Money Moral Dilemma: Should we split bills equally if my husband has higher outgoings?

74jax

Sea_Shell said:

I hope all those in favour of separate accounts all have power of attorneys in place!!  Especially if their incomes/savings are one sided.

Joint accounts do have a place within a marriage, along with ensuring that you both have access to funds in your own names should one of you become incapacitated.

Sole accounts are fine, as long as they are all counted in the round, as far as your future planning as a couple are concerned.

JMO

My poa is with my daughter, so not my husband, but I do agree everyone should have a poa.  And Will.  

MovingForwards

Will and POA are in place, as are details of all my assets and liabilities.

JGB1955

Mojisola said:

JGB1955 said:

Mojisola said:

74jax said:

I'm from the different-account camp. My husband and I have different incomes, each put in our own account, and a % goes to the bills account where every bill comes from. Maintenance I'd class as a household bill and have it from that account. 

When couples have this kind of arrangement, what happens if one partner has a long term health problem or gives up work to care for children or older relatives or has a spell of unemployment?

Then you adjust the %'s paid into the bills account. When I was a SAHM I paid nothing into the bills account. When I started my second, part time, career I contributed 40%. When we were first married I paid 60%, as I was the higher earner then.  All seems fair to us.

So you paid nothing into the bills account and had no money for yourself?  Did you go without haircuts, new clothes, etc?

I used my Family Allowance (as it was then), topped up with cash from a Saturday morning cleaning job to pay for petrol, clothes, haircuts etc etc.

pickledonionspaceraider

I think do what the heck you want.
There will always be people who suggest quite heavily that your relationship is 'lesser than' because you chose to do things a different way to them
Do what you want.

SandyShores

We have joint accounts for bills, and then our own separate accounts for spends - we both take the same amount for spends each month.  The rest goes into the bills accounts and then we decide jointly how any extras are purchased or what is saved.  DH used to earn more and spend more, (and spend more than he earned), so its better now I'm the money manager .  I earn more than DH now, he got a recent promotion, but then I got a payrise -  its keeping him on his toes but its a friendly rivalry and means there's more to spend all round.

I wouldn't begrudge helping to support a stepchild.

Ringo90

Sea_Shell said:

I hope all those in favour of separate accounts all have power of attorneys in place!!  Especially if their incomes/savings are one sided.

The way I see it, needing an attorney is more likely when you put everything in one pot, especially if there are income differences. The possibilities to create resentments especially for the person on a higher income are endless. Not to mention if anything goes wrong in the marriage it's very easy to take advantage of the other person's money if they have bad intentions.
That is why I think the best option is to only share the expenses that are necessary (grocery, bills, rent, mortgage) or those that the whole family can benefit (furniture, appliances for the house etc.) in different pre-agreed percentages according to each person's income and savings. Whatever comes as extra or is strictly personal (expenses for my own hobby, for example) should not come from the shared pot but from my own savings. After all, that should be my reward for working hard and managing my money well, not for finding a rich husband.

Retireinten

We don't have the dilemma of paying for children from previous relationships and for the vast majority of our 26 years together we have pooled our money and paid everything from our joint income.

Overall it has worked for us but there has been resentment at times, mainly when work life clashes with my home life and my stress levels shoot through the roof. We have a fairly traditional relationship in that I have been the main carer for our children and household but I've done this alongside a decent paying but high stress job, working a mix of part time and full time hours. So for much our relationship I've earned similar or more than my husband bar about three years, two of which I was on maternity leave.  This honestly has not been easy but I've also be really fortunate to have successfully balanced both (most of the time). 

My husband is also the bigger spender and in recent months I've started to resent that his decisions on personal spends (current plan is a £20k weekend car plus running costs) is affecting how much longer i have to work in a high pressured job I don't enjoy. 

I want to retire early and hubby supports this but because our earnings and spends have always been treated as one pot I apply this to our retirement, meaning that a big spend triggered solely by hubby translates into us both working longer.

Irrespective of the type of spend, the key is to talk about it and work out what feels fair to you both. 

We've agreed that my planned retirement age or financial independence age will be 53 (I may still work but I at least want the choice to or not at that age) unless there is a significant change to our circumstances. If these big spends affect our retirement savings then he works longer to cover it. 

He's happy because he's getting what he wants and although he would like the option to retire early it's not his sole focus. He enjoys his job and is actually nervous about a cliff edge early retirement anyway. And I feel more comfortable with his spends knowing they won't impact my longer term plans. 

crmism

Why don't you have a joint bank account into which both lots of earnings are paid and from which all outgoings are met, no matter who earns more or has greater outgoings? Marriage doesn't bestow on the parties a formula to decide who should pay for what - that's what marriage is about.

mralowe

Absolutely - why should you subsidise his commitments from a previous relationship?

Maybe because they are not selfish, and entered the relationship with a commitment to sharing and looking after each other?

In a few years time, the husband may become the higher earner, then contribute a higher share to the joint spending.

They knew about their husband's Child Support commitment in advance.

In a relationship, one partner might spend more on alcohol, clothes, food, eating out etc. As long as this is by mutual consent, then it is not a problem.

seven-day-weekend

I don't see why she should help pay for her partner's child.  On the other hand I think the bills and outgoings (other than this) should come from a communal pot.

So I suppose it will end up with her paying more seeing as she will have the most disposable income.