Would you expect your spouse to share their wealth with you

[JollyQuail]

Just wondering, if your partner was considerably wealthier than you, would you expect him to share all his wealth with your after you’re married?

Name added to houses; joint bank accounts, name added to BTL properties.

I would feel very uneasy doing this.

I'd feel weird to ask to have my name added to anything that was owned before getting married, I'd just expect my name to be on anything bought together. An exception would be if my husband already owned the house that became our marital home and we were planning to stay there permanently, then I'd expect to become a joint owner (as it would become my home and I'd be contributing to its upkeep in various ways for hopefully the rest of my life). Another potential exception is when you start having kids and have to think about securing their future (in case access to money/property was required if anything happened to the wealthier parent, eg long hospitalisation etc etc) - but again it would depend on the circumstances.

Don't get married. Don't live together.

Well... husband did. Quite a fortune.
It took him some time, but absolutely.
I wouldn't if I was in his position, but fair game here for both. 👍

I agree with you. If you have built your wealth yourself, it would be madness to just share it all with someone later in life.

Don’t get married because you will have to give them some or half of the weakth if and when you divorce.

This is our situation (well similar) - I come from a very wealthy family, which has enabled us to have a very different lifestyle to the one we would have otherwise. He comes from no wealth at all (although a very old family, but the money long gone). I have obviously shared my wealth with my husband - that’s what marriage is, sharing and building a family unit together. I couldn’t imagine hoarding my good fortune, and not using it for the joint benefit of our family (including my husband). When I inherit, I will use it for the good of the family and decisions will be joint with my husband.

Us too!

I am the wealthier one and, yes, have shared the wealth, but I didn’t marry him until we had been together 9 years, even though I never have any doubts about the fact that I couldn’t have achieved what I have without his support and that he’s one hell of a husband and I am confident in what we have together.

Depends. If I had children with him then yes. Because he would be the father of my children and I would want him to always be confortable for that reason even if we were to break up... but I would be sure to have children with a decent man to start with..which I did:)

This is kind of the purpose of marriage-with "All my worldly goods l thee endow," if he is not happy with this perhaps marriage is not the right choice. Talk about it beforehand be sure to let him know what your expectations are

There is a difference between day to day living expenses and capital items. I wouldn’t add a partner to BTL or split shares. Those are your assets. Same with pension. But without a prenup then your partner could have a claim if you divorce. I would suggest you get a current valuation so you could argue that he is only entitled to the growth in value of those assets during marriage but don’t know if that legally washes. If there are no children would he ever be entitled?

how you run day to day finances is up to you. Could split 50:50 with a joint account for all household bills. Seperate sole accounts. Take same approach for one offs like holidays. No issues if salaries are similar.

if big disparity on salary income then it’s fairer (in a marriage situation not just living together), that the higher earner pay proportionally more.

As a female I am not sure I would marry someone who earns significantly less than me. My DH earns similar to me but if he earned more then I think the approach above is fair.

Just to add to above- the residential home should have both names but a record of who has contributed the deposit/ equity.

No. I was married to a guy who would class as wealthy ..several seven figures.
I wasn’t. I’d the sale of a house and some savings.
His was his before we met. I did not expect any of it at any time. He had earned it and it was his to do as he pleased. Which was generally to hang on to it. All I asked was that I did not leave poorer than when we met in the pre cohabitation agreement and pre nup. He agreed to that. I helped in his business every day. He paid the bills.

The agreements were probably not enforceable in the UK but I had no interest in his money 16 years on when I left.

No as I know I'd be looked after regardless wouldn't be any need for my name penned to claim any of his wealth I'd rather make my own. Emotional support always trumps anything else in my eyes

If that's how you feel, then dump, and persue some one wealthier!

Well, my DH stood up beside me in church and said 'with all my worldly goods I thee endow,' which is what you vow when you marry in the CofE.
But these days, it goes both ways. We have always shared our wealth, such as it is -- inheritances, windfalls, salaries and savings. Sometimes he was the higher earner, then I overtook him, but then retired early. Swings and roundabouts.
If you don't want to do this the solution is simple, do not get married.
The less simple solution is to see a lawyer and have ring-fences put into place. (Or whatever financial strictures you decide on.)
FWIW, now as an older person I would not get married again if I became single, there are childrens' positions and inheritances to consider. But when you're starting out in married life as a younger person it makes sense to pool your wealth, to put yourselves on a reasonably equal footing with each other and to take into account the likelihood of having children.

we’ve always shared everything. If I remarried I would expect us to share finances too.

Then you should not get married!

Hi OP - whether these step are taken or not (adding you to the house / joint bank account etc) it is irrelevant compared to the contract he has made when the two of you got married. It is explicit in that legal binding, especially as more time passes and if you have children together.

Being married means you make sure that your other half has the same lifestyle as you and is not left out in the cold if you split or die.

That’s not the same as handing over half your assets when you get married and if any potential spouse suggested this, it would raise serious red flags.

Things like ISAs and pensions cannot be held jointly anyway and if you are wealthy, you are likely to have a large part of your assets in those.

We do similar. It works for us, perhaps partly because we both earn around the same and have around the same leisure time

I'd feel differently if I was working part time and doing all the chores. Then it would feel like a double whammy - (1) having less money in my bank account due to working part time AND (2) doing all the chores due to having more time at home

This is a lose-lose for the higher earner (historically, usually the man!)

Either the higher earner insists on a pre-nup, which sours the relationship, "don't you trust me, don't you have faith in our relationship?"

Or you combine everything, divorce five minutes later and they lose half. Not a bad deal for playing happy families for a few years...

You could also say having children is a lose lose situation for women . ( historically and now, the ones who do most of the work).
No way would I have children with a man who didn't share.

Yes
That's the only answer needed

Either he believes in his vows and believes marriage will last and loves you and sees you as partners
Or he doesn't in which case I wouldn't marry him

I am not married, but after an 18 year relationship my ‘solid reliable trustworthy’ partner had his head turned and up and left within 6 weeks. He guilt tripped me into not creating a deed of trust on our property ( I was considerably wealthier and put 40% deposit) and now wants 50%. The law is not on my side due to my error of judgement. Protect yourself, you never know what might happen further down the line - I wish I had 😕

Your post implies that it’s the other way around - that he is the wealthy one. That’s why your comment about it making you feel uneasy doesn’t make sense.