Moving in together and splitting bills - how?!

[Ace56]

DP and I are planning on moving in together in the near future (when it’s possible with the current situation...). We’re in our twenties, no children. I earn slightly more than him, about 4K more per year. This is the first time either of us has lived with a partner, just the 2 of us as a couple and no other housemates etc.

He thinks rent, bills etc should be split proportionately according to income, so I would pay slightly more. I think we should split everything 50/50, as I have done in the past and as is normal for housemates/friends living together. I KNOW living with someone you’re in a relationship with is different to living with a friend/housemate, but I can’t understand why I should be effectively subsidising his living costs when we’re not married and don’t have joint finances? His reasoning is that it wouldn’t be ‘fair’ as he would then have less spending money/for savings than I would. I said that this is true now, when we don’t live together, so what’s the difference? He thinks that when you live together you effectively become a ‘unit’ and so it should be more equal.

In reality, because I don’t earn that much more than him, I know the difference would be minimal if we did split it proportionately. However I think it’s the principle that bothers me. I think it should be 50/50 but you should both live within the lower-earner’s means - ie. if he says he can only afford 600pm for rent, then I can’t expect him to pay more than that, and if I want a more expensive house then he has every right to ask me to subsidise him. But if we both live in a place that he can afford, why do I need to pay more for that? AIBU?

In my first serious relationship we also split 50/50. We never married.
It did become a problem though when my exDP started to earn much more than me. He actually ended up in a very well paid job.
It caused some major resentment on my part, when I couldn’t join him on holidays, eating out in fancy restaurants etc. because after we both paid are equal share he was left with so much more money than me.
He always told me that I should just earn more and Lord knows I tried, but I just never managed to achieve that. Tried to have a sidejob for some time, but that just wore me down. In the end we were just not compatible financially and it caused the relationship to be over.

I’m very blessed my DP lets me contribute proportionately. I get to do everything he does. Even now after the DC and I’m earning even less because of reducing my hours for childcare.

Have you thought about how you would feel if you (or him) would start earning much more and the other wouldn’t?

OP - you've said already you'd want it split proportionally later when you're on maternity leave but not at the moment.

So you basically want it whichever way benefits you. If you insist on 50/50 now why should he not insist the same in ten years time?

Me and dh split everything 50:50; no joint accounts. When I first moved in with him I earned more than he did, he's since had a promotion and now earns more than me. So it's probably evened itself out!

A banana is a banana op, but that's an item sold by a private company. For shared public resources - transport, the NHS etc, people pay a proportionate amount in taxes relative to their income.

Ace56

You have already made your mind up. So there is no real point in the thread.

In all the threads where the situation was reversed it would be proportional.

I earn less than my bf and we split all of the bills 50/50, my boyfriend runs a car so spends extra on that. We use the money we have left over to spend however we like.

If you move somewhere on your own you'll be paying 100% of the costs.

Proportional is the best way! It's a long term approach and definitely fairer.

Without marriage or kids- 50/50 split- nothing to
Hold you both back from trying to earn more. To split according to what you earn (when only 4K in it) is ridiculously petty, and then when every time
Someone gets a pay rise the amounts are adjusted?! Nope

I think that ye are very young moving in together and 50/50 is the fairest and simplest way. Keep finances strictly separate until you decide this is what you want.
Simple is best.

If however the relationship involved marriage and particularly children, everything in the pot.

@Newmummyxx That's a red flag, to be honest. I'm guessing from your username that you have a baby, and your higher earning boyfriend not only has not given you the financial protection of marriage, but is also insisting on 50:50 when you earn less. Bet he doesn't insist on 50:50 when it comes to housework and childcare.

If there's a need for him to be subsidised then you should do it (e.g. huge disparity in wages or he is a student or unemployed). Otherwise it should be 50 50 if you both work full time.
I have been subsidised by a partner as a student and also subsidised a different partner when he was unemployed for a year. But a straight split is better and makes you feel like an equal team.
I am also much better at saving, this means we will afford a nicer house which we will both benefit from, so I don't agree with whoever said split all the money after bills.

It’s not a flat share with mates, it’s a couple living together.

Proportionate contributions are the most fair. From each according to ability, to each according to need, y’know? You are becoming a household, a unit. If I were him I’d think you had a very selfish attitude to money.

Definite 50/50 split. If he can't afford the proposed rent, you'll have to move into a cheaper area.

The difference may be minimal to you OP, it might not be to him!

I bet he wouldn't find it 'fair' if he received a 10k payrise and you adjusted the bill's and rent accordingly.

@Ace56 He would be subsidising you because he is paying a higher proportion of his wages towards rent etc, but also because he is left with less disposable income.

If I love someone I want to be in a fair partnership with them, I don’t want to put them in financial hardship.

I don’t think there is a right or a wrong answer but the fact you don’t seem to be on the same page wrt the relationship/finances is worrying.

FWIW
when we first moved in together we used a third account & both paid into that equally
(For part of that I was unemployed, for part of that we earned about the same, for part of that I out earned him)
When we bought a house we had our salaries paid into the joint account & paid ourselves a set “pocket money” into our own accounts.
A year or so later he started his business & made nearly nothing for a year then min wage - we ditched our accounts & just used the joint & have continued like this through house moves, children, home Ed etc - the business alone has been supporting our family for the last decade

We have a very similar attitude to money & if anything it has grown more similar over the years.

I do think it’s not fair though to expect him to pay more than 50/50 in the future if you decide to work less etc. It sounds like you want your cake and to eat it too.

He’d be very right to stick to the 50/50 then too.

Personally I'd pay equal share. 50 50 now is fine as 4k per year wont make that much difference. But if you're in it for the long haul there is likely to be a time when one or both of you have a career break because of various reasons- children, caring for elderly parents, illness, retraining or redundancy, and if you're in the 'all costs must be split equally' mindset, one or both of you is going to end up feeling resentful.

Yes if you were just housemates then 50 50 share is appropriate but unless you move in with whoever you're dating at the time, this is for most people a pretty big step and often the first stage of setting up your life together so I think being a bit more generous or sharing more is more appropriate for someone who is likely going to be a life partner.

Also how do you think it would work if one of you earned 4 or 5x the other? Is someone on 100k going to want to rent the cheapest apartment because they insist their partner earning 20k pays half? Are they going to be happy eating out having cheap 2 for 1 pub deals because that's all their partner can afford or would they go to fancy restaurants with their friends and family and leave the poorer one out? What about holidays, would the much higher earner be happy backpacking when they could afford 5*?

I think you're looking at it like a flat share rather than the next stage in your relationship.

And yes a banana costs the same whether you're a millionaire or a student but if they were dating I think most people would think it pretty odd if the millionaire bought a bunch of bananas to share and asked the student for their half back

DH and I have always done it the way @aLilNonnyMouse suggests wages into the joint account so bills out of that, a proportion goes into savings and we have the same amount as dd to an account each for monthly spending.

Up until we had DCs we were earning approximately the same amount, I now earn almost 50% less than dh, but we are still managing our finances in the same way as its just easier.

50/50 right now seems fair. Later on if we are talking babies and marriage then it should be proportionate. We are only talking 4k which in the grand scheme of things doesn't amount to much. Is he referring to just rent or is he including bills also.

If this actually happens maybe talk again 6 months or a year down the line as you will be a more permanent entity by then.

I think it depends how you see the future; if you expect this relationship to be your long term partner, then I’d say a proportional split is okay.

Proportionally should be based on net pay rather than gross (particularly if you’re higher earners).

Proportionally probably won’t make your contribution much bigger, it’s not like he’s asking you to put all your extra wage in and then split the remainder.

Eg if you were on £34k and he was on £30k; that makes net pay £26k and £23k assuming small pension contribution and no other expenses.

On £2k of monthly expenses, you would pay (26/49) the total; so £1060 to his £940.

I think you should be left with the same amount of disposable income each or there abouts. I did 50/50 when my dp first moved in to my house but he was left with move spends, so over time this has changed to proportionate split. Also, are you viewing this as a house share or a start of a new future together?

Though this thread is funny as there is always the argument of money abuse when the man who id the higher earner ask for 50/50 but when it's the woman it's right it should be 50/50!!!!

But surely if a couple later decide to have a child it's a joint decision and it's still technically a 50/50 'split'. Not necessarily in monetary terms but in the full 'cost' of raising a child together?

We have a joint account the Bill's goes out of. My partner makes more so he puts more in.