a functional, transparent system now, are both happy, and on the same page with long term goals and spending.
I see it sort of like hobbies. Some couples do the joined-at-the-hip thing and do everything together. Some couples have totally separate hobbies. Most couples are probably somewhere in the middle. In our case, we have a handful of joint activities like hiking and travel, but do the majority separate since, for example, I can't wrap my head around D&D and he has no interest in becoming a ballerina. I don't think any system is superior to another - it totally depends on the couple involved and what they prefer.
-
Ok, well, this is getting a little ridiculous. If you're not keeping secrets from each other you don't actually have separate finances, despite the fact that you don't have a single account with more than one name on it?
Much of the argument discussion in this thread revolves around the definition of separate finances. From what I have read on this thread, no one has claimed that they are totally oblivious to what their SO's financial state is. Again, semantics.
-
Ok, well, this is getting a little ridiculous. If you're not keeping secrets from each other you don't actually have separate finances, despite the fact that you don't have a single account with more than one name on it?
Much of the argument discussion in this thread revolves around the definition of separate finances. From what I have read on this thread, no one has claimed that they are totally oblivious to what their SO's financial state is. Again, semantics.
I absolutely agree.
Sol, it seems like what you're saying is that being oblivious about your partner's money is a problem. Everyone agrees with that! That is unrelated to how many names are on your accounts however, and is quite common even among (non-mustachian) couples with joint finances.
-
For me, joint finances would facilitate a whole heap of stress and problems that I see no reason to have, particularly when we have a functional, transparent system now, are both happy, and on the same page with long term goals and spending.
What problems do combining finances create? I got married last year, and all it took was opening a joint account, and changing the routing number on direct deposit. I can understand continuing what works if both spouses have access to see spending (not necessarily individual expenses, but I'd certainly want to know an amount), but I honestly do not see how combining accounts really leads to stress and problems, if anything it makes things easier as it is one account you can put automatic billing on and not having to worry about going into 2 accounts, dividing costs, making sure two payments go through, etc.
-
For me, joint finances would facilitate a whole heap of stress and problems that I see no reason to have, particularly when we have a functional, transparent system now, are both happy, and on the same page with long term goals and spending.
What problems do combining finances create? I got married last year, and all it took was opening a joint account, and changing the routing number on direct deposit. I can understand continuing what works if both spouses have access to see spending (not necessarily individual expenses, but I'd certainly want to know an amount), but I honestly do not see how combining accounts really leads to stress and problems, if anything it makes things easier as it is one account you can put automatic billing on and not having to worry about going into 2 accounts, dividing costs, making sure two payments go through, etc.
We have different comfort levels for things like minimum chequing account balances, and would judge the hell out of each other's spending (neither of us is extravagant, but we spend on different things).
We both believe in living as close to a stress-free life as possible. Having done so for many years, I think it's one of the best things you can do for your mental health.
-
We do this but not for any other reason than laziness. We both know eachother's account names/passwords. But we set up online bill pay through one or the other account and don't want to have to copy over the information to another one!
It's not really splitting the cost either, it's just picking which account to pull from. We use YNAB so it's all one big fund anyways. If we're making a big purchase, we just take from whichever account has more money in it. We don't care about where it's coming from for any other reason than convenience.
We're like this, too. At this point, it's way more work to merge everything than to just keep it the way it was when we met. But I'll pay bills that are in my name from "his" bank account, and vice versa. It's all our money, in the end.
-
Sounds like some are sharing information, but at that point what is the real purpose behind having separate accounts? If you plan to spend your life with someone, you should have an mutual understanding and agreement of where you both want to be, and each person should be 100% committed to those goals and objectives.
I guess what a lot of people feel is that if you know you're both committed to those goals and objectives, you don't need to actually see how they're spending every cent? You can just trust that they're making decisions that will help both of you achieve those goals and objectives?
-
Reading through some of the replies here, I find this discussion very interesting.
My wife and I are recently married ~ 2 years. When we got married she was at school, so I made her joint on my account and gave her my bank card, because there wasn't any money in her account.
Since then we have canceled her accounts because they were charging us fees.
I completely agree with the commenters that are saying that in a marriage your finances along with your lives and future goals need to be on the same page. You can have different goals but you need support from your husband/wife to make it happen.
But you don't need a joint account.
If paying one bill from His account and paying another bill from Her account makes sense, go for it. Strive to eliminate any His money Her money ideas from the relationship, we should always give ourselves (money, goals, life etc) as a gift to our spouses.
-
I don't understand this. If you are married, you both have financial responsibility for everything and all financial decisions should be joint decisions.
If you plan to spend your life with someone, you should have an mutual understanding and agreement of where you both want to be, and each person should be 100% committed to those goals and objectives.
And what if the agreement was mutual to have separate accounts? Is that allowed? Because you guys seem to think that everything needs to be agreed upon, but somehow fail to realize that having separate accounts was decided jointly as well.
-
You both should be intimately aware of each other's spending, etc.
While I agree with your statement that couples need to be on the same page financially, this statement bugs me quite a bit. Do you suggest I comb over everything my wife spends to see what she is spending money on...and her mine?
A) Why would you be "combing" through each other's spending? My husband and I have joint accounts and credit cards, and we track everything on Mint. So it's all out there, in black and white. And why shouldn't it be? There is no combing involved. We know what we are spending money on, simple as that.
B) I can't understand why spending would be a private matter in a marriage. Keeping things separate to avoid disagreements is just putting it off, possibly creating a greater fallout later.
Do I like that my husband buys expensive energy drinks from the gas station? No. Do I judge him for it? No, he is an adult and I trust that he spends money as he sees fit, and vice versa. But I might discuss him buying his drinks in bulk to save money.
Listen, marital money is marital money (however your state handles assets brought in/gifts). And your SO can rob you blind even if you have separate finances.
-
1) We have very different ways of managing our bank accounts and credit cards. DH is set up for an email notice on Every Damn Transaction. That would drive me NUTS. I just check my accounts every few days. His salary is more than half again what mine is, and so a couple Big Bills going to him and many Smaller Bills going to me ended up proportional. I also did not marry until my late twenties, so giving up full autonomy was not easy.
2) One of my relatives was in an abusive relationship- her husband kept sole access on "their" bank account, but nothing stayed in it long. I won't go into the gory details, but not having money/an account of her own and all paychecks monitored made it more difficult for her to leave the relationship. Obviously I don't think DH would be the type, but I still wanted my own account, subject only to me. It's a security blanket. DH had a small inheritance, and meant to keep that in an account with his name only, so he couldn't complain if I wanted my own. IIRC, he told me to on his own initiative, from the experiences of his own family.
-
I don't understand this. If you are married, you both have financial responsibility for everything and all financial decisions should be joint decisions.
If you plan to spend your life with someone, you should have an mutual understanding and agreement of where you both want to be, and each person should be 100% committed to those goals and objectives.
And what if the agreement was mutual to have separate accounts? Is that allowed? Because you guys seem to think that everything needs to be agreed upon, but somehow fail to realize that having separate accounts was decided jointly as well.
Obviously, people agree to have separate accounts. That's how they have separate accounts (I would hope). The question was, why do they decide to do that?
-
Obviously, people agree to have separate accounts. ... The question was, why do they decide to do that?
Jezebel, this question has been answered a dozen or more times already in this thread. Give it a rest. Clearly separate accounts is just not for you, and thankfully nobody is forcing you to have them, since you clearly don't understand how a marriage can work with this system. So just leave it alone as one of the mysteries of your known universe. We can all continue to enjoy our own methods of organizing our own households. Amen.
-
A) Why would you be "combing" through each other's spending? My husband and I have joint accounts and credit cards, and we track everything on Mint. So it's all out there, in black and white. And why shouldn't it be? There is no combing involved. We know what we are spending money on, simple as that.
B) I can't understand why spending would be a private matter in a marriage. Keeping things separate to avoid disagreements is just putting it off, possibly creating a greater fallout later.
Do I like that my husband buys expensive energy drinks from the gas station? No. Do I judge him for it? No, he is an adult and I trust that he spends money as he sees fit, and vice versa. But I might discuss him buying his drinks in bulk to save money.
To me intimately aware means you know everything your SO spends money on. Which I would assume means you look over your statements or mint outputs and are asking him what that expense was. Sounds like combing if you want to define it. Personally, I don't care what my wife is spending money, nor do I really have a need or desire to know. I ultimately only care about the amount. If we are hitting our savings goals, that's all that matters.
Listen, marital money is marital money (however your state handles assets brought in/gifts). And your SO can rob you blind even if you have separate finances.
I don't think anyone has argued that keeping finances separate is a way to protect yourself in a divorce. It might simplify things ones a couple decides to separate. (I guess one person claimed being wiped out by a SO with a joint account).
In the end it is about what works for the couple. The key is communication and trust (as any part of a relationship). The means to this end really doesn't matter. People are always going to have different systems and methods. There are no absolutes here.
-
The question was, why do they decide to do that?
And think that was answered too. Mostly for convenience. Sometimes for laziness. And the remainder because of complicated financial situations that can occur in a 2nd marriage.
Trying to make this subject seem like it's some reflection of the strength of the partnership is silly. Lots of people do things lots of different ways. There's no one right answer. Joint accounts seem like a lot of extra work to me/us, so we just never got around to it. And yet we have a wonderful marriage. It's a miracle!
-
You both should be intimately aware of each other's spending, etc.
While I agree with your statement that couples need to be on the same page financially, this statement bugs me quite a bit. Do you suggest I comb over everything my wife spends to see what she is spending money on...and her mine?
A) Why would you be "combing" through each other's spending? My husband and I have joint accounts and credit cards, and we track everything on Mint. So it's all out there, in black and white. And why shouldn't it be? There is no combing involved. We know what we are spending money on, simple as that.
B) I can't understand why spending would be a private matter in a marriage. Keeping things separate to avoid disagreements is just putting it off, possibly creating a greater fallout later.
Do I like that my husband buys expensive energy drinks from the gas station? No. Do I judge him for it? No, he is an adult and I trust that he spends money as he sees fit, and vice versa. But I might discuss him buying his drinks in bulk to save money.
We also track everything on Mint, despite having separate accounts. We have complete transparency.
B) makes no sense. Why would there be fallout? Why couldn't I continue to buy the occasional soda or my boyfriend the occasional video game out of our own money indefinitely, without judging each other? It's worked excellently for 5+ years so far, why would it suddenly implode?
Compromising for the sake of compromise is not some sort of accomplishment. Analogy time: Me and him prefer different types of peanut butter (crunchy and smooth), and both love peanut butter and eat it every day. We choose to stock both types, so we both get exactly what we want all the time. Could we compromise, and for example alternate between the two, or find some type that's that's in the middle (mildly crunchy?)? Sure. Would there be any advantage to that over our current system? No. Are there any consequences to keeping our own separate jars? No. Does it indicate anything else about our relationship, besides that we prefer to eat different types of peanut butter? No. Will there be any long term fallout from not compromising on this? Oh HELL no.
-
For me, joint finances would facilitate a whole heap of stress and problems that I see no reason to have, particularly when we have a functional, transparent system now, are both happy, and on the same page with long term goals and spending.
What problems do combining finances create? I got married last year, and all it took was opening a joint account, and changing the routing number on direct deposit. I can understand continuing what works if both spouses have access to see spending (not necessarily individual expenses, but I'd certainly want to know an amount), but I honestly do not see how combining accounts really leads to stress and problems, if anything it makes things easier as it is one account you can put automatic billing on and not having to worry about going into 2 accounts, dividing costs, making sure two payments go through, etc.
We have different comfort levels for things like minimum chequing account balances, and would judge the hell out of each other's spending (neither of us is extravagant, but we spend on different things).
We both believe in living as close to a stress-free life as possible. Having done so for many years, I think it's one of the best things you can do for your mental health.
This. I have several friends who have joint accounts. One or the other is constantly making comments about how the other spends. She thinks its wasteful for him to spend money on unnecessary car modifications, he thinks its unnecessary for her to spend money on yoga classes. Both equal the same amount of money, but since it comes out of the joint account there is a lot of judging.
-
Are there any consequences to keeping our own separate jars?
What if you finish your jar first, and have to fill that craving by dipping into his jar. What would happen then? WHAT? Lord, think of the children!
-
A) Why would you be "combing" through each other's spending? My husband and I have joint accounts and credit cards, and we track everything on Mint. So it's all out there, in black and white. And why shouldn't it be? There is no combing involved. We know what we are spending money on, simple as that.
B) I can't understand why spending would be a private matter in a marriage. Keeping things separate to avoid disagreements is just putting it off, possibly creating a greater fallout later.
Do I like that my husband buys expensive energy drinks from the gas station? No. Do I judge him for it? No, he is an adult and I trust that he spends money as he sees fit, and vice versa. But I might discuss him buying his drinks in bulk to save money.
To me intimately aware means you know everything your SO spends money on. Which I would assume means you look over your statements or mint outputs and are asking him what that expense was. Sounds like combing if you want to define it. Personally, I don't care what my wife is spending money, nor do I really have a need or desire to know. I ultimately only care about the amount. If we are hitting our savings goals, that's all that matters.
We do know what we are spending money on. Because we have one pot of money and we track all of our accounts in Mint. I have never asked my husband what an expense was (nor him of me). If you don't care what she is spending money on, what difference does it make to know? There's no harm, and tracking spending is incredibly useful in achieving financial goals/independence.
-
Did anyone say that there was anything wrong with a marriage that keeps finances separate, much less that it would implode? There is a distinct level of hyperbole in some of these responses that seems to avoid an actual discussion of the issues.
If people are keeping separate accounts because they don't want to be judged by their partners, that IS an actual problem that goes far beyond the joint v separate debate. If people are transparent with finances, but simply too lazy to comingle funds, fine, but that doesn't really add anything substantive to the discussion.
-
My parents have separate accounts, and mostly shared finances. They have a rough idea what the other has in their accounts of course, and divide up the financial responsibilities between the two of them. . .
They have always counselled me to keep separate accounts. Not to keep secrets, nor as 'insurance' against a divorce (doesn't work anyway) but because it's easier to delegate responsibility that way. They argue that it means you don't need to feel like every detail of something that's your responsibility is examined by the SO. That sort of energy, they argue, is better invested eslewhere in the relationship.
I don't understand this. If you are married, you both have financial responsibility for everything and all financial decisions should be joint decisions.
Why does having separate accounts and split finances prevent this?
My wife and I discuss all major purchases, despite having accounts and incomes that are completely separate from one another. However, and this is a benefit mentioned earlier in the thread, not having eyes on one another's money prevents us from scrutinizing small purchases. If she wants a manicure, it is none of my business. She pays for it with money she earned from her checking account. My finances aren't impacted.
I should mention that we don't accumulate credit card debt. She doesn't even have one, and the one I have is a low balance daily use card that I pay down each month. If debt was in the picture, I could see having more joint oversight. But cash? We both love our independence and are happier this way.
On the subject of trust, I would turn the issue back on it's head: Having separate accounts isn't a sign that you have something to hide. It's a sign that you don't think that your spouse does. It takes a great amount of trust, and mutual belief in shared values, to be comfortable letting your other half have their own space financially.
-
Did anyone say that there was anything wrong with a marriage that keeps finances separate, much less that it would implode? There is a distinct level of hyperbole in some of these responses that seems to avoid an actual discussion of the issues.
If people are keeping separate accounts because they don't want to be judged by their partners, that IS an actual problem that goes far beyond the joint v separate debate. If people are transparent with finances, but simply too lazy to comingle funds, fine, but that doesn't really add anything substantive to the discussion.
LOL!
-
For those with separate accounts, how did you initially divvy up expenses, and do you have plans on how to address future income disparity (e.g. loss of job, big pay cut/increase)? This discussion has been very interesting and I do see benefits of separate accounts, but the potential for future complications would make be nervous if I did not have a set plan in place.
-
Did anyone say that there was anything wrong with a marriage that keeps finances separate, much less that it would implode? There is a distinct level of hyperbole in some of these responses that seems to avoid an actual discussion of the issues.
Yes, a number of people have said that there's something wrong with a marriage that keeps finances separate - that's what this whole discussion is about.
If people are keeping separate accounts because they don't want to be judged by their partners, that IS an actual problem that goes far beyond the joint v separate debate. If people are transparent with finances, but simply too lazy to comingle funds, fine, but that doesn't really add anything substantive to the discussion.
Just because you see something as problematic does not mean the people who are actually in that situation do. Maybe it would be a problem for you, in which case don't do it, but try to expand your mind to recognize that many people do this and it is NOT a problem for them, and does not harm their relationship or happiness.
-
For those with separate accounts, how did you initially divvy up expenses, and do you have plans on how to address future income disparity (e.g. loss of job, big pay cut/increase)? This discussion has been very interesting and I do see benefits of separate accounts, but the potential for future complications would make be nervous if I did not have a set plan in place.
We split expenses 50/50. We have similar incomes now, but if there was a large disparity we would scale our lifestyle and expenses to the comfort level of the lower earner. In the case of job loss, the person would find a new job.
-
You don't see it as problematic that people don't want their partners to see what they are spending money on? Ok, must be just me who wouldn't want to be financial tied to someone who wants to hid their spending when we are legally/financially considered to be the same person. Guess I'm nuts.
I never said there was anything wrong with a marriage that keeps finances separate, only that there could be something wrong with the underlying reason, if it involves secrecy. That is a pretty obvious distinction to me.
-
For those with separate accounts, how did you initially divvy up expenses, and do you have plans on how to address future income disparity (e.g. loss of job, big pay cut/increase)? This discussion has been very interesting and I do see benefits of separate accounts, but the potential for future complications would make be nervous if I did not have a set plan in place.
Great question:
1. Before we were married, my wife lived in my house. She paid for her bills (car, phone...) and personal expenses and I paid for mine. Mine included the house and utilities. We always went dutch when we went out or did any kind of social activity that cost money. After we were married, nothing changed. Well, now she pays for the grocery bill. But that's it.
2. In the event that she loses her job, she will continue to pay her bills from her savings. If those are exhausted, absorbing her expenses temporarily would be trivial to me. If I lose my job, then she would contribute to household expenses like utilities much more aggressively until I find work again. The mortgage can be paid with my pension and savings almost indefinitely.
-
You don't see it as problematic that people don't want their partners to see what they are spending money on? Ok, must be just me who wouldn't want to be financial tied to someone who wants to hid their spending when we are legally/financially considered to be the same person. Guess I'm nuts.
Separate finances =/= hiding things, as multiple people have said in this thread.
-
You don't see it as problematic that people don't want their partners to see what they are spending money on? Ok, must be just me who wouldn't want to be financial tied to someone who wants to hid their spending when we are legally/financially considered to be the same person. Guess I'm nuts.
jezebel, you're kind of trolling at this point. To me, if the trust isn't there, it doesn't matter whether you share accounts or not. If the trust *is* there it also doesn't matter if you share accounts or not. Different strokes. Do what works for you and stop belittling other people's commitments. The thing that's making you sound nuts is your refusal to acknowledge other people's experiences.
-
What really irks me about this thread and the conversation we're having here is that people who are so against a married couple having separate finances aren't really curious at all to understand why and how this can work for some people. They're not really here to learn or to understand. It seems like these people are here to make themselves feel superior, and to prove that their way is the right way.
Look, if you really want to understand how people can have trusting, communicative relationships, then that's one thing -- and people here are trying to explain it to you. But please don't come in here and pretend to be curious while immediately slamming other people for their decisions. I'm not really fond of answering pretend, judgy questions that are thinly disguised as curiosity. You're ruining it for those who might actually have been interested in how people arrange their lives with separate finances, such as (I assume) the OP. Don't drag the thread through your own need to 'prove' yourself superior. It's a waste of everybody's time and energy.
-
You both should be intimately aware of each other's spending, etc.
While I agree with your statement that couples need to be on the same page financially, this statement bugs me quite a bit. Do you suggest I comb over everything my wife spends to see what she is spending money on...and her mine?
We budget every single dollar we have, so yes, I'd expect that. But that works for us. Anything else would be weird (again, to us). I mean, we combined our genes to make offspring. It's a little bit more intimate than our spending.
Now, we each get fun money. That can be spent however we want. We both laugh about how we can't believe that the other spends it on X (most of the time it's coffee for me).
-
Keeping finances separate (including prenup) has helped my wife and I avoid a lot of potential stress and arguments. She really wanted everything separate because she had previously been in a relationship where her ex was very controlling and the "joint" accounts basically became his. I wanted the separate accounts because I think she spends money like crazy, but since it is HER money that SHE earned I don't really care. We can log into each others Mint and talk about money and things regularly and we are gradually growing closer in style but its a lengthy process. Thus far we haven't had a fight about money and haven't had a serious fight about anything in 8 years so I think it is going well.
-
Now I'm trolling? Several posters have commented that they, or people they know, don't have joint accounts because they don't want their spending to be judged by their (financial) partners. I specifically said that I would have a problem with this in my relationship. And no, I still don't understand why it isn't a problem.
In the event that she loses her job, she will continue to pay her bills from her savings. If those are exhausted, absorbing her expenses temporarily would be trivial to me.
And this is baffling to me. Your wife loses her job and even though her expenses are trivial to you, she has to continue to pay them out of her (separate) savings? It appears that I am too dense to continue this conversation and should just bow out of this thread.
-
So how does separate accounts work when one parent is stay at home and not bringing in any income?
-
Three things:
- Funny anecdote, an employee of mine complained to no end when the company decided to stop cutting paychecks. You had to choose between direct deposit or a pay card. Seems he liked to keep a few bucks for himself after cashing the check as his wife had pretty tight purse-strings.
- Try not to conflate separate bank accounts (topic title) and separate finances (no visibility into each other's finances)
- I think separate accounts would require more trust than a joint account would. If you can't trust your spouse/SO to have a separate account what can you trust?
-
What really irks me about this thread and the conversation we're having here is that people who are so against a married couple having separate finances aren't really curious at all to understand why and how this can work for some people. They're not really here to learn or to understand. It seems like these people are here to make themselves feel superior, and to prove that their way is the right way.
Look, if you really want to understand how people can have trusting, communicative relationships, then that's one thing -- and people here are trying to explain it to you. But please don't come in here and pretend to be curious while immediately slamming other people for their decisions. I'm not really fond of answering pretend, judgy questions that are thinly disguised as curiosity. You're ruining it for those who might actually have been interested in how people arrange their lives with separate finances, such as (I assume) the OP. Don't drag the thread through your own need to 'prove' yourself superior. It's a waste of everybody's time and energy.
Standing and clapping after reading this post. You nailed it.
-
Now I'm trolling? Several posters have commented that they, or people they know, don't have joint accounts because they don't want their spending to be judged by their (financial) partners. I specifically said that I would have a problem with this in my relationship. And no, I still don't understand why it isn't a problem.
The problem with your arguments is that you have been speaking in absolutes. In your main argument you even underlined an absolutist statement for emphasis. Your other main argument is against keeping financial details secrets or hiding spending...which I do not believe anyone has advocated for nor claimed they do this (please correct me if I am wrong).
Clarification: The reason this seems like trolling is because you seem to believe that your way is the only correct way and have almost entirely refused to acknowledge that there are different ways to handle things other than a few relatively dismissive statements. In my opinion.
-
What really irks me about this thread and the conversation we're having here is that people who are so against a married couple having separate finances aren't really curious at all to understand why and how this can work for some people. They're not really here to learn or to understand. It seems like these people are here to make themselves feel superior, and to prove that their way is the right way.
Look, if you really want to understand how people can have trusting, communicative relationships, then that's one thing -- and people here are trying to explain it to you. But please don't come in here and pretend to be curious while immediately slamming other people for their decisions. I'm not really fond of answering pretend, judgy questions that are thinly disguised as curiosity. You're ruining it for those who might actually have been interested in how people arrange their lives with separate finances, such as (I assume) the OP. Don't drag the thread through your own need to 'prove' yourself superior. It's a waste of everybody's time and energy.
Standing and clapping after reading this post. You nailed it.
+1
-
In the event that she loses her job, she will continue to pay her bills from her savings. If those are exhausted, absorbing her expenses temporarily would be trivial to me.
And this is baffling to me. Your wife loses her job and even though her expenses are trivial to you, she has to continue to pay them out of her (separate) savings? It appears that I am too dense to continue this conversation and should just bow out of this thread.
Cash savings exist for several reasons. One of them is to serve as a substitute for lost income. There is no reason for me to pay my wife's expenses if she can afford to do so herself.
Your wanton judgement of others in this thread is unnecessary and unwelcome. Perhaps it's best that you DO leave.
-
What really irks me about this thread and the conversation we're having here is that people who are so against a married couple having separate finances aren't really curious at all to understand why and how this can work for some people. They're not really here to learn or to understand. It seems like these people are here to make themselves feel superior, and to prove that their way is the right way.
Look, if you really want to understand how people can have trusting, communicative relationships, then that's one thing -- and people here are trying to explain it to you. But please don't come in here and pretend to be curious while immediately slamming other people for their decisions. I'm not really fond of answering pretend, judgy questions that are thinly disguised as curiosity. You're ruining it for those who might actually have been interested in how people arrange their lives with separate finances, such as (I assume) the OP. Don't drag the thread through your own need to 'prove' yourself superior. It's a waste of everybody's time and energy.
Standing and clapping after reading this post. You nailed it.
+1
+2
-
Here is what works for us. Background, we met in college and married right after so we started our professional lives together. We had joint everything for years. Then we realized what worked better for us is to have almost joint everything but to each also have a small checking account where we deposit a monthly allowance from our joint account to spend however we wish. We also put cash gifts received into those fun accounts. Now there is no judging of each other's fun spending. We exclude those accounts from Mint too. So, we see the money go off of our main account as a "transfer to spending" but we don't see where it goes from there. These are generally small sums though and I don't think either of our accounts has ever made it over $1000.
-
In the event that she loses her job, she will continue to pay her bills from her savings. If those are exhausted, absorbing her expenses temporarily would be trivial to me.
And this is baffling to me. Your wife loses her job and even though her expenses are trivial to you, she has to continue to pay them out of her (separate) savings? It appears that I am too dense to continue this conversation and should just bow out of this thread.
Cash savings exist for several reasons. One of them is to serve as a substitute for lost income. There is no reason for me to pay my wife's expenses if she can afford to do so herself.
Your wanton judgement of others in this thread is unnecessary and unwelcome. Perhaps it's best that you DO leave.
No reason? How about that she is your wife? Why would she need dip into her savings if you can easily absorb the expenses?
Many of the post regarding separate accounts involves shielding spending from one's partner to some extent - these are all examples:
"I can't imagine all the money being in one pot and the arguments that would come from each judging the other's expenditures."
"If my wife needs to buy some new clothes she can do so without guilt, and same for me."
"Having things separate has prevented resentment"
"Separate finance means zero "can we afford this" conversations. It doesn't mean you don't value your SO or wouldn't do things for them, or wouldn't even split all the bills, it's just that it creates a buffer for avoiding arguments."
"In hindsight, the separate money should have been a major red flag for me to have left the relationship 15 years before I did. At a deep level we never fully trusted each other nor was a team who had each other's backs."
"Because we are in different places, financially. I have a job making 4x what she does, and a mortgage that preceded our marriage. She has a desire to be independent and unaccountable to me for what she spends."
"The "separate" part means that we can't see what the other person is spending mad money on and can't pass judgment."
"We have different risk tolerance, different spending values, and she is not as gung ho about FIRE as I am. I want her to feel no pressure to have to do what I think is best. I don't want to have to justify myself either."
"We have different comfort levels for things like minimum chequing account balances, and would judge the hell out of each other's spending."
"I have several friends who have joint accounts. One or the other is constantly making comments about how the other spends. She thinks its wasteful for him to spend money on unnecessary car modifications, he thinks its unnecessary for her to spend money on yoga classes. Both equal the same amount of money, but since it comes out of the joint account there is a lot of judging."
"not having eyes on one another's money prevents us from scrutinizing small purchases."
"I wanted the separate accounts because I think she spends money like crazy."
"Now there is no judging of each other's fun spending."
-
I don't even understand the point you're trying to make.
-
Now I'm trolling? Several posters have commented that they, or people they know, don't have joint accounts because they don't want their spending to be judged by their (financial) partners. I specifically said that I would have a problem with this in my relationship. And no, I still don't understand why it isn't a problem.
We all know our partners poop. Most of us don't go into the bathroom to watch them. Crude? Yes. But I think it makes the point that just because you know something is happening ($$ being spent on a hobby, etc) doesn't mean you want to see it regularly in your financial picture. And your partner may not want to see yours. Not because it's a secret, but because it's unsightly to you. Your relationship might be different. Some couples hang out in the bathroom together, I hear, and there's nothing wrong with that. It's a matter of comfort level. It's about what does or doesn't *emotionally* bother you even if you've accepted it *mentally*. There is a difference.
Personally, I would find it a huge hassle to split expenses 50/50 without a joint account. To me, that is the more straightforward method; my bf and I opened a joint checking acct when we moved in that we contribute equally to and then use to pay expenses. It took us 5 mins to set up. We both come from families that merged finances and expect to do so once we get married, barring perhaps some amount of personal/discretionary spending.
However, I acknowledge that others may feel differently. They might be more comfortable splitting up bills to find an equitable distribution; they may not feel that changing an existing system is worth the effort; pooling their money might make them feel powerless/trapped due to things in their past(s) or just their personality, so they opt for separate accounts to preserve their sense of independence at a comfortable level. Jezebel, you and I might not choose to do it this way...which is why these people are with each other and we are with our partners that share our outlooks on finances.
-
Jezebel, are you not hearing all the people you are quoting above ALSO saying that they are happy with their setup? Some of us like to live in blissful ignorance that our partner has just purchased yoga classes or expensive peanut butter or what have you. These things are trivial and not really important to a relationship.
However, if my partner was HIDING seriously important things from me (which none of the above posters have even remotely described their situation as) then there may be something to talk about in the marriage. Like if my partner secretly owed the mob a million dollars, I might be a little upset. If they spent 100$ on a hockey ticket even though I hate hockey, then why would I want to bother myself with this triviality? Who cares.
In other words... Nowhere in the posts above are people talking about actual deception. For some strange reason you are intent on twisting this around. I suggest you go back to your idea of leaving the thread, since you do not seem to be able to listen very clearly to what people are saying here.
I admit... I too thought of bathroom behaviour as an analogy :) I don't need to see a written report of my husbands bowel movements. It doesn't mean he is hiding something from me.
-
The question was, why do they decide to do that?
And think that was answered too. Mostly for convenience. Sometimes for laziness. And the remainder because of complicated financial situations that can occur in a 2nd marriage.
Trying to make this subject seem like it's some reflection of the strength of the partnership is silly. Lots of people do things lots of different ways. There's no one right answer. Joint accounts seem like a lot of extra work to me/us, so we just never got around to it. And yet we have a wonderful marriage. It's a miracle!
+1
-
I think there are really just 2 kinds of relationships being described here. Both are romantic partnerships but some people just keep money separate from that, for a variety of reasons (it sounds like comfort is the main driver here, with many folks just uncomfortable with the idea of sharing money with anyone.)
Others feel that now they're on the same "team", there is no point pretending that the money is separate - since presumably if your spouse needed money for some good reason, you would pay for whatever it was that was needed anyway, and I believe legally your spouse's debts are often yours anyway. There is probably an efficiency argument to be made but IMO it probably isn't going to save much time or money either way.
Separate finances, as others have pointed out, will always be something of a pretense, at least in the US, since legally lots of assets/debts are considered to be owned jointly regardless of whose name is on the bank account.
I am *guessing* that couples with children generally just combine finances and younger couples and older couples in second+ marriages don't as much. But maybe I'm wrong about that.
Both ways work, though if the OP's description of a couple arguing over paying for dinner is accurate, I'd bet against that marriage!
-W
-
We have separate accounts but I also have a ton of different accounts all over the place too. So two more from my wife (when we got married) isn't really a big deal. Sure it makes tracking things kinda painful but whatever. We each have access into all our accounts and most of them are joint anyway. It would be nice to eventually combine everything into a single account but we're a bit lazy, and it's not really a priority to us anyway.
-
Jezebel, are you not hearing all the people you are quoting above ALSO saying that they are happy with their setup? Some of us like to live in blissful ignorance that our partner has just purchased yoga classes or expensive peanut butter or what have you. These things are trivial and not really important to a relationship.
However, if my partner was HIDING seriously important things from me (which none of the above posters have even remotely described their situation as) then there may be something to talk about in the marriage. Like if my partner secretly owed the mob a million dollars, I might be a little upset. If they spent 100$ on a hockey ticket even though I hate hockey, then why would I want to bother myself with this triviality? Who cares.
In other words... Nowhere in the posts above are people talking about actual deception. For some strange reason you are intent on twisting this around. I suggest you go back to your idea of leaving the thread, since you do not seem to be able to listen very clearly to what people are saying here.
I admit... I too thought of bathroom behaviour as an analogy :) I don't need to see a written report of my husbands bowel movements. It doesn't mean he is hiding something from me.
Obviously people are happy with that set up or they wouldn't do it. And I don't recall saying anything about deception. If willful ignorance is a good descriptor, so be it. From the perspective of a someone who is married and trying to achieve FI, which is why I, and many others, are on this site to begin with, it seems counter productive at best.
It's funny how many people are saying they don't want/need see their partner's spending, especially for this forum. One could see where the confusion lies.
-
Try not to conflate separate bank accounts (topic title) and separate finances (no visibility into each other's finances)
Yes, there are definitely a couple concepts getting mixed up in here. I personally am mostly interested in the discussion of separate finances. (DH and I have a couple low dollar value individual accounts left over from before the marriage so I "get" the laziness factor [ETA: i.e. One of the oft quoted reasons for having separate accounts]).
What I am hearing is that separate finances does not necessarily mean no visibility. Instead it sounds like separate finances is more defined by a sense of "his money/her money". Would others agree? In some cases, even though the "ownership" of money is separate, it doesn't sound like most would leave their SO out to dry if the SO runs out of money.
For those who consider themselves to have "separate finances", do you consider you and your SO to have separate net worth? If so, how do you feel that results in a different marriage dynamic (or not) compared to having joint finances?
-
Jezebel, are you not hearing all the people you are quoting above ALSO saying that they are happy with their setup? Some of us like to live in blissful ignorance that our partner has just purchased yoga classes or expensive peanut butter or what have you. These things are trivial and not really important to a relationship.
However, if my partner was HIDING seriously important things from me (which none of the above posters have even remotely described their situation as) then there may be something to talk about in the marriage. Like if my partner secretly owed the mob a million dollars, I might be a little upset. If they spent 100$ on a hockey ticket even though I hate hockey, then why would I want to bother myself with this triviality? Who cares.
In other words... Nowhere in the posts above are people talking about actual deception. For some strange reason you are intent on twisting this around. I suggest you go back to your idea of leaving the thread, since you do not seem to be able to listen very clearly to what people are saying here.
I admit... I too thought of bathroom behaviour as an analogy :) I don't need to see a written report of my husbands bowel movements. It doesn't mean he is hiding something from me.
Obviously people are happy with that set up or they wouldn't do it. And I don't recall saying anything about deception. If willful ignorance is a good descriptor, so be it. From the perspective of a someone who is married and trying to achieve FI, which is why I, and many others, are on this site to begin with, it seems counter productive at best.
It's funny how many people are saying they don't want/need see their partner's spending, especially for this forum. One could see where the confusion lies.
Ok, then I have absolutely no idea what point you are trying to make in your post above, where you have quoted other people's comments.
As someone else said, as long as we are meeting our savings goals, I don't care whether DH is buying three ply or two ply toilet paper. It's the big picture that matters.
Again, we don't all have to think exactly the same way. I'm not sure why you are obsessing over whether or not people choose to share the minutiae with each other in THEIR OWN RELATIONSHIPS.
-
If feeling strongly enough about a position to post about it on an internet forum qualifies as an obsession, well, we're all in trouble.
-
Try not to conflate separate bank accounts (topic title) and separate finances (no visibility into each other's finances)
Yes, there are definitely a couple concepts getting mixed up in here. I personally am mostly interested in the discussion of separate finances. (DH and I have a couple low dollar value individual accounts left over from before the marriage so I "get" the laziness factor [ETA: i.e. One of the oft quoted reasons for having separate accounts]).
What I am hearing is that separate finances does not necessarily mean no visibility. Instead it sounds like separate finances is more defined by a sense of "his money/her money". Would others agree? In some cases, even though the "ownership" of money is separate, it doesn't sound like most would leave their SO out to dry if the SO runs out of money.
For those who consider themselves to have "separate finances", do you consider you and your SO to have separate net worth? If so, how do you feel that results in a different marriage dynamic (or not) compared to having joint finances?
We look at net worth both individually and combined. Because we like to celebrate milestones with cookies, and doing it that way results in more cookies.
-
We look at net worth both individually and combined. Because we like to celebrate milestones with cookies, and doing it that way results in more cookies.
Haha, nice!
-
Obviously people are happy with that set up or they wouldn't do it. And I don't recall saying anything about deception. If willful ignorance is a good descriptor, so be it. From the perspective of a someone who is married and trying to achieve FI, which is why I, and many others, are on this site to begin with, it seems counter productive at best.
I am married and trying to achieve FI. My SO and I discuss our goals. We agree on what we need to save and how we can reach those goals. I could not tell you how much she spent or what she bought this month. I could tell you how much she invested and saved. Any scrutiny beyond this is just splitting hairs in my opinion. The details don't matter if we are achieving our goal. Just because you can't visualize how this would work how is it counter productive...at best?
-
If feeling strongly enough about a position to post about it on an internet forum qualifies as an obsession, well, we're all in trouble.
By "obsessing" I meant taking the time to go through all the posts of a thread and copying and pasting 20 or so lines from other people's comments with no discernable point to make.
-
Try not to conflate separate bank accounts (topic title) and separate finances (no visibility into each other's finances)
Yes, there are definitely a couple concepts getting mixed up in here. I personally am mostly interested in the discussion of separate finances. (DH and I have a couple low dollar value individual accounts left over from before the marriage so I "get" the laziness factor [ETA: i.e. One of the oft quoted reasons for having separate accounts]).
What I am hearing is that separate finances does not necessarily mean no visibility. Instead it sounds like separate finances is more defined by a sense of "his money/her money". Would others agree? In some cases, even though the "ownership" of money is separate, it doesn't sound like most would leave their SO out to dry if the SO runs out of money.
For those who consider themselves to have "separate finances", do you consider you and your SO to have separate net worth? If so, how do you feel that results in a different marriage dynamic (or not) compared to having joint finances?
Not married but same boat as Zikoris. SO and I have been together for over 4 years. We have very different incomes, FIRE goals, and risk tolerance. We keep separate finances for these fundamental reasons. If she doesn't want to pay off her student loans or rush to FIRE, while I do everything from trimming any and all fat from my budget and doing side work on the weekends to increase savings rate as much as possible. Why would I want to combine finances? I think my SO would cringe at the idea of my AA, and I cringe at hers. I know if we just pooled our money together I would be wondering why I am putting in so much effort to hit FIRE asap while she takes a slower and more relaxed view. I just don't see the benefit of it.
That being said, if something happened and she needed help. I would help her without even thinking about it. I pay for many of our entertainment expenses, travel etc by choice.
-
Try not to conflate separate bank accounts (topic title) and separate finances (no visibility into each other's finances)
Yes, there are definitely a couple concepts getting mixed up in here. I personally am mostly interested in the discussion of separate finances. (DH and I have a couple low dollar value individual accounts left over from before the marriage so I "get" the laziness factor [ETA: i.e. One of the oft quoted reasons for having separate accounts]).
What I am hearing is that separate finances does not necessarily mean no visibility. Instead it sounds like separate finances is more defined by a sense of "his money/her money". Would others agree? In some cases, even though the "ownership" of money is separate, it doesn't sound like most would leave their SO out to dry if the SO runs out of money.
For those who consider themselves to have "separate finances", do you consider you and your SO to have separate net worth? If so, how do you feel that results in a different marriage dynamic (or not) compared to having joint finances?
First of all, thank you for asking these questions and for trying to understand without being judgmental! I had no idea this issue was so unusual for some people, or that it could be so contentious.
In our case, I'm not sure if you'd say we have separate finances or not. We have separate bank accounts, but we consider our money to be "ours." We track our net worth jointly. At the beginning of each month DH hands me his account balance totals and I tally up our NW in Excel. I also track our combined dividend income, which is what we plan on living on in retirement.
DH pays for most of the bills, since he is the higher earner. Our house is jointly owned and we both contribute to the household in our own ways, and ways that we see as equitable. We talk a lot about our finances and our future plans, and we both dream of retiring early. We're both on track to do this, which is exciting and motivating for us.
If one of us were to lose our jobs, the other would cover the expenses. Were on the same page about savings goals, life goals, and spending habits, and we both hate debt, and avoid it like the plague. So overall there are no conflicts around money. We married later in life after having established our own lives, so joint finances never really seemed necessary.
I'm liking the idea of celebrating net worth goals with a cookie :) I might adopt this idea, too!
-
I don't understand this. If you are married, you both have financial responsibility for everything and all financial decisions should be joint decisions.
Yes. If my husband decides to go buy a new 100K vehicle on a whim, then he doesn't pay for it, I am going to be hurt financially as well. Doesn't matter how we've allotted our accounts.
The real issue is making sure you and your spouse are on the same page financially ... so that neither of you will do anything ridiculous as my above example. Side note: I'm amazed occasionally when my co-workers say something about NEVER having really discussed money with their spouses. How can that be?
It's not really splitting the cost either, it's just picking which account to pull from. We use YNAB so it's all one big fund anyways. If we're making a big purchase, we just take from whichever account has more money in it. We don't care about where it's coming from for any other reason than convenience.
Sounds like more work than is necessary. We've always had one checking account between us, and we pay everything from that. We do have multiple savings and investment accounts, but only one "outgoing account", and we both pay into it.
So many people are touting "convenience" as a reason to split expenses, when it looks much more complicated to me. Okay, I can see that for the newly married, it means combining accounts -- but once that's done, you never have to do it again! Whereas, if you're both contributing to the household account, occasionally needing to "bail one another out", or whatever, it's an ongoing process!
How can multiple accounts and the need to move money from here to there be EASIER?
While I agree with your statement that couples need to be on the same page financially, this statement bugs me quite a bit. Do you suggest I comb over everything my wife spends to see what she is spending money on...and her mine?
No, it just means that early in the marriage you should agree upon rough guidelines -- and stick to them. For example, my husband doesn't want to know that I just bought my girls some spring clothes, but he does care that I buy only what's necessary and look for value in my purchases. We've long ago established "our comfort level".
When we were younger, we talked more frequently about money. Now it's just sort of melded into a sixth sense, which we share.
- Funny anecdote, an employee of mine complained to no end when the company decided to stop cutting paychecks. You had to choose between direct deposit or a pay card. Seems he liked to keep a few bucks for himself after cashing the check as his wife had pretty tight purse-strings.
Yep, I can tell a similar story: Years ago we used to have our paychecks directly deposited ... but we got a twice-yearly bonus, which was delivered to us in the form of a check. When that changed and EVERYTHING went to direct deposit, a BUNCH of employees were ENRAGED for just the reason you stated. They weren't 'fessing up to their spouses that those twice-yearly bonuses existed. It seems to me that dividing things up into little "yours and mine" stacks can lead to this type of deception.
Cash savings exist for several reasons. One of them is to serve as a substitute for lost income. There is no reason for me to pay my wife's expenses if she can afford to do so herself.
What I don't get is, Why are they your wife's expenses? Why isn't everything a family expense? When we were first married, I went back to school for a year, then I stayed home with the kids for a while -- I still needed to eat, still needed the occasional item of clothing, still needed a haircut now and then. We pay our older child's college tuition out of our shared short-term savings account, which is technically from my paycheck -- but educating her is OUR shared responsibility. Our needs are OUR needs, not something that we keep separate.
However, if my partner was HIDING seriously important things from me (which none of the above posters have even remotely described their situation as) then there may be something to talk about in the marriage. Like if my partner secretly owed the mob a million dollars, I might be a little upset. If they spent 100$ on a hockey ticket even though I hate hockey, then why would I want to bother myself with this triviality? Who cares.
I agree that I wouldn't care if my husband bought a $100 hockey ticket occasionally; however, if he bought a 2K season pass, I'd be put out. I didn't 'specially think he needed to buy another shot gun recently, but it wasn't tremendously expensive, and he did mention it ahead of time. He might not be thrilled with what I spent on a new bathing suit recently, but it does fit into the overall clothing budget, and I won't buy much else in the way of clothing this summer. However, these things aren't really about separate finances vs. shared finances -- they're more about having SHARED GOALS. As I said earlier, when we were younger and first married, we established our personal boundaries for spending /saving /investing /retirement, and we've both kept to them -- the vast majority of the time.
I think overall keeping money separated INCREASES THE CHANCES that "hiding" could take place.
And I think keeping money separated DECREASES THE CHANCES of having shared goals.
Sharing one's money with a spouse is kind of like having an accountability partner.
Others feel that now they're on the same "team", there is no point pretending that the money is separate - since presumably if your spouse needed money for some good reason, you would pay for whatever it was that was needed anyway, and I believe legally your spouse's debts are often yours anyway.
Yes, I can relate to that description.
-
We all know our partners poop. Most of us don't go into the bathroom to watch them. Crude? Yes. But I think it makes the point that just because you know something is happening ($$ being spent on a hobby, etc) doesn't mean you want to see it regularly in your financial picture. And your partner may not want to see yours. Not because it's a secret, but because it's unsightly to you. Your relationship might be different. Some couples hang out in the bathroom together, I hear, and there's nothing wrong with that. It's a matter of comfort level. It's about what does or doesn't *emotionally* bother you even if you've accepted it *mentally*. There is a difference.
+1000 We did this finally for DH's vehicle restoration projects....it was driving me mad and since it came out of our joint account, there was never really a good reason to limit him that didn't make me seem/feel like a controlling shrew. In the end, I was resentful as hell about having to be the responsible one telling him, no, we can't afford a bigger engine to replace your perfectly good engine. Strife abounded. Now he has a personal account to which a certain portion of our takehome pay goes into. That is his to play with, and I don't have to see the bleeding. Seriously, it really helped me just chill the heck out about the whole thing.
DH and I had a joint account in the beginning and separate personal accounts so we could both ease into the financial trust issues. Yes, we both had previously controlling spouses (mine wouldn't let me spend anything, his would spend it all before he could get off work) That worked for us for a little while and then it just got easier to have one joint account. The deal is we transitioned when we both felt comfortable with it. For us it took a year, but maybe other folks take longer. Maybe some don't need that at all.
Some people end up in arranged marriages and do just great. Others marry their high school sweetheart. There is no one right way to get this life right. We all have our own ways, and the best couples give eachother that room to figure it out.
-
+1000 We did this finally for DH's vehicle restoration projects....it was driving me mad and since it came out of our joint account, there was never really a good reason to limit him that didn't make me seem/feel like a controlling shrew. In the end, I was resentful as hell about having to be the responsible one telling him, no, we can't afford a bigger engine to replace your perfectly good engine. Strife abounded. Now he has a personal account to which a certain portion of our takehome pay goes into. That is his to play with, and I don't have to see the bleeding. Seriously, it really helped me just chill the heck out about the whole thing.
In the end, how is this different from setting a budget for his expensive hobby /paying it out of a family account?
-
"Now there is no judging of each other's fun spending."
In my opinion, in a good marriage, whether accounts are joint or separate, major purchases are agreed upon, because the major values overlap. Fun money is where differences in minor values could cause unnecessary strife if it was coming from the shared pot without agreement. To word it differently, you agree that you have "differences in minor spending values" and you agree to have reasonably equivalent fun money accounts so that you don't have to agree on every small purchase.
If the money is coming directly out of a shared account, it might be "judged" because of differences in minor values (i.e. clothes shopping, small gadgets, coffee, beer, books, etc.) These minor values do not need to be shared for a marriage to be solid.
-
If feeling strongly enough about a position to post about it on an internet forum qualifies as an obsession, well, we're all in trouble.
By "obsessing" I meant taking the time to go through all the posts of a thread and copying and pasting 20 or so lines from other people's comments with no discernable point to make.
Whether you understand the point or not, my post was in direct response to someone asking where people have advocating hiding spending. It is still hiding, whether you agree to it or not. My point now, just to be clear, is that it is laughable that people are criticizing me out for disagreeing with what they have likened to protecting their partner from their spending habits, at risk of judgment, on MMM. But you have made your point. Some people do it, and they will continue to.
-
+1000 We did this finally for DH's vehicle restoration projects....it was driving me mad and since it came out of our joint account, there was never really a good reason to limit him that didn't make me seem/feel like a controlling shrew. In the end, I was resentful as hell about having to be the responsible one telling him, no, we can't afford a bigger engine to replace your perfectly good engine. Strife abounded. Now he has a personal account to which a certain portion of our takehome pay goes into. That is his to play with, and I don't have to see the bleeding. Seriously, it really helped me just chill the heck out about the whole thing.
In the end, how is this different from setting a budget for his expensive hobby /paying it out of a family account?
It's not different at all...but to continue the metaphor I was quoting, he gets to poop all he wants, I just don't have to watch.
-
I got a laugh out of the posters who were saying that people *should* do it one way and not the other, and that separate finances are a road to divorce/betrayal after all the examples of people who have separate finances and are happily married (some for 30+ years).
Separate accounts and separate finances do not mean that there is no trust in a relationship. In fact, as already mentioned, they require more trust in some ways. I don't look to see exactly what the SO spends on what, I just trust that she is doing it in a way that won't cause any harm. We keep separate finances because we have different income and spending levels, different risk tolerance, different hobbies, etc. When I go through my accounts, I don't want to see a bunch of transactions for shoes and makeup and art supplies and other things she likes, and she doesn't care to see how much airplane insurance or a new transceiver cost. Those are things the we each choose to spend on individually and don't need to be accountable for to the other partner. The joint expenses are shared such as food and mortgage, but we do that quite easily without having a joint account. We also know that if one person lost their income the other would be fine because the housing and food costs would be covered by the other partner.
Another +1 to the pooping metaphor, I was going to mention the exact same thing.
-
Another +1 to the pooping metaphor, I was going to mention the exact same thing.
The problem with the pooping metaphor is that it assumes frivolous spending is something everyone does, and must do, and should do.
Frivolous spending that does not align with your stated family goals is not a necessary but private act, it's a betrayal of your commitment to your partner, and whether that money goes to energy drinks or a gambling addiction makes no difference. If you're both on board with a specific plan and then one of you feels the need to sneak off and betray that plan, then you need to revisit your plan.
My marriage has certain expectations for how we will each behave, and we both value accountability for our actions whether they are or are not in line with expectations. If I wanted to sleep around or buy a sailboat, my wife needs to either approve of it or we need to revisit our plan. One partner can't just go around breaching your mutual expectations without there eventually being some kind of fallout.
To me saying that private spending is like pooping sounds too much like you're hiding your shame. If you're both okay with being two-faced about it, that different from saying it's not an issue.
-
Another +1 to the pooping metaphor, I was going to mention the exact same thing.
The problem with the pooping metaphor is that it assumes frivolous spending is something everyone does, and must do, and should do.
Frivolous spending that does not align with your stated family goals is not a necessary but private act, it's a betrayal of your commitment to your partner, and whether that money goes to energy drinks or a gambling addiction makes no difference. If you're both on board with a specific plan and then one of you feels the need to sneak off and betray that plan, then you need to revisit your plan.
My marriage has certain expectations for how we will each behave, and we both value accountability for our actions whether they are or are not in line with expectations. If I wanted to sleep around or buy a sailboat, my wife needs to either approve of it or we need to revisit our plan. One partner can't just go around breaching your mutual expectations without there eventually being some kind of fallout.
To me saying that private spending is like pooping sounds too much like you're hiding your shame. If you're both okay with being two-faced about it, that different from saying it's not an issue.
Let's change the analogy to farting, then.
My DH, God bless him, farts like a champ. I can hear him, sometimes I can smell him. I know he's doing it, he doesn't hide it. We even laugh about it when he lets one rip.
And you know what? Me, too. I think it's fair to say that we are fart tolerant in our house.
But my husband doesn't feel the need to shove my face into his butt when he farts. I'm aware he's doing it, but I don't need to inhale all the molecules to get the general idea.
We have figured out a relationship to farts, and spending, that we are both 100% comfortable with. And there are people on this thread who are trying to shove my schnozz into my husband's (metaphorical) butt. When we have already negotiated that for ourselves.
What is that about, exactly?
-
If your marital dynamic is that neither of you care about wasteful spending, that's totally fine. It's just a weird situation to defend on the MMM forums.
-
Another +1 to the pooping metaphor, I was going to mention the exact same thing.
The problem with the pooping metaphor is that it assumes frivolous spending is something everyone does, and must do, and should do.
Frivolous spending that does not align with your stated family goals is not a necessary but private act, it's a betrayal of your commitment to your partner, and whether that money goes to energy drinks or a gambling addiction makes no difference. If you're both on board with a specific plan and then one of you feels the need to sneak off and betray that plan, then you need to revisit your plan.
My marriage has certain expectations for how we will each behave, and we both value accountability for our actions whether they are or are not in line with expectations. If I wanted to sleep around or buy a sailboat, my wife needs to either approve of it or we need to revisit our plan. One partner can't just go around breaching your mutual expectations without there eventually being some kind of fallout.
To me saying that private spending is like pooping sounds too much like you're hiding your shame. If you're both okay with being two-faced about it, that different from saying it's not an issue.
Me buying a soda once in awhile is not a betrayal of commitment to my relationship. My boyfriend does not sneak around buying video games behind my back. Neither of those things harms our long term goals or relationship. We just don't want to pay for each other's personal choices, and would resent it if we were through joint accounts.
Nothing sneaky, no betrayal, no harm. It works for us. Clearly it would not work for you, and there's nothing wrong with that, but please recognize that it works very well for many of us, where your system would not.
-
Another +1 to the pooping metaphor, I was going to mention the exact same thing.
The problem with the pooping metaphor is that it assumes frivolous spending is something everyone does, and must do, and should do.
Frivolous spending that does not align with your stated family goals is not a necessary but private act, it's a betrayal of your commitment to your partner, and whether that money goes to energy drinks or a gambling addiction makes no difference. If you're both on board with a specific plan and then one of you feels the need to sneak off and betray that plan, then you need to revisit your plan.
My marriage has certain expectations for how we will each behave, and we both value accountability for our actions whether they are or are not in line with expectations. If I wanted to sleep around or buy a sailboat, my wife needs to either approve of it or we need to revisit our plan. One partner can't just go around breaching your mutual expectations without there eventually being some kind of fallout.
To me saying that private spending is like pooping sounds too much like you're hiding your shame. If you're both okay with being two-faced about it, that different from saying it's not an issue.
So you've found the point where the analogy breaks down; most analogies do. Although, I think there's a perspective from which it's still pretty valid. Maybe the $X discretionary personal spending isn't a necessity for life, but it may be necessary for each person in the couple to achieve comfort level Y; but the actual expenses for each person may vary and may annoy the other, even if they have agreed to it. Agreement doesn't always equate to being 100% emotionally committed to the plan. It can be a compromise and a statement that the health of the relationship and happiness of the partner is more important than the amount of money in question. Thus, the expense can still be irritating to see on a regular basis.
If you don't like the comparison to pooping, how about this: a couple decides they'll only spend 3 hrs/week watching TV, for their health. But they each have a 1 hr show that the other detests (or even is simply bored to tears by). So they each have an hour of TV time that they take alone, and then have a joint movie night together. They aren't *hiding* anything. They aren't *betraying* anything. Their partner knows what they're doing, and that it's important *to them*. But they don't have to participate, they don't need intimate awareness of the details.
-
Another +1 to the pooping metaphor, I was going to mention the exact same thing.
The problem with the pooping metaphor is that it assumes frivolous spending is something everyone does, and must do, and should do.
Frivolous spending that does not align with your stated family goals is not a necessary but private act, it's a betrayal of your commitment to your partner, and whether that money goes to energy drinks or a gambling addiction makes no difference. If you're both on board with a specific plan and then one of you feels the need to sneak off and betray that plan, then you need to revisit your plan.
My marriage has certain expectations for how we will each behave, and we both value accountability for our actions whether they are or are not in line with expectations. If I wanted to sleep around or buy a sailboat, my wife needs to either approve of it or we need to revisit our plan. One partner can't just go around breaching your mutual expectations without there eventually being some kind of fallout.
To me saying that private spending is like pooping sounds too much like you're hiding your shame. If you're both okay with being two-faced about it, that different from saying it's not an issue.
Give it up Sol. Spending from separate accounts instead of a joint account doesn't make that spending frivolous, anymore than spending from a joint account automatically makes every purchase an absolute necessity.
For the record, I poop with the door open.
-
I don't think that there is much middle ground here, folks. If you think money is *intensely* private, so much so that you make an analogy to bodily functions... you are not going to convince someone who feels money is just a fungible shared resource. The reverse is also true.
-W
-
I didn't read everything but I have a slightly different answer from what I've seen. I'm big on FI. I'm big on wall charts and projected crossovers and monitoring progress - and now that I've been FI for years, making sure I maintain that status. My spouse is none of these things. Which is fine with me and fine with him, but being "an accountant" is very much a part of what I am and what I do and, frankly, a part of my self esteem and my identity is rooted in walking the talk of MMM-style values and seeing the progress of my choices. This is an area in which my DH's behavior would seriously impinge on my own goals, so why would I intentionally set up a situation that would make us miserable?
-
I don't think that there is much middle ground here, folks. If you think money is *intensely* private, so much so that you make an analogy to bodily functions... you are not going to convince someone who feels money is just a fungible shared resource. The reverse is also true.
-W
As far as I can see, the only attempts to convince are going the other direction - the separate finances people are all saying "This is what we do and it works for us, but other methods are fine too if they work better for you".
-
I don't think that there is much middle ground here, folks. If you think money is *intensely* private, so much so that you make an analogy to bodily functions... you are not going to convince someone who feels money is just a fungible shared resource. The reverse is also true.
-W
As far as I can see, the only attempts to convince are going the other direction - the separate finances people are all saying "This is what we do and it works for us, but other methods are fine too if they work better for you".
This.
-
I think another part of the problem is that the shared-accounts folks can't really fathom the non-shared thing because, well, if you're married, they're really shared anyway, so why bother pretending otherwise?
Like I said, totally different conceptions of money and/or marriage here.
-W
As far as I can see, the only attempts to convince are going the other direction - the separate finances people are all saying "This is what we do and it works for us, but other methods are fine too if they work better for you".
-
My husband an I have always had joint accounts. Who makes what doesn't matter, it is all in the same pot, all going toward the same goal. We never feel "guilty" about buying things because we are both on the same page with frugality so the tiny splurge here and there is never an issue.
For example, my husband would never second guess even if I came home with a whole bag of new clothes because A) he knows I must have needed them since I never buy new things without a good reason and B.) because he knows I got a hellava deal on those clothes because full price is not something I pay. :)
We briefly discuss any out-of-the norm purchases just to let the other know. It is extremely rare for us to disagree on a purchase.
BUT! To each their own! For us separate accounts would be a nightmare- all the shuffling money around, blah. It would be a huge annoyance to us. BUT for OTHERS, if money is something that is fought about then I can see how separate accounts are necessary to keep the peace, ha! Or simply because they prefer it that way. Who am I to judge? Do what makes everyone happy! :)
-
Another +1 to the pooping metaphor, I was going to mention the exact same thing.
The problem with the pooping metaphor is that it assumes frivolous spending is something everyone does, and must do, and should do.
<snip>
To me saying that private spending is like pooping sounds too much like you're hiding your shame. If you're both okay with being two-faced about it, that different from saying it's not an issue.
Oh my goodness. The perils of debate on the internet. Disproving the analogy does not disprove the argument. The analogy is not the argument, it's a way to convey it. It's never perfect; in this case, nobody intended to convey anything about necessity or shamefulness of the acts. Indeed, the point is that you might desire privacy even in the absence of these things. But fair enough, that is why it doesn't help make you comfortable with the idea.
As a practical matter, am I the only one who "reconciles" their books by just glancing at the bank's website once a week or so? It's a hell of a lot easier to see if there are any fraudulent or erroneous charges if I only need to check for my own transactions. Once another person's expenses are on there, I'd need to check in with him about every one of them. For couples with different schedules, this is hardly how you want to spend your limited time together.
Plus, some people have different comfort levels with buffer. I would rather max out money in my interest-earning accounts and keep a low buffer in the non-interest one. My SO, however, has a ton more transactions and is terrible about mentally keeping track of his balance when he's out and about so he wants a really big buffer. Even once you agree on the ideal buffer, having another person have real-time affect on the account balance just introduces more possibility for error.
Plus, we each have an account with the same credit union because the maximum balance for high interest is $5k, so with two accounts we get $10k. Since you have to meet a minimum of ATM transactions to qualify for high interest, it would be better if we could do it as one account, but it doesn't work that way.
edit: It didn't give me the normal red warning of death when other people have replied in the meantime; other people already covered the analogy thing.
-
BUT! To each their own! For us separate accounts would be a nightmare- all the shuffling money around, blah. It would be a huge annoyance to us. BUT for OTHERS, if money is something that is fought about then I can see how separate accounts are necessary to keep the peace, ha! Or simply because they prefer it that way. Who am I to judge? Do what makes everyone happy! :)
Just for your own piece of mind, that's not even really a thing. My wife and I both work, so our employers do the shuffling, not us. :) It would be much more of a hassle if there was only one earner though.
I think another part of the problem is that the shared-accounts folks can't really fathom the non-shared thing because, well, if you're married, they're really shared anyway, so why bother pretending otherwise?
We have separate accounts and still view it as "our" money. I'm not sure why the physical place where you keep track of your balance seems to be such a hang up. It's just way easier to only see your outgoing transactions and not have to worry about keeping a large balance for someone else. No overdrafts and no worries about whether there's enough money there today.
-
Do those of you with separate finances budget together? Or how do you make that work? Do you have discussion about larger goals like retirement/housing?
-
Another +1 to the pooping metaphor, I was going to mention the exact same thing.
The problem with the pooping metaphor is that it assumes frivolous spending is something everyone does, and must do, and should do.
Frivolous spending that does not align with your stated family goals is not a necessary but private act, it's a betrayal of your commitment to your partner, and whether that money goes to energy drinks or a gambling addiction makes no difference. If you're both on board with a specific plan and then one of you feels the need to sneak off and betray that plan, then you need to revisit your plan.
My marriage has certain expectations for how we will each behave, and we both value accountability for our actions whether they are or are not in line with expectations. If I wanted to sleep around or buy a sailboat, my wife needs to either approve of it or we need to revisit our plan. One partner can't just go around breaching your mutual expectations without there eventually being some kind of fallout.
To me saying that private spending is like pooping sounds too much like you're hiding your shame. If you're both okay with being two-faced about it, that different from saying it's not an issue.
Oh man, this is getting ridiculous.
It's hilarious that you have interpreted "as long as we trust each other and meet our shared savings goals, I don't care what he / she spends money on" as "married people with separate accounts only spend frivolously, are betraying their life goals as a married couple, and should not be on this forum, and furthermore, need to get a divorce ASAP." Bravo. Thanks for the entertainment tonight :)
-
Another +1 to the pooping metaphor, I was going to mention the exact same thing.
The problem with the pooping metaphor is that it assumes frivolous spending is something everyone does, and must do, and should do.
<snip>
To me saying that private spending is like pooping sounds too much like you're hiding your shame. If you're both okay with being two-faced about it, that different from saying it's not an issue.
Oh my goodness. The perils of debate on the internet. Disproving the analogy does not disprove the argument. The analogy is not the argument, it's a way to convey it. It's never perfect; in this case, nobody intended to convey anything about necessity or shamefulness of the acts. Indeed, the point is that you might desire privacy even in the absence of these things. But fair enough, that is why it doesn't help make you comfortable with the idea.
[...]
edit: It didn't give me the normal red warning of death when other people have replied in the meantime; other people already covered the analogy thing.
I liked how you said it. Especially the bolded bit. :)
-
I just wanted to chime in to say I have mad respect for all you people with separate accounts/finances who have found a partner they can trust to organize her/his finances in a parallel and complementing fashion to your own. It's a cool idea to me to retain some of that autonomy while in a relationship and yet still working in a mutual fashion towards the same end point. When I met my partner at 31, he had no retirement savings and a checking account balance that hovered around $0 (to be fair, also no debt other than a reasonable student loan debt). For some, I could see that causing warning bells and making separate finances a must. But actually, that told us that he sucks at money and that joint account (with a tiny stipend shuffled off to our personal accounts monthly) was a way for me to make sure we save and spend appropriately and for him to no longer have to deal with something that bored him to tears (and it's worked out great so far! Spending way down and savings way up). If we had the same talent/desire to budget and plan, though, I can see how separate accounts/finances would let us feel like we could apply our talents to the situation.
-
I find it surprising that so many keep separate accounts. When you get married, unless there is a prenuptial agreement, legally all assets are shared 50-50. It doesn't matter who makes more, or who has more debt, if a divorce happened, it's going 50-50. Most expenses are shared, why complicate things by having separate accounts? I could see each person having a main account where everything is deposited, and then having a small amount withdrawn into two separate accounts for free spending if that is a concern, but other than that it seems to make everything more complicated.
And to the presents comment, if each person is working, each are contributing money, so I don't see how it becomes less special if it's from a shared account, the spouse is still using hard earned money to give something thoughtful.
Exactly! Thank you for saying this. This is my feeling for having separate accounts -- no matter who pays the bills, everything would be split 50/50 in a divorce, anyways.
We each have our own investment accounts, because they are registered. DH pays into my TFSA and he pays most of the bills so that I can invest my income in a taxable account. It's a form of income splitting, as a workaround. If he were to give me money to invest in my name, in a taxable account, then he would be taxed himself at his higher tax rate, as per attribution rules in Canada. If he pays all the bills and allows me to invest my own income, then I pay taxes at my lower rater. For us, it works. As you say, the money is shared, anyway. But since we are not legally allowed to do income splitting as a married couple with no kids and very different incomes, this is what works best for us financially.
Whatever works, people! Different strokes.
Canada isn't the US, though; your money is yours, there are rules regarding paying into other people's TFSAs, you file individually, etc.
-
BUT! To each their own! For us separate accounts would be a nightmare- all the shuffling money around, blah. It would be a huge annoyance to us. BUT for OTHERS, if money is something that is fought about then I can see how separate accounts are necessary to keep the peace, ha! Or simply because they prefer it that way. Who am I to judge? Do what makes everyone happy! :)
Just for your own piece of mind, that's not even really a thing. My wife and I both work, so our employers do the shuffling, not us. :) It would be much more of a hassle if there was only one earner though.
I think another part of the problem is that the shared-accounts folks can't really fathom the non-shared thing because, well, if you're married, they're really shared anyway, so why bother pretending otherwise?
We have separate accounts and still view it as "our" money. I'm not sure why the physical place where you keep track of your balance seems to be such a hang up. It's just way easier to only see your outgoing transactions and not have to worry about keeping a large balance for someone else. No overdrafts and no worries about whether there's enough money there today.
What do you mean when you say your employers do the shuffling? Does the $$ one partner owes the other for bills just get automatically deposited in to the other's account? Just honestly curious! :)
As far as worrying about the transactions going over the limit- I pretty much head our finances, and am also the one doing most of the spending so I know when things are about to come out of the account. (I do most of the spending because I do all the grocery/toiletries shopping because I am a crazy coupon lady and am a rock star at shopping, lol.) Husband is not put out about either of these because he feels he gets the better end of the deal not having to do either of these things, ha! He has full access to our accounts, of course.
Splitting our finances would be difficult because technically I make more money....but only because I get a bonus from MY employer for taking HIS insurance. Weird, eh? Having all the moo-la in one place is easier. For US. For others it is easier to keep the $$ separate, I am sure. Sounds like it works for a lot of people. I honestly never knew so many did it this way. Learn something new everyday!
-
After doing some research (thanks, Wikipedia) I see that in the US you are allowed to split incomes if one spouse earns significantly more. This may be where some of the confusion here is coming from! I'm not sure if the people here in the separate income camp tend to be non-Americans, but this could be part of the issue. In Canada we all file taxes separately, and until very recently the government did not allow income splitting at all. We still don't, technically, although Harper has passed some bill recently that allows couples with kids to do some sort of income splitting. I haven't looked into it because it does not apply to us. But now it makes sense why people don't get the purpose of separate accounts! It really makes no difference in Canada. There's no financial reason to have a joint bank account, since even when married, we pay income taxes based on our individual incomes. And in marriage all assets are 50/50.
D'oh, ok this was your next post, my last one is pretty irrelevant! Family Tax Cut is not real income splitting, though.
-
Basically, my wife is a grown woman and doesn't need or deserve an allowance. She deserves to do as she pleases with the money that she has earned, and the same goes for me. I have a goal to retire early, and yes, requisitioning her earnings and putting them first and foremost towards that goal WOULD make the process quicker. But that would be bullshit, because it wasn't money that I worked for. As long as she is meeting her obligations and not taking on debt, she can buy 100,000 Mentos to throw into her swimming pool full of Diet Coke for all the fucks I give.
Now, it so happens that she does save most of her money. Even if she didn't, this would still be the right way for us to manage our finances. The State of Virginia might view us as a single entity for tax purposes, but that doesn't mean we have ceased to be individuals.
-
Man, reading arguments is exhausting!
We keep out finances separate- lived together 3 years but unmarried. Our spending styles and notions of frugal are so different. I support my son on my own, we pay joint expenses together 50/50, and do what we want with the rest- I think it works for us. DP came into the relationship with significantly more invested, an army pension, and makes about 20k a year more than I do. I make less but also spend less, and am much more frugal, whereas he spends much more often on clothes, gadgets, car stuff. We even grocery shop separately for the most part- tried shopping together and it was a disaster (he can spend $100 on a little basket of fancy cheeses, craft beer and mens moisturisers, which drives me nuts as I keep my whole grocery bill to about that per fortnight for DS and I). We are at different points in our financial journey right now, he can swing luxuries while still saving a high %, I can't yet, and that's okay.
-
When we go married, there was a serious imbalance in wealth & income, and hadn't know each other long (dated about 9 months, never lived together). So we had joint account, but we also set up an account with 10,000 USD for my wife, because I wanted her to feel comfortable that she could do things/ buy stuff/ have an emergency stache without asking my permission - heck, worst case that she would have enough money to leave me if she felt she had to. Didn't stop us having a joint budget and discussing finances, but I strongly felt that she should have a measure of financial independence from day 1, and should never feel I was using money to control her.
After a couple of years, we were both comfortable enough in the relationship to close it down.
-
When we go married, there was a serious imbalance in wealth & income, and hadn't know each other long (dated about 9 months, never lived together). So we had joint account, but we also set up an account with 10,000 USD for my wife, because I wanted her to feel comfortable that she could do things/ buy stuff/ have an emergency stache without asking my permission - heck, worst case that she would have enough money to leave me if she felt she had to. Didn't stop us having a joint budget and discussing finances, but I strongly felt that she should have a measure of financial independence from day 1, and should never feel I was using money to control her.
After a couple of years, we were both comfortable enough in the relationship to close it down.
That's awesome.
-
Do those of you with separate finances budget together? Or how do you make that work? Do you have discussion about larger goals like retirement/housing?
We don't really budget per se, but he's an authorized user on my credit cards and I plug those into Mint for tracking. We like to keep our total spending under $1500/month, plus up to around $8000 per year on travel but otherwise we don't have limits - neither of us really spends much, so it's not a big deal. We each pay off our half of the credit card bill, and he e-transfers me half the rent once a month.
We don't really need to discuss our larger goals anymore since they're kind of automated now - keep the spending low,dump everything into investments, and wait for retirement in 9-ish years. Not much to talk about there. We like where we live now and don't intend to move, so not much to talk about there either, though if one of us wanted to move we would definitely talk about it.
-
... it assumes frivolous spending is something everyone does, and must do, and should do.
Frivolous spending that does not align with your stated family goals is not a necessary but private act, it's a betrayal of your commitment to your partner, and whether that money goes to energy drinks or a gambling addiction makes no difference. If you're both on board with a specific plan and then one of you feels the need to sneak off and betray that plan, then you need to revisit your plan.
As I already explained, those that support separate accounts still have shared family goals that they do not betray (probably). They also have minor personal goals or values or indulgences that do not betray the shared family goals, but may vary. What some call frivolous spending, others may call tiny treats. Of course you and I disagree on that, but I happen to believe it's OK for the two individuals in a marriage to disagree on those little things as well. Since you aren't going to change those minor values, why fret over each other's minor spending? You don't need to know the exact details of a latte purchase or magazine subscription or in-app purchase as long as it doesn't detriment the big picture.
-
BUT! To each their own! For us separate accounts would be a nightmare- all the shuffling money around, blah. It would be a huge annoyance to us. BUT for OTHERS, if money is something that is fought about then I can see how separate accounts are necessary to keep the peace, ha! Or simply because they prefer it that way. Who am I to judge? Do what makes everyone happy! :)
Just for your own piece of mind, that's not even really a thing. My wife and I both work, so our employers do the shuffling, not us. :) It would be much more of a hassle if there was only one earner though.
I think another part of the problem is that the shared-accounts folks can't really fathom the non-shared thing because, well, if you're married, they're really shared anyway, so why bother pretending otherwise?
We have separate accounts and still view it as "our" money. I'm not sure why the physical place where you keep track of your balance seems to be such a hang up. It's just way easier to only see your outgoing transactions and not have to worry about keeping a large balance for someone else. No overdrafts and no worries about whether there's enough money there today.
What do you mean when you say your employers do the shuffling? Does the $$ one partner owes the other for bills just get automatically deposited in to the other's account? Just honestly curious! :)
Personally, we each make just one transfer a month to the joint account. Then bills (rent, utilities, occasionally home insurance or a large vacation cost), are paid out of that. We put in more than is needed so I also set up an automatic purchase of savings bonds. And the remaining buffer acts as emergency household savings. Everything else is a personal expense or evens out (e.g., I buy groceries, he pays for restaurants), and so comes out of our personal accounts.
-
From the previous page:
So many people are touting "convenience" as a reason to split expenses, when it looks much more complicated to me. Okay, I can see that for the newly married, it means combining accounts -- but once that's done, you never have to do it again! Whereas, if you're both contributing to the household account, occasionally needing to "bail one another out", or whatever, it's an ongoing process!
How can multiple accounts and the need to move money from here to there be EASIER?
I was one of the ones who said we have separate bank accounts due to laziness (and share finances completely - we have our money, not his money or my money, ditto debts that we brought with us into the marriage).
Closing down two accounts and setting up a joint account in theory sounds easy and only needs to be done once. But, we both get paid fortnightly on the same day, direct deposit into our respective every day bank accountes. We both have a bunch of direct deposits that come out from each of our accounts, some fortnightly, some monthly, and not all on the same day for various reasons. Things like mortgage, utilities, internet, various insurances, union memberships and so on, and the types of direct debit does vary a little depending on what was cheaper for each organisation or what options they offered at the time it was set up.
Some of these organisations are easier to deal with than others, and each would require a phone call (or two) and/or a visit during business hours and/or fill out forms or whatever. ie a pain in the ass. At the same time, you have to get the timing right in transitioning to a new bank account as well as getting the timing right of changing over bank account numbers at work, and not letting any direct debits bounce or bank account balances to go below zero. Because then that costs us money and drama and effort to fix the payments ASAP so we don't incur other charges or whatever.
Whereas setting up automated transfers of money from his account to mine on payday (so I can put extra on our mortgage redraw account) or us shuffling money between the two accounts or to the credit card (in his name) is really no effort. Half a minute of logging into online banking, clicking a couple of things and you're done.
That's what I mean when I say laziness is the main reason we have 2 separate bank accounts as opposed to one joint one. We both hate paperwork and that sort of thing. Since the status quo works just fine for us, why go through all that painful effort and planning just to have a joint account?
When we go married, there was a serious imbalance in wealth & income, and hadn't know each other long (dated about 9 months, never lived together). So we had joint account, but we also set up an account with 10,000 USD for my wife, because I wanted her to feel comfortable that she could do things/ buy stuff/ have an emergency stache without asking my permission - heck, worst case that she would have enough money to leave me if she felt she had to. Didn't stop us having a joint budget and discussing finances, but I strongly felt that she should have a measure of financial independence from day 1, and should never feel I was using money to control her.
After a couple of years, we were both comfortable enough in the relationship to close it down.
That's awesome.
+1 what a thoughtful thing to do.
-
I think it really depends on how close to the wind your budgeting is. If you have plenty to spare, and are investing it, there is not much impetus to have a joint account. If you really need to make every dollar squeak, a joint account enables you to track money down to the last cent.
-
As far as I can see, the only attempts to convince are going the other direction - the separate finances people are all saying "This is what we do and it works for us, but other methods are fine too if they work better for you".
I want to understand why y'all are saying that separate finances work, but I just can't see any actual reasons. I can't grasp at all how managing multiple accounts /occasionally needing to move money around is "easier" or "more convenient" than simply having a single account. And if the two spouses don't agree on how to spend, I don't see how looking the other way (spending out of a separate account) makes it any more acceptable; I don't see how it wouldn't lead to resentment, if it's happening on a regular basis.
I'm trying to understand, but the reasoning just isn't solid.
On the other hand, it makes perfect sense for the spouses to agree together how to spend, to set limits ... and then to use their combined money within those limits. And if the spouses are in agreement, why all the arbitrary "your money vs. my money"?
-
All of the real money is in the 401K, IRA, ROTH's and Vanguard (or similar) taxable accounts. Almost every one of those accounts have a primary owner and are NOT joint accounts.
The $$$$ is in these accounts and not in the checkbook. Go ahead and lecture on how checking accounts and bill paying should be joint, I will focus on the real money and financial future. You guys are missing the forest by focusing on a small little shrub. By GOD we need a joint account to pay for toilet paper....meanwhile, I'll worry about our total investment portfolio.
-
It seems like this thread is more about marriage than about finances. For some of us, we do not need to know every tiny detail about our partners and where they are spending their money. For others, they DO need to know all the spending details and discuss them. For me in a relationship the bottom line is that I trust my partner and we are on the same page about our life goals. It's not "looking the other way" about whatever he chooses to spend his money on. It is the fact that we are two separate people who have agreed to share our lives with each other, and I honestly don't feel the need to know whether he buys coke on sale or at full price. It's a very minor and insignificant detail to me. He is already saving 75% or so of his income -- do I care if it is 74.9999999% or 75.00000001%? Hell no! I don't need to monitor his every move, nor do I want to. If that's what your marriage is all about, then hey, best of luck to you. But my partner and I choose to allow one another to be adults, and figure out our own spending decisions, and then we respect each others decisions. It's more about respect and trust than an attempt to avoid arguments, as some of you seem to be implying.
There is zero resentment in this way of living. I believe we are both grown ups and quite capable of making our own financial decisions in life. I did quite fine on my own for 15 years before I met him. I don't really need him to monitor my spending, and same goes for him.
For me this forum and MMM in general is about financial responsibility, and about taking personal responsibility for my own actions. That is what I'm here for, anyway. So I don't see how this 'separate accounts' issue is in any conflict with the message of this site.
I'm trying to figure out what the divide is here. Nobody I know in real life has joint accounts. It is just a natural thing to me for a married couple to have separate accounts. It could be that everyone I know found their partners in their 30s after being adults for a while? Or the fact that in Canada married couples are taxed separately? Do we have a great banking system here that allow paying bills from separate accounts to be no big deal? Or... I don't know! I'm at a loss as to why this is so confounding for people :)
-
As far as I can see, the only attempts to convince are going the other direction - the separate finances people are all saying "This is what we do and it works for us, but other methods are fine too if they work better for you".
I want to understand why y'all are saying that separate finances work, but I just can't see any actual reasons. I can't grasp at all how managing multiple accounts /occasionally needing to move money around is "easier" or "more convenient" than simply having a single account. And if the two spouses don't agree on how to spend, I don't see how looking the other way (spending out of a separate account) makes it any more acceptable; I don't see how it wouldn't lead to resentment, if it's happening on a regular basis.
I'm trying to understand, but the reasoning just isn't solid.
On the other hand, it makes perfect sense for the spouses to agree together how to spend, to set limits ... and then to use their combined money within those limits. And if the spouses are in agreement, why all the arbitrary "your money vs. my money"?
+1
-
As far as I can see, the only attempts to convince are going the other direction - the separate finances people are all saying "This is what we do and it works for us, but other methods are fine too if they work better for you".
I want to understand why y'all are saying that separate finances work, but I just can't see any actual reasons. I can't grasp at all how managing multiple accounts /occasionally needing to move money around is "easier" or "more convenient" than simply having a single account. And if the two spouses don't agree on how to spend, I don't see how looking the other way (spending out of a separate account) makes it any more acceptable; I don't see how it wouldn't lead to resentment, if it's happening on a regular basis.
I'm trying to understand, but the reasoning just isn't solid.
On the other hand, it makes perfect sense for the spouses to agree together how to spend, to set limits ... and then to use their combined money within those limits. And if the spouses are in agreement, why all the arbitrary "your money vs. my money"?
Everything is automated. Direct deposit comes into my individual account and the $$ that is allocated to joint expenses is automatically transferred to the joint account. Bill payment out of that account is also automated. Everything syncs up in Mint and/ or Quicken -- reconciliation is quick and easy. We're both completely transparent and our goals are in sync but neither of us is forced to change long-settled habits.
IME, how couples manage money together is often a byproduct of how old they are when their lives merge together. A young couple just starting out with no assets and no ingrained habits can easily merge into one, joint system. An older couple with twenty or thirty years of asset-building and ingrained habits is going to approach it differently. AND THAT'S OK.
IMHO, having separate accounts in addition to a joint account signals a high degree of trust. I don't need to have oversight of my SO's accounts. I trust that he has good judgment and that we're working toward shared goals. That's enough.
-
All of the real money is in the 401K, IRA, ROTH's and Vanguard (or similar) taxable accounts. Almost every one of those accounts have a primary owner and are NOT joint accounts.
The $$$$ is in these accounts and not in the checkbook. Go ahead and lecture on how checking accounts and bill paying should be joint, I will focus on the real money and financial future. You guys are missing the forest by focusing on a small little shrub. By GOD we need a joint account to pay for toilet paper....meanwhile, I'll worry about our total investment portfolio.
EXACTLY! thank you.
-
Reading this discussion was quite enlightening (last time we had it, I was staunchly on the shared finances side).
I think I'm spoiled -- I have all the benefits of both sides.
Why? Because DH is disabled and can't drive (plus his disability causes memory issues/some other executive functioning issues). So everything is joint, but I manage it almost entirely like a single person.
Basically, everything gets deposited into one joint account (his disability income, my paycheck). From there, a certain amount gets diverted to his 'fun spending' account (which is actually still joint, so I can see it in my online banking), and a much larger amount gets diverted to "my" (also joint) household spending/fun spending account, and another amount gets transferred into savings. We have several accounts because all of our monthly bills are on auto-pay and I don't like having to worry about spending withdrawals interfering with that.
It works this way precisely because he can't drive -- there is no 'honey pick up the milk on your way home' for him; that's all me. He can check the balance in his one spending account, because it accumulates every month, and know immediately whether or not his planned purchase is within his (previously agreed to) budget. If it's not, he just waits until it is. Any purchases bigger than the regularly monthly budgets (for any category) are clearly discussed and planned ahead of time. Oh, and the monthly transfers between accounts are automatically set up through my bank, so it really is hands off. The only issue with this system is that we're not optimizing by using rewards credit cards, but I'm okay with that given our past irresponsible history with them.
As far as monitoring actual transactions, I don't think I've ever checked the transaction level of his spending account; I just glance at the total balance on the main banking page. Granted, he only gets $50/month and AFAIK uses it exclusively for video games, but still. He doesn't monitor my spending account either, though he technically has access to do so.
So yeah, at this point I'm not even sure if we have joint or separate finances according to you guys :/ But it works for us...and we're not at the investment portfolio stage, so despite some viewpoints, how toilet paper gets paid for is still rather significant. Honestly that last comment was a bit belittling...
-
IME, how couples manage money together is often a byproduct of how old they are when their lives merge together. A young couple just starting out with no assets and no ingrained habits can easily merge into one, joint system. An older couple with twenty or thirty years of asset-building and ingrained habits is going to approach it differently. AND THAT'S OK.
I was just about to ask this! It seems like the separate finances group are mostly either married late (or second marriages) or are both earners. DH and I moved in together when I was 23 and he was 31, but I was the one with the checking account and savings, so I just added him to my checking account and opened an IRA for him. He doesn't have a clue where most of the money is held, I show him the spreadsheets, but as long as the balances are climbing he doesn't want to be bothered by it. Since he doesn't want to deal and never has, I take care of all the details of our financial life. But, if he cared and he had accounts before we met, things might be different.
Right now we are both working for corporations and have direct deposit, so I can see where that situation might lead to separate accounts. And if he was more spendy than he is, then maybe that too. But what happens to the separate accounts when only one person is working?
-
All of the real money is in the 401K, IRA, ROTH's and Vanguard (or similar) taxable accounts. Almost every one of those accounts have a primary owner and are NOT joint accounts.
The $$$$ is in these accounts and not in the checkbook. Go ahead and lecture on how checking accounts and bill paying should be joint, I will focus on the real money and financial future. You guys are missing the forest by focusing on a small little shrub. By GOD we need a joint account to pay for toilet paper....meanwhile, I'll worry about our total investment portfolio.
EXACTLY! thank you.
^ This
On top of that, a marriage has a 50/50 chance of lasting tell death do us part.
Bulletproof prenup + separate retirement accounts = less anxiety
-
All of the real money is in the 401K, IRA, ROTH's and Vanguard (or similar) taxable accounts. Almost every one of those accounts have a primary owner and are NOT joint accounts.
The $$$$ is in these accounts and not in the checkbook. Go ahead and lecture on how checking accounts and bill paying should be joint, I will focus on the real money and financial future. You guys are missing the forest by focusing on a small little shrub. By GOD we need a joint account to pay for toilet paper....meanwhile, I'll worry about our total investment portfolio.
EXACTLY! thank you.
^ This
On top of that, a marriage has a 50/50 chance of lasting tell death do us part.
Bulletproof prenup + separate retirement accounts = less anxiety
That statistic is inaccurate these days:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/02/upshot/the-divorce-surge-is-over-but-the-myth-lives-on.html?_r=0
-
All of the real money is in the 401K, IRA, ROTH's and Vanguard (or similar) taxable accounts. Almost every one of those accounts have a primary owner and are NOT joint accounts.
The $$$$ is in these accounts and not in the checkbook. Go ahead and lecture on how checking accounts and bill paying should be joint, I will focus on the real money and financial future. You guys are missing the forest by focusing on a small little shrub. By GOD we need a joint account to pay for toilet paper....meanwhile, I'll worry about our total investment portfolio.
EXACTLY! thank you.
^ This
On top of that, a marriage has a 50/50 chance of lasting tell death do us part.
Bulletproof prenup + separate retirement accounts = less anxiety
That statistic is inaccurate these days:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/02/upshot/the-divorce-surge-is-over-but-the-myth-lives-on.html?_r=0
Lol I guess those married in 2000's haven't been married long enough to grow weary of each other.
As an aside, this doesn't prove much.
Maybe people in the 2000's also feel less social pressure to marry. I know that is the case with many of my friends and coworkers.
Finishing college, getting hitched and popping out 2-3 kids was almost mandatory a few decades ago.
-
There seems to be some emphasis from some of the separate finance folks that not seeing each others spending is indicative of adult-ness or treating each other as adults, and they equate joint accounts or shared account statements as "monitoring" the other person. I am lost there.
-
All of the real money is in the 401K, IRA, ROTH's and Vanguard (or similar) taxable accounts. Almost every one of those accounts have a primary owner and are NOT joint accounts.
The $$$$ is in these accounts and not in the checkbook. Go ahead and lecture on how checking accounts and bill paying should be joint, I will focus on the real money and financial future. You guys are missing the forest by focusing on a small little shrub. By GOD we need a joint account to pay for toilet paper....meanwhile, I'll worry about our total investment portfolio.
EXACTLY! thank you.
^ This
On top of that, a marriage has a 50/50 chance of lasting tell death do us part.
Bulletproof prenup + separate retirement accounts = less anxiety
That statistic is inaccurate these days:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/02/upshot/the-divorce-surge-is-over-but-the-myth-lives-on.html?_r=0
Lol I guess those married in 2000's haven't been married long enough to grow weary of each other.
As an aside, this doesn't prove much.
Maybe people in the 2000's also feel less social pressure to marry. I know that is the case with many of my friends and coworkers.
Finishing college, getting hitched and popping out 2-3 kids was almost mandatory a few decades ago.
If you look at the slope of the lines, you can see that even in marriages that have lasted the same number of years (5 years in 1985 vs 5 yrs in 2005, for example), divorce rates are lower in more recent marriages. So, the argument that more recent couples haven't been married long enough to grow weary is irrelevant based on the type of data presented.
Also, if you had actually read the article, it cites the differences in social norms surrounding marriage as a likely cause for the reduction in divorce rates.
I'm not sure why either of your points changes the fact that your initial assertion was wrong and shouldn't be used to scare newlyweds into keeping finances separate as a hedge against divorce.
Edited for typo
-
I have been writing my wife a monthly check for my share of things and extra house principal. She pays the mortgage from her account since she had the house before I came along.
I just found out that USAA lets you add an external account that isn't yours to which you can make ACH deposits. I just did this and put in her routing and acct numbers and name and checked the box saying this wasn't my account. They said it would take about 4 days to confirm the account. If this all works, I'll do a test transfer and start sending her money that way.
Once the house is paid off, hopefully next year, we'll reevaluate who's paying what. We started 2014 owing $166K and 2015 owing $99K. It's around $80K now. (I know that all goes in the mortgage payoff thread but I was on a roll.)
-
I am not trying to scare newlyweds into anything.
I am in the school of thought that it is up to the couple to decide what they are comfortable with.
I know what I would need in my own situation, but that is a result of my own experiences, values, etc.
I am sorry I went off topic.
-
As far as I can see, the only attempts to convince are going the other direction - the separate finances people are all saying "This is what we do and it works for us, but other methods are fine too if they work better for you".
I want to understand why y'all are saying that separate finances work, but I just can't see any actual reasons. I can't grasp at all how managing multiple accounts /occasionally needing to move money around is "easier" or "more convenient" than simply having a single account. And if the two spouses don't agree on how to spend, I don't see how looking the other way (spending out of a separate account) makes it any more acceptable; I don't see how it wouldn't lead to resentment, if it's happening on a regular basis.
I'm trying to understand, but the reasoning just isn't solid.
On the other hand, it makes perfect sense for the spouses to agree together how to spend, to set limits ... and then to use their combined money within those limits. And if the spouses are in agreement, why all the arbitrary "your money vs. my money"?
Well, the actual processes (paying bills, etc) are presumably equally logistically "easy", since me writing a check from my account is no more or less difficult than writing a check from a joint account. What people are saying is that no, it doesn't cause resentment, and for people who prefer it it leas to a lot less stress and more happiness. It's "easier" more in a mental way to not spend brainpower on someone else's money, at least for me.
Simply put - your system would cause people like me massive amounts of stress and unhappiness. My system does not. The opposite may well be true for you.
-
I get that people do this different ways, i don't care how you do it v. how we do it, but I don't like people insinuating that combined finances are for couples with trust issues, or that separate finances protects a couple from divorce. Maybe it means that for you, but it's a blanket statement that doesn't apply to all couples.
There are lots of reasons to have combined finances, here are our personal reasons:
- we get full picture of your family's financial standing and habits
- we share finances to pay for shared expenses, and pretty much all expenses are shared (housing, kids, vacations, food, utilities. The only thing that is not is the occasional piece of clothing, we are very different sizes...)
- if we kept separate finances he would be so poor and I would be so rich. (He doesn't really have his "own" money, we are an almost one income family, I am the primary earner and he drops some in the bucket from low-wage, part-time work that he squeezes around his main job, which is stay-at-home-dad.)
- life is more simple for us with less accounts.
We were pretty well established when we got married at 27 & 29, but we just knew that combined is what would work better for us.
-
There seems to be some emphasis from some of the separate finance folks that not seeing each others spending is indicative of adult-ness or treating each other as adults, and they equate joint accounts or shared account statements as "monitoring" the other person. I am lost there.
Jezebel, I was in part referring to your comment:
You don't see it as problematic that people don't want their partners to see what they are spending money on?
To me, the fact that some people don't want or need to know what their partner spend money on = treating their partner as an adult who can make their own grown-up decisions. I don't really want to rehash that whole thing again, though, so truly, let's just shake hands on this and agree to disagree.
-
I get that people do this different ways, i don't care how you do it v. how we do it, but I don't like people insinuating that combined finances are for couples with trust issues, or that separate finances protects a couple from divorce. Maybe it means that for you, but it's a blanket statement that doesn't apply to all couples.
There are lots of reasons to have combined finances, here are our personal reasons:
- we get full picture of your family's financial standing and habits
- we share finances to pay for shared expenses, and pretty much all expenses are shared (housing, kids, vacations, food, utilities. The only thing that is not is the occasional piece of clothing, we are very different sizes...)
- if we kept separate finances he would be so poor and I would be so rich. (He doesn't really have his "own" money, we are an almost one income family, I am the primary earner and he drops some in the bucket from low-wage, part-time work that he squeezes around his main job, which is stay-at-home-dad.)
- life is more simple for us with less accounts.
We were pretty well established when we got married at 27 & 29, but we just knew that combined is what would work better for us.
Sorry Catccc, if you're referring to my comment, I don't mean to imply that all those with joint finances don't trust each other! I don't believe that's what I said. I am responding to the implications in this thread that those with separate finances are 'hiding' something from their partner and that separate finances are somehow a way for the other person to spend frivolously or act deceptively. I am trying to clear up what I see as a misunderstanding here. Personally I believe joint accounts can work very well for people, and I do understand this POV. But I don't get why having separate accounts is such a big deal, and for me it's just a matter of us being individuals in life. I would HATE for my husband to be giving me an allowance, for example, but that is just the way I am. I need to feel like I'm earning my own money, even if in reality all our assets are 50/50. I like having my independence. I'm not here to convert anyone to this way of thinking... I'm just trying to explain why it works well for us.
-
We met each other early and still have separate finances. It just worked that way for us.
-
...But I don't get why having separate accounts is such a big deal, and for me it's just a matter of us being individuals in life. I would HATE for my husband to be giving me an allowance, for example, but that is just the way I am. I need to feel like I'm earning my own money, even if in reality all our assets are 50/50. I like having my independence. I'm not here to convert anyone to this way of thinking... I'm just trying to explain why it works well for us.
Agree to disagree, I am with you on that.
Curious though, why does joint accounts imply anyone getting an allowance? In my mind, just the opposite - each person taking from the one pot as they see fit (keeping their agreed upon financial strategy in mind of course).
If all the money is going into the same pot (immediately in our case via direct deposit), there is never any concept of his/hers money. I am the primary wage earner, but I have never, even for a second, considered it my money - it's the family's money. That's why seeing each other's spending is a non issue, it's just our spending.
ETA I guess can see how separate accounts is synonymous with being independent for some people, which I think can be hard for the joint account folks to understand, given that legally, a married couple is considered one financial entity, at least in the US.
-
...But I don't get why having separate accounts is such a big deal, and for me it's just a matter of us being individuals in life. I would HATE for my husband to be giving me an allowance, for example, but that is just the way I am. I need to feel like I'm earning my own money, even if in reality all our assets are 50/50. I like having my independence. I'm not here to convert anyone to this way of thinking... I'm just trying to explain why it works well for us.
Agree to disagree, I am with you on that.
Curious though, why does joint accounts imply anyone getting an allowance? In my mind, just the opposite - each person taking from the one pot as they see fit (keeping their agreed upon financial strategy in mind of course).
If all the money is going into the same pot (immediately in our case via direct deposit), there is never any concept of his/hers money. I am the primary wage earner, but I have never, even for a second, considered it my money - it's the family's money. That's why seeing each other's spending is a non issue, it's just our spending.
Emphasis is mine. This is how we do it, too. Nobody gets an allowance. (Plus, there's no banking with negabucks, which is what my husband "earns" for our family as a SAHD). We just don't keep track of money as his or mine, but that doesn't mean we aren't independent people. We are very much individuals that happen to operate smoothly together.
Morning Owl, no worries, my post wasn't aimed at you. TL,DR all the posts... there were several early posts that caught my attention.
-
...But I don't get why having separate accounts is such a big deal, and for me it's just a matter of us being individuals in life. I would HATE for my husband to be giving me an allowance, for example, but that is just the way I am. I need to feel like I'm earning my own money, even if in reality all our assets are 50/50. I like having my independence. I'm not here to convert anyone to this way of thinking... I'm just trying to explain why it works well for us.
Agree to disagree, I am with you on that.
Curious though, why does joint accounts imply anyone getting an allowance? In my mind, just the opposite - each person taking from the one pot as they see fit (keeping their agreed upon financial strategy in mind of course).
If all the money is going into the same pot (immediately in our case via direct deposit), there is never any concept of his/hers money. I am the primary wage earner, but I have never, even for a second, considered it my money - it's the family's money. That's why seeing each other's spending is a non issue, it's just our spending.
OK, now I feel like you are actually asking a question vs. being judgmental. Thanks for that, seriously.
Basically for us, since he's the (much) higher earner, it would be him putting $ into an account with both of our names on it, and me withdrawing from that. So, I would see that as him giving me an allowance.
I wouldn't want to be putting money into this shared pot, because I don't earn enough, and my income is very erratic. In our case, as I previously explained, it's a tax benefit for me to be investing my own money. And yes, this all has to be accounted for in our tax returns. So it is a tax incentive for him to be paying all of our bills directly, vs. putting money into a joint account. If I were to put half of my income (or whatever percentage or dollar amount we agree upon) into a joint account then I would not have anything left over to invest. Thus he would be investing more of his own money, because I would be contributing to the bills instead, and he would be paying higher taxes on the income from his taxable investments.
Make sense?
Anyway, perhaps a takeaway from this is that everyone's situation is different, and there is no reason to get uptight and judgy about it. For some people, having separate accounts actually works better for their own situation. There's no reason to say things like "there's a problem with your marriage! Alert, alert!" just because people do things differently than you do. (And by 'you' I mean you, as well as others in this thread.)
-
I have a better measure of relationship health......is he still going down on you every morning?
This is a way better measure than if you put all of your spending money into a joint pile.
:)
-
I wouldn't want to be putting money into this shared pot, because I don't earn enough, and my income is very erratic. In our case, as I previously explained, it's a tax benefit for me to be investing my own money. And yes, this all has to be accounted for in our tax returns. So it is a tax incentive for him to be paying all of our bills directly, vs. putting money into a joint account. If I were to put half of my income (or whatever percentage or dollar amount we agree upon) into a joint account then I would not have anything left over to invest. Thus he would be investing more of his own money, because I would be contributing to the bills instead, and he would be paying higher taxes on the income from his taxable investments.
Make sense?
It makes sense only in that sounds like your tax system is highly individualized even for married people. For us, it doesn't matter how much we earn separately, all the money goes into the pot and we fund our IRAs for example, in equal amounts, from there and our tax deductions are applied to our total income as a couple. It doesn't matter who made what money.
This is pretty fundamentally different starting point for two positions on this thread. I believe there is more misunderstanding than judging going on than you think.
-
BUT! To each their own! For us separate accounts would be a nightmare- all the shuffling money around, blah. It would be a huge annoyance to us. BUT for OTHERS, if money is something that is fought about then I can see how separate accounts are necessary to keep the peace, ha! Or simply because they prefer it that way. Who am I to judge? Do what makes everyone happy! :)
Just for your own piece of mind, that's not even really a thing. My wife and I both work, so our employers do the shuffling, not us. :) It would be much more of a hassle if there was only one earner though.
What do you mean when you say your employers do the shuffling? Does the $$ one partner owes the other for bills just get automatically deposited in to the other's account? Just honestly curious! :)
I just mean that because we each receive a paycheck, we don't need to pay each other. Neither of us care if it's "even" so there's no reconciliation at the end of the month. She pays her designated set of bills, and I pay mine. Whatever's left over gets funneled into investment accounts. It doesn't really matter if she paid for all the groceries and I paid for VTSAX or the opposite, as we're combining these balances to fund our retirement. I think we've had to transfer money between us less than 5 times over 11 years, so there is basically no shuffling at all for us.
-
DH and I pool our paychecks into one pot, then transfer out a set amount of "fun money" to our separate accounts (this is where we would buy each other gifts, for the people who asked how that would be kept a secret). He makes a lot more than I do, so we felt it was easier to do it this way than try to divvy up bills in an equal way etc.
Plenty of people have separate finances, and it works fine. As long as you're communicating about money, and on a similar page, just use whatever method works best.
-
I think some of the misunderstanding comes from people who hold the idea that when you get married you become one single functional unit, or at least you should. While this may be true for many couples, it is certainly not true for all. For many people getting married means "we are two individuals who chose to spend their lives together." I don't think this is a red flag at all, many healthy long lasting relationships are formed this way. Being two individuals, there is no need to automatically share all finances in a single pot. In fact, there is not even a requirement to be on the same page financially - if one person wants to save their pennies to invest while the other wants to have a new car to drive, they are free to organize their relationship to allow for that, as long as they're in agreement. That's the beauty of being an adult, you can do whatever you want and not follow other people's scripts.
This is coming from a Canadian perspective, so as others have mentioned, this may be part of the divide.
-
When I was getting married 15 years ago, I couldn't wait to combine all finances. I couldn't imagine that things could be any other way.
Now, that I am in the process of divorce, finances being one of the major contributing factor to it, I will never have joint finances again. If I ever end up in the a long term relationship or marriage again, somehow it will have to be worked out that things stay separate. I see a prenap in my future in case of second marriage too.
-
Basically, my wife is a grown woman and doesn't need or deserve an allowance. She deserves to do as she pleases with the money that she has earned, and the same goes for me. I have a goal to retire early, and yes, requisitioning her earnings and putting them first and foremost towards that goal WOULD make the process quicker. But that would be bullshit, because it wasn't money that I worked for. As long as she is meeting her obligations and not taking on debt, she can buy 100,000 Mentos to throw into her swimming pool full of Diet Coke for all the fucks I give.
Now, it so happens that she does save most of her money. Even if she didn't, this would still be the right way for us to manage our finances. The State of Virginia might view us as a single entity for tax purposes, but that doesn't mean we have ceased to be individuals.
Love
-
ETA I guess can see how separate accounts is synonymous with being independent for some people, which I think can be hard for the joint account folks to understand, given that legally, a married couple is considered one financial entity, at least in the US.
The "you are legally one entity" argument has come up several times now. But why should what the state considers legally true bear on how people organize themselves within the marriage? Even if assets are owned jointly, don't couples still allocate items (clothes, computers, etc), furniture (e.g. desk, nightstand, dresser), and cars to each other exclusively? Obviously this allocation is based on individual vs common usage based on preference or practicality (most couples can't share all clothes, cars might be optimized for different usage, etc). But couldn't the same be true of pools of money? Or of bills?
As for independence, with our setup right now (his, mine, joint for household), we can always say "well YOU can do/buy that" if we're discussing a possible joint expenditure one of us doesn't agree with. And I think that's a great type of agency for both parties to have. I wouldn't want to completely give that up upon getting married; I think many would agree with me that having a sum (whether it's $10, $100, or $1000 per month) to make decisions about with complete independence is empowering.
-
I am of the opinion that having completely joint finances is a necessity - for anyone who wants to be married to me. My husband and I have absolute respect for each other, and shared values (to an extreme degree). The fact that I will never buy a video game (and he does) or that he will never buy a dress (and I do) is not incompatible with that. I believe that the best way to achieve our joint goals is to combine our money, view it as entirely 'ours'. Separate finances confuse me in the sense that it seems like a psychological trick - for instance, one poster mentioned not wanting a joint account because with her husband as the main contributor, it would feel like she was getting an allowance. How is that in reality different from his paying all of the bills for her?
I can definitely understand why others prefer separate finances. But for me, it was really important to be VERY aligned financially, which is what makes joint finances completely painless. I understand that not everyone has that - I think my apprehension just comes from the fact that some other people's marriages have a foundation that differs from how I would want my marriage to be. But what is really hilarious about all this, is that my husband and I are SUPER independent - we are way more independent than any other couple I know. We don't have all the same friends, do plenty of things separately, have some different interests, different personalities. He's not my better or other half - I'm my own person. He's not my soulmate - we're just two people who are compatible and make each other happy and made a commitment. And yet - our finances are as one.
Very much enjoying this conversation!
-
Separate finances confuse me in the sense that it seems like a psychological trick - for instance, one poster mentioned not wanting a joint account because with her husband as the main contributor, it would feel like she was getting an allowance. How is that in reality different from his paying all of the bills for her?
He doesn't pay ALL the bills -- he pays the regular household bills, like insurance, utilities, phone, etc. We have no mortgage, but when we did, I paid my fair share of that! I currently pay for our groceries, and whatever else I need. Again, it's not a psychological trick -- it's merely for convenience, and for the sake of tax efficiency and at the same time allowing me to build my own investment portfolio. I have mentioned this several times in this thread, but you folks in the US are allowed to income split, and here in Canada we are not. Having the higher earner pay the higher proportion of bills is a form of income splitting here and is quite common. The other option would be for him to hire me as an employee, but I don't actually do any work for him, as I have my own business, so that's not an option for us.
If you're unfamiliar with the term "income splitting" it essentially means pooling your incomes together and being taxed at a combined rate. It doesn't exist here, so, if one person earns 400k in Canada, and their spouse earns 10k, they are each taxed at their own individual income tax rates. If the person earning 400k has 500k in taxable investments, income from these investments will be taxed at the rate of their own income. If the person earning 10k has 500k in taxable investments, then they'll be taxed at their much lower rate. The higher earner can't just give the lower earner money to invest for themselves. If they do that, then attribution rules kick in and the higher earner still has to pay tax at their own higher rate.
I'm only explaining all this because people seem very quick to judge on this forum, without taking into consideration that people have different backgrounds, cultures and situations.
-
The foundation for most marriages is not financial but love, respect, honor, trust, etc... Having separate finances does not in any way change that foundation. Nor does having separate finances mean you are not VERY aligned financially. Most can be just as aligned as those with joint finances. It's just a different way of doing things that works for some, and doesn't work for others, not a reflection on the character or strength of one's marriage.
You make a great point. And I think my response was unclear - I didn't mean to imply that separate finances means you're not aligned financially with your partner. That was more in reference to many people's statements that they don't want to see their partner spending money on X (some expense they think is stupid/unnecessary/stresses them out), and my perspective of not having this expense X that is contentious or so troubling as to be better out of sight. (Which is the impression I'm getting from some of the separate-accounts folks.) I was pointing out that for some people, the separate finances work well because it prevents conflicts due to different values. So my point was that I am aligned (including financially) with my spouse, and I was referencing that difference.
If you're unfamiliar with the term "income splitting" it essentially means pooling your incomes together and being taxed at a combined rate. It doesn't exist here, so, if one person earns 400k in Canada, and their spouse earns 10k, they are each taxed at their own individual income tax rates. If the person earning 400k has 500k in taxable investments, income from these investments will be taxed at the rate of their own income. If the person earning 10k has 500k in taxable investments, then they'll be taxed at their much lower rate. The higher earner can't just give the lower earner money to invest for themselves. If they do that, then attribution rules kick in and the higher earner still has to pay tax at their own higher rate.
I'm only explaining all this because people seem very quick to judge on this forum, without taking into consideration that people have different backgrounds, cultures and situations.
Ah, very interesting. That does make sense - I'm approaching things from the perspective of a US citizen (and our tax code), so thanks for the clarification, wasn't aware.
I think this aspect of finances is definitely one of personal comfort levels. For instance, my partner and I are very affectionate - no gross PDA like making out in public, but lots of physical affection like holding hands, quick kisses on the cheek, hands around the waist, hugs, etc. I have plenty of friends that don't like to have any physical affection in public with their partners (or sometimes generally with anyone). I don't think they should change (assuming both partners are happy), I love them as they are, I understand they are different from me. But in the back of my mind, I think about how glad I made that my relationship operates differently, and I know I would be unhappy being in a relationship with those parameters. So I don't care what other people do in their own relationships (it doesn't affect me), I'm not trying to get them to change. But I also fundamentally don't really relate.
So that's where I'm coming from - not trying to judge, but also having a hard time understanding why especially people in the same position as me (married young, similar assets, similar financial attitude and values, both income earners) would make the choice to have separate assets. Since marriage, while giving many financial and other benefits, does obligate you to your spouse in financial ways too, I wonder whether someone people create a false sense of independence when obligation is actually there. If your spouse has CC debt, doesn't matter to an extent whether you didn't contribute and don't approve, if you're on the hook.
I think this conversation is skirting the lines of what marriage means to different people, which is fascinating. I for one might be more inclined to live together unmarried, and draw up legal documents on my own with a lawyer (to get some of the same benefits marriage provides) than to get married, if ultimately autonomy is of major importance. In reality it's not too realistic - there are cultural benefits being married provides, that you couldn't get with self0contracts. I just find that a lot of the separate finance folks have views that are identical to what mine were in the committed-but-not-married stage, and that fascinates me.
-
I think the next thread should be on a less acrimonious topic. I suggest: Is one saved by works, or by Grace alone? Or, perhaps, if there is a god, who/what is the one true god, and what does s/he~it require of us? :-)
One comment surprised me:...
I'm trying to figure out what the divide is here. Nobody I know in real life has joint accounts. ...
Do people actually know how their friends manage their finances? I have no clue and (probably like most) just assume they do it the right way--i.e., the way DW and I do it! :-)
(FWIW, we've had joint on all non-retirement accounts for 30+ years, from starving student days to dual high incomes, my SAHD years, and back to Duals. Works for us. Other options work for other people. Whatever works for you and your partner is your right system.)
-
ETA I guess can see how separate accounts is synonymous with being independent for some people, which I think can be hard for the joint account folks to understand, given that legally, a married couple is considered one financial entity, at least in the US.
The "you are legally one entity" argument has come up several times now. But why should what the state considers legally true bear on how people organize themselves within the marriage? Even if assets are owned jointly, don't couples still allocate items (clothes, computers, etc), furniture (e.g. desk, nightstand, dresser), and cars to each other exclusively? Obviously this allocation is based on individual vs common usage based on preference or practicality (most couples can't share all clothes, cars might be optimized for different usage, etc). But couldn't the same be true of pools of money? Or of bills?
I think that's a really good point. A lot of the arguments against separate accounts seems to come down to this idea of being considered a single economic unit by an outside perspective. I can understand these folks might also believe that's an integral part of marriage, but it's funny that the legal definition keeps being relied on as though it's proof of that.
And anyway, I think a lot of the separate accounts types are not saying they are financially separate. They are saying they do operate as a single financial unit in the abstract, in the broad sense, they just keep separate accounts. So the preference is a pretty superficial one.
-
I'm only explaining all this because people seem very quick to judge on this forum, without taking into consideration that people have different backgrounds, cultures and situations.
So that's where I'm coming from - not trying to judge, but also having a hard time understanding why especially people in the same position as me . . . would make the choice to have separate assets. . . . If your spouse has CC debt, doesn't matter to an extent whether you didn't contribute and don't approve, if you're on the hook.
I think a lot of people, on both sides of this debate, are interpreting "having a hard time understanding" as being judgmental. As if, if we weren't all so busy judging, we would be able to understand. Well, that's a pretty unreasonable assumption to put on internet strangers.
Functioning as one economic unit makes the most logistical sense to us since we are both responsible for our debts and the financial future of our family unit. Maybe you see it as absorbing an outside perspective, which I guess it is, to an extent, but it also comes from the inside, as inherent to our family unit.
-
I think a lot of people, on both sides of this debate, are interpreting "having a hard time understanding" as being judgmental. As if, if we weren't all so busy judging, we would be able to understand. Well, that's a pretty unreasonable assumption to put on internet strangers.
Um, I read at least 5 or 6 posts here that were basically like "in a healthy marriage people should do x, not y" or "people who keep separate accounts are headed for divorce" or "marriage counselling is in order" or "you are betraying your partner" or "separate accounts are a sign that the couple doesn't trust one another." I'd say that these types of statements are making some outrageous (and even ignorant) presumptions. To me these posts come across as judgemental rather than "trying to understand."
Nobody in an online forum can EVER know the details of someone else's situation, so it's best not to judge. I know that's an ideal that doesn't often happen on the internet, but I guess I had unrealistic expectations of mustachians on this forum as being somewhat open minded. I was wrong; no biggie.
-
We had all of our money and expenditures together in one account over the past 10 years ... not coincidentally the 10 year period that we didn't know where our money was going and it was a total mess. After reading this article, we opened several other accounts (not all 7) and it has been such a joy.
- Both our paychecks go into our main account and this is the account that our monthly bills are paid.
- We both take care of other monthly expenses and have our own budgets and personal checking accounts
- Another account for our Emergency Fund where money is transferred automatically every month from our main account
- A slush fund for short term saving (for house projects, vacations, camp, etc.)
http://funcheaporfree.com/2012/10/the-7-bank-accounts-every-family-should/ (http://funcheaporfree.com/2012/10/the-7-bank-accounts-every-family-should/)
-
We fall into the "too lazy to do the paperwork" camp. It would be a pain to re-do all our direct deposits, pre-authorized payments, monthly bills, and links to investment accounts. Technically, it's more like I have TWO accounts, since I handle all the online finances... I just decide which account to use to pay the various bills. And, husband seems to wind up handling most of the physical finances (like ATM deposits), so he tends to carry around both bank cards. It works well for us.
-
Do people actually know how their friends manage their finances? I have no clue and (probably like most) just assume they do it the right way--i.e., the way DW and I do it! :-)
I think it's really awesome if people are so open with their friends about money that they talk about how it's managed. I was thinking about this a lot when transitioning to being married after dating 5+ years with totally separate finances. When I blogged about how it was going for us, I got a lot of interest and had some neat conversations.
Here's an article about finances in marriage that really resonated with me, maybe some of you will enjoy it too: http://apracticalwedding.com/2012/03/combining-finances-marriage-wedding/
-
Do those of you with separate finances budget together? Or how do you make that work? Do you have discussion about larger goals like retirement/housing?
We have separate and joint bank accounts. Here is how it works…
We don't really "budget" but we have the same goals and work together.
Prior to buying a house I took care of all the bills and he just said "tell me what I owe and I won’t ask questions." I split everything 50-50 coming from separate accounts. I'm frugal, he trusts me!
We still have separate accounts and now a joint account for house expenses, mtg, insurance, and the Visa bill every month. We have a joint account for a rental property too but it pays for itself.
I have always pushed for separate accounts even though I was making about half as much as him for ~8 years. He was happy to “take care” of his GF before me and was a bit surprised I wanted to go Dutch. Maybe I am just a touch of an independent feminist. I have made slightly more the past 6 years and it is still 50-50. Even on mat leave I planned ahead and dug into my savings to keep up the 50:50.
Every month we put the same into the joint to pay the Visa, daycare, and housing expenses.
All small things are split 50-50 large things for our work are paid separately. (I get most reimbursed and he tax-deducts those expenses) For long term goals we decided together to make large lump sum mtg payments. We did this aggressively and almost had it paid off this past Christmas. He had enough to pay his "half" the last time it was up for renewal. So he paid his share and I put the rest in My LoC at a great promo rate. Yeah no mortgage!! But I teased him that there will be no champagne until my half is gone too. I am competitive so my half was just paid last week!!
We are both frugal. No debt ever except mtg debt. He is already a MMM semi-retired before 40.
Next is a discussion of how to save &/or invest in another rental property. Long term we keep track of our net worth about twice a year. I want to be a MMM too but I think it will take a few more years, and then I may be brave enough. When we are both full MMM I can see more merging together but I am a bit more aggressive in my investments then he is.
Our spending/saving habits are similar, any tips on when your investment strategies are different?
-
We have a joint bank account and I have my own separate bank accounts. My husband doesn't have his own account. This is because we want all of our savings to be under my name as I pay no tax. Makes very Mustachian sense to me. :)
-
I'm only explaining all this because people seem very quick to judge on this forum, without taking into consideration that people have different backgrounds, cultures and situations.
So that's where I'm coming from - not trying to judge, but also having a hard time understanding why especially people in the same position as me . . . would make the choice to have separate assets. . . . If your spouse has CC debt, doesn't matter to an extent whether you didn't contribute and don't approve, if you're on the hook.
I think a lot of people, on both sides of this debate, are interpreting "having a hard time understanding" as being judgmental. As if, if we weren't all so busy judging, we would be able to understand. Well, that's a pretty unreasonable assumption to put on internet strangers.
Functioning as one economic unit makes the most logistical sense to us since we are both responsible for our debts and the financial future of our family unit. Maybe you see it as absorbing an outside perspective, which I guess it is, to an extent, but it also comes from the inside, as inherent to our family unit.
Actually, every time I see someone on this thread say, "I'm having a hard time understanding...", I'm reminded of a conversation I had years ago with my father, who had recently found out that his brother was gay. My dad was not overtly homophobic, but was of a generation that had virtually no exposure (that they knew of) to gay people. He sought me out because he knew I had a fair number of gay friends. During the course of the conversation, he said that he was having a hard time understanding same-sex attraction.
"Well," I said, "fortunately for your brother, he doesn't. And that's all that matters, isn't it?"
-
I have to admit that I have a hard time fathoming a healthy marriage where finances are managed separately. But I assume it is likely because my parents had separate finances and growing up I witnessed so many stupid fights between them about money that it really soured me on the idea.
Some examples: 1) they frequently chose to drive the other's car when doing errands so that the other spouse would have to pay for the gas. 2) They would argue about who's turn it was to go grocery shopping because they wanted the other one to pay that week. 3) They would get upset about going out to eat because one would only want to go someplace fancy when it wasn't their turn to pay.
I resolved to have everything in one pool when I got married and luckily it worked out well for me. My husband and I got married fairly young, before he started his career, so it made sense to just take the few assets he had and dump them into my checking/savings accounts (which I added his name to). He doesn't like managing money, so it allows me to take charge of our finances so he doesn't have to think about stuff like bills. Also, it facilitated our ability to support each other in pursuing our goals and dreams. Like, when we were first married my husband didn't have a job and was actually costing large amounts of money going back to school to get a degree in a field he could be happy with. (His first degree/career choice turned out to be a HUGE mistake for him.) During this time I was the sole breadwinner and everything went into a joint account, with an agreed-upon amount being withdrawn by each of us each month as our discretionary spending money. Now that he is working the roles are reversed with him making all the money and me staying home to take care of our son. I feel like we would have had a much harder time making these choices to stop working and pursue our goals if we started with the expectation that we each had to be financially self-sufficient. There have also been very lean times where every penny counted to make sure we didn't bounce checks, so having fewer accounts to shuffle money between has made sense for us. Lastly, we both sometimes get off-track on our budget and seeing each other's purchases helps a lot with keeping each other accountable for our spending.
However, I can recognize that this has been great for us in part because of the fact that we started doing it when we were young and the fact that we recognized from the very beginning that we would not always be a dual-income family. Other couples have different situations than ours. Still, I tend to recommend pooling finances to young couples getting married, especially if they eventually plan to have kids.
-
I have to admit that I have a hard time fathoming a healthy marriage where finances are managed separately. But I assume it is likely because my parents had separate finances and growing up I witnessed so many stupid fights between them about money that it really soured me on the idea.
Some examples: 1) they frequently chose to drive the other's car when doing errands so that the other spouse would have to pay for the gas. 2) They would argue about who's turn it was to go grocery shopping because they wanted the other one to pay that week. 3) They would get upset about going out to eat because one would only want to go someplace fancy when it wasn't their turn to pay.
1. We had the same issue - easily solved by a gas credit card we share and split the cost of - most fuel efficient car is driven
2. Groceries - same thing credit card so we split them equally
3. Going out to eat - could do a CC but we dont do this enough that its an understanding that who ever wants to go pays.
-
reply 2
Because my wife gets a headache when I'm doing things that require thought or action on her part. She wants to pay a fixed mortgage amount and max out her 401K and get on with watching TV.
I'm working on paying off her mortgage this year and told her I'll be putting X in her bank account and she needs to change her autopay by that amount. It's like pulling teeth to get her off Facebook for 2 mins.
I also told her that in January, after the house is paid off, that I'm not going to give her a monthly check of my 1/2 of the expenses (plus extra house principal) since she'll make enough to cover what she pays, and I'll need to build my savings back up.
-
There are three financial categories married or thinking-about-marriage couples should consider:
If you and your partner's principles are in close alignment on these three things, you shouldn't have any worries - dump it all into one account, pay it all out of one account, and save in joint accounts.
Sometimes, though, that doesn't quite work out...
My wife and I agree; maximize the hell out of income and optimize tax strategy! I currently make more, but that doesn't matter, we're aligned.
My wife and I agree; cut back to the bone on ridiculous shit and 'splurge' on what adds true value. We have some trivial differences here, but for the most part we are synced.
My wife and I compromise; what to do with what's left over at the end of the month? Me - invest every drop, immediately. My wife - create a safety net, then cash cushion (yes, in addition to, like a pillow top to a mattress), then save for travel/new furniture/baby, then maybe invest, but only in something "safe".
The principles are almost completely aligned - there are just a couple of differences.
Which then leads to the mechanics of couple finances.
For us, all income goes into the same pot (our family checking account). All regular expenses (99%) go on our joint rewards credit cards. Those are then paid out of the family checking.
If I want a new gadget for my bike, I buy it with a separate CC or "my" checking account (she's still on the account, but we deem it "mine").
If she wants a new item for her wardrobe, she buys it on her separate CC or "her" checking account (again, I'm on it too). We don't monitor each other's separate accounts.
At the end of the month, we "split" control over the savings proportional to income. She can do whatever she wants with her piece, and I can do whatever I want with my piece. It works great for us!
As a sidebar, when I first discovered MMM, FIRE instantly clicked. DW, however, was NOT on board...but, after over a year of my subtlety selling FIRE, she is finally seeing the "why" and "how". She's starting to ask "when" :D
-
My husband and I have a pretty healthy marriage (9 years) and separate bank accounts.
The key to our success is joint goals and mutual accountability. We have an accelerated schedule for paying off the mortgage (out of my income) and saving away extra money on a set schedule (out of his income). Household bills also come out of his income. Between the accelerated mortgage and the extra savings, we're putting away about 65% of post-tax income. He can look at the mortgage payments online, and I can see the savings account the same way.
After all of the goals have been met and the household bills paid, whatever's left out of both our incomes is ours to spend however we see fit. I don't want to require his approval before I buy my yarn or books, and I don't really want to know the minutae of his spending either. As long as the goals and the bills are met first, what happens with the leftovers doesn't matter that much. If one of us is a bit short of cash one week, the other will pay whatever bills need paying. For us, the arrangement strikes a balance between working towards a shared goal and being able to pursue individual interests without having to justify it to each other.
It works largely because we can trust each other and because we have similar approaches to spending. I think under those conditions, just about any system can be made to work. If one of us suddenly developed a gambling habit, for example, our system would not work at all.
-
Assuming you aren't planning on getting divorced (which is sadly true, i have known multiple people go into marriages with hunches / thoughts it won't last, so they plan that way), it's just so much easier.
Both of our paychecks go into one bank account. All of the bills and credit cards and mortgage comes out of that bank account. From there its invested. The only thing separate is retirement accounts, for tax purposes.
We also have no budget and don't talk about purchases unless huge. and manage to save 40-50%. not bad.
-
We had all of our money and expenditures together in one account over the past 10 years ... not coincidentally the 10 year period that we didn't know where our money was going and it was a total mess. After reading this article, we opened several other accounts (not all 7) and it has been such a joy.
- Both our paychecks go into our main account and this is the account that our monthly bills are paid.
- We both take care of other monthly expenses and have our own budgets and personal checking accounts
- Another account for our Emergency Fund where money is transferred automatically every month from our main account
- A slush fund for short term saving (for house projects, vacations, camp, etc.)
http://funcheaporfree.com/2012/10/the-7-bank-accounts-every-family-should/ (http://funcheaporfree.com/2012/10/the-7-bank-accounts-every-family-should/)
Similar to what we have set up. When we were first married. It was one joint account for bills and a set amount to a joint savings. Now its everything into several accounts
-
We pool everything. We used to have separate accounts for "fun money"/"walking around money" but that's mostly gone out the window. I do miss being able to just throw $300 at him and have it go for everything until the next pay period and not have to enter 8 zillion little transactions into my spreadsheet, but I do have a better handle on what is going on this way. We are somewhat on the same page with our goals--getting better at that--he lets me handle the finances and investments since I care more strongly, and we married young & broke so we didn't bring anything significant to the marriage. And immediately after we got married I went part-time at work to go back to school and he was the breadwinner for 4 years, then we split the role of working parent after I graduated and our daughter was born, and then after he lost his job I became the breadwinner and he is a SAH parent. It's always been "our money", no matter whose name is on the pay check; we're in it together. I never even considered doing it any other way and I don't think he did either. But everyone is different, so if another couple's system works well for them, then what business is it of mine?
-
Pooling our money allows us both the freedom to pursue our long-term goals. My husband wants to start his own business, and my paycheck will allow him to do this without worrying about how he will eat while he builds it up. I want to go back to school in a year or two, and we will be able to live mainly on his paycheck for a few years. Then one of us may want to stay home with the kids for a period of time. I can't imagine living extravagantly and watching my husband struggle with money while he builds up a business. I can't imagine him taking fancy vacations while I'm eating Ramen as a student. That's just not how we work.
-
We kept ours separate for a couple of reasons.
1) My Wife didn't make much money (I made about 4X) so she felt the need to balance a checkbook every month where as mine was on autopay.
2) My Wife was not particularly on board with the principles of saving everything, consequently she tended to always blow through her salary check. This was partly due to having some large expenses such as boarding her horse at a training facility rather than bringing the damn thing home to graze on our pasture for free.
I did note that over a few years she gradually came round to my way of thinking.. It took a while, I had to lead.. not nag and cajole. Eventually she saw the light and the landline went, the $40 to $100 cell phone bill disappeared, the horse came home when the fees went to $500 a month.
Just last night she said... Ooh, I have $7000 in my bank account now, I used to have nothing.
I wouldn't say she is committed as I would like, but last years spend was about $29k for two people in a fairly high tax state with about $3k in charitable giving (plus that freaking horse) and we are FI (and partly RE'd).
It could be a lot worse!..:)
-
We are mostly integrated, but each of us takes responsibility for paying for certain things each month, approximately split 50/50. It just keeps us both involved/engaged in finances and reduces how much each of us has to remember.
-
I earn a little less than double what my husband does. He feels it would be unfair for him to spend "my" money. I'd be fine with us sharing a single budget (hey, it'd be easier organizationally), but he doesn't feel comfortable with that. We each have our direct deposit setup to put a certain amount into a shared checking account to pay the bills. As the higher earner, I fund the savings account that covers home improvement. The rest, we each decide how to save, invest, or spend. Organizationally, this makes restaurants, pizza, groceries, etc. more difficult because we never really do settle up on who picked up the tab more.
Before he was saying he didn't want me judging his spending on video games and whatnot. He's changed his tune there, since he read MMM's post on clearing non-grocery purchases over $10 with the SO and we've been getting him set up with YNAB. He had just enough savings to get him through 6 months of unemployment when they happened, but rebuilding that account has been difficult, so he's willing to take more drastic measures.
-
Pooling our money allows us both the freedom to pursue our long-term goals. My husband wants to start his own business, and my paycheck will allow him to do this without worrying about how he will eat while he builds it up. I want to go back to school in a year or two, and we will be able to live mainly on his paycheck for a few years. Then one of us may want to stay home with the kids for a period of time. I can't imagine living extravagantly and watching my husband struggle with money while he builds up a business. I can't imagine him taking fancy vacations while I'm eating Ramen as a student. That's just not how we work.
Why, hello strawman! How have you been?
There are numerous posts from people with separate accounts in this thread. Which one led you to believe that separate accounts would lead to one person living extravagantly while the other struggles?
-
Twenty-one years ago when my, now, wife and I were first dating we took a 4 month trip to SE Asia together to see how we got along on the road under stress :). I can still remember standing in my living room with my future wife before we left on our trip. We were each counting stacks of $100 bills which were to be our spending money for the trip.
After we'd finished silently counting our money, my girlfriend asked me, "How much do you have?" "Five-thousand two hundred," I said. How much do you have?" She said, "Four-thousand eight hundred."
Without any hesitation, I peeled two $100 bills off the top of my stack and handed them to my girlfriend. She just looked at me and was like, "What's this for?" I said, "That's so we both start out even."
Pretty much our lives together have been like that. Whatever we have, we share. What's mine is hers, and what's hers is mine. As soon as we got married we opened a joint checking account, and just dumped whatever money we both made into that account. It never occurred to either of us to do otherwise.
When both of us were working we tended to make similar amounts of money. Some months I made a little more and some months my wife made more, but overall it's averaged out. Since we adopted our daughter in 2009 my wife has been a SAHM, so she has no outside income. But, to me, that makes no difference. I don't think of the money I make at a job or doing side hustles as "my" money. It's all ours.
It's been interesting reading through other members of this community's descriptions of how they manage their money. To me, the value of a forum like this is that we get to learn from others in the community. I can't imagine attacking or criticizing others for their personal, private decisions on how they manage finances within their marriages...
Thank you to everyone for sharing!
-
We have separate bank accounts, but everything is tracked together, all of the accounts are in Mint and Personal Capital, and we're authorized users on most of each other's credit cards, so we can maximize using the right card for the best rewards. There's no good reason to have separate accounts at this point aside from inertia, but it works for us just fine, so I don't really see a reason to change it. We budget so that we each get an equal amount of "fun"money as well as joint fun money; what we each make has nothing to do with that.
-
[This is an odd thread-> please explain why you do x? > people explain why they do x > others refuse to accept their reasoning> rinse and repeat.]
I have separate accounts from my partner and don't see that changing any time soon, in much the same way that I won't change my name if and when we get married. It's not a sign of mistrust that I don't want to merge completely. We are pretty open about finances and money and have shared goals, if slightly different paths to get there. He earns more but has higher expenses, due to a previous marriage and children. We each pay a utility and once a quarter I spend approximately 2 minutes entering the values into a spreadsheet with pre-prepared calcs and it lets us know where to rebalance. It's just Not Hard so I don't understand why people think it's complicated.
-
I wouldn't say I thought it was hard or complicated to have separate finances, although it certainly would be more so if one spouse was not working or had no income. For instance, my husband was a student and SAHP for a number of years. His contribution to the household was incredibly significant to our family and my career. All the income we have is family income, even now that he is working, and our expenses are our expenses. Having children from a previous marriage seems like a situation where separate accounts/finances might be necessary for various reasons.
-
So how does separate accounts work when one parent is stay at home and not bringing in any income?
I am bumping this, as it is my question too.
We had one person with non driving husband on an allowance, but to me, unless the SO acknowledged poor spend habits, it is pretty demoralizing...and they can't pay the bills for the household chores...
Another mentioned a $10k seed acct that was ended back to full joint after 10 years.
For all of you strongly in the 'pro' separate finances, how would you do it if one spouse had no income for 7+ years, and separate savings are zero after a few months?
My DH and I are 100% joint, because only I was working at first, and we were young and maybe naive. Then never changed, except to now have tiny cash based personal allowances each month for whatever we want. Having troubles wrapping my head around the idea.
Any takers on the question?
How do you split finances if one spouse does not have income?[\b]
-
How do you split finances if one spouse does not have income?[\b]
I would NEVER marry someone who wasn't able to stand on their own two feet.
If AFTER the fact, something happened, job loss, health issue, etc......that is a different story.
I would never enter that arrangement where I am expected to support someone financially.
-
So how does separate accounts work when one parent is stay at home and not bringing in any income?
I am bumping this, as it is my question too.
We had one person with non driving husband on an allowance, but to me, unless the SO acknowledged poor spend habits, it is pretty demoralizing...and they can't pay the bills for the household chores...
Another mentioned a $10k seed acct that was ended back to full joint after 10 years.
For all of you strongly in the 'pro' separate finances, how would you do it if one spouse had no income for 7+ years, and separate savings are zero after a few months?
My DH and I are 100% joint, because only I was working at first, and we were young and maybe naive. Then never changed, except to now have tiny cash based personal allowances each month for whatever we want. Having troubles wrapping my head around the idea.
Any takers on the question?
How do you split finances if one spouse does not have income?[\b]
Maybe the no income spouse has savings; maybe they change their strategy.
This thread has come up a million times. There are many strategies for managing finances as a couple, there is no one size fits all solution, and no particular strategy may be successful 100% of the time during the course of a single relationship. Those who "cannot fathom" a thing are openly admitting to not being able to consider anything but their own personal opinion on the matter. You are then not looking to fathom the thing, but to cement your personal opinion.
Anyone who may be interested in trying to uncement that position is wasting their breath.
For anyone looking for advice on how to manage finances in a relationship, find out what works for you and your partner, communicate openly on what isn't working and what's causing tension. Address those tensions with solutions that you both agree on.
Mic drop.
-
How do you split finances if one spouse does not have income?[\b]
I would NEVER marry someone who wasn't able to stand on their own two feet.
If AFTER the fact, something happened, job loss, health issue, etc......that is a different story.
I would never enter that arrangement where I am expected to support someone financially.
It was his final year of school. Thought he would graduate, then needed to repeat a few courses, but wedding plans had begun... Oh, and see my comment. ' naive'..yep...
I made the ' potential' rationalization. He did work for 5 years after that, then fell ill, then became SAHD, then back to school, and will be full time again this June..after 12 years... So for me for better or worse really rings true, and we think of it as ours-- most of the time..
Please keep the suggestions coming for how to split with only one income.
-
So how does separate accounts work when one parent is stay at home and not bringing in any income?
I am bumping this, as it is my question too.
We had one person with non driving husband on an allowance, but to me, unless the SO acknowledged poor spend habits, it is pretty demoralizing...and they can't pay the bills for the household chores...
Another mentioned a $10k seed acct that was ended back to full joint after 10 years.
For all of you strongly in the 'pro' separate finances, how would you do it if one spouse had no income for 7+ years, and separate savings are zero after a few months?
My DH and I are 100% joint, because only I was working at first, and we were young and maybe naive. Then never changed, except to now have tiny cash based personal allowances each month for whatever we want. Having troubles wrapping my head around the idea.
Any takers on the question?
How do you split finances if one spouse does not have income?[\b]
Maybe the no income spouse has savings; maybe they change their strategy.
This thread has come up a million times. There are many strategies for managing finances as a couple, there is no one size fits all solution, and no particular strategy may be successful 100% of the time during the course of a single relationship. Those who "cannot fathom" a thing are openly admitting to not being able to consider anything but their own personal opinion on the matter. You are then not looking to fathom the thing, but to cement your personal opinion.
Anyone who may be interested in trying to uncement that position is wasting their breath.
For anyone looking for advice on how to manage finances in a relationship, find out what works for you and your partner, communicate openly on what isn't working and what's causing tension. Address those tensions with solutions that you both agree on.
Mic drop.
Wow, pretty holier than thou response..
I actually want suggestions, as I have been thinking there are advantages to this for a couple, but can't figure out how to get those advantages when there is only one income. But I am indeed a bit trapped in thinking it from my own position, so thought you and other would have a practical suggestion or two.
-
Maybe the no income spouse has savings; maybe they change their strategy.
This thread has come up a million times. There are many strategies for managing finances as a couple, there is no one size fits all solution, and no particular strategy may be successful 100% of the time during the course of a single relationship. Those who "cannot fathom" a thing are openly admitting to not being able to consider anything but their own personal opinion on the matter. You are then not looking to fathom the thing, but to cement your personal opinion.
Anyone who may be interested in trying to uncement that position is wasting their breath.
For anyone looking for advice on how to manage finances in a relationship, find out what works for you and your partner, communicate openly on what isn't working and what's causing tension. Address those tensions with solutions that you both agree on.
Mic drop.
Yeah, no. This is not a response to the question. Almost all of the separate finance households have two incomes.
I would NEVER marry someone who wasn't able to stand on their own two feet.
If AFTER the fact, something happened, job loss, health issue, etc......that is a different story.
I would never enter that arrangement where I am expected to support someone financially.
Are you familiar with the stay at home parent thing? Or someone who is finishing or going back to school?
-
So how does separate accounts work when one parent is stay at home and not bringing in any income?
I am bumping this, as it is my question too.
We had one person with non driving husband on an allowance, but to me, unless the SO acknowledged poor spend habits, it is pretty demoralizing...and they can't pay the bills for the household chores...
Another mentioned a $10k seed acct that was ended back to full joint after 10 years.
For all of you strongly in the 'pro' separate finances, how would you do it if one spouse had no income for 7+ years, and separate savings are zero after a few months?
My DH and I are 100% joint, because only I was working at first, and we were young and maybe naive. Then never changed, except to now have tiny cash based personal allowances each month for whatever we want. Having troubles wrapping my head around the idea.
Any takers on the question?
How do you split finances if one spouse does not have income?[\b]
Maybe the no income spouse has savings; maybe they change their strategy.
This thread has come up a million times. There are many strategies for managing finances as a couple, there is no one size fits all solution, and no particular strategy may be successful 100% of the time during the course of a single relationship. Those who "cannot fathom" a thing are openly admitting to not being able to consider anything but their own personal opinion on the matter. You are then not looking to fathom the thing, but to cement your personal opinion.
Anyone who may be interested in trying to uncement that position is wasting their breath.
For anyone looking for advice on how to manage finances in a relationship, find out what works for you and your partner, communicate openly on what isn't working and what's causing tension. Address those tensions with solutions that you both agree on.
Mic drop.
Wow, pretty holier than thou response..
I actually want suggestions, as I have been thinking there are advantages to this for a couple, but can't figure out how to get those advantages when there is only one income. But I am indeed a bit trapped in thinking it from my own position, so thought you and other would have a practical suggestion or two.
What exactly was holier than thou? Was it the part where I said that multiple methods can work? There is no one size fits all? I never said anything about my particular method of dealing with the situation but that there will be many different situations and therefore there will be many different solutions. The question itself is meaningless as it does not have any detail, just an open scenario in which any number of details could change how a couple would handle it.
Or was it that I said people get cemented into their own opinions? Which you agreed with two sentences later.
What I said was practical and is frankly the only advice you can give in such an open scenario. If there were particular couples with particular problems that they could ask specific questions then there would be more specific practical advice rather than generic practical advice.
-
Maybe the no income spouse has savings; maybe they change their strategy.
This thread has come up a million times. There are many strategies for managing finances as a couple, there is no one size fits all solution, and no particular strategy may be successful 100% of the time during the course of a single relationship. Those who "cannot fathom" a thing are openly admitting to not being able to consider anything but their own personal opinion on the matter. You are then not looking to fathom the thing, but to cement your personal opinion.
Anyone who may be interested in trying to uncement that position is wasting their breath.
For anyone looking for advice on how to manage finances in a relationship, find out what works for you and your partner, communicate openly on what isn't working and what's causing tension. Address those tensions with solutions that you both agree on.
Mic drop.
Yeah, no. This is not a response to the question. Almost all of the separate finance households have two incomes.
Almost all != all. How is it not a response? This is exactly what I'm talking about. You're just casually rejecting what was said without even trying to engage in it. You're not trying to understand you're trying to stay solidified in your way of thinking.
I am in that household right now. I saved money and am going to school, I have no income. However I still contribute to the household financial picture, we have separate finances though. We manage it by talking about shared expenses and being open about what we do together. But if I decide I want to buy a six pack of beer I do not have to consult her, nor do I have to hide it, nor do I have to tell her when I do so. And we've been managing just fine for the last year this way.
-
To me a good present from DH is not about the money he spent, but rather the time he spent in planning the gift and thinking about what I would like. It doesn't matter to me what "pot of money" it came from.
Also, this is a reason for one of us to get something we want, courtesy of the Gift Fund we put savings into every month. I've wanted a XBox One for awhile now and I finally get it to buy it soon because I've "banked" a few presents towards it.
Back to the OP - I think both methods can work and that it depends on the couple. DW and I share finances but a lot of that is necessity - she has virtually no income.
One of my best friends was a staunch advocate of separate finances for the longest time. He and his wife have been married for almost 10 years now and he's told me that since they had their kid a few years ago, the finances have drifted more and more towards the shared model. He says he's pretty sure that's where they'll end up and he's fine with that.
Sol - I remember GRS and JD, but I never put those two thoughts together. Are you sure that's why he wanted to split them, or is that intuition?
-
I am in that household right now. I saved money and am going to school, I have no income. However I still contribute to the household financial picture, we have separate finances though. We manage it by talking about shared expenses and being open about what we do together. But if I decide I want to buy a six pack of beer I do not have to consult her, nor do I have to hide it, nor do I have to tell her when I do so. And we've been managing just fine for the last year this way.
Are you buying beer, and/ or paying for half the bills, with your savings? This is what people are asking about. Not the theory, the practice. Others on this thread have said that if a spouse lost their job, etc, they would be expected to pay for things out of their savings.
-
I am in that household right now. I saved money and am going to school, I have no income. However I still contribute to the household financial picture, we have separate finances though. We manage it by talking about shared expenses and being open about what we do together. But if I decide I want to buy a six pack of beer I do not have to consult her, nor do I have to hide it, nor do I have to tell her when I do so. And we've been managing just fine for the last year this way.
Are you buying beer, and/ or paying for half the bills, with your savings? This is what people are asking about. Not the theory, the practice. Others on this thread have said that if a spouse lost their job, etc, they would be expected to pay for things out of their savings.
Bolded for emphasis.
There are many ways to do it. How I've done it is one way. The practice depends on the details of each persons particulars. When it is left as a general question like "what if a spouse lost a job, etc.?" then you will get a general answer like. "I don't know, they'll work it out by talking and finding a strategy that works for their particular circumstances." Which is the same thing I've said in the last three posts which has been ignored for some reason in lieu of asking the same question.
-
I am in that household right now. I saved money and am going to school, I have no income. However I still contribute to the household financial picture, we have separate finances though. We manage it by talking about shared expenses and being open about what we do together. But if I decide I want to buy a six pack of beer I do not have to consult her, nor do I have to hide it, nor do I have to tell her when I do so. And we've been managing just fine for the last year this way.
Are you buying beer, and/ or paying for half the bills, with your savings? This is what people are asking about. Not the theory, the practice. Others on this thread have said that if a spouse lost their job, etc, they would be expected to pay for things out of their savings.
Bolded for emphasis.
There are many ways to do it. How I've done it is one way. The practice depends on the details of each persons particulars. When it is left as a general question like "what if a spouse lost a job, etc.?" then you will get a general answer like. "I don't know, they'll work it out by talking and finding a strategy that works for their particular circumstances." Which is the same thing I've said in the last three posts which has been ignored for some reason in lieu of asking the same question.
Is that a yes? You are paying for half of the household expenses out of your savings while you are a student? I must have missed where you previously answered that question.
-
I am in that household right now. I saved money and am going to school, I have no income. However I still contribute to the household financial picture, we have separate finances though. We manage it by talking about shared expenses and being open about what we do together. But if I decide I want to buy a six pack of beer I do not have to consult her, nor do I have to hide it, nor do I have to tell her when I do so. And we've been managing just fine for the last year this way.
Are you buying beer, and/ or paying for half the bills, with your savings? This is what people are asking about. Not the theory, the practice. Others on this thread have said that if a spouse lost their job, etc, they would be expected to pay for things out of their savings.
Bolded for emphasis.
There are many ways to do it. How I've done it is one way. The practice depends on the details of each persons particulars. When it is left as a general question like "what if a spouse lost a job, etc.?" then you will get a general answer like. "I don't know, they'll work it out by talking and finding a strategy that works for their particular circumstances." Which is the same thing I've said in the last three posts which has been ignored for some reason in lieu of asking the same question.
Is that a yes? You are paying for half of the household expenses out of your savings while you are a student? I must have missed where you previously answered that question.
Yes. Saying I saved money to pay for stuff while I'm in school means I use my savings to pay for stuff while I'm in school.
-
Are you familiar with the stay at home parent thing? Or someone who is finishing or going back to school?
I am, however not applicable to me. I have no interest in kids.
-
So how does separate accounts work when one parent is stay at home and not bringing in any income?
I am bumping this, as it is my question too.
.....
Any takers on the question?
How do you split finances if one spouse does not have income?[\b]
This thread has come up a million times. ..... Those who "cannot fathom" a thing are openly admitting to not being able to consider anything but their own personal opinion on the matter. You are then not looking to fathom the thing, but to cement your personal opinion.
Anyone who may be interested in trying to uncement that position is wasting their breath.
Wow, pretty holier than thou response..
.....
What exactly was holier than thou?
I have shortened the thread above for clarity... The bolded part is the portion I found "holier than thou"
I am not trying to uncement anyone's ideas, but learn more. You claim in strong language that I can not consider anything but my own opinion.
Then you did not attempt to answer a specific, practical, question.
Why do I say this?
... because my opinion and experience is that I generally see marriage = joint money. period., but realize by reading this thread that joint "family" money can be spread across multiple accounts with various levels of controls and assignment to individuals....
... I find other's primary arguments against separate accounts -- re: hiding one's finances by using split accounts -- sounds reasonable, but is actually egregious, as even with entirely joint accounts I can quickly think of four ways to hide money or spending from my spouse.
Lastly, the unanswered question is this, maybe others can help if I provide specifics:
I have a spouse that has been SAHD / Out of work for many years, not entirely his fault. (Illness, moving for my work, desire for SAHP). Any separated savings he may or may not have had has since been absorbed into one of the home purchases, or used to pay cash for a family car. Like others, we did not change the financial arrangements we had set up in our early 20's, for us, that is joint everything.
I would like some of the advantages of separate accounts, (for both of us, namely independent planning and control purposes, like FI for the saver while the other spends) but I see three not-great methods:
1) Give him an allowance for personal spend, but he can "look not touch" what is in my account, which is used to pay for everything, by my making the payments directly. Seems like a bad idea from a human nature "teamwork" standpoint, a bit like treating him like my 15 y.o..
2) Split my pay in two, and divide it into two accounts, and pretend it just "magically appears" for both of us. Divide expenses in half. -- This seems artificial, but what are the other reasons against this? Does anyone do this with two incomes -- e.g., have the total income split, so identical money is placed into each person's account? Why wouldn't this work well, do you think...? or Would it be likely to?
3) Create a big joint account with all the income, feeding two identical, tiny personal accounts -- but wait, this is what we have now, except the personal accounts amount to $250/month "cash" envelopes, for clothes, lunches, gifts, school courses & books, phone plan upgrades, donations, or whatever... seems to be the same to me as one joint account, with more overhead. I must admit, I do like the allowances, as we just started them about 18 months ago and there are many many advantages to having money for yourself.
So - any takers? what other good options have I missed, and can you point out problems with 1) and 2).??
-
Goldilocks, in that situation I'd pay all joint bills from the breadwinner's account and then put half of the remainder into the other person's account to invest or spend as they wish.
-
So how does separate accounts work when one parent is stay at home and not bringing in any income?
I am bumping this, as it is my question too.
.....
Any takers on the question?
How do you split finances if one spouse does not have income?[\b]
This thread has come up a million times. ..... Those who "cannot fathom" a thing are openly admitting to not being able to consider anything but their own personal opinion on the matter. You are then not looking to fathom the thing, but to cement your personal opinion.
Anyone who may be interested in trying to uncement that position is wasting their breath.
Wow, pretty holier than thou response..
.....
What exactly was holier than thou?
I have shortened the thread above for clarity... The bolded part is the portion I found "holier than thou"
Fine, you see that as me saying it doesn't happen to me as well for some reason, whatever, think what you will.
I am not trying to uncement anyone's ideas, but learn more. You claim in strong language that I can not consider anything but my own opinion.
Then you did not attempt to answer a specific, practical, question.
Specific in a general way? Practical...? Really? Let's revisit the question again. I believe it was phrased as "How does separate accounts work when one parent is stay at home and not bringing in any income?" or "How do you split finances if one spouse does not have income?" those are practical and specific in your opinion...
Cool if you view those questions that way, fine. But then my answer being that those questions are actually very open and general and therefore deserve an open and general answer isn't wrong or incorrect just that you don't see it as being general. You see some sort of specifics in those questions that I don't. If a friend were to ask you that question wouldn't you probe a bit more for detail before answering? Or do you have quick practical and specific answers to open general questions?
Why do I say this?
... because my opinion and experience is that I generally see marriage = joint money. period., but realize by reading this thread that joint "family" money can be spread across multiple accounts with various levels of controls and assignment to individuals....
... I find other's primary arguments against separate accounts -- re: hiding one's finances by using split accounts -- sounds reasonable, but is actually egregious, as even with entirely joint accounts I can quickly think of four ways to hide money or spending from my spouse.
Lastly, the unanswered question is this, maybe others can help if I provide specifics:
Finally...
I have a spouse that has been SAHD / Out of work for many years, not entirely his fault. (Illness, moving for my work, desire for SAHP). Any separated savings he may or may not have had has since been absorbed into one of the home purchases, or used to pay cash for a family car. Like others, we did not change the financial arrangements we had set up in our early 20's, for us, that is joint everything.
I would like some of the advantages of separate accounts, (for both of us, namely independent planning and control purposes, like FI for the saver while the other spends) but I see three not-great methods:
1) Give him an allowance for personal spend, but he can "look not touch" what is in my account, which is used to pay for everything, by my making the payments directly. Seems like a bad idea from a human nature "teamwork" standpoint, a bit like treating him like my 15 y.o..
2) Split my pay in two, and divide it into two accounts, and pretend it just "magically appears" for both of us. Divide expenses in half. -- This seems artificial, but what are the other reasons against this? Does anyone do this with two incomes -- e.g., have the total income split, so identical money is placed into each person's account? Why wouldn't this work well, do you think...? or Would it be likely to?
3) Create a big joint account with all the income, feeding two identical, tiny personal accounts -- but wait, this is what we have now, except the personal accounts amount to $250/month "cash" envelopes, for clothes, lunches, gifts, school courses & books, phone plan upgrades, donations, or whatever... seems to be the same to me as one joint account, with more overhead. I must admit, I do like the allowances, as we just started them about 18 months ago and there are many many advantages to having money for yourself.
So - any takers? what other good options have I missed, and can you point out problems with 1) and 2).??
Actually I see problems with all three. You're talking about it from your side of things. My only advice for your situation would be to engage your DH and come up with a solution together. You can by all means propose during that conversation as some sort of start point(s) to work from.
#1 might work where you have a relationship with someone who sucks at their spending skill. It definitely wouldn't with someone who might see it as controlling.
#2 is just a flip of #1. Depends on your partner and their spending skills.
#3 seems to be somewhat of a middle ground. And seems to work fine if both partners have good spending skills and have agreed on it.
Thank you for providing specifics. I hope it all works out well for you and your spouse.
-
We did #3 for a while and it worked fairly well. We've gone back though to using the joint card for everything and just having an understanding that we'll talk through anything frivolous. I rarely buy anything frivolous and he's getting a lot better.
-
So how does separate accounts work when one parent is stay at home and not bringing in any income?
We had one person with non driving husband on an allowance, but to me, unless the SO acknowledged poor spend habits, it is pretty demoralizing...and they can't pay the bills for the household chores...
Umm I'm pretty sure this is directed at me and honestly it's a bit judgmental and rude. My husband isn't on an 'allowance,' doesn't have poor spending habits, and he's perfectly capable of paying bills. And we're perfectly able to pay for our household needs, so I'm not sure where you got that idea. Both of our names are on all of the accounts I am about to mention, and we both have full, open access to our online banking and Mint. We don't put our spending on credit cards, for family history reasons (on his side, but I fully respect where he's coming from). Because of that, we have a fairly complicated system of checking accounts, but it works well for us and trust me, my husband is not demoralized (at least, not any more than the fact that he's under 30 with a life long disability that prevents him from driving and working naturally demoralizes him). We consider ourselves to have joint finances, and consider all incoming money to be 'ours.'
We have everything on autopay, as I said in my original post. So, I have elected to have a 'bill paying' account for those withdrawals -- that way I can keep less of a buffer than if we also did our household spending from that account.
He has a "separate" spending account for 'fun' things, and I have a "separate" spending account for my fun things and household spending. I say separate because there is only one debit card for each of these accounts, and he carries "his" and I carry "mine," but again, they are actually joint accounts. The household spending comes out of my account because, again, my husband is medically banned from driving and literally never does household shopping without me. If he had to, for some reason, he has a debit card linked to the bill paying account, which consistently has a buffer of $500-1000, which should be more than enough to cover a short term emergency. Or, he can access mobile banking on his phone and transfer whatever amount he pleases into whatever account he pleases. Because, again, he's not on some sort of restricted allowance.
The only reason we have it set up like this is to avoid overdrafts that might occur, because I prefer to keep a low buffer in our checking accounts. If we didn't have the separate accounts for various purposes, he would insist on a 2-5k buffer in the general checking account (which is how he did things before we combined finances). Having that much sitting around doing nothing is semi-annoying to me, so we worked out a compromise.
I'm the kind of person that likes for everything to have it's place and designated purpose, and being able to portion out our budget into it's individual little buckets on the 1st of every month is very satisfying to me. It has absolutely nothing to do with my husband's spending habits, or personal responsibility, and is not an 'allowance' or 'demoralizing.'
So yeah, I agree with your general view on joint finances, but I'm not really thrilled with what you got out of my initial explanation of our situation.
-
Sorry Caliq! I completely misread your earlier post.
-
I would like some of the advantages of separate accounts, (for both of us, namely independent planning and control purposes, like FI for the saver while the other spends) but I see three not-great methods:
1) Give him an allowance for personal spend, but he can "look not touch" what is in my account, which is used to pay for everything, by my making the payments directly. Seems like a bad idea from a human nature "teamwork" standpoint, a bit like treating him like my 15 y.o..
2) Split my pay in two, and divide it into two accounts, and pretend it just "magically appears" for both of us. Divide expenses in half. -- This seems artificial, but what are the other reasons against this? Does anyone do this with two incomes -- e.g., have the total income split, so identical money is placed into each person's account? Why wouldn't this work well, do you think...? or Would it be likely to?
3) Create a big joint account with all the income, feeding two identical, tiny personal accounts -- but wait, this is what we have now, except the personal accounts amount to $250/month "cash" envelopes, for clothes, lunches, gifts, school courses & books, phone plan upgrades, donations, or whatever... seems to be the same to me as one joint account, with more overhead. I must admit, I do like the allowances, as we just started them about 18 months ago and there are many many advantages to having money for yourself.
I think it's possible to set up one income to simulate two separate income streams and then set up separate finances. But no one said it would be efficient or logical. Maybe you set it up so you pay each other back. Or one pays some bills while the other pays the other. It would, after all, work. And maybe for some people it would give them a sense of empowerment or control over the situation. But you're saying it doesn't make sense to you (those bills have to get paid anyway, so money is going from the initial stream to those bills eventually anyways, regardless of the path to get there). And if you're saying that, it probably means that system isn't right for you. And that's fine, too! Why set something up that feels complicated, cumbersome, and fake rather than empowering and liberating?
Sounds like the best bet for you is to pay these relatively fixed household expenses out of one account, and split the rest. Then your discretionary incomes, which aren't spoken for by rent/mortgage, car insurance, utilities, and groceries, are separate and you have complete power over them individually. And you aren't adding steps that seem convoluted and illogical *to you* to your process of paying the basic bills. And it's hard to get upset over the amount in this situation unlike an arbitrary amount, because it's literally half of what's available. Which it's my personal opinion is pretty fair for a stay at home parent...not mooching, but their fair share of the family's funds earned by the work they do and enable their spouse/partner to do.
By the by, I have no idea how this evolves in terms of achieving FIRE. If EarnerSaverSpouse builds up a stash and SAH-SpenderSpouse spends all of theirs, doesn't quite seem fair for EarnerSpouse to be forced to keep earning twice as long, does it? Which is probably why many families in this situation long-term go for joint finances. But if it's a temporary situation, and/or they have the potential to return to work eventually, it might be a good interim setup, for certain couples.
-
Sorry Caliq! I completely misread your earlier post.
Thanks for apologizing :)
-
Sorry Caliq! I completely misread your earlier post.
Thanks for apologizing :)
You guys are doing it wrong, you're supposed to escalate and get more and more angry with each other until the thread gets locked after lots of insults/trolling/etc.
What's this "being nice" thing all about... ;)
-
My husband and I do separate checking and merged savings. We do this because he's self-employed and refuses to get a business checking account, and it would be too anxiety-provoking for me to see our checking account bouncing up and down. I know that a lot of mustachians get really upset about separate accounts, but I think that if both partners are happy, then you're doing fine!
-
My gf of 3 years and I have separate accounts. We may merge them after marriage but not too sure.
I have 3 rewards credit cards, all with her name attached to the account and she has a card for them.
I make around 4x what she does, so I cover the bulk expenses, and have more bulk expenses personally. She gives me $200/wk and that covers everything.. Insurance, phones, rent, groceries, gym membership, etc. I find it to be pretty fair, she drives my 2nd vehicle. She had one her parents gave her that was falling apart, so I bought a reliable 99 Camry for her to use.
If we take a week off for vacation or something, I don't have her give me the $200 as I'm salary and she is not, so she doesn't get paid those weeks.
We do split when we go out to eat sometimes, or occasionally bigger ticket items (new bed, new tv) etc.
-
My gf of 3 years and I have separate accounts. We may merge them after marriage but not too sure.
I have 3 rewards credit cards, all with her name attached to the account and she has a card for them.
I make around 4x what she does, so I cover the bulk expenses, and have more bulk expenses personally. She gives me $200/wk and that covers everything.. Insurance, phones, rent, groceries, gym membership, etc. I find it to be pretty fair, she drives my 2nd vehicle. She had one her parents gave her that was falling apart, so I bought a reliable 99 Camry for her to use.
If we take a week off for vacation or something, I don't have her give me the $200 as I'm salary and she is not, so she doesn't get paid those weeks.
We do split when we go out to eat sometimes, or occasionally bigger ticket items (new bed, new tv) etc.
Damn I nee to find myself a sugar momma like this.
Damn ne