Splitting the bills? Is anything other than 50/50 unfair?

BigAunty

ska_lover wrote: »

I couldn't imagine expecting my husband to foot more of the bills than I do. He is my partner 50/50 equal in every other way of my life, so why should finances be so totally different?

How is paying proportionally according to income, contributing equally according to means, unfair? High rate tax payers pay more tax, for example - income can drive the level of some expenses.

One way to do it is to base the contribution on income, another by splitting expenses.

When there is significant disparity in income coming into the household, a better way to divide up responsibility is by asking for a proportional contribution to the household purse.

Otherwise the person who has a much smaller income paying half towards running the house will find 80% of their disposable income swallowed up which limits their personal expenditure on things like social expenses, interests, clothing, their ability to save and so forth while their partner only loses 20%.

SeduLOUs

I personally don't understand couples who split bills 50/50 when their income isn't the same, it just seems so unfair to me.

I earn double what my partner does and if we paid our bills 50/50 he would barely be able to afford his half at the moment. I don't want us to hold back from living in a nice house because he can't afford half the rent/bills/groceries, we would both suffer.

So we have a joint account, we both get paid, bills go out and then we split whatever is left 50/50. Just because he doesn't earn as much money as me, he still works just as hard and I'd feel terrible having loads of spending money to myself and him not having the same.

Tiglath

I earn a lot more than my hubby, but we treat all income and outgoings as joint, and just split the disposable income 50/50. It means I contribute more to bills, but that's okay - it's about a shared life, not two strangers living in the same house.

DUTR

Tiglath wrote: »

I earn a lot more than my hubby, but we treat all income and outgoings as joint, and just split the disposable income 50/50. It means I contribute more to bills, but that's okay - it's about a shared life, not two strangers living in the same house.

Glad you posted your reply, as often I see posts suggesting the 50/50 thing as ok as long as it's the male is subsidising the other party.
In the 21st century of equal opportunity I don't see this as fair and certainly wouldn't entertain the practice of subsidising, however a longer term thing then things change.

FBaby

This subject often comes up on the forum and I don't know why as it seems to be quite a straight forward matter. Surely any logic is that anyone moving in together should think what is fair is that each party ends up with similar disposable income at the end of the month?

When I moved with my now husband, it would have seemed fair in appearance that we both contributed 50/50 since our incomes are similar. However, I have much higher outgoings (kids from previous relationship mainly and cost of running a car) whilst his car/phone is included with his salary and he gets a good bonus each year whereas I do not. The conversation took whole of 15 minutes. We wrote down what we had coming in and what we had coming out, arrange that he would pay all the bills and I would give him a share of it so that once all the bills were paid, we had an equivalent sum left. We then took a flexible approach to some things, ie. we never half pay when we go out, I will buy one time, he will buy the next time.

ClareTeaches

My partner and I are in the process of buying a house, too, and he's just had a promotion, so earns considerably more than me. We've decided to get paid into a joint account where all bills, mortgage and food will go from, as well as any joint treats (meals out together, for example), we'll each get some spending money transferred into our individual accounts and the money left in the joint account at the end of the month will be cleared into a savings account. (Though might suggest we split it between two ISAs, to save the tax on interest - we need to look at savings accounts and work out what will work best for us.)

And that's the key, really, you need to talk and consider what will work best for you. We decided this system was best for us for several reasons:

- We've lived together for 4+ years (with flatmates), so we understand how we both spend money and we're used to operating as a team or a single unit with a lot of these things.
- On top of living together all that time, we've been together 7+ years and totally trust each other, so neither of us are concerned about sharing our pay entirely like this.
- We both want to limit our spending (we don't go crazy, but we'd like to do better!).
- Currently our joint account is used by us and our flatmates for household bills and expenses, so I end up buying food, toiletries, etc for myself and partner out of my wages, while he buys petrol and pays for more of our treats. It probably ends up mostly even, but sometimes I'm a bit skint by the end of the month from paying for groceries, so sharing wages keeps things equal.

I definitely think it's fair to split bills to reflect your unequal wages, but how much you want to integrate finances, only you and he can decide together. Good luck with your discussion!

highjewelgreen wrote: »

You are quite right, he is moving closer to my family so will have to travel 2 hours a day to and from work. While he is traveling I don't mind doing the extra house work because he is making the sacrifice to move closer for my sake. But I certainly don't intend to be doing it all, he can help at the weekend.

Not "helping", that makes it sound like it's your work and he's doing you a favour. It might not seem important, but the phrasing we use can really affect attitudes - I used to say "helping" and "can you do X for me?" to my flatmate (and have heard others use it with partners/housemates) and his approach was that it was my chore and he was giving me a hand, rather than doing his fair share. Things have changed now! :cool:

Remember that you work hard, too, and the chores are in no way more yours than his. Someone else suggested dividing tasks between you, which I think sounds like a good idea, so you might do more of the smaller daily tasks (stacking the dishwasher, wiping down the sides, washing machine loads, etc) , but he does the less frequent, but larger jobs (taking binbag out and giving the bin a wipe, running the hoover around a couple of rooms, ironing his shirts on a Sunday night! etc). Other things, I'd try to share, like alternate cleaning the bathroom, cooking, etc.

You might do dinner more often during the week, if you're the one back first from work, but that doesn't mean he can't do any - again, as someone else suggested, he can make sort some quick meals once or twice a week, like pizza.

Good luck with whatever you both decide, just don't approach this as you "owing" him for moving closer to your family or earning more than you, etc. He's an adult and should be able to look after himself and you're his equal PARTNER, not his mother or slave or anything like that!

ClareTeaches

(Eek, sorry, that turned into the world's longest post! :eek: )

moomoomama27

Thankfully my hubby and I have always been on the same page with regards to finances, we gave always earned very differently, with hubby being the main wage earner, but everything goes into one account, all bills etc paid and whatever is left is jointly ours, we make all financial decisions together. I personally couldn't live any other way, you' re either a partnership or not!!

GobbledyGook

I don't think buying a house together without living together is necessarily a bad idea (although I wouldn't do it personally), but buying a house together without discussing how the joint finances are going to work is a bad idea imo.

What happens now if your OH is set on 50/50?

You could end up in the ridiculous situation the partner of my OH's work colleague is in - sat at home while he goes on multiple holidays because she 'can't afford it'.

We were never 50/50. OH earned ten times what I did at one point and we lived a lifestyle that fitted his income. I wouldn't have been able to be part of his circle of friends at all on my income. For us all the money went into a pot, all the bills were paid and we took an equal amount of spending money every month. Anything left over that went into the savings account.

For us financially equal meant being able to do the same amount of things, not always putting in the exact same amount.

Takeaway_Addict

I go with the line of pro rata of total income but it also raise the point of time spent in the house doing housework. If the OP's OH spends an hour each way travelling to work MORE than the OP then should the housework not be split pro rata as well.

I mean considering the OH has less time to do the housework the amount of free time they would have would be less than the OP due to the work constraints.