Would you expect your spouse to share their wealth with you

For love perhaps.

BTL and joint accounts - no, I wouldn't expect it. But I would expect us to be able to live in an equal way - not find I'm struggling for money whilst he's constantly buying luxury goods and jetting off on holidays.

Marital home - definitely would. Although if you're married would it matter if you weren't on it in the event of divorce?

My DH and I met later in life and haven't combined much financially. He's got kids from a previous marriage and it's just easier not to. But we do live equally.

I have BTL's and they are all in my sole name. I don't see why you'd need to put his name on them after marriage, but I don't know how they would be legally split in the event of a divorce. If they are classed as your business, they might be ok, but not sure how it works.

Do you have concerns about something in particular with your partner?

Sorry, that post got a bit messy because I have literally (like, in the past hour) just had this argument with my soon-to-be-(deservedly)-ex. The point is, income from assets we created while we were together should entirely go to us in equal parts plus our children. And our argument was about where the income-generating assets will go in our wills, once we are divorced. Any income from assets he builds and any income he earns after we divorce can go to whoever the f he wants, as will any assets or income I build after we divorce.

I am in my 40s, no kids, and would not share pre-marital assets, no. I would want to protect myself in the case of a split. I would be happy to combine assets / share future earnings but would not put myself at risk of losing what I have built (equity in home and pension) if I needed to leave the marriage. It's very well to say you shouldn't be marrying if you have any doubts but nearly half all marriages end in divorce and you can't guarantee what will happen.

This is a different point from living completely different lifestyles. I wouldn't let that happen but think it's a less common scenario for a woman to need to consider (because men tend to earn more).

All income should be shared as a family while you're married. But but assets from previous income not.

Once you're not still a family, ie married and living together, income from previous assets (ie investments, if your'e rich enough to have them) should only go to the people involved when those income-earning assets were built; that is, the past wife and their children. I mean that income from invested assets should only be shared as long as you're together, but income from invested assets should only be shared if the assets themselves were earned and built while you were together.

I have literally just had this argument with DH, who, partly from our views on this point, is about to become my ex. The assets we built will be ours, as will be the income from them. The income he earns after we divorce he can share as he wishes. Assuming I don't kill him first and end up in jail

Yes. Why would we be married otherwise?

I’ll be getting a pre nup. I’ve put down over 50% deposit for my house so if my partner doesn’t respect that I want to save that then he wouldn’t be my partner. Anything else I’d share but not That.

I thought OP said 'spouse' - which means the couple are married. My late DH and I had no DC in common (each of us had DC) but we shared our assets equally - it's a marriage and that entails sharing everything.

I think assets before marriage are fine to be kept separate.
Assets gained after marriage split 50/50.

Although if the less wealthy partner is the woman and she is going to be having children and taking maternity leave or time off work and also supporting the man in his career then it would be fair to include in the agreement a cash sum she gets at the end of the relationship.

I don't believe that marriage automatically means access to prior assets, but I do think that one partner shouldn't be left vulnerable in the case of a split.

Yes. We are married - a legal contract which entails sharing assets. Besides, last time I looked the marriage service in the UK still called upon the spouses to endow each other with all their worldly goods.
I and my late DH shared our assets equally. One of us started off with more than the other. Since we shared the wealth we ended up much better off than had we not shared it.

I wouldn't add someone else to my house deeds or give them free access to my bank account when I had more money than them. So I wouldn't expect someone to do that for me.
I believe in everything that you both use/benefit from is 50-50, but money/assets separate. If one has more money then they can choose to share it, but it's not a given. If you know what I mean.
I don't want to take money off someone if we split, and I don't want to give any to them in that event either.
But I don't believe in traditional legal marriage (for me personally). So I might be a bit different to many.

What would you want/expect if your circumstances were reversed?

In the sense that I'd expect them to contribute proportionally more to things like bills and holidays, yes.

Simple. I would expect to share future income. Not previous assets.

Unless absurdly wealthy and feeling need to protect themselves with a prenup, I would definitely expect them to share.

I'm not sure why you would want to get married for a second time if you.didnt want to fully unite. I do understand wanting to keep my wealth for my kids, so I would never remarry, there would be no need for it.

And if you are marrying for a first time looking to build a family together, than yes, I think you should be all in as a team.

I would expect half because if it was the other way around I would be happy to give half. All in or all out.

If I for instance inherited a substantial amount, or any amount, I would consider that our money. To better our lives, new house, holiday, savings, kids savings etc. I would never dream of keeping it just for me, I would use it to benefit my spouse and children too

You work out something that feels right for both of you.
Personally I can't see any need to make all accounts joint and all property (as in houses) jointly owned, whether or not one partner is richer than the other. Some means of sharing outgoings fairly according how much each partner earns is important, and so is safeguarding the interests of a partner in case of an eventual breakup, so they can each afford to live somewhere. So if one partner didn't want to give half of the home she already owned to her poorer spouse, she might pay the deposit on a buy to let property in his name.

This is why I will never marry again. I would not want to share anything.

You wouldn’t be giving anything away unless you divorced, and if you’re going into marriage with divorce in the back of your mind, I would say you’re probably not in the right headspace to get married.

This is becoming a serious issue for second and subsequent marriages, step children, children from previous marriage and blended families. Assets moving to 2nd partner on death and they then exluding children from the first marriage from inheritance etc. If you are in this situation you need to get advice on ring fencing Assets to where you want them to go. Don't rely on anyone's good nature or someone doing the 'right thing' on divorce or death. They often don't.

You may really love your partner, but if you have children from a previous marriage I think they should be your primary concern. Wealth should be joint if you accumulated your wealth together. The wealthier spouse can still look after their spouse but I don't think they should be "entitled" to it.

In those circumstances I personally would feel I had chosen to make my partner and their children my new family, and would want to share equally any wealth created during the existence of that family unit.