Is this a fair way to split finances?

[BittySpider]

It’s my Son and his partner so I know it’s realistically none of my business but had an convo with him today and wondering if I am being unfair thinking this is unreasonable?

My Son and his partner are getting married in the summer. The live together. The topic of finances came up today as we were discussing the wedding and we have offered them a few K towards it.

He told me that the way they have always split their finances is that they have a joint account both wages are paid into. All direct debits for bills come out of that account including house, bills, subscriptions etc. Food shop money also comes out of that. Then they both transfer themselves the exact same amount from the joint account on pay day and this is to cover all personal expensive such as their phones, petrol, coffees, clothes etc. He said they don’t take from the joint unless absolutely necesssary and if one of them runs out they might say to the other can I borrow a tenner and then on payday they will give it the other person back out of their personal allowance.

I asked about takeaways or date nights and he said one person will usually cover it out of their “pocket money” but they don’t take it out of the joint unless it was a special treat like an anniversary. All holidays and other joint costs come out of the joint but as they’re getting married all of wedding costs are being paid from the money building up in the joint account. He said if one of them had their car break down then they’d take money out of the joint to fix it too. He also said they both have their own personal savings accounts too but these are currently neglected due to paying for wedding.

FWIW my DIL earns much more than him. DS doesn’t earn much more than minimum wage. I know it’s none of my business so I won’t say anything but AIBU to think this is a bit tight? Personally I think bills should be split proportionately to what they earn. The amount that they take out each for pocket money isn’t a lot and he’d have a lot more left over if they split it differently.

We have the exact same set up. I earn much more and we have the exact same 'spending money' each month. My husband is getting a great deal and really appreciates it!

Imagine her mum comes out and says "wtf, he's the man, how dare he make my daughter pay equal/contribute more money than him" what then? Isn't he supposed to be the head of the household? You are a very unreasonable person, people who act like only their child is precious

That doesn’t make sense to me. If all their wages go into their joint account and they each take out the same amount of "pocket money", surely she has contributed more to their joint account than he has and neither of them has any "left over" apart from what they don’t spend from their pocket money. If anything, it’s unfair to her.

And the thread is about income though.

They've talked about it and made a decision about how to deal with money. That is an amazing thing as so many couples (looking in the mirror here) just fall into something and hope it works.

All assets are theoretically owned jointly. When you divorce “fair settlement” law comes into play . A court can’t even seal the consent order unless they’re satisfied that fair settlement is met. This was actually called “shared misery” by the lawmakers who put this in place.
during a financial settlements ALL assets are included, that DOES include incomes, as well as chattels, savings, investments, pensions. It may sometimes include business assets .

the reason Is that fair settlement is based on future needs. Not behavoiurs in the past. Income , even pension income form pensions already taken, is a key part of the courts overseeing that future needs can be met form these assets .

so whilst income is taxed individually, from the law perspective it is inclured in the assets of a marriage (hence why the derisory marriage tax allowance can now be used). From a benefits point of you income is ALWAYS considered as household income, even when not even married, as many people trying to claim benefits in merged families find out.

You may be correct semantically, but the way the marriage act, in divorce, the way benefits are calculated, and some calculation by HMRC certainly absolutely consider income as part of joint assets.

But are only special occation dinners paid from the joint account? If they're having a take away together why is it coming out from one person's pocket money? I think either they need to have a joint fun money in the joint budget or they pay for their own meals. Just saying, if we want to keep it fair 😁

Best thread I’ve read in a long time 🤣

(Maths issue aside, the only potential issue here is they’re not paying themselves enough pocket money but this doesn’t seem to be an issue in reality)

You're mad! Of course he's hugely benefitting

Lets say he earns 100, and she earns 200. They both put it all in the joint, and take out 25 quid spends.

All the bills come out of the joint, holidays (so they can now afford a much more expensive holiday than if he had to only have one he could afford himself), he has a built in emergency fund far larger than he'd have if all he had to contribute was 100 minus bills.

If bills are 50, and they do it this way, at the end of the month, they have 200 in savings together. If they split it proportionally, then she'd pay 34, he'd pay 17 - so she'd walk away with 166 quid for her spends and savings, and he'd have 83 quid for spends and savings - he's clearly better off doing it this way!

To take it to an extreme, lets say bills are 100, and they take 100 each in spends - with their current scheme, he keeps all his money, and the bills are still paid!

She is covering more of the bills

Erm what? She has clearly outlined her son earns less. That’s the point.

Why were you asking about their joint account? That is prying! Give them some money for the wedding, or don’t. Everything else is none of your business.

This sounds great to me.

It's recognising they're a partnership. Unequal amounts going in, same coming out with the same boundaries.

A large savings pot accruing.

Good on them

I did ask about this as I queried if I put the money in the joint if it would be spent on wine and takeaway! But apparently not as they are on an eating out and takeaway ban due to saving for the wedding. He said he would usually pay for a takeaway or a meal out anyway as he still wants to feel like he can treat her. Doesn’t make sense to me as I think she should be paying given the discrepancies but maybe they should have a separate fund put aside for that? Maybe that’s what I struggled to understand?

Anyway as I said none of my business I certainly won’t be saying anything! I have no idea how much she earns.

I know he earns MW as he told me that’s why he’s entitled to college funding. She works in the legal sector.

Well yes. I asked how much they keep to themselves and it was very low. Much lower than I think it needs to be. This is why I think he’d have more money if he just paid a percentage and kept the rest.

Sounds like he does really well out of the deal - I wouldn’t do it that way for sure, lol.

I think the pp is suggesting it might be a reverse. Unlikely though

Why were your mithering your son about what his joint account is for?

Besides this, your son is getting a good deal and this is a great and fair financial setup. You should be pleased they're saving. Why are you so anti the savings being joint?

MIL from hell in the making! You don’t even know what she earns but want her to sub your son more than she already does.
If you’re so concerned about your DS living the high life while at college why aren’t you topping him up financially?

This...

Your maths is waaay off OP!!! He is getting an amazing deal here. If anything, this is unfair on your DIL!

And who would pay for the wedding then? Her?

You really have no grasp of this do you? He is doing much better out of this arrangement and they both have the same amount of money. If he paid a percentage, he would have LESS money.

You mean he would have more money if she paid a larger percentage! What percentage would you say is reasonable?

Your DS and his GF probably have quite a low disposable income because he’s on minimum wage and she’s paying more of their joint bills while saving for their wedding.

You can’t actually be this dense.

I do think you’re wrong OP. I know what you mean about contributing proportionally to salaries and how many people usually say this is the fairest way. But the difference here is that she and he both have the same fun money each month. Also that the left over money is saved in a joint pot that they both own, not saved separately in her personal savings. So he really is getting a good deal financially, long term at least, even if it means he has to be quite careful with money month by month (the same as her).

If everything was proportional, his fun money would also be lower that hers which I personally think could create a difficult dynamic and may not feel fair.

The difference is diddums is by default saving some of the rest of his money rather than having it as money to fritter on crap. I am baffled at what could possibly be the problem with this but I can only assume OP thinks DIL is somehow forcing him to save that money against his will.