Should all be 50--50 ? Is this fair ?

[financesplitting]

So I'll try to be a bit precise but also a bit vague, as to not be too outing.

My husband and I own all major assets 50-50. We've always put down the exact same amount of deposits on our house and flat / cars etc.

I used to make more money than my husband for a while, but he's overtaken me and I'm also currently on maternity leave, so my pay packet is a smaller than usual, as I don't get commission, just my base salary.

The situation is as follows- I feel like I pay for a lot of our day to day expenses- all food shopping pretty much, nappies, children's clothes, take aways usually, all cleaning stuff.

My husband tends to pay for stuff like tools and kitchen pans occasionally, that kind of stuff.

We pay our mortgage and bills completely 50-50.

We've recently had some work done at our house and he paid quite a bit for that, plus bought some large items like a TV. I also paid for some big stuff, but he paid a bit more than me.

I also pay all of my son's nursery fees since January.

Whenever I bring up that I feel like I pay more stuff than him day to day, he says he also pays for a lot of stuff.

But the fact remains that he's making double what I am making on maternity and I have basically no savings as I spent most of it on the house and I'm unable to save much now due to me paying mortgage, car, nursery fees and basically all food and cleaning. Plus cleaner and Gardner ! I forgot to mention that I pay those too.

I feel like if I bring it up, he'll just count all the extra big ticket items he bought for the house that we didn't split. Is that fair ? Maybe it is .

Sounds like a good plan.

I feel like I've essentially been trying to ' pay back ' the money he spent more than I did on house items. I paid probably about 15k whereas he spent around 28kish.

I think he thinks I am ' paying him back ' by paying all the nursery fees, all our food and everything else basically. I've always paid for these things anyway.

That's the point I made earlier though, he wants a 1950s outlook with the wife at home doing the childcare and cleaning, but he wants a 2020's wife who also pays 50/50 whilst doing so.

He really does want to have his cake and eat it, and he is being an abusive dickhead whilst he is about it.

I’d ask him how he intends to pay for everything so all his own housework and cooking and look after the children 50/50 when you apply for a divorce?

Unless he wants to buy a new tv and coffee table every week
CHILDCARE FEES ARE JOINT FEES.
i suggest offering to sell the Tv and coffee table again so he feels ok paying for childcare fees becasue what you want is him sharing the daily /weekly cost of the child you have together and his coffee table shite and one off purchase of furniture that can probably be bought much cheaper can get to fuck. You don’t coparent the furniture.

You are totally correct, but I think we also know that this kind of man will never do 50/50 of the childcare if they split and will probably quibble over paying CM as well....

My gosh. What a petty marriage.

Can you explain why he thinks finances should be 50/50 irrelevant of wages, so will not share the perk of his job, being a higher salary, BUT he doesn’t believe chores around the house should be 50/50 and that you should share the perk of your job, having more free time?

Fuck that, if he wants 50/50 then that includes doing 50% of the chores, irrelevant of his working hours.

Oh and ironing HIS shirts is not YOU outsourcing, he is, so he can fucking pay for it.

God, I’m furious on your behalf, I don’t know how you haven’t left him.

'My gosh'. Its not petty. Its abusive.

What an absolute cunt.

Abusive, thats the word you are looking for.

Don't minimise abuse by calling it petty.

"Apparently that's the price you have to pay for success, he says. He also often says that to be successful, men need wives and children that basically leave them to focus on what they need to do career wise. Apparently I am not one of those wives and that makes his life difficult."

This has me really fucking angry. Who does he think he is.

So he's happy for you to be a single parent.

One that's kept short while he has plenty. Who "owes" him.

Who's kept in the dark about money.

Wives and children should be seen and not heard.

It's your life's work to service him.

I fucking hate this absolute c*nt.

OP this is how it goes in our house.

We've always had separate accounts but it's totally transparent and the money is "ours".

The bills come out of my account and he does all the shopping.

Anything left is "swept" into savings or premium bonds.

He's useless with tech so I do all the online banking stuff.

When the kids were young we juggled everything between us. He did all the cooking and I did the cleaning.

He's just retired early and does the majority of housework. I used to do my share but I've lost interest and outsource as much as possible.

I work long hours because I enjoy it, it's financially rewarding and frankly it's a housework avoidance plan!

I've always earned more than him but that mattered not a jot to either of us.

Surely essential costs like nursery fees and DC’s clothing should also be 50:50 if that’s the route you’re taking. It isn’t an even split if one is earning a lot more yet not paying more towards household costs. He should be paying more even if it’s only temporarily until you return to work but irrespective of this, I think nursery fees and clothing should be 50:50 because they’re essential costs for the children you created together.

I don't understand how marriages like this work. If that's his stance I suggest you cut your maternity leave short/ have shared parental leave and go back to work.

He's being quite greedy and selfish.

You didn't mention what type of work he does but would he be willing to take another job that has regular hours?

So does everyone pool have their e tire salary into one account when they get married

No. But we are v high earners and are completely open about where all our money is.

During my mat leaves I paid my 50% of bills into joint account as usual, and I paid most family costs, DH simply put savings in my name from his money. I have access to all his accounts and know what he earns as I do his tax return.

He hates his life, because I make it difficult for him by not having everything ready for him / keeping the house like he would like etc. and also complaining that he doesn't spend enough time with us and that I'm on my own with the children a lot. Apparently that's the price you have to pay for success, he says. He also often says that to be successful, men need wives and children that basically leave them to focus on what they need to do career wise

I actually have some sympathy with him on this score, as he can't be working to support everyone and be at home. My XH was always at work, but I fully accepted that this was the deal. He worked like mad, I gave up my career and looked after our children in order to facilitate his career and (IMO) to give our children what we both regarded as the best childhood, meaning I needed to be a SAHM.

So I completely agree with your husband on this score. However: where he is going very, very badly wrong is to think that his money is all his. The deal, if you at home with children, is that all the money he earns is your joint money. End of story. You in turn don't nag him about coming home at 5 o'clock or doing things with the children at weekends.

What your husband is doing is working (which is good), saying that he can't be in two places at once (true, and you need to give him a break on that score), and keeping all "his" money (which is absolutely ridiculous).

MN, though, is a bit odd about suggesting that husbands should "get a new job" with "regular hours". If you want to earn well, you are very, very unlikely to do that in a 9-5 job. The issue is that this man is not realising that marriage means that his money is also his wife's.

@Heresince2006 he isnt working to support everyone - finances are at least 50/50 (if not more in his favour). The OP works and isnt on maternity leave.

Yours works because you are a SAHM who shares finances equally.

The OP has neiether

That's sort of my point, Quartz. The husband in the OP's case wants it all ways - he wants her to be at home, but also wants to keep all 'his' money. The OP wants him to be at home more, but that isn't really feasible so long as she's on maternity leave. The real issue is that neither of them seems to have come to terms with the idea that every single penny that he earns is shared money, whatever name they choose to put on it, because they are married. And all the more so as they now have a child, and only one of them is on leave. It would be very different if they were just living together.

BTW, Quartz, I have been divorced for a long time now! But it was being married which meant I was financially ok after 15 years as a SAHM... My former husband would have been thrilled if he'd been able to argue that his money was his and my no-money was mine...

Urm no, the Op is working, contributing and also has her own career. She certainly should not shove that to one side to facilitate the career of a financially abusive man.

A mans career does not come before a womans.

@Maddogsandtoplessenglishmen I agree. However, in the OP's case - the fact is that she is currently on maternity leave and is still apparently expected to pay "her share" even though she is not earning. And whatever her contribution - whether that be financial or in 'unpaid childcare' - they are married and all their money is shared money. The OP's husband clearly can't see this - but it seems that the OP can't see it either, if she is still going along with the idea that she pays for some things (which are, needless to say, all to do with the children they produced together) and he pays for other things (the big, important, manly things).

In most cases, marriage is a very good thing for women - unless they are the higher earners, in which case they'd be mad to get married. I suppose it's surprising, really, that men ever get married, given that their careers and earning potential are largely unaffected by having children. There's nothing in it at all for them. However, the OP's husband has chosen to marry her, so he needs to accept that he thereby signed over half of all his worldly goods to her.

Oh I agree he needs to financially support her on maternity leave. I have said so repeatedly on the thread.

I just have very little sympathy for a man who does the following:

Works 60 hours'
Has 108 hours a week free to sleep, eat, relax

Vs a woman:

Looks after baby and has broken sleep for 168 hours a week

I don't care how much he claims he needs to a wife to support his career, there are plenty of successful single men, and he chose to have children with a woman who at the time was out-earning him. He has no right to demand a life that neither of them appeared to sign up for before children.

MY DH has worked 60 hour weeks. He still did cooking, some gardening and occasional cleaning. He shared the cost of a cleaner so that the other full time worker (me) in the household didn't bear the brunt of an unfair share and he would have been fully on board with childcare if we had been able to have children.

He absolutely can do it, he has at least 50 hours a week to do it, he chooses not to.

My husband is a high earner, works a lot of hours and I'm on maternity leave without pay as I've extended it. I have access to all money, and he obviously pays the bills. My toddler goes to nursery one day a week to give me a break.

He is still capable of picking up dinner or grabbing things from the shops when needed. (If you weren't there he'd have to do those things anyway?!)

Honestly he sounds like a cunt and your life would be a lot easier without him.