|
Post by mirrororchid on Oct 26, 2022 19:09:41 GMT -5
You and I come from polar opposite perspectives. 2) I can only assume you never spent many years financially strapped or you would not so readily embrace the idea going back to that simply for the joy of getting your stinger wet. 3) Our view of splitting income and assets differs as well. I see an income stream that supports one household in a modest fashion as insufficient to fund two households, two utility payments, and two of everything else it takes for people to live independent of each other. 4) I did not get your intended message about getting laughed out of court regarding the inheritance money thing. 5) The potential inheritance money is tied up in CD accounts so access to any of those funds for reasons such as the ones you suggest is beyond consideration. 6) Taxes on inheritance money will be what it is for the most part and the only way I am aware to possibly change that would be through a trust AFAIK which would require some pre-planning that may not be possible since my mom might actually need that money before her passing. I am going to have to check that with an attorney. I think your and my expectations and plans for post marriage are far different and as such our perspectives of the situation are far different as well. All that said, I do appreciate your ideas and input because that was exactly what I asked for so I thank you for that. At the risk of squandering your generous gratitude, I'll keep asking questions, hoping for some escape, because I hate to see you stuck so much. 2) True enough. Been out of work four months and started talking about selling the house. Pretty lightweight scare I suppose. 3) I would think a court would see the same obstacle and I'm not sure their solution would be, sorry, you have to live together forever because you, sir, don't make enough money. I would think if you are the one employed, you'd be expected to pony up whatever you could spare after your own living expenses. She would be required to apply for food stamps and perhaps housing vouchers. She can live off the dole and a small assist from you. I could be way off on this scenario, but perhaps you have some divorced friends who also struggled to make ends meet? What did their situation become? Maybe some other ILIASM members may know folks who couldn't hope to support an independent ex. What happened when you / they broke apart anyway, despite the scant resources? I also have to wonder, what if both of you worked, but together you couldn't live independently without public assistance? People divorce, despite poverty. How do they do it? 4) If a wife cannot lay claim to an inheritance, it would be absurd for an Ex-wife to lay claim to her ex-husband's parent's money. I could be wrong, but it seems like a stretch that could ford the English channel. 5) Forgot you said that. CDs do mature though. Not trying to pry or kibitz. Again, just looking for any opening for you not to have to live this way. Maybe a gift account like I suggested would get eaten by expenses immediately. You couldn't keep it out of reach. Either existing bills would eat it or she'd generate a new one, knowing the money was there? 6) In the event your mother were in a position to gift you money, gifts are not taxed at either federal or state level. Most inheritances are small enough to have no federal tax, but can incur state taxes. By giving money away, she'll end up passing on more of it. I live in Maryland which has state inheritance taxes, 33 states don't, so odds are, thsi countermeasure won't help save money, but you can check against the list: www.thebalancemoney.com/states-without-estate-tax-3505467I'll drop the subject if you want.
|
|
|
Post by DryCreek on Oct 27, 2022 12:18:56 GMT -5
One overwhelming challenge seems to be that the family court math does not account for the expenses of the primary breadwinner.
That is, child support is a percentage of income, and spousal maintenance is a percentage of income. But nowhere in the mix is there a factor that looks at whether the breadwinner can also survive after what’s left. It’s not infeasible that they can end up with much less than 50% of their earned income. I have no doubt this creates some very hopeless situations and contributes greatly to the higher suicide rate among men.
|
|
|
Post by steve1968 on Oct 27, 2022 13:23:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by worksforme2 on Oct 27, 2022 14:24:00 GMT -5
One overwhelming challenge seems to be that the family court math does not account for the expenses of the primary breadwinner. That is, child support is a percentage of income, and spousal maintenance is a percentage of income. But nowhere in the mix is there a factor that looks at whether the breadwinner can also survive after what’s left. It’s not infeasible that they can end up with much less than 50% of their earned income. I have no doubt this creates some very hopeless situations and contributes greatly to the higher suicide rate among men. You are correct. In my first divorce the W got half of everything, though she had not contributed on thin dime to the costs of building our new home. And I had a child support payment of $1000/month This was almost 30yrs. ago. I ended up living with my mother again until I could save enough to purchase a 50 yr. old house that needed a lot of work. I also was required to maintain health insurance on my children as well as provide dental care. What was left was way less than 50% of my take home pay.
|
|
|
Post by h on Oct 27, 2022 16:03:00 GMT -5
In every legal research site I've been to, calculations for spousal support are based only on income of the parties. There is no deduction for living expenses. The payor is just supposed to pay and if they can't afford to live on their own afterwards, tough luck. These calculations (at least for my jurisdiction) are directly from the courts, based on current divorce laws, and publicly available. It's convenient if you want to do the math before you file, but makes it less flexible when you do. Your lawyer needs to provide solid justification for deviating from the calculations at all. Income is the only factor that matters when determining the amount. After that, the duration of the marriage is used to determine the duration of the support. All numbers.
|
|
|
Post by TheGreatContender -aka Daddeeo on Oct 27, 2022 18:14:46 GMT -5
Interesting reading. In regards to percentage of income, I assume combined income?
|
|
|
Post by DryCreek on Oct 27, 2022 19:06:46 GMT -5
Interesting reading. In regards to percentage of income, I assume combined income? The formulas are different for child support vs spousal maintenance. And, of course, each jurisdiction is different. A common model bases child support on the combined parental income, and then adjusts for the ratio of the two incomes and the percentage of custody. Which can lead to custody battles being motivated by higher/lower child support. Spousal maintenance is often a percentage and duration based on time. For example, maybe nothing for less than 10 years. Ranging up to 30% of the higher earner’s gross income for life. Maintenance is commonly reduced by the other spouse’s sources of income, including investments, and there is presumed to be a full-time job (for at least minimum wage, though you could argue for much higher based on education or proven earning potential). Also… you don’t get to deduct spousal maintenance, so you also eat the taxes on top of the payments.
|
|
|
Post by TheGreatContender -aka Daddeeo on Oct 27, 2022 21:46:14 GMT -5
Thanks DryCreek. I dont recall, did you end up getting divorced? Interesting reading. In regards to percentage of income, I assume combined income? The formulas are different for child support vs spousal maintenance. And, of course, each jurisdiction is different. A common model bases child support on the combined parental income, and then adjusts for the ratio of the two incomes and the percentage of custody. Which can lead to custody battles being motivated by higher/lower child support. Spousal maintenance is often a percentage and duration based on time. For example, maybe nothing for less than 10 years. Ranging up to 30% of the higher earner’s gross income for life. Maintenance is commonly reduced by the other spouse’s sources of income, including investments, and there is presumed to be a full-time job (for at least minimum wage, though you could argue for much higher based on education or proven earning potential). Also… you don’t get to deduct spousal maintenance, so you also eat the taxes on top of the payments.
|
|
|
Post by mirrororchid on Oct 28, 2022 5:12:14 GMT -5
In every legal research site I've been to, calculations for spousal support are based only on income of the parties. There is no deduction for living expenses. The payor is just supposed to pay and if they can't afford to live on their own afterwards, tough luck. These calculations (at least for my jurisdiction) are directly from the courts, based on current divorce laws, and publicly available. It's convenient if you want to do the math before you file, but makes it less flexible when you do. Your lawyer needs to provide solid justification for deviating from the calculations at all. Income is the only factor that matters when determining the amount. After that, the duration of the marriage is used to determine the duration of the support. All numbers. These things would explain the preponderance of "deadbeat dads" (or moms) Well, yeah. They don't pay their child support. They aren't magicians. If the money ain't there, y'can't hand it over. It might work better if courtrooms used this handy tool called "reality".
|
|
|
Post by TheGreatContender -aka Daddeeo on Oct 28, 2022 9:09:41 GMT -5
You raise a very interesting point. One of the things that has held me back from Divorce is a mistrust that the law can facilitate an equitable transition to separate households and to what is best for our family. On this point my wife and I are in agreement. In every legal research site I've been to, calculations for spousal support are based only on income of the parties. There is no deduction for living expenses. The payor is just supposed to pay and if they can't afford to live on their own afterwards, tough luck. These calculations (at least for my jurisdiction) are directly from the courts, based on current divorce laws, and publicly available. It's convenient if you want to do the math before you file, but makes it less flexible when you do. Your lawyer needs to provide solid justification for deviating from the calculations at all. Income is the only factor that matters when determining the amount. After that, the duration of the marriage is used to determine the duration of the support. All numbers. These things would explain the preponderance of "deadbeat dads" (or moms) Well, yeah. They don't pay their child support. They aren't magicians. If the money ain't there, y'can't hand it over. It might work better if courtrooms used this handy tool called "reality".
|
|
|
Post by DryCreek on Oct 28, 2022 11:12:38 GMT -5
Thanks DryCreek. I dont recall, did you end up getting divorced? Analysis paralysis. The default math for spousal maintenance (alimony) is not in my favor because of the circumstances (= a lot, payable for 15+ years). I’ve been a) working on her sources of income to reduce what I’d owe under that formula, and b) coming to terms with what’s left. I have been trying hard to keep it amicable, and so far so good, but it’s made for a very slow process. That’s because the above depends on her agreement, which she will not eagerly accept. We have not yet confronted the fact that her education / skills say her earning potential is X and I’m entitled to deduct X even if she chooses not to work and realize that income. One way or another, that’s going to profoundly affect the “retiree” lifestyle she’s adapted to. DC
|
|
|
Post by TheGreatContender -aka Daddeeo on Oct 28, 2022 16:27:32 GMT -5
Any chance for together but apart strategy? Would that go against your better judgement? Does she care if you start dating other women? Thanks DryCreek. I dont recall, did you end up getting divorced? Analysis paralysis. The default math for spousal maintenance (alimony) is not in my favor because of the circumstances (= a lot, payable for 15+ years). I’ve been a) working on her sources of income to reduce what I’d owe under that formula, and b) coming to terms with what’s left. I have been trying hard to keep it amicable, and so far so good, but it’s made for a very slow process. That’s because the above depends on her agreement, which she will not eagerly accept. We have not yet confronted the fact that her education / skills say her earning potential is X and I’m entitled to deduct X even if she chooses not to work and realize that income. One way or another, that’s going to profoundly affect the “retiree” lifestyle she’s adapted to. DC
|
|
|
Post by DryCreek on Oct 29, 2022 0:44:57 GMT -5
Any chance for together but apart strategy? Would that go against your better judgement? Does she care if you start dating other women? It’s a creative option, and frankly one I could probably strong-arm her into going along with, but I wouldn’t for so many reasons. It’s not my style to force a hand like that, and I think it would create more awkwardness in my relationship with my kids than if things were black and white. I’d also be tethered to her financially, splitting big wins and sharing legal/financial liabilities going forward. Warren Buffet famously did this with his first wife for decades, but my pockets aren’t quite so deep. And I realize that, despite being a chiseled GQ model, the whole “still married” thing might hamper my dating prospects. In today’s scene, it seem like guys are challenged enough before adding obstacles. DC
|
|
|
Post by TheGreatContender -aka Daddeeo on Oct 29, 2022 14:31:05 GMT -5
DryCreekIts hard being GQ chiseled. I'm with you there 🤣 Makes sense. We each know what our needs are. You might be surprised at "married man" dating prospects. Its a different ddating pool thats for sure.
|
|
|
Post by h on Nov 1, 2022 5:26:56 GMT -5
Thanks DryCreek . I dont recall, did you end up getting divorced? Analysis paralysis. The default math for spousal maintenance (alimony) is not in my favor because of the circumstances (= a lot, payable for 15+ years). I’ve been a) working on her sources of income to reduce what I’d owe under that formula, and b) coming to terms with what’s left. I have been trying hard to keep it amicable, and so far so good, but it’s made for a very slow process. That’s because the above depends on her agreement, which she will not eagerly accept. We have not yet confronted the fact that her education / skills say her earning potential is X and I’m entitled to deduct X even if she chooses not to work and realize that income. One way or another, that’s going to profoundly affect the “retiree” lifestyle she’s adapted to. DC You're lucky in that respect if her earning potential is actually taken into account. Here, it's only based on current income. My wife and I have identical earning potential due to equivalent levels of education and professional certification. None of that matters in this jurisdiction. Her choice not to pursue better jobs for years has screwed me.
|
|