Talk About Marriage banner
321 - 333 of 333 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,878 Posts
I see. So all the other posters who are saying this guy burying money in the yard to hide it from the judge so it won't be considered for child support, are they also saying what I'm saying is beyond rationale? All the other posters, 10 pages of it, agreeing that this person is taking the notion of a pre-nup, something I wholly support, beyond what is legal and is openly advocating for hiding assets in anticipation of what he sees as an inevitable divorce, ALL those other people who agree with me, they're saying that too? Tell me, are they in the room with you right now?

Quote EXACTLY what I said that is "beyond rationale." Or stop it.
I'm speaking in general.
If this guy is committing acts of fraud to hide assets for a divorce, the judge will come down hard on him.
Nothing wrong with a pre-nup for either party, as somebody coming late to the relationship has no claim on previously obtained assets.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
47,553 Posts
I'm speaking in general.
If this guy is committing acts of fraud to hide assets for a divorce, the judge will come down hard on him.
Nothing wrong with a pre-nup for either party, as somebody coming late to the relationship has no claim on previously obtained assets.
Yea, seperate assets and debt is seperate by law.

The OP is talking about a man hiding income earned during the marriage from his wife and shifting marital assets/income to himself and/or his parents. I wonder if the OP is ok with a woman doing all the things that he thinks men should do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter · #323 ·
No. The son is a renter. The Dad is getting the full benefit of rental income, appreciation, and equity. The son is paying $120k in rent. To say that that is removing it from marital property isn't exactly true. Why? Because the full $120k no longer exists. $46k of it is lost to mortgage interest. $10k(ish) to property taxes. $4k to insurance. That's $60k right there, or half. Is your intent to safeguard your money, or is it just to spite your spouse? Of the remaining $60k, only $20k will be coming back to the son with the house in the form of the equity portion of the mortgage payments. The other $40k is either still part of Dad's estate, or lost to the IRS in Dad's income tax from rental income. So you're paying $120k to get back $20k, plus <$40k in some separate future transfer. Say 3 more years of gifts under $15k to stay under the tax exempt gift level. Is that better than the son having bought the house initially?

Now the gift transfer. Dad may have tax liability on that gift. Depending on the size of Dad's estate, it could affect future gift ability, or estate taxes upon Dad's death. As far as the equity, in general on a gift of this type the basis on home price for the son will be the price Dad paid and not the FMV of the property at the time of gift while the gift amount deducted from Dad's estate will be the current FMV of the property. Which means that that equity may cause the son to pay higher capital gains tax on its future sale.

So in the end you are left with less than half of what you were shuffling off to Dad. Dad has probably lost money on the deal if he's returning the rental income. Son is probably on the hook for higher capital gains on the house.

And of course all of that is without taking into account the effect this type of move on the divorce itself. A contested divorce can be amazingly expensive. For a move like this to make any sense at all, your financial benefit has to outweigh the additional cost to litigate it in the divorce. You could very easily see yourself facing an $80k legal bill after the lawyers and accountants get done, all to "save" $60k. Is it still worth it? When instead of this scheme, you could have had a clear prenup and a less contentious and less expensive divorce?
This transaction is in addition to a prenup and postnup. Its a CLEAN, LEGAL way to remove marital assets in case of future dispute. The wife is aware of the rental agreement, who owns the property and is consenting to pay at market rate with marital assets for joint use. I would love to see the other side waste money on legal fees here.

The rest of your financial numbers are really investment in rental market calculations and gift/estate tax issues. These will be there no matter who rents the property
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter · #325 ·
Yea, seperate assets and debt is seperate by law.

The OP is talking about a man hiding income earned during the marriage from his wife and shifting marital assets/income to himself and/or his parents. I wonder if the OP is ok with a woman doing all the things that he thinks men should do.
No,if we had 'girls' in our family instead of boys advice would be a little different, it would go something like this

1) Focus first on education and career to close 20% pay gap with men
2) Be very selective when choosing to marry, be receptive to people of different backgrounds and ideas but reject anyone suspicious
3) Sign pre-nup with proper legal advice, periodically sign post-nups
4) In general do not pay for household expenses or children's education as its the man's job, 100% of what you earn should go to your legally separated account
5) Never agree to stay at home, with or without children and never compromise on your career
6) Focus on saving and invest in fixed assets, these are needed in case of divorce as you may have primary custody of children
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter · #326 ·
I'm speaking in general.
If this guy is committing acts of fraud to hide assets for a divorce, the judge will come down hard on him.
Where is the fraud in any of my suggestions? If both partners agree to give some marital assets to husband's family members or if one partner agrees to give marital assets exclusively to the other, its all valid and legal and these assets will not be considered during divorce.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,878 Posts
Where is the fraud in any of my suggestions? If both partners agree to give some marital assets to husband's family members or if one partner agrees to give marital assets exclusively to the other, its all valid and legal and these assets will not be considered during divorce.
Everything should be on paper, so an equitable division can be made.
If you didn't do a pre-nup before you got married, that's the penalty of not being well prepared.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,669 Posts
This transaction is in addition to a prenup and postnup. Its a CLEAN, LEGAL way to remove marital assets in case of future dispute. The wife is aware of the rental agreement, who owns the property and is consenting to pay at market rate with marital assets for joint use. I would love to see the other side waste money on legal fees here.

The rest of your financial numbers are really investment in rental market calculations and gift/estate tax issues. These will be there no matter who rents the property
The point is you aren't saving anything. The money is just gone. You're better off just buying the house in the first place, and including a clause about the house in the prenup. It is CLEANER, and cheaper in the divorce.

If you are somehow saving money then you run afoul of hiding assets with a third party. Which is no-no in almost all jurisdictions. Whether you win on the issue or not isn't really important. It's the legal bills that pile up as you defend it.

I don't think you would really "love to see the other side waste money on legal fees" here. Why? Because you'll have legal bill piling up defending it. Also as the wealthier party, you're on the hook for paying those fees. Or they come out of the marital estate so at best you're only paying half of those fees. Contested divorces where one party suspects the other of hiding assets can grow into six figure bills.

So again I ask, is your goal to have the best financial outcome in your divorce? Or is it to spite the other party? Because running the numbers, it seems like you're more keen on cutting off your nose to spite your face on this one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter · #329 ·
The point is you aren't saving anything. The money is just gone. You're better off just buying the house in the first place, and including a clause about the house in the prenup. It is CLEANER, and cheaper in the divorce.

If you are somehow saving money then you run afoul of hiding assets with a third party. Which is no-no in almost all jurisdictions. Whether you win on the issue or not isn't really important. It's the legal bills that pile up as you defend it.

I don't think you would really "love to see the other side waste money on legal fees" here. Why? Because you'll have legal bill piling up defending it. Also as the wealthier party, you're on the hook for paying those fees. Or they come out of the marital estate so at best you're only paying half of those fees. Contested divorces where one party suspects the other of hiding assets can grow into six figure bills.

So again I ask, is your goal to have the best financial outcome in your divorce? Or is it to spite the other party? Because running the numbers, it seems like you're more keen on cutting off your nose to spite your face on this one.
I see your point on pre-nup being cheaper, I am trying to explore other options here. I believe each option has its pros and cons
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,535 Posts
No,if we had 'girls' in our family instead of boys advice would be a little different, it would go something like this

1) Focus first on education and career to close 20% pay gap with men
2) Be very selective when choosing to marry, be receptive to people of different backgrounds and ideas but reject anyone suspicious
3) Sign pre-nup with proper legal advice, periodically sign post-nups
4) In general do not pay for household expenses or children's education as its the man's job, 100% of what you earn should go to your legally separated account
5) Never agree to stay at home, with or without children and never compromise on your career
6) Focus on saving and invest in fixed assets, these are needed in case of divorce as you may have primary custody of children
7) don't marry a man whose assets and money are more important than you.
8) don't marry a man who talks about divorce before you have even married him.
9) don't marry a guy who is deceptive about income and money generally.
 
321 - 333 of 333 Posts
Top