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?

I guarantee if this thread had been posted with the sexes reversed, any talk of red flags would have been referring to the person wanting 50:50.

(Not that I agree there are any red flags in this situation.)

Ace56
I said hypothetically because people were talking about how your attitude to finances could be trying to have cake and eat it. One way this could become cake and eat it is if the goalposts shift around when you would be benefited from the shift to proportional.

And I've also said repeatedly that attitudes to money and finances are a big issue that can cause issues, there are many valid approaches but both people in the relationship have to be on the same page. If he sees proportional as the default and your approach is his job his problem and living together is basically a flatshaee then you're not on the same page in terms of attitude to finance in a relationship.

RandomLondoner you put it very well.

Reading more about the fact you don't view yourselves as seriously together yet, while I still think proportionate is fairer, I'd agree def not go for pooling money.

I guess you could opt for 50/50 as you're just "trying it out". It's not what I would do, but I can see why you might prefer this as you're not fully committed to being in a long-term relationship just yet.

All of that aside, I think your attitude absolutely stinks and if I were him, I'd run a mile right now. Comments like this from you just leave me open-mouthed:

" But it’s not at his expense. He would be paying his fair share. If that’s a bigger proportion of his income, that’s got nothing to do with me.
Should a millionaire pay more for a banana than someone on 10k, just because it’s a smaller proportion of their income? No. A banana is a banana - they are buying the same thing for the same price and getting the same outcome from it."

Wow.....just wow. And that's without even quoting your comment where you say you don't see why you should subsidise him.

And for reference, I've always been the higher earner in relationships by quite a significant sum. I'd never be so uncaring about someone who I wanted to live with in a romantic set-up. It's not really the fact that you decided you were right before posting, or even the decision you've made. It's your whole attitude to it. Best of luck to him, he's going to need it with you.

Ok given it’s not been years and years you’ve been together I can see your point that you want to keep it 50/50 and I do think that fair enough for now. I think I would go for a cheaper place though with a rent amount that he’s happy with so he’s not stretched too much.

Maybe review it after a year?

And for reference, I've always been the higher earner in relationships by quite a significant sum. I'd never be so uncaring about someone who I wanted to live with in a romantic set-up. It's not really the fact that you decided you were right before posting, or even the decision you've made. It's your whole attitude to it.

Exactly. It’s the attitude you’re putting across. Subsidising him is such a strange way of looking at a relationship for me. It makes you seem like you’d be the kind of partner who’d pull out the calculator after a meal out.

50/50 and if he can't agree on that then don't move in together! It does not matter you earn more or even if he earned more. 50/59 is fair.

50/50

Never ever have a joint account either! I learned the hard way about joint accounts. You keep your excess money in your bank. You can both save for wedding/ holidays separately and again 50/50 when it comes to paying for it. When circumstances change then adjustments can be made and always make sure you have emergency stash in case things don't work out. Again another hard lesson I learned in the past.

I don’t think either approach is correct - it’s more about your approach to money generally and how disparate your salaries are.

A £4K difference isn’t significant in the scheme of things so early in the relationship I’d be favouring a 50/50 split (but could be persuaded for the proportional split).

It’s different if salaries are significantly different as you start getting into territory where one can’t afford the lifestyle the other wants and that’s trickier.

Pooling money is, IMO, the natural arrangement when children are in the frame.

OP I don’t think you are being uncaring at all.

A couple years ago my dp and I were considering renting together for a while when it looked like my flat I was buying was going to be delayed. He earns more than me and wanted to look at more expensive properties.

We agreed that if we found something within my budget it would be split 50/50 but if he wanted something nicer then he would pay the top up.

Likewise when we go on holiday, we pick where we are going etc to my budget and he usually adds in some activities and upgrades that he wants and pays for for us. I would be happy with us doing things within my budget but it’s his choice to then treat us.

We are slowly changing the ways we do things as our relationship gets more serious and will change if/when we marry but for now I think this is fair and reasonable for two people who earn a good wage but where one might want to do more things occasionally as they have more spare cash.