A maths question - shared finances

[lemonyaid]

DH has 3 kids, one of who is also my kid.

We have seperate accounts and pay into joint account to cover everyday expenses, mortgage, bills etc.

Previously this has been split according to our incomes. His has been higher. Mine is now higher.

I don't feel I should be paying more than him into the shared account as he has more children to pay for.

The 2 DSC live here every other weekend and half of the school holidays.

I propose making a % adjustment based on this. Eg. He pays 5% more for each child.

What % do you think we should use?

I'm thinking perhaps if he just buys the food when they are here that might be easiest. But then we'd just split into the pot according to income still.

This would not be a equitable solution supported by the maths. The only way to mathematically do this is to calculate the exact costings associated with the two children when they are with him and for him to cover it. To be accurate, it would have to go down to the minutiae of it all, e.g.

• you are going to the cinema, he covers the cost of his ticket, 2 child tickets, you cover your ticket and the 3rd child's ticket is split,
• you were going to make a pasta dish. For 3, you'd need less pasta but, for 5, you need more so he covers the difference in price for the size of the pasta needed.

That would be the only way to do in and also be able to claim it was supported by "the maths".

Any costs that would be high anyway, such as the mortgage, or fixed, such as TV or broadband, would not be calculated in a weighted manner because the SC don't actually affect this. I know some will claim the mortgage is high because a bigger house is needed but all parties benefit from that, particularly if the mum is claiming a 50% share in the ownership of the property.

OP, I can see where you are coming from but, honestly, I think you need to be careful here. Bringing this level of pettiness into the situation will only cause others to reflect on everything too. For example, having your contribution to shared finances be a percentage of your income doesn't match with him covering the costs of his step children. If all parties are covering their own costs/responsibilities, then shared costs would be split 50:50, regardless of income. You saying now that you don't want to cover the costs of his children would then justify him saying that, actually, he was covering the costs of you when he was the higher earner.

I'd say if your bill split is 60% you 40% him he pays extra 10% to allow for kid's expenses so 50:50 .

If my husband had kids that spent so little time in my house I'd just pay the % that was a fair split. So if I was the higher earner I'd pay more. How much difference can the children really make to bills. You will still need to heat the house, pay the mortgage. They might have a small impact on food and water but to me it would be so minimal I wouldn't make a fuss. I'd see this as part of taking on a blended family. If it was me I'd be putting all money in a pot and taking what we need for bills and the rest as shared income/savings.

Why were you happy for your DH to pay the higher % when he was earning more but now you happen to earn more you are trying to get the exact cost of your SKs who are rarely even there from him? If this is the case, please go back over the years and work it out retrospectively to see how much he was overpaying when he was the high earner.
If I were your DH I'd really be considering mine and my childrens place in this relationship.

Because he had more kids

But your previous calculations weren't based on number of kids, it was based on earnings. What if he was paying more than the silly 7% number you've arrived at? Are you going to allow him deduct that from your new formula for overpayment? Or if in fact his old payments don't seem enough are you going to ask him for backpay?

No

Ok, so it's apparent then that you've now just decided single handedly that you don't want any part in paying towrd your SKs... who are now your family. But you didn't care if you were perhaps underpaying historically. This isn't just about money, this is pure spite. If it was about money you'd retrospectively try to make it fair.

I haven't been underpaying. I have fewer kids plus he earned more so it's only fair he paid more

And he agreed

Funny how DSC allegedly cost fuck all extra according to this thread because you have to pay for a house and bills regardless, yet when talking about an RP's finances those things most definitely count in the list of stuff CMS allegedly barely touches the sides on. I guess the RP is being petty too when they want the NRP to make a fair contribution towards their own children😉

I would be perplexed if I was your DH and you suggested this. I would rethink personally and just split the finances. What would you do if DH children start missing weekends as they get older, would you reimburse him a percentage?

@DebussytoaDiscoBeat That's a really good point

No.. we would look at the figures again!

What are your DHs thoughts on this? It's all well and good getting various opinions on MN but ultimately he's the poor guy who's gotta pay up.

@BudgetBuster he's a poor guy for having to pay for his own children? Seriously?! You might have a point if OP was billing him for all the extra cooking, washing, housework etc she'll inevitably be doing for her DSC...now that would be petty. Why does she need to contribute even more on top of that?

Jeez this is a hard read. We always paid 50/50, then we had joint child and I needed to make provision for them. It appears first family kids cost a lot more than the second. The poster who said it was unfair for dad to pay more after paying cms for the first child(ren) must be bonkers! The second family is not free, school uniform etc. is still insane and often the mother pays it all as dad is paying for the first child.

No, it's not ok, the second family aren't cheaper or lesser! We have separate finances, similar earnings but he pays dsc mum so has less but am I willing to pay 50% of everything? No I am not, the extra goes in savings for my dc

@DebussytoaDiscoBeat No, I don't have an issue with anybody splitting costs in a blended family particularly. But the OP has only decided to start doing this now that she's the high earner and never seemed to care if perhaps her DH was paying alot more historically (maybe he was maybe he wasn't, we will never know). Also, judging by how OP appears to view her SC I highly doubt she's doing anything extra for them. You've given her a great idea to start invoicing though if by some miracle she does

@BudgetBuster If her DH was paying more historically then that would have covered his DCs extra costs, so not unfair. OP says she's had no problem going halves for holidays so I highly doubt she's doing nothing extra for her DSC.

It would be unfair if he was paying more than the % the OP is now suggesting. Tbh I don't believe much the OP says and I'm going to leave this thread.

I think you get where I'm coming from. DH understands. Anyway, I've had help with the maths and we're going to sit down over the weekend and sort it out. It might be easiest for us to just split according to income and he buys the food shop when the DSC are here. We'll see.

@lemonyaid
Welcome to the place where step mums are jumped on, you can't do right by doing wrong, no you shouldn't be out of pocket for your dcs, these are the people who would tell you let there parents work it out it's nothing at all to do with you, or you shouldn't be doing this and doing that cause your not there parent, in this case your not the parent let there father cover the cost for them.

I think the general assumption of treat them as your own is a bit of a fallacy when we all dammed know that treat them like your own doesn't apply to rules, food navicular tickets, schools and graduations weddings especially if the DSc have already have two present and active parents (parents being active and present is a assumption)

But when it comes down to things like finances, childcare or resources it's treat them like your own. Which you can't because most DSc (and I'm now a adult DSc) would find that weird and overstepping.

Funny that tbh if this was rp no one would be calling her petty to trying to advocate for equity in the division of resources across all the children.

Equity isn't the same as equal. Ops not trying to take more than her due, she's trying to balance the equity across all the children. Arguably it's dad that has a financial responsibility for both first and second family. Not op.Her child also doesn't live on thin air and crackers.

You can't all go ohh so sad for the children... no by children I only mean the first one. Petty for you to even think your child should even be considered...

Egh thankfully most wives of second marriages usually out earn their spouses so can take the slack. But it doesn't mean morally they have to pick up dads slack because they married a man with children. Nice if they do (I pay for my DSc horse and keep out of my own money) but no one's entitled to that.

Am I missing something here?? Because these kids have caregivers but the OP isn’t one of the two with parental responsibility?? So why would she pay?

I do not pay for my step kids. Not my responsibility to do so. I pay for my kids. He pays for his. The house is shared ( o own more of it but we split bills 50/50) I have more money left because he pays a load of maintenance to his ex. Again, not my problem.

OP is the relationship generally good? Is there enough money to cover bills and some treats? DP and I pay generously but proportionally into a joint account so there is enough to cover the bills and save for holiday / days out.

How much more would DP pay to you? Is it worth the hassle? Or are there bigger issues at play and you feel taken for granted etc. in other ways?