To not contribute more money?

[moneyistheroot]

DP and I have just had a disagreement over money.
We are engaged to be married, no kids.
We are in the process of buying our very long term home. We already own together.

I'm 25 and currently earn £60k in finance. It's gruelling, stressful and has long hours. I'll be on £100k+ by 30.

DP is a teacher on £40k and is 30. He will struggle to match my income.

Our lives are lived similarly, DP does extra tuition which makes our net pay similar. We live as to what the lowest earner could afford. For the majority of the relationship I was the low earner (studying). He never paid for more, we always split equally.

He has just said he expects me to contribute more to our household financially when I begin to earn significantly more. I disagree. When we have kids it would be joint but I wouldn't work my hours now and would take a pay cut, so likely to be equal.

I don't think I should sacrifice the extra money pre-children when I don't have as much pension contribution and I'd like to buy nice things for myself etc.

So who is BU?

He didn't pay more then so you don't pay more now.
Sauce fro the goose.

No matter how nice a bloke he is he has no business deciding how you spend your income beyond your share.
The issue is the controlling. It doesn't get better.

Of course you should.

DP is on 60k (finance like you) and I am in a media job (20k). Both mid 20s. If we split everything equally he would have thousands of extra money and I'd have to sit at home and do nothing.

We do the same number of hours so DP considers us both to be contributing our fair amount (and I am actually more highly qualified).

We split everything 65/35. That way we are proportionately equals. We are partners. We decided to join our lives together and that includes equal opportunity.

Follow your instincts.

@Passthecherrycoke if you are sponsored in big 4 then you can be an assistant manager on around that at 24/26. Then you reach 100k by 30.

Split finances as a proportion of income. My ex and I (we’re not exes because of money) put 2/3 of our income in the joint account and kept 1/3 for ourselves. Being a partnership does not mean surrendering everything you work for.

When DH and I met I earnt more, we split everything unless doing so would make it out of reach for him in which case I’d contribute more so I didn’t miss out. He now earns more but everything is split. I spend more and he never criticises. He also realised I work harder in a more stressful job but being in a vocational public sector job there’s no chance of me earning more without stopping what I actually need to do to feel fulfillment.
He’s a teacher, he’s overworked and underpaid and is likely struggling to keep up with you by the sounds of all the tuition he’s doing. That won’t be manageable long term.
I think you need to chat about your compatibility.

You're saying that you're going to go part time.

Have you discussed it together? What if he wants to go part time, too?

YABU. Share as equals. - it's what marriage means.

Pool your money and each have the same spends. Whatever is left over each month after bills put in individual ISA's (equally).

I see your aren't married yet so your finances are separate and up to you. However, you are about to enter into a marriage - it has to mean something to you? Why are you even getting married if you don't believe in what marriage stands for? And mores' the point - how do you expect your marriage to work if you don't live as equals?

Oh dear, dont have children then. Getting Married means you act as one, and hardly anyone see's this anymore. Lets throw some spanners in the works, lets say you are ill, or injured will his pay cover your finance. You was the low earner and it was split equally, but who paid for his training before that? and how well off were you at that time, he didn't spend on himself either did he. Now fast forward and you've had a baby, you may decide your job is too stressful with children. What i'm saying is that's it is about trusting that you will care for each other, if he needs something you strive to obtain it, if you need something his love for you will mean he will stive to get it. I'm not getting this picture with you two right now, and on that basis YABU

The best solution I found to shared expenses was to have a separate household account that both contributed a bit more than it took to run the household so that savings would build up for major purchases.
It avoided all manner of potential conflict.
If your partner wants to overpay the mortgage (excellent idea) he should do so too and not put it on you.
I paid off my house over five years early with just a small overpay each month.

Split finances as a proportion of income. My ex and I (we’re not exes because of money) put 2/3 of our income in the joint account and kept 1/3 for ourselves. Being a partnership does not mean surrendering everything you work for

This is sensible

You are not compatible. I would cut my losses & move on tbh. Don't get married or have children FFS! I know from bitter experience.

You are not compatible. I would cut my losses & move on tbh. Don't get married or have children
I'm so sorry but I honestly agree with this. If you're already disagreeing over this it's only going to get worse. I really believe money is the biggest mountain in a relationship and marriage and kids just bring more money issues

@moneyistheroot
I personally don't think you're being unreasonable. I prefer separate finances and don't want to muddy what DP and I currently do. However, we both acknowledge there may be times where we need to support each other financially.
What I do think is absolutely vital in your home ownership position is that you hold the property as tenants in common and you have a declaration of trust. You can have one drawn up with floating shares, so if you're paying more off the mortgage you can ring fence your contributions for upon sale. This can be reviewed at any time if it is no longer suitable to your needs. However, on marriage it is only persuasive. To really belt and brace the situation you'd need a pre and then post nup. Obviously this may cause friction between you both but it is possible to protect yourself with a bit of forward thinking. Also I would say this if you were a man too!

Pre children we split it roughly proportional to income (should be net income after pension contributions really ) I think - I didn't want to live to the lower income level- that would have meant no nice meals out/no holidays/less nice food- equally we needed to live in an expensive area because of my need to have a good commute. That said I had enough spare to buy nice stuff for myself.
I do think the views would be different if it was a man asking...

I vehemently disagree with anyone stating the double standard argument. They are ultimately forgetting the glass ceiling women are still trying to get through, the extra work being a woman in a male dominated work place ensues and that most of this will be given up the moment I have children because I will take on the responsibility, as a woman. That's standard.

This is, quite frankly, bollocks. Especially for someone in your position. Huvrn your household income be in excess of 150k by the time you have kids, theres no reason for you to give OP work or reduce your hours, apart from if it's because you choose too.

You have the money to hire a nanny, which is usually the easiest of childcare options, forbthe parents.

I donr forget theres a glass ceiling. I deal with it. By returning full time after mat leave, that because far less of a problem.

It's not standard for women to take ok the bulk of the childcare if they are 5 figure earners.

Obviously, if that what you want to do, that's fine. But dont make out that it's not a choice. On your earnings it really is.

Start off with extra pension contributions, then start thinking about ít from that point.
Perhaps build up a savings fund to begin with then perhaps pay off an extra chunk of mortgage as one off payments each year but save some as both your savings but in your name.

See how it goes when children come among. Maternity should not just be your expense. If he's generous then, you can be more generous with your extra savings. It all depends on attitude.

I missed your comment about double standards- I agree with MsRomanoff.
You're not at the glass ceiling yet- currently you are in a similar position to a man would- actually your DP is suffering as he is in a female dominated profession which suffers from the low pay traditionally awarded to female roles.
Why are you assuming that you will go part-time /give up work /become primary childcarer on having children ? that's sexist thinking. You need to work it about between the two of you. There are lots of dynamics in play- you might want to take time out - he might not want to - or the reverse might be true. What are you going to do if you both want to be primary carer? you can't assume its you

On a different note- you do know that you can have different shares of ownership of property- so you are paying more but getting more?

You are going to get divorced.

I out earn DH by about fifty percent, we pay the same towards bills etc into the joint account. However I'm not spendy so after having roughly the same amount as him as spends for the month, I save the rest and it's used for joint things like car repairs/replacement, holidays, renovations . So it looks like I have more in my accounts but I don't spend any more on myself than he does. I used to put it in a joint account but he never touched it there either and I have access as an individual to better interest rates. I think if you're interesting the money for your joint future that's one thing, if you're buying designer boots and flashy cars, while he bums around in a twenty year old banger that's different.

YABU. When you were splitting 50/50 that would have been in the early day's. You're now talking of marriage etc and are a team but you only want to be a team where it suits you. I wouldn't marry you tbh. If circumstances changed would you be happy to have nothing?

DH (no A levels) went from 27k as a counsellor to 60k as a business analyst at a consultancy within two years. Restrained as a BA, got a job in a bank, got promoted, moved and promoted again. Now on significantly more at 28.

@PooWillyBumBum are you saying he was on 27k and either got headhunted into or applied for a job as a biz analyst worth 60k, THEN retrained AS a biz analyst!?

My DH has always earned more than me ( as I was a teacher) but I kept him on my student grant when he was on a union provoked strike without demur and, since then, we always pooled our finances. He had longer hours and I worked my socks off in term time and in the holidays, cleaning, maintaining, gardening and decorating.

We pooled everything and paid our bills out of a common joint account. We have done everything financially together and equally, and being both prudent and debt averse, we paid off what we owed immediately and saved. It has done us very well indeed not to be selfish. We have savings and manage to survive even after my early retirement and his sudden and unexpected redundancy.

We have both gone without too many ‘nice things’ but, instead, have trust and security.

Yabu, when you were paying 50/50 I assume this was still a new (ish) relationship. But once marriage and kids are involved everything is shared.