7 ms·

A note to any single folks out there with the potential to earn more than their future spouse: understand family law in your jurisdiction and understand what yo

A note to any single folks out there with the potential to earn more than their future spouse: understand family law in your jurisdiction and understand what you are signing up for when you get legally married. Divorce can leave you liable for more support payments than you can even afford. The other party can walk away with half of your property, including unvested RSUs(!!!), and it doesn't matter if they cheated or failed to contribute to the marriage. If you think you're being nice by trying to make the marriage work and tolerating it, you may be just setting yourself up for even more pain down the road.

msoad 5y ago
Unvested RSU??
- xen0 5y ago
  Restricted Stock Unit; a form of compensation that a company may provide. Such stock is subject to a vesting period, where you only gain the stock after a period of time.
  - msoad 5y ago
    I'm aware but I don't think unvested RSUs are subject to divorce asset splitting. Unvested RSU is like unearned salary. It's not an asset to split. Maybe you mean vested but not released RSUs in pre-IPO companies.
    - llampx 5y ago
      You give family court too much credit.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
62951413 5y ago
"any single folks with the potential to earn" == if you're a man "understand family law" == you can do nothing, don't kid yourself This is an unusually serious topic for this forum. Those of you who are too young to believe it can happen to you or assume the financially raped were exceptionally stupid or unlucky. Do your future self a favor and think twice. The men you hear about were once like you. You're just earlier in the lifecycle. With every generation is's getting worse and not linearly. At the very least * marriage is for only if you're in your 30s and want to have a child within a year * make sure your parents unanimously approve of the woman Also, the older you get the easier it gets to get laid without the paperwork. Marriage is a guaranteed loss for a man.
- 01100011 5y ago
  It's not specifically advice for men. I use gender neutral pronouns for a reason. It applies to high earning women as well. My friend is a VP making good money. Her ex was a mostly out of work machinist with drug problems. She faced the same risks. Your risk is much less when you've made your money before the marriage. You can still be on the hook for alimony, but at least you won't lose half of everything you've ever worked for. In either case, understand the law. Marriage is a legal contract enforced by the state. It, legally speaking, has nothing to do with love, commitment, marital duties, fidelity, etc.
  - llampx 5y ago
    Just going by the numbers and the outcomes, your high-earning VP woman is a LOT LOT rarer than the average lovestruck engineer who doesn't look before he leaps. Yes of course both sexes can theoretically face the same thing, but in practice it is very biased.
fphhotchips 5y ago
I'll add to this: you don't necessarily have to get married for this to apply. In most (all?) Australian jurisdictions, living with someone for enough time is enough to establish you as defacto - which for almost all intents and purposes is just like being married.
- AussieWog93 5y ago
  Also worth noting is that Australia doesn't have alimony, nor do we seem to have the ridiculous child support arrangements that people get into overseas.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - dendriti 5y ago
    Australia absolutely does have laws on the books for alimony, aka spousal maintenance.
    - AussieWog93 5y ago
      Holy shit, we do. Never actually met anyone who had to pay it, though.
      - llampx 5y ago
        It is hilarious that you confidently assert something completely wrong that could have been researched with a simple google search.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
  - steve_taylor 5y ago
    We have both of those things here.
ceras 5y ago
An example that surprised me: a friend of mine is unable to quit his stressful, unfulfilling high paying job due to alimony from a contentious divorce. Depending on jurisdiction, alimony payment amounts can be based on your earning potential, not your current income. So if you can earn lot you may be stuck in a job you hate.
- sjg007 5y ago
  tldr; Your friend should talk to an attorney. Yes your ex can argue that you could make more but he could take a similar job with the same skill set that is less stressful. Or if he moves, less by cost of living adjustments etc... But he should be able to quit, there's no forced employment. Obviously, the employer is not a party to the contract either that they have to keep him employed. So he would have to file a motion to decrease the alimony support unless things have been locked in by a separate joint agreement: MN calls this a Karon waiver. If the job is too stressful and impacting his mental health then he should present that evidence with justification from medical experts to the judge... That process could be stressful no doubt but should be worth it. Alimony is also not always criminally enforceable like child support is. A judge could hold you in contempt but it's not going to do much to get you to work if there's no motivation to work. Then the judge would have the additional problem of you being in jail and not being able to work or having to explain to your employer or a new employer why you were in jail. The courts really want a win:win here.
- xunn0026 5y ago
  That sounds like the literal definition of indentured servitude.
  - 01100011 5y ago
    The last lawyer I consulted with basically said they can't force my wife to work because that's slavery. I then asked why they can force me to work and he just went silent. Everyone in that industry knows it's bullshit but they're rich, connected, and unwilling to let it change.
  - closeparen 5y ago
forinti 5y ago
Of course you should understand what you are getting into before marriage and prepare also for a possible breakup. But I don't find this "she took my money" to be a reasonable attitude. Both parties have responsabilities in a marriage. Maybe the other party didn't make as much money (or made no money at all), but taking care of the house and kids is work too. It also enables the person with a job to concentrate on their carreer.
- 01100011 5y ago
  This is based on a lot of assumptions. First that there are children. Second, that one of the parties actually put forth effort to raise the children. > "She took my money" You realize gender is irrelevant now, right? My friend is a VP at a medical device manufacturer and had my situation in reverse. It doesn't just affect men.
  - satyrnein 5y ago
    Somehow I doubt your friend would look at these commenters and consider them to be fellow travelers. There does seem to be an undercurrent of hostility to women in some of them.
- freewilly1040 5y ago
  The point of the advice is to come up with a reasonable division of responsibilities that work for your partnership, rather than accepting the default agreement handed to you by the state without even understanding what it is.

msoad 5y ago

Unvested RSU??

xen0 5y ago
Restricted Stock Unit; a form of compensation that a company may provide. Such stock is subject to a vesting period, where you only gain the stock after a period of time.
- msoad 5y ago
  I'm aware but I don't think unvested RSUs are subject to divorce asset splitting. Unvested RSU is like unearned salary. It's not an asset to split. Maybe you mean vested but not released RSUs in pre-IPO companies.
  - llampx 5y ago
    You give family court too much credit.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

62951413 5y ago

"any single folks with the potential to earn" == if you're a man "understand family law" == you can do nothing, don't kid yourself This is an unusually serious topic for this forum. Those of you who are too young to believe it can happen to you or assume the financially raped were exceptionally stupid or unlucky. Do your future self a favor and think twice. The men you hear about were once like you. You're just earlier in the lifecycle. With every generation is's getting worse and not linearly. At the very least * marriage is for only if you're in your 30s and want to have a child within a year * make sure your parents unanimously approve of the woman Also, the older you get the easier it gets to get laid without the paperwork. Marriage is a guaranteed loss for a man.

01100011 5y ago
It's not specifically advice for men. I use gender neutral pronouns for a reason. It applies to high earning women as well. My friend is a VP making good money. Her ex was a mostly out of work machinist with drug problems. She faced the same risks. Your risk is much less when you've made your money before the marriage. You can still be on the hook for alimony, but at least you won't lose half of everything you've ever worked for. In either case, understand the law. Marriage is a legal contract enforced by the state. It, legally speaking, has nothing to do with love, commitment, marital duties, fidelity, etc.
- llampx 5y ago
  Just going by the numbers and the outcomes, your high-earning VP woman is a LOT LOT rarer than the average lovestruck engineer who doesn't look before he leaps. Yes of course both sexes can theoretically face the same thing, but in practice it is very biased.

fphhotchips 5y ago

I'll add to this: you don't necessarily have to get married for this to apply. In most (all?) Australian jurisdictions, living with someone for enough time is enough to establish you as defacto - which for almost all intents and purposes is just like being married.

AussieWog93 5y ago
Also worth noting is that Australia doesn't have alimony, nor do we seem to have the ridiculous child support arrangements that people get into overseas.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- dendriti 5y ago
  Australia absolutely does have laws on the books for alimony, aka spousal maintenance.
  - AussieWog93 5y ago
    Holy shit, we do. Never actually met anyone who had to pay it, though.
    - llampx 5y ago
      It is hilarious that you confidently assert something completely wrong that could have been researched with a simple google search.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
- steve_taylor 5y ago
  We have both of those things here.

ceras 5y ago

An example that surprised me: a friend of mine is unable to quit his stressful, unfulfilling high paying job due to alimony from a contentious divorce. Depending on jurisdiction, alimony payment amounts can be based on your earning potential, not your current income. So if you can earn lot you may be stuck in a job you hate.

sjg007 5y ago
tldr; Your friend should talk to an attorney. Yes your ex can argue that you could make more but he could take a similar job with the same skill set that is less stressful. Or if he moves, less by cost of living adjustments etc... But he should be able to quit, there's no forced employment. Obviously, the employer is not a party to the contract either that they have to keep him employed. So he would have to file a motion to decrease the alimony support unless things have been locked in by a separate joint agreement: MN calls this a Karon waiver. If the job is too stressful and impacting his mental health then he should present that evidence with justification from medical experts to the judge... That process could be stressful no doubt but should be worth it. Alimony is also not always criminally enforceable like child support is. A judge could hold you in contempt but it's not going to do much to get you to work if there's no motivation to work. Then the judge would have the additional problem of you being in jail and not being able to work or having to explain to your employer or a new employer why you were in jail. The courts really want a win:win here.
xunn0026 5y ago
That sounds like the literal definition of indentured servitude.
- 01100011 5y ago
  The last lawyer I consulted with basically said they can't force my wife to work because that's slavery. I then asked why they can force me to work and he just went silent. Everyone in that industry knows it's bullshit but they're rich, connected, and unwilling to let it change.
- closeparen 5y ago

forinti 5y ago

Of course you should understand what you are getting into before marriage and prepare also for a possible breakup. But I don't find this "she took my money" to be a reasonable attitude. Both parties have responsabilities in a marriage. Maybe the other party didn't make as much money (or made no money at all), but taking care of the house and kids is work too. It also enables the person with a job to concentrate on their carreer.

01100011 5y ago
This is based on a lot of assumptions. First that there are children. Second, that one of the parties actually put forth effort to raise the children. > "She took my money" You realize gender is irrelevant now, right? My friend is a VP at a medical device manufacturer and had my situation in reverse. It doesn't just affect men.
- satyrnein 5y ago
  Somehow I doubt your friend would look at these commenters and consider them to be fellow travelers. There does seem to be an undercurrent of hostility to women in some of them.
freewilly1040 5y ago
The point of the advice is to come up with a reasonable division of responsibilities that work for your partnership, rather than accepting the default agreement handed to you by the state without even understanding what it is.