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.

You really think your son is getting the raw end of the deal? If your DIL earns considerably more than him she's coming off worse and being left with the same amount of money as a lower earner. Why shouldn't he contribute towards 50% of their shared bills if he's also benefitting from her inflated salary? Bizarre that you think this is unfair (on him!)

It sounds like my first marriage. It worked very well, we never had a single argument over money and everything that was mine was ours, everything that was his was ours. It is actually the traditional way of handling things, and encourages couples to build their future together. Here in the States, we have Dave Ramsey, a financial advisor for everyday people, and his methods emphasize that the couple is a team.

He would have less at the end of the month with what you suggest!

FWIW DH and I did exactly what you suggest when we got together at 22 except that we didn’t even bother keeping a personal account each, just used the joint one for everything. 20y later it still works perfectly fine.

You are saying that he should get more spending money- in that case so should she. But they are saving for a wedding so that's where both their money is going. It's that the wedding is being prioritised as a joint expense. Of course he'd have more spending money if they were just paying bills with their income. It sounds fair to me.

OP, you said it yourself: she’s the higher earner and all of her money is in the joint

He’s got access to it. It gets spent on holidays, car repairs and maintenance, the wedding, and so on.

He’s got a much higher standard of living than he would alone.

Stop focusing on what he doesn’t get in this arrangement, and maybe support him to get off minimum wage and into a better paying position.

Maths wasn’t your strong suit, was it, OP?

Your son is getting a very generous split of finances.

It's so funny - I thought you were going to say "It's not fair on my poor DIL; she earns all that money and has the same spending money as my ne-er do well son."

Hahahaha! Good point @broccolienthusiast 😉

She sounds like an absolute keeper! You don’t seem very good with understanding finances so I would keep out unless you want to be that toxic mother in law.

This thread is absolutely brilliant 😂

OP @BittySpider I don't think you thought this one through before posting....

OP, you're no good at maths and you're going to be a hell of a mother-in-law 😂

Sounds very fair to me. Very similar to how DH and I do things. He is the higher earner (about 4x what I earn) but he says it wouldn't feel right him having anymore 'spending money' than me, I work just as hard as him in other ways (house and now DD as well).

Well, she is. She's putting all her pay into the joint account,

Most people do one of the following:

Pay an amount into the joint "bills" account proportional to their earnings, Keep the rest for personal spending. The person with the larger income has more spending money, because 25%, sy% of a big amount is bigger in pounds and pence than 25% of a smaller amount

Pay everything into the "bills" account. Take out an equal amount for personal spending.

The total amount you can afford to allow for personal spending is the same in each (it's the amount left after the bills). In the second method (which is what they do) she gets haf of the spending money, in the first method, she gets more than a half.

The way you describe sounds like the old fashioned way of the husband giving the wife "housekeeping money", in the days where wives, if they worked, were considered to work for "pin money".

Me and DH have always had a joint account and I have always earned 2x more than him. Trust me, in the time we have been married he has ended up far better off financially than he ever was when he was single.

I keep getting Father Ted trying to explain "Small...far away" to Dougall in my head.

I think you need to stay out if their financial affairs. Your son is fortunate that he gets same personal money as his future wife.

Good grief, surely this thread can’t be real.

I wasn’t a fan of Rishi Sunak but maybe he had a point about teaching maths until 18 years old.

What exactly is happening because you have said they have wages paid in and then bills are covered and they get equal spending money

I think this would only be unfair if the amount of 'pocket money' was different. As it stands they are both left with the same amount. Your son probably goes on more holidays/ trips etc as its covered by the joint account which your DIL pays more into.

Whichever way you look at it, your DS is the net beneficiary and your DIL is a star.

So dil is paying for most of the bills from her salary

what happens when she is on ml

will your son Be able to pay the lions share

It's a grim way to live and will eventually cause resentment.

😂

As pointed out, you are completely misunderstanding the maths here. This is how I have always handled money, through periods of being the higher earner, the lower earner, and an equal earner. It is 100% fair.

What you are really saying, I think is that either a) you think she should pay more than a proportionally fair share, and have less access to money than him, despite earning more? Not sure why you think that would be fair. Or b) It's really about the control over money, and the way the bills and savings are ringfenced, forcing him to abide by their agreed spending priorities?

But they both get the same amount to play with. It’s not like DIL is getting more than him although she brings in more. It’s quite sensible really because the money they have saved which sits in their joint account they use towards shared things such as holidays etc. I don’t see how you think this isn’t fair?