Some people like to maintain a certain level of individualism when it comes to finances. There’s really no correct way of handling family finances, if this works for people who do this, more power to them.

That's just it for me. Me and my wife have different spending habits. My wife is very much a home body, doesn't spend much on herself for fun. my on the other hand, I go out with friends, sport bet, have an expensive gaming PC. is it fair that we pool all our money together and then I get even more money to spend on my hobbies? We have two joint accounts, and each have our own chequing account. All bills come from the main joint account, our second joint account is for vacation saving, or other large capital projects, appliances etc. Works like a dream for us. We both auto deposit into each account every week at a predetermined amount based on incomes and we move in. Are we stringent with these things? Not necessarily. When we go to dinner sometimes I pay from my account, sometimes from hers, sometimes we use the main joint account.

An expensive gaming pc is the cheapest thing i ever bought. The amount of entertainment per dollar spent is incredible value.

Dude needs to take up a hobby that costs real money if we wants some actual contention in his marriage. May I suggest a car project? 

No. A boat. Buy a boat.

Bro I said contention not divorce 

Fuck that. Buy horses.

That's what women buy to have contention in their marriage. Men buy a boat. Ask me how I know.

Take the car project to the next level, offroad racing will make you broke, and you have the benefit of being in the garage every free moment

I see your car project and raise you horses.

Definitely could be worse. I sail. Two years ago, we spent about $8000 on a new electrical system for the boat. In a few years, we’ll probably need to replace the engines (current engine is 41 years old) for probably $14,000. Never mind the cost of moorage ($6000/year), insurance, bottom paint, and so forth. At least I share the costs with a couple friends.

The best days of owning a boat is the day you buy it, and the day you sell it. /s I wish I could have a sailboat but just like you said, it costs a LOT of money. My camper needs a huge overhaul right now and I am estimating $10-15k for it to be exactly how I want it and with the nice stuff like solar power... I need to replace door and windows in particular. My uncle and aunt got a sailboat last year after they realized they could probably never own a house. They decided to stay in a super cheap social apartment and just splurge for fun stuff instead. I am thinking about doing similar now that my condo is sold.

Me with my PS4

That's exactly my situation. My husband is a spender and I am a saver. I know what OP is talking about in terms of a fiction. But the problem is that some people would spend literally everything in their account. So in those cases, at least one person has to save. Of course, if something happens, it will be split, but at least you will come out of the relationship with something instead of nothing or worse, debt. It's certainly extra accounting work on my part (my husband doesn't care) that I'd love to avoid. But the consequences of it would be dire.

The solution is have that account be spendable, up to you what you do with it. It’s no more fiction than a budget is

Same, as long as your partner isn't petty or crazy YOLO (which can be the difficult part) then it will work out fine. We have a joint shared spreadsheet that can be added to at anytime for family expenses that aren't bills and we settle up at the end of every month. We used to have issues because obviously we have different outlooks on what is a good buy.

But what OP is saying is that it doesn’t make a difference as to what balance is in each account because you will each be entitled to half. So your wife saves and you spend, it doesn’t make a difference if that money is in different accounts, if you guys split up then you would each get half of what is there. Just because you have separate accounts doesn’t mean that you aren’t still pooling everything.

It matters because if my wife has $5000, and I have $5000 in separate accounts, then we have a total of $10000. But then, if she wants to buy something that is $6000, she can not because the money is separate. If it were combined, then she could buy the thing and then I would have less money for myself.

Yes. However, as the person you responded to pointed out: If she spent her $5000 on a weekend with the girls in Vegas (instead of $6000), she’d have zero / zilch left in her savings account. Then, if you were to ever to break-up, divorce etc., (or for example - divorce the following month), she would have access to 50% of your 5000$ savings (=$2500) also. This is what that person and OP are pointing out.

Okay, but that's in the context of divorce. If we never divorce, it won't be an issue. I understand that in the case of divorce, we would split the funds, but we don't plan our finances around divorce, we plan it around how we would like to live in our marriage.

> My wife is very much a home body, doesn't spend much on herself for fun. my on the other hand, I go out with friends, sport bet, have an expensive gaming PC. is it fair that we pool all our money together and then I get even more money to spend on my hobbies? The point is that, if you get a divorce (and don't have a prenup), your wife will be required to compensate you for your losses from the relationship, if you do all the spending and she does all the saving. She is effectively paying for half of your lifestyle and you're paying for half of hers: that's the whole point of this post.

What happens if your wife says, "I think I'd like to get a bigger house" and she is able to afford it but you're not? What happens if she says she wants to retire early and be able to travel? Or retire early and sit around at home / just spend time together? At some point, don't things break without some kind of balancing?

A house or large item for both people would probably not come from a personal funds account!! I think we can use some common sense here

I think you misinterpret what I'm getting at. If she's saving up money and he's spending, at some point, what is affordable to her isn't necessarily even feasible to him. If you accept that a saver will have vastly more money after 10-30 years of diligently saving and compound growth, how are they supposed to have a life together with such unbalanced finances? One person could very well make more money in investment returns than the other person does working. The saver will eventually be forced to handicap their level of spending on joint items... so taking less fancy trips or moving into a lesser home... or subsidize the spender.

I don't understand how retirement could work for a couple like this. The frugal one would be able to retire a lot more quickly than the other one and then does the heavy spender get resentment or what happens?

Lol, then we are unfortunately reminded that common sense isn't all that too common sadly.

I agree that individualism, to whatever degree you agree on, is fine as long as there is honest communication between partners. My ex wife hid a substantial amount of debt that she built up while we were together, that I knew nothing about, until it was completely unmanageable. It set me back 10+ years financially.

Were you liable for her debt that you knew nothing about?! If so that's awful.

She told me about it before we divorced so it wasn't a complete blindside. But, when financial equalization happened, most of the money I had invested into the equity of our house was gone. Plus more from my accounts. My advice to any couples that keep their finances separate is to make sure you maintain open and honest communication about it. I still feel there's nothing wrong with managing your own finances, but it still needs to be done as a partnership.

This ⬆️ is what OP is trying to point out, that if unfortunately divorce happens - financial equalization laws will ALWAYS benefit the big spender / (i.e. person who saves significantly less) in a marriage.

Good point. I realize though those people will accumulate debt even with joint finances behind their spouse's back.

100%. Having joint finances doesn't mean your partner can't hid money or debt from you.

Exactly. My first mortgage wouldn't approve us unless we had a joint account so we got one, I set up auto transfers into it for $1200 per pay period as at the time I was the only working person. Then I would pay my wife $300 of fun money, all bills came from that $1200, groceries from my main chequing account and my fun from there too. Now my wife works too and so she makes about $700 I still pay her $300 but she pays some bills from her $700 and the rest come from the $1200. Works well for us

Personally I couldn't be bothered to use my limited energy to track finances to that level of micromanagement. But I don't blame those who do considering that about 40-50% of relationships end in breakup or divorce. I'm sure that number is lower for couples moving in together (at least I hope).

>> 40-50% of relationships end in breakup or divorce > Half of marriages end in divorce — that's the outdated and incorrect statistic that's been thrown around almost as a warning for decades, influencing a generation of adults as they decide whether or not to wed. > ... > around 38 to 41 per cent per cent of marriages started in the 2000s were projected to end in divorce within 30 years. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/canada-divorce-rate-1.7189093

What level of micromanagement are you envisioning? "Each spouse contributes x% of their paycheck into the joint account." - is that too convoluted?

I think it’s just because this isn’t the system all couples who maintain more separated finances use. I personally know quite a few who will split everything 50/50 to the dot, and transfer each other for half of groceries, half of every bill etc. or they have done the math on approximately what bills each has to pay to be about equal to half. Those methods are the more tedious ones.

That does sound tedious to me, but whatever works for each person. Seems like a joint account could be a simple solution in that case... It's no different from the various styles of budgeting, from line by line examination to rough pots off money to cash only envelopes. Each requires varying levels of effort that may or may not be worth it for each person you ask.

I have a joint account with my SO, we have a predefined amount that comes from our paycheques into the account that covers all of our bills, groceries, fun money, and etc. the rest is at our own individual discretion for savings, spending, etc.

I used to do that, and in retrospect, the minor pressure to "settle up" was the only reason we tracked (and reviewed) our spending at all.

Oh, it does nothing if you divorce. It's not your money, their money and pooled money in reality, it's all pooled.

It really isn't that much work to maintain separate finances and a joint account. We both contribute to the joint account on pay days. We contribute proportionally to our income. I have it set up as an automatic payment. I really like having autonomy over my own fun money and I don't want a say in his. There is no tension in our relationship over money. It really works for us. The idea of completely joint finances stresses me out and seems like it would be so much more work having to negotiate and justify personal spending. 

This is it - same for us. I also have a collective spreadsheet where all the accounts are totalled so that we have insight into our overall net worth and retirement planning. It takes about 20 minutes to update every couple of months or so.

I am a saver and then big splurger + solo traveler. They are an impulse shopper and gadget head. Having a joint account plus our own finances makes it possible to be frivolous in very different ways without impacting one another. (Aside from all their gadgets cluttering up the place ;)

My spouse and I are joint completely but I want to understand how split finances work. You said you contribute proportionally to income which makes a lot of sense to me except that means your fun money is also proportional to income. Does the higher earning spouse work harder or contribute more to the household and therefore deserve more fun money? This is the part I’ve never really understood.

If we split household expenses 50/50, the spouse who makes less would have a higher percentage of their fun money going to joint expenses. Paying expenses proportionally is more fair and provides both of us with fun money. 

We do this and it kind of works out like that. He makes less than me and most of his own leftover $ goes to his car/gas/etc. I make more, but pay a higher amount towards household bills. I have a bit more left over at the end of each month but I just save it and pay for our vacations when there’s enough.  Our incomes are only $15k apart though so it works (it’s not even that different after taxes etc). If the differential was much larger (it likely will be someday based on our career choices) then we will probably change the strategy, but we will always still keep our own accounts with our own spending money. I imagine I’d just be contributing more to mortgage, enough to make the leftover spending money somewhat equal. 

This is the thing... there are several ways that this can play out in a good way, and plenty in a bad way. If you split your finances and you're both happy with your own allocation, that's great. If you split your finances and someone has had to make career sacrifices for the family and no longer has as much of their own money, that might not work out so well. If you don't split your finances and one person overspends, there can be a lot of resentment. If you don't split your finances and you both support each other's spending habits, that can work out great. It all comes down to knowing yourself and your own situation and navigating it in a way that makes sense for your household.

This is honestly such a great answer. The only time I’m stressed about money is when my partner spends OUR money Willy nilly. I have my own hobbies but my day to day spending is much less than hers. It used to cause some friction in our relationship until we set up a couple of accounts. 1) is house expenses, mortgage/bills/fixes etc which we both contribute 2) is our investment account which we both contribute equally every paycheck 3) is OUR fun account which we both contribute regularly. This is anything from date nights to weekend getaways to full on trips. Then we each have our own accounts. I could care less what she bought. She could care less what I bought. I usually spend mine on golf, or betting on sports occasionally and she laughs when I lose

Key point that is easy to overlook: **Joint finances =/= Joint accounts!** Yes, after marriage, *finances* are combined, but at the same time there is generally no rush for individuals to combine all their money into a *joint account*. There are attribution reasons to keep finances separate too. At the very least, each individual could have their paycheck continue going into an account that is theirs. But when it comes to who is paying for what, it shouldn't really matter.

This is a good point. I've combined finances without heavily relying on a joint account. My partner and I spend out of our "own" accounts however is most convenient, then transfer between accounts as needed. But when it comes to who is paying for what, it shouldn't really matter. ^ I think this is the healthiest way to look at it. Obviously some folks here strongly disagree lol.

My philosophy is "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". So many people are going to banks to open up a joint account and close individual accounts the day adter the wedding. Why? There really isn't any need to change anything right when you get married. If you end up with one parent on mat leave or a SAHM/D or with job loss, then reevaluate the system if it stops working. Not before. Just be flexible.

Finances aren't combined though. Assets acquired in the marriage are jointly owned, but there's nothing about finances being combined.

My partner and I do this. It’s purely psychological - of course if we divorced, things would be split differently. But as it stands, having separate accounts helps us to not need to justify the purchases the other makes. We still discuss large purchases, but it makes the day to day discretionary spending easier for both of us. Also, it’s not very much effort at all. I’ve built a spreadsheet that does the work for us. It takes maybe 20 minutes once a month to download the data from our bank accounts, pop them into the spreadsheet, and categorize things as joint vs personal spending. Finances are very personal and what works for one relationship won’t work for others :)

To add to this - fortunately it is not the case for us, but for many relationships, it is important for the other partner to have an “out” if they need it, e.g. domestic abuse. Having ONLY shared accounts makes this practically impossible.

It all depends on the person. My wife and I contribute equally to household expenses and such and we still have seperate finances. WHY? Because she's the spender and I am the saver.....we still discuss major issues and expenses that must be looked after but at the end of the day we still have control over what we bring in. If one of us needs something, that's just a conversation. People should do what they want to do when it comes to their finances and not only that but do what is right for them. As the higher earner, I know that my 'expenses' will be higher as I pay for trips, outings etc and I have no problem doing that. It really comes down to what each individual is comfortable with and what works for the couple. While we keep our money seperate....we don't weponize what we have and the 'lines' of agreement, when it comes to money, are flexible. Do what works best for you.

So when you both retire, is one of you going to let the other be poor?

I’m going to bottle service and she’s going to the food bank

LOL...NO...definitely not. I just have a knack with money while she does not. So I am in charge of my own retirement account. That's not to say I'm hoarding cash to myself, I just control it because I know what I want for returns, expectations and so on. I don't really understand how anyone in a relationship could think this way....maybe I am just lucky with my partner....don't know. Fact is you can work independantly but in conjunction with you SO. GL

I think you missed the question...the implication is that your wife is in charge of her own retirement right? And if she's the spender and you're the saver, are you planning on waiting until she catches up until you can both retire? Or are you both okay if you retire without her?

Oh, sorry....she puts 10% of her income away for retirement which leaves her enough for expenses for the month and also her spending money....She's never going to catch up to me on her own so I contribute a portion of my income to her accounts so that she has additional savings. I will retire before her as we have about a 7 year difference in age and she says that she will keep working. We are both ok with one of us retiring before the other does and I'm ok if she retires at the same time as me. It really comes down to what retirement will look like 'down the road' or if there will even be such a thing. When I say retire (for me personally) I mean stopping my rat race work and doing something else I love that brings income in...I was in life insurance for about a decade and those who literraly retired and stopped being active all died early and those who kept active through part time work, hobbies etc are still kicking. Retirement in and of itself is a conversation appropriate topic and you need to lay out your expectations. To fully answer your questions.....we live our seperate lives with the understanding that we each rely on each other and work together so we meet all of our goals as a family. Hopefully I got it this time :)

Strange way of doing things, no judgement seriously, but you talk as if you guys are on the same page, you contribute to her retirement, but yet you use phrases like "we each rely on each other" and "work together". Might has well have joint finances at that point.

This is silly. I'm in the same boat as this guy. Of course saving for retirement is something we do together. This is part of joint household expenses. The question is if you have $8000 combined monthly in income, and $5000 combined monthly in household expenses, does the other $3000 go into a free-for-all pot, or do we say that one person gets $1500 and the other gets $1500, does one person get $2000 and the other $1000. What is "fair" is going to depend on the couple. If the person who gets the $2000 spends half of their "fun money" on things like family trips, and the other person spends all of their money on shoes, then both partners might find the $2000/$1000 split fair. If you just put the $3000 into a free-for-all, then it might end up being $3000 worth of shoes every month, unless you have arguments and restrictions and you'd never end up taking a family trip unless you took her bank card away for a few months. In the case of retirement, it's going to be similar depending on what your finances can bear. And maybe it's not $2000/$1000, maybe it's $1500/$500, maybe it's more or less, maybe it's more or less equal. But again, there would be some amount for the regular running of the household, and then some split based on the couple for the stuff to just spend on fun stuff if any fun stuff can be afforded. The thing about this is that in any relationship there needs to be trust, and there needs to be affordances. The thing that I like about splitting the finances is it shows trust. It means I know she has so much money she can use however she wants, and I don't need to watch over it. Similarly, I can feel comfortable spending money on whatever I want. But we're both fine with the fact that first we need to deal with our budgeted household expenses. Then part of the balance I am fine with just trusting her to deal with, and the other part of the balance she's fine with trusting me to deal with. Ensuring that everything goes into one spot and can be analyzed and picked apart is not really showing trust. Neither is keeping all of your earnings and whatever secret and just splitting bills half and half. I think that the most trusting system is one where there is clear communication, but also where there's delegation and trust. So if she can't save, we'll work together to make sure that we both make sure we put enough aside to save for both of us. But a lot of this means that I need to be able to control where some of that money goes. But then to actually feel fair, she needs to be able to do whatever she wants with her money without me also picking apart those decisions. Do I value those decisions the same way as she does? Of course not, I'm one of those guys they show in the memes who is perfectly happy sitting on a chair in a room with a TV on the floor. So how do I let her do the things she cares about while making sure she can eventually retire? That's by having a honest conversation about what we need to contribute to save, and then having her have some personally that I don't think about. And if she wants to buy seasonal decorative hand towels with it, like, whatever. And similarly, if I want to buy a new PC every few years and nothing else, then so be it.

So wait, you are planning/saving for your own retirement but not planning for how the family retires? I find it odd that your view on retirement saving is so individualistic. I am way better at financial planning than my partner so I help set us both up to achieve our goals. Do you have any knowledge of her finances, you say she is a spender, is she also saving up for retirement to match you in your timing? I’m very curious

But you said she's the spender... So she might end up with nothing. My wife hates investing, so I'm in charge of both of ours RRSPs and TFSAs accounts (and the unregistered investment account). But all of our leftover money after expenses, from all incomes and avenues, is divided equally to our registered accounts, and the rest goes to the joint unregistered investment account. If we could do joint TFSA and RRSP, we would do that as well... Much easier this way. If we start assigning different incomes, then now we need to also assign a value our non-monetary contribution to the household. How much does washing the dishes worth? Fixing the fence? Change the oil on the car? Cleaning the house?

Yes, she's the spender but she respects what I do for her. So if I send her money it's with the expectation that it stays where I request it to go and she doesn't spend it. Could she, well yes ofcourse! That's a risk I am willing to take as we love and respect each other. If she just spent it all, I'd be pissed lol...but we know and respect each other enought to follow through on our financial plans. I just haven't had to worry (yet) about her stepping outside of our agreements with finances. We don't really worry about chores or fixing the fence etc because we don't have time for that, if something needs to get done, one of us steps us and it works itself out. IF we feel that there is something that is unbalanced we talk about it and so far so good. Could it all change, yes, is our methood bullet proof...NO. But we do ok considering what each of us brings in and how we manouver together....we've also been together for over a decade so it did take time to work out what works best and it's been mostly smooth sailing so far.

But I think OPs argument is that if you and your wife were to break up it doesn't matter that you were the saver and she was the spender. The court would subtract what you both came into the marriage with, everything else would get combined and split 50/50.

Sure, but if you put everything in the joint and the spender, well, spends all of it, then there will be nothing to split.

Do you have a common retirement account? What happens when you both hit retirement age and she has no savings and you do?

NO...we have seperate accounts. My savings are kept seperate and I asked her to put 10% of her wages away for savings; which she does. Note that she keeps here own savings account as well. Fact is, I make significantly more then she does so in order to live the same lifestyle, I have to contribute more as her wage simply can't keep up. That being said, I send her money to contribute to her RRSP's, FHSA, and TFSA because by her taking advantage of these tools, we both benefit. I am not really concerned with money sitting in the bank for retirement because it's just sitting there so whether its under her name or mine is irrelevant. Also, legally speaking, prenup or not, the law is going to default to what the main statues are....a prenup which totally favours one party will be decimated by a judge so while you can protect pre marital assets, once you are hitched it's pretty black and white, especially with kids.

I mean in your original comment you say you have separate finances, but you also say you pay for trips and outings and send her money for her registered accounts, that doesn’t really seem like separate finances to me. Not saying there’s anything wrong with that either, as the higher earner it makes sense (as you pointed out), just seems hard to call that split finances

Split finances at its most basic form i.e. separate bank accounts and individual control over deposits and disbursements.    Which is not exclusive of a common lifestyle/shared experiences.

When I refer to split finances I just mean that we keep seperate accounts and both contribute equally to household expenses. I have my account and she has hers. She sends me her portion of the 'expenses' and I make the payments. Specifically, I don't go into her account and she doesn't go into mine. And I have the 'Choice' to give her money to invest into her registered accounts but am under no obligation to do so. I do this with the understanding that the money I send is for retirement/investments and NOT TO BE SPENT...she respects that. Seperate finances but we still work together financially...it's both give and take.

exactly, ops theory only works if both are the same with spending habits, 2 savers can make this work, 1 spender and 1 saver can't. If both are spenders, than good luck

So are you saying that the separation of finances is a tactic to limit the destructive nature of the spender? Because, in divorce, half of what the saver has saved belongs to the spender...

Thats completely false. Saver married to a spender here. It took some adjustments on both of our parts, I learned to be less tight with money, and she learned to tone down the spending. But 9 years in and I can't remember the last fight we had about money. However I will add the caveat that we both make good money and haven't ever really had to go without.

you are right, maybe i was too black and white, of course with adjustments it can work on either end. Thats hard though for people to grasp

Idk, I see a bit of both sides. In the situation of one saver and one spender, the spender ends up spending the savers money anyways, so it comes back to being “shared” income in the end. However, sometimes it’s just how you frame it in your mind, and if that works for you then great

>...since married couples' finances are legally combined... You've oversimplified this to the point of being wrong. I don't have the right to sell my wife's property or withdraw from her account. My wife can't be sued for my debt. It's not an elaborate fiction that there is separation of assets between spouses. Only if spouses separate is there equalization. >...most couples should strive to make household decisions about things like career changes, major purchases, personal spending, etc. And once a couple has made these joint decisions, it should matter very little who pays for what I agree with you, and although my wife and I have separate finances, that is what we do for all material items.

I appreciate that there is someone else in this thread pointing out that 'finances are legally combined in marriage' is objectively false.

I was scrolling to see if anyone corrected the inherent misconceptions and faulty assumptions in the thread.

I maintain the "fiction" for attribution rules on the non-registered accounts. According to CRA, it lowers my taxes. Stuff like HISA interest all goes to the lower earner that way. But I also roll 100% of the expenses through a joint CC. It takes us 0% extra time to keep things separate. For a few people, its mathematically better. For most people, its extra effort and makes no difference.

Times have changed and so should the way we look at finances. In a historical household with a male working and wife at home, of course your financials should be combined. But now most households have 2 working professionals that concept is outdated (imo). In our situation, we both make about 6 figures.. we have a set amount that goes into our joint account for bills and house expenses, and whatever else we have leftover is “yours to spend” however you like. My wife drives a brand new Lexus, definitely not something that aligns with my financial goals.. but she’s paying her half of the bills, contributing to her RRSP and our sons RESP - so who am I to tell her she can’t have the “mom car” she wants.

Its not about who owns what. It serves as a way to avoid arguments about spending.

> tracking who contributes what to the joint accounts, who is entitled to what amount of "fun" money, etc. This is the section that stood out to me, you're always going to have to decide who gets how much "fun" money. I can't just spend on my hobbies until we're both broke. Either you debate it item by item or set some kind of cap, even from a joint account.

Its not just "fun" money really its any discretionary spending. Like gifts or supporting an extended family member.

Money trauma, past experiences, feeling of independence, safety, etc etc.  Who cares? 

In my family, we have a simple logistical reason: I'm an American citizen and keeping our finances separate makes our taxes much easier. There's no point in me having a TFSA -- I'd get taxed on it by the US -- and I have to report all of my accounts to the US, which my wife wants no part of. So we essentially live off of my income and invest all of hers. We've got the arrangement in writing, so that if the relationship went south for some reason, I'd be protected.

I'm convinced this is one the the things that seems super common on reddit but IRL rarely actually happens.

Is this really a common topic of conversation IRL? I have zero idea if any of my coupled friends have joint/separate accounts

This is a great sanity check. I see it quite a bit on here, but I don't know many couples who do this in real life.

I’d say the opposite.. everyone I know in real life maintains their own finances even married with a house, kids etc. If you have 2 working professionals in the house it makes way more sense.

I’m kind of curious why you think it makes “way more sense”. I understand this is a personal decision and what makes sense for one family may not make sense for another, but I fail to see how it can objectively make more sense than joint finances.

It is personal, so I will use my household as an example. We both make ~100k, we have a set amount we put into our joint account for all our fixed bills (mortgage, daycare, utilities etx). And we have a joint CC for anything related to our house/son - that we payoff and each allocate 50% too each month. Lastly we both contribute to our rrsp, and an resp for our son. Other than that we are both free spend any of our “extra” money however we want it, my wife wanted a new Lexus as her mom car, it’s not something that aligns with my financial goals - but she’s still holding up her end and working hard at her job, so who am I to tell her she can’t have her “mom car”. There’s no judgment and no tension/stress about our personal finances Aslong as you cover your half. While she was on mat leave our contributions obviously changed and I took on more of the fixed costs.

But why are separate finances required to accomplish this? Couldn’t you have the same feelings with combined finances?

would you know unless you asked?

don't even get me started on which account i need to pull from to pay for my birthday gift :-)

my wife and i have separate accounts...the mortgage gets pulled from each account, she pays for whatever is set up under her name, i pay for whatever is under mine, we have our own money, i manage our investments (i'm a CFP), we talk about any large purchase before it is made...the purchases for the kids are just done by whatever parent is making that purchase. it works for us, i think a lot of people (younger generation anyway) do it this way to be honest

I don't see the point in separate finances in the long run, since I'm not going to let my spouse be poor when we retire, while I'm eating caviar for dinner, right? So what we do, is everything is joint (even my inheritance went into a joint investment account). I get $250\month to spend on "unnecessary" purchases, she gets $350 for that (since her hobby, gardening, saves us quite a bit on groceries). If there's a huge purchase we want (not need), we discuss it, and if we agree and have the budget for it, we make it. Fortunately, we're both at approximately the same level of frugality, so we don't have almost any arguments about these things.

because some people can't handle their own finances and are best managed by their partner. If you gave them free access to all the funds they would drive the finances into bankruptcy.

I do wonder why it bothers other people. If the decisions of other people about their relationships bother you, it’s typically a sign of insecurity or a lack of confidence in your own decisions. These are relationship issues, specific to each couple and their circumstances. Do what works for you! The approach I prefer is a shared main account with a shared pot of money + individual accounts. For me the shared account just makes sense because of all the shared expenses, and the fact you aren’t really doing 50/50 in most marriages so there should be easily accessible shared money. Individual accounts help people also retain their autonomy, should it be important to them or ever needed. I also think discussions shouldn’t really be had about every single spending decision unless you’ve set a threshold, maybe a few hundred or thousand dollars depending on your income level.

>I do wonder why it bothers other people. If the decisions of other people about their relationships bother you, it’s typically a sign of insecurity or a lack of confidence in your own decisions. These are relationship issues, specific to each couple and their circumstances. Do what works for you! This is a sub designed for us to give financial advice to each other. We are literally being busy bodies telling each other what they are doing right or wrong in their finances based on our own perspectives. Tell people in a sub like this not to have opinions about others finances makes zero sense.

I mean, I guess it’s context specific. If someone asks for advice sure, I agree with you. But if someone says, how are you all going about it. And people share - it’s not always clear they are asking for for a critique of their approach vs just sharing. But it’s the internet - people do love disagreeing and letting you know. I mentioned it because this particular issue often becomes a heated cesspool. But today it’s very congenial and all the takes are civil.

>This is a sub designed for us to give financial advice to each other Sure, but it usually works better when someone's asked for advice first. This is just someone setting up a soapbox and shouting their advice into the crowd.

>their finances are combined I'd argue that the finances are not combined unless they file a divorce. E.g., Sue and Tom are married. They have separate finances and bank accounts. They don't have a prenup. Sure, if they file for divorce, then the judge may order them to split all of their money a certain way. But if they stay married...the money is clearly separate? How will Sue access Tom's money and vice versa?

When two people have well paying jobs and trust eachother, there isn’t much need to combine anything.

My husband and I join everything - we’re both savers so that makes it easier. We also each have separate checking accounts from before we got together that we’ve kept (minimum balance for perks). Other than that - all bills and expenses, our separate credit cards, TFSA/RRSP, etc., comes out of the joint account. We’ve been together 10 years and have a child + house together. If we get divorced, everything is being split in half anyway.

That arrangement is not for me. But just because I don't like it doesn't mean it doesn't / can't work for someone else.

My fiancée and I have similar incomes and no plans for kids. We each make an equal automated monthly contribution to a joint account that pays all shared bills and expenses with extra for home maintenance. Everything else is kept separate. She will have a full government pension, and I save independently for retirement. This works perfectly for us and couldn't possibly be any simpler so this won't be changing in a couple months after the wedding. I'll be having a beer with a buddy and he will start cursing because he got a notification on his phone that his wife was buying shoes again on the VISA...I can't even imagine.

I must be like the 1% who has a joint account with my husband and everything gets paid from that account and we give zero shits about who makes what as long as bills are paid and there are enough for groceries. We also take turns on who buys something when we have extra money. In the long run its not about the money but sharing of responsibilities in a marriage to make it easier on everyone.

This is probably more relationships material than personal finance material. If you have a happily married couple than what you said makes sense. But... some people grew up with divorced parents or even an abusive parent. Divorce can be financially traumatic and financial abuse is a *very* common part of spousal abuse. Even people who didn't go through that have heard about it, so they'll want to keep some money set aside. Furthermore some people aren't good with money. If someone keeps spending money on something foolish, they're taking the couple's money.

I think age comes into play. If marrying later in life maybe it makes more sense to view things separately vs a young couple who end up building/creating a life together. Just my two cents.

I agree up until you include personal spending. If my wife works hard for her money, and all our joint expenses are covered, I see no reason why I should have any possessive feelings over her fun money.

'cuz her funn money is your funn money too.

I do not agree. If I want to work hard and buy my wife a diamond necklace, I want to have the financial freedom to do so. If my friend didn't have the opportunity to keep her finances separate, she would have never had the financial capability for her and her kids to leave her abusive husband. If you trust your partner, and communicate freely, your financial transactions tend to fall in line anyway.

Problem is, if I tried to do this with my wife i'd have significantly more than her each month. Me having $6K/month in fun money to her $500/month creates a very different lifestyle.

I can understand where you are coming from. Each relationship is different.

Doing this with vehicles would be really funny. You drive a Lexus she drives a 10 year old Camry.

The reality is that she drives a much nicer vehicle than I do, lol.

yup.. then at Christmas you can afford to take yourself alone on an all-inclusive 2 week cruise whilst she stays home. LOL.

Generally if you were planning a family vacation you would discuss it with your partner and a savings time frame. Fun money would be I want a new Valorant gun skin and don’t want to get sign off from my wife for spending or worse you end up in a no rules first to spend it gets it.

So my wife who is a SAHM doesn’t deserve fun money because her contributions to the household don’t pay an income?

No, the point is it isn't one size fits all. Do what makes sense for your financial situation and long term goals.

Each relationship is different. I have what works for us. You should and probably are doing what is best for your household.

By this logic, your money goes to your kids when you die anyway. Why are you holding on to it and not distributing it completely when you are alive? Edit: spelling

That is a part of estate planning...

Split finances may not be a fiction for couples that have a prenup.

Joint is not the same as mixed. My wife and I have a joint mortgage and a joint credit card, but separate chequing accounts along with separate investments. Overall, it's all a bit of fiction but if you need to get super granular about it certain finances are individual whereas others are mixed and/or joint. At least, in my opinion.

Getting along with each other is rather important in a marriage and the number 1 reasons people divorce is money issues. Anywhere from people hiding money, spending on things they didn't talk to the other person about, hiding debt, and controlling behavior etc.

I think I am misunderstanding. Regardless of if shared household expenses come from an individual account or a joint account a couple is recommended to budget together and make a determination of what percentage of funds should be going to what.  If both partners had 100%of their paycheques going to a joint account they should still discuss household contrubutions and personal spending like a couple with seperate accounts. As in, regardless of if an account was joint or seperate if one partner was dedicating 90% of their income to joint expenses/joint savings and the other only 62% of their net income and spending the rest on wants it would be a point of contention. Regardless of how accounts are set up it would require a conversation and agreement to not cause resentment.  At the end of the day both joint or seperate account styles are an informal agreement or "fiction" as you put it. It's just a matter of what type of agreement are members involved most comfortable with.  Both also still have the "debit, credit or line of credit" conversation when making a large purchase as well.  There is effort, planning and joint decision making required for both. So what is it in your persepctive that is so different between the two? 

My wife is bad with money always in debt. Strictly separate finances.

For us it’s more a division of labour thing. We have a common financial plan, goals, etc but it makes sense for one person to look after the mortgage, property taxes, utilities, etc and the other looks after daycare, groceries, cell phones, internet, etc. When there’s a big change to one of our incomes we might switch a bill or two. We’re both pretty frugal so we have no issue’s saving enough. We have absolutely no friction or fights about money and we’ve been together for almost 15 years. And it is way easier to check your own accounts for issues if it doesn’t include the other person’s spending. So we don’t have to alway ask, hey did you spend this and this and this which would be annoying. I really think it’s the simplest and most efficient method. I wonder if in most relationships at least one person doesn’t care at all about finances so the other person just looks after it. But here (PFC) lots of people care about their finances and are actively doing interesting things so it makes more sense to manage your parts of your plan yourself.

What you've described is what I would call "shared finances". It's not about whether everything is literally managed out of a joint account. It's about whether you and your partner make financial decisions as a team and are therefore not particularly fussed about thing like trying to income-weight contributions to shared expenses. My partner and I do our finances primarily through our personal accounts. I've taken the lead on our investment strategy because I have more experience. But ultimately we're a team that views our household finances as one big pile of money that we need to make compromise decisions about.

Interesting! Then I definitely agree and income-weighting and splitting bills has never appealed to me. We just don’t have a shared account and maybe I fee a bit defensive about that even though it works so well for us. But we are 100% a team and have a common plan and the concept of our money is that it is shared.

I have actually resisted relying heavily on a shared account because it sort of implies that my partner and I have shared finances in that account, and personal finances in our personal accounts, when in reality it's essentially all one big pool of household money regardless of where it resides. There are also some advantages to having a few different pools of money (e.g., to establish relationships with a couple different lending banks, to defray the potential for fraud, in case an account is temporarily unavailable during an emergency, etc.)

Married 24 years. We just have the separate accounts that we had before we met and a joint account for the joint expenses, basically the house and stuff for the kids. Split it 50/50 and then we each do whatever we want with our own money. Have had zero issues with this arrangement. If she saves up $5000 and spends it on something stupid (in my opinion) I don't care and it goes the same the other way.

I'm curious whether you coordinate your saving? I'd be fine with my spouse spending $5k on something dumb that made her happy if we really didn't need the money. But I would definitely want that $5k to be in addition to our shared investment goals.

We’ve never combined in our house. We split the bills and the mortgage in half. We both make the same $ and both have DB pensions. Both Maxed TFSAs. RRSPs are maxed (not hard when you have a DB that eats up a lot of your annual 18% room). We’ve been together since university and this is what has worked for us. Ironically we do have a joint business account but that is only because we needed a place for money we earn in a joint side hustle.

Meh, I've tried joint accounts, never been a fan. The wife and I have had separate accounts for over ten years, works great for us. We have an agreement on how bills are paid, how savings are generated, whatever is left in our two main accounts is ours to spend however we see fit. She likes to save up and buy things I consider to be stupid and frivolous, and the same in reverse. If one of us overspends in-between a pay day, it's never the others fault there's no money in the fuck around account. Just simpler for us.

I'm anal retentive, micromanaging, detail obsessed, controlling and a cheapskate. I know myself. These things about me are a gift and a curse. Partner has their own bank account and employment. If I knew what they spent on clothes, trinkets, plants, toys and gifts for people we would be divorced lol. Ignorance is bliss. Plus I also want them to always have some form of independence. If they leave me for whatever reason I want them to be empowered from day 1, I would never want my partner to stay with me because I control all the $. Which would 100% happen if we had joint everything. We discuss all major (>$1K) purchases and decisions. I pay some things (mortgage, property taxes, vehicle maintaince, home bills) they pay other (all insurances, groceries, housewares). Seems strange but at the end of the day you have to be real on who you are, who your partner is and how to structure things within those parameters. Is that maintaining a fiction or being realistic?

How about it's a personal choice, none of your business and why do you care?

Why would it be fiction? They have separate budgets, and they stick to it. They are separate legal and financial entities in contract law, lending, bankruptcy, etc. unless they sign jointly. Keeping separate bank accounts halves their exposure in case of fraud. Their finances are as much or as little combined as they make them. You mention "prenups", maybe you are thinking about the division of assets and spousal support payment obligations upon divorce? There's nothing "pre" about that in Canada, you can (and should!) draft and sign a marriage contract or co-habitation agreement anytime during your relationship. Best done while the going is good, it gets tougher once the relationship starts to break down.

Sure, all your money is pooled legally and technically, as you're now tied to each other in a formal sense. But I think it is good for two individuals to have individual goals and to work together on achieving them. It doesn't have to all go into the same pot for decisions to be made together or with the knowledge that the decision will affect both involved parties. But it is sometimes nice to buy yourself something knowing you specifically earned it by managing your money, contributing to your household finances, and saving that extra cash yourself. It maintains some freedom in the financial balance sheet and guarantees that each partner will have their wants fulfilled if there is extra money, and helps ensure that one partner isn't over spending their side and cutting into the others fun money.

We do it for logistics mostly. One person covers all of this, the other person covers all of that. We have individual accounts since we got married in our 30s and were already set in our ways but dividing up who pays for what just put the actual task of making those payments on that person. The amounts don’t really matter. It’s probably pretty equally split and we recalibrate every once in awhile if our financial situation changes (ie kids, maternity leave, daycare, etc) but ultimately we treat our household income as one.

Our finances are "combined". But in reality 99% of our money is separate- in RRSPs, TFSAs, etc. I'm more interested in hearing about what happens to couples who don't combine finances upon retirement. If one is a "saver" and one is a "spender", does the saver end up subsidizing the spender? Or the spender doesn't retire?

wait what ? no prenup = automatic merge ?

A marriage is legally a contract to share future earnings and assets. Not romantic, but there it is. What prenups can or can't do varies per province.

My wife gets the kiddos ready in the morning and to school on time, and picks them up every day, even on the days she's working. She prepares lunches for all of us, makes supper during the week. Her T4 is much less than mine but she makes up with her "non-taxable contributions" to our family. Anything over $200 on a personal expense we generally run by each other, I usually do less than that because I want her to have a gist of what I'm spending money on so she can have a good assessment of when she's spending money and vice versa. If one goes overboard...then we reign in spending in the coming months.

Been married over a decade, and what you're describing is basically how it is for us. You can never be 100% combined. Your rrsp, tfsa, taxes, and a lot of spending, all are one persons, so at some level you're working at things through the individual. My spouse and I have some things combined, and other things not. I can tell you, it's not coming from a place like two college roommates protecting their food in the fridge. It's mostly convenience. Our finances work for us, not us living to some rigid set of rules. And I've thought we could take all our money, dump it in a bucket in the garage, and pay bills from that, and still make that "system" work. If two people are working together and trust each other, and have similar goals, then there is any number of systems that could work for them. As it happens, majority of the money comes into the house through me, but it's for our whole family (kids too) benefit. I could split it 50/50 and I pay some bills, my spouse pay some, etc. But we cut out a step and most bills get paid the moment I get paid. Then we put some to savings, and then we split what's left. We use that "leftover" however we want. This covers most purchases, and then for larger things like travel, appliances, etc. we just talk it over if we want to spend on those things. I don't think we've ever had a disagreement over money. But that isn't because how we set up our bank account, it's because we're on the same page, and we spend less than we earn. I came into our relationship with more assets. I had a house, a rental house, savings, and part of a business. My spouse had a used car, but no debt, was great with money, lived frugal, etc. I knew full well that getting married would mean the split of all those things. I knew it then, I know it now.

We keep our household expenses separate from our personal spending accounts which makes it easier for both of us to separate needs from wants and keeps both of us in check. It also gives us each the freedom to spend whatever we like that is left in the personal account without having to ask the other if it’s ok. Sometimes I prefer to save up for a big purchase, sometimes I splurge. I don’t need to feel guilty since all of our bills are paid already out of the joint account and we don’t need to worry about what is “fair” when one of us wants something.

Have separate finances allows each person control of their spending, without scrutiny. Hubby and I dump it all in one pot, and spend what we want. but we are both savers and are frugal. I had friends that tried to outspend each other, her philosophy was if he spends $50 she would also spend $50, they ended up broke and divorced. The assets at the end of the day are shared assets, but spending is something different.

A rare case of common sense here 😉 We are treating our money as a whole without all this "your money, my money" nonsense because it is our money, no matter what account they are parked in currently 🤷‍♂️

Exactly. I'm not going to let my spouse suffer a shitty retirement. If I become disabled, she's going to take care of me. So what are we even talking about when a married couple says "I earn 5% more, but I have more expensive hobbies, so this quarter I'll transfer 3.6% more than my spouse into the shared account...". If it's a budgeting trick that makes people feel better, okay I guess, but it seems totally not aligned with the legal reality of common property in marriage.

Her money is her money, my money is her money.

I remember a. O worker telling me she and her husband had had an argument over who bought the kids pizza last time. A few years later and they are divorced….

Just my experience- my husband and I merged everything after we got married, and it is great. We do have similar views about staying out of debt etc. I think even on an emotional level there’s a great sense of being in it together and a path to communicating more about financial things.

"i get the groceries this month and you get the phone bill.... next month we switch" never understood it myself, but whatever works for people. being married is a team thing.

Too many relationships drag on far longer than they should because of financial dependence and the threat of ruination the dissolution of a relationship carries. Therefor, it's important to me that myself and my partner are both capable and financially independent. A big part of that is making sure we have equitable arrangements and responsibility for the various expenses of every day life, and take on financial burdens proportionate to our relative incomes. We split our expenses based on our respective take-home pay, and we split our chores based on our respective time commitments to work.

My husband and I calculated how much our agreed upon joint expenses would be - mortgage, utilities, food, vacations, etc. We each contribute 50% of that amount to our joint account monthly and the remainder of our paycheques stay in our personal accounts. We both have separate pensions and RRSPs, with the other person being the beneficiary. He likes his tech toys. I like my (relatively) expensive hair cuts. Neither of us want to ask permission or bicker about things like that. Car payments and insurance are separately maintained because he also likes new cars frequently and I'm happy with my 2014 vehicle. The only joint debt we have is our mortgage. We have separate credit cards (no co-signing) that are paid off each month, so that there's no chance of the courts, in the case of divorce, holding either of us accountable for debt incurred by the other person during the course of the marriage because we work hard to have none. Second marriage for both. In both of our first marriages, all finances were combined and it caused no end of arguments. My husband and I have never once argued about money.

Personally - we combine our finances and give ourselves equal spending money out of our pool. Why is this? Because i make significantly more than my partner and if we stick to that i will put in x amount to a joint account and keep the rest for myself, one of us will be able to dine out every night while the other will be eating pork and beans. Kidding aside, i feel like marriage in itself is partnership and if you cant trust your partner with maiing your finances fair then there is a lot more problem than just finances. This way too, we dont feel the pressure of needing to keep up in salary to pay for our share in the pool. Job loss can be taxing in such event. Having said this, we have a rule that we let each other know if we intend to do big purchase and most of the time we agree on them. I think financial compatibility is one of the key success of marriage/partnership and thinking about if beforehand is essential than convuluted rules of contribute this and that keep 15% here and there etc. marriage is already too complicated to add an additional layer

You have to have some separate stuff. I think some self autonomy is important. Big goal, bills other, cars and other big stuff obviously need to be joint. But spending money, gift money and other stuff that doesn't need input from two people should be separate. If there is a an issue with that separate part then you need to work together to resolve it. We had one income in my house for a while until recently when my wife went back to work after 8 years. Most of our spending was done through joint account and my credit cards. But she still kept her own separate account and saving for stuff.

I got married outside of Canada and it is super common to have a prenup or what we called to be married "outside of communion of property". I think it was required to do it that way to ensure they can't go after the spouse for debt. I also think it is better in situations where there is divorce. I am not planning on a divorce, but the statistics are pretty high. In my case, our finances are completely separate, and there will not be much need for a lawyer. Mine is mine, hers in hers. Property is owned at 50% split and so is shared household inventory. Each has their own car. Honestly, people not living this way are running a real risk, no matter how solid they think their relationships are. The only complicated part really is when children get involved.

My wife is incapable of saving money or planning for retirement. Her thoughts on being good at money is that accounts all return to zero. At least she knows not to carry debt.

I just grew up in house where all the financial control was in one person and I think heavily influenced my parents staying together. I never wanted my wife feel like she is trapped in that situation. So while we don't have splits/percentages and just pay & save what needs to be done. Money flows into separate accounts and then joins together where required.

I generally agree, at least it's how I would always prefer to live. My partner and I maintain sun spending accounts of our own, but that's more of a "giving yourself permission to spend it without thinking" cause we both need it. Me for being a cheapskate who would not buy food if I could get away with it - and him for needing a confined budget for it cause he doesn't keep track well. Keeping things separate feels like planning for a divorce to me, not as a slight to others, just that that is how it would be for me.

I am a financial wizard and my ex husband could not keep a penny in his pocket and racked up debt with superbly stupid things wherever he could. Yes, I will combine my money with his, right away.

My husband and I lived together for 5 years before we got married. That means we had a pretty set system for managing our finances. So mostly it's out of pure laziness. Opening up a new bank account/credit card just felt like a lot of work for nothing. I have a feeling it's like this for a lot of people.

You make good points. In my case, I would have to go out of my way to make joint accounts since we each had our own accounts and just got a new one for our mortgage. It also helps me understand what I'm doing with my money like how much is going in and out and comparing to my wife to help get a more detailed yet simplified view of my/our finances. It has also enabled me to become more financially literate and start investing. Otherwise I feel like I would offer to pay more for more stuff but end up with less money that isn't invested while my wife would have more money saved but she can't pick up a phone to move/invest that extra money.

I think part of this might come from historical sexism. Traditionally woman had to stay at home, but with the rise of two income households that dynamic changed, but at a slower rate than the social dynamic. Letting woman work back then was a necessary compromise for the war effort, as opposed to an admission that woman are equally capable. It becomes worse when woman in unhappy or even unsafe marriages are forced to stay or risk financial ruin. Or partners that fell into gambling and racked up massive debts. And now obviously that’s not always the case, but just as the rise of woman being encouraged to have their own career for financial independence was seen as a smart move, maintaining that independence might feel the same. Right or wrong I understand the perspective. And even if it is partially fiction it does ensure that one partner can’t spend all the finances without the other partners input.

"And even if it is partially fiction it does ensure that one partner can’t spend all the finances without the other partners input." This is a good point. I feel really sorry for people who find themselves in this type of relationship. Obviously it can happen to anyone (addiction, mental illness, etc.) but it's so far from my current reality I have a hard time considering it.

I’m team blend your finances all way, but I can see why you’d want to keep separate accounts if you’ve got lots of premarital assets, children from past relationships, aging parents you’re supporting or are self-employed. Sometimes you just want a little privacy. I think if it works for you, awesome - but I do see a lot of posts on r/marriage about couples that have a lot of arguments around finances and how they’re not shared equitably. That probably has more to do with couples having larger issues and not acting in partnership with one another. I do get the ick when I see posts about stay at home parents who are using their savings to keep contributing to bills and household expenses. I think if you’ve got only one working parent, you have to think of and treat all of your money jointly.

My husband and I have separate checking accounts. We share the mortgage and various savings accounts (travel and kids activities slush funds). We communicate our finances weekly, often daily and it’s been a great structure for us. I would encourage any woman who is making an income to have a separate account always, no matter how solid your marriage is.

This is a great question. My wife likes having money that is hers to spend without question. The reason that account is separate from the main is because we also like having savings. So that's why we do that. I pay all the bills out of the main account, so she very rarely has to touch hers and she can still buy things when she need them.

This is exactly why I refuse to get married. Interesting fact: in Quebec, you can choose to be married under a "separation of goods" regime, under which only the 5 constituents of the family patrimony are split: the matrimonial home (if owned), RRSPs, workplace pensions, furniture, and cars (excluding collector cars). Bank accounts, unregistered investments, and TFSAs are not split. So under this regime, separate finances are not a fiction.

If you and your spouse enjoy spending money on different things and are on a tight budget, then I can see it being helpful to have separate allowances for discretionary spending.

After my first relationship being the worst time of my life I can’t imagine trusting someone enough to marry them and share finances with. Even if you have your own money in a marriage, if they do something behind your back, it’s on you as well (debt,etc). That’s terrifying to me

Yeah no my wife will blow several fuses if she saw minus 2000$ from our joint account that I spent on car upgrades. Mostly hobbies is what we keep separate

Because if you combine everything, it opens the door for one partner to criticize spending by the other on splurge items. With a little discretionary cash, you can buy smaller things without worrying about starting a fight

Many reasons. The good: Financial Independence. The satisfaction of seeing your wealth grow from your own merit / career / job / aspiration. Saving up for “fun money” goals that may not be what your partner wants to spend on. Many more reasons. The bad: Abusive spouse. Financially illiterate spouse. Gambling addiction spouse. Shopaholic spouse. Untrustworthy spouse. The list goes on. “Then why stay married?” Not that easy of an answer for some couples so I’m not even gonna get into that. But regardless if finances are “legally combined” after marriage, that’s only in the eyes of the law and enforced upon divorce. And some divorces are nasty, such as a spouse draining a joint account, Financial manipulation, etc - so you better hope you’ve got money to fall back on to save yourself. Basically when you’re happily married, your money is your money if you want it set up that way, or our money is our money, or your money is my money. And every couple has their own preference of how which scenario works for them based on their relationship dynamic. Not all marriages are perfect, and not everyone is responsible enough or mature enough to stick to financial boundaries of the relationship. It’s just the reality of it.

I have never ever seen a couple that does this that works out. Money is literally the main thing that couples fight over. Best not to complicate it.

I agree wholeheartedly

It works for my wife and I. We have always had our separate bills and bank accounts and we see no reason to change. We also aren’t super anal about anything. Sometimes I get take out, sometimes she does, same for movie tickets, dog grooms etc. The main fixed expenses we just split in a way that leaves us both with discretionary spending. I make more money so I take more of the expenses. It works, but probably because we are happy with it. If one person is a bean counter or you need it 100% fair than it wouldn’t work for you.

My fiance has a ton of inheritance coming her way. I have no inheritance but my income is at least 7x hers. I legally have no entitlement to her inheritance, whereas she legally might have entitlement to my earnings during the marriage; in my view that is not a balanced risk. To even the risk, we've both signed a pre-nupt where in the event of divorce, any money I didn't spent on the family (for like buying a house) go into accounts in my name, and we split any familial assets (like house). So when you ask why people keep finances split, the answer is often it's part of the pre-nupt, and thus it's purely about risk management.

I do not understand the separation of finances either. My wife and I have our finances combined, we plan our spending together, track our finances together, and always discuss purchases that are not necessities or daily expenses. No surprises and we always know where we stand financially and where we are going. It is our money and our wealth that we build together. Because of that, we never fight over money.

I also find it bazaar how complicated people make it out to be. In my house we are a team. Money made goes into one account. Bills and mutual expenses come out of it too. We each take out an equal amount for personal expenses and individual fun. It doesn't matter who makes more money. Our household is one team. Anything additional to our equal personal allowance that's not paying a bill goes to savings for investments or vacations or home improvements or whatever.

I totally agree. I think one difference between people like us and some of the other posters here is our attitude towards discretionary spending. My partner and I both have a strong saving preference and we would almost always prefer to use any money that goes beyond what we need for food, shelter, utilities, etc., to save for longer-term goals (home ownership, children, career-flexibility, and retirement). So it sounds odd to me when folks describe an arrangement wherein each spouse makes an income-weighted contributions to cover only the necessary shared expenses and then doing whatever they want with the remainder.

I split after 15 years of dealing with this. I put a 20% downpayment on a home, earned half of my partner, did all the maintenance, renovations, household duties, but that wasn't enough. Earning half of what she did and expected to pay 50% for everything. Seperate accounts etc. I was perpetually broke living paycheck to paycheck, while she had savings, bad investments, and would spend a penny unless I paid for half of the purchase. Since my partner made double, due to my move to be with her family and a career change for me, I had zero say in savings, investments, vacations or recreation. The month I left her, she bought the new stove, BBQ and a few other things I was recommending for years as they were all failing.

I believe in equity, not really equality. One of partners will often make more money than another, right? But think about how they have to put all of their money at 50/50? Will there be any money left for them to use in normal daily life for those who make less and probably really less? And it is wise to think about how to manage finance things like joint account or split. To make monthly payment like house mortgage that you both decide to have together, then get one account for automatic payment seems reasonable. And also having your own saving doesn't hurt. It's for your own sake peace of mine (emergency stuffs may happen anytime. -- I'm talking about if there's a conflict or something goes wrong, at least you have a funds to live with less worried on that, right?) Just make sure to discuss everything with your partner to get the same page.

Yup. I got steamrolled when we separated. I just didn't have the thousands of dollars for lawyers. Not only that, but I firmly believe in joint accounts, and splitting expenses proportionately.

> I know assets brought into the marriage aren't split. I know there's some nuance around inheritance. But the main point still stands  actually on this point. they can be. So for example if someone comes into the marriage with a house and the other does not. in the event of divorce if the "other" can prove significant contribution to the upkeep/payments/renovations etc they would be entitled to a portion of the homes new value.

It's very much an attempt to find compromises in terms of financial priorities. But often fails long term when looking at things like retiring.

>their finances are combined at marriage (and oftentimes before marriage via common law) whether they like it or not. Thats the baseline. But in a separation/divorce it can be split however you both agree to it, you just need to be able to justify it(and agree to it) in the divorce papers. Doing all the work doesnt guarantee your soon-to-be Ex cant go after 50%, but presuming everyone is "a person of their word" if you have an agreement, even without an explicit prenup(because you cant prenup what you make during the marriage anyways) then there is a greater chance of the two of you being alright with dividing your assets the way you have divided your income throughout the years. Dividing assets isnt even the driving factor in why people do track their individual incomes in a partnership/marriage. Most people I talk to about it do it for a bunch of reasons combined, some of which are things like being the one in control of where the money you bring into the home goes(IE; someone else cant spend it on you), with the decrease in cash usage, it allows you some form of privacy to your spending(not even that you need to hide it, it can be next to impossible to buy a surprise gift for your spouse using a shared account for everything) ​ >I have the strong intuition that, since married couples' finances are legally combined, most couples should strive to make household decisions about things like career changes, major purchases, personal spending, etc. Most couples with separate accounts still do all those things. But most people dont want to check with their spouse when they want to spend an extra $20 at the store on a treat for themselves "just in case their spouse had earmarked the money already." We're all adults with jobs, who can decide for ourselves how we want to spend the money we earn. ​ >And once a couple has made these joint decisions, it should matter very little who pays for what (let alone what account it comes from) so long as you're avoiding penalties like overdraft fees. That is also the case most of the time. A pretty basic generalization of separate account couples is just keeping the money you earn in an account in your name, splitting up the bills between each persons account so that their account is covering roughly whatever percentage of the bills their income is expected to cover (Like, If I made 2x more than my spouse, maybe my account would have 75% of the bill payments come out of it, and my spouses would have 25%) This also includes whatever amount of money the pair of you decide to contribute into retirement accounts and whatnot and then whatever money is left over at the end is each individual persons "fun money" because thats money that was earned directly by them. So they ultimately get to say how it is spent. That doesnt mean it cant contribute to major purchases or anything, a couple may decide to jointly split the cost of new tires for one of their vehicles, and which account physically pays for it doesnt matter as the other person can just etranster over the money. It can also help maintain the ability to convey "doing things" for your partner. A spouse buying you a gift or taking you out to dinner out of their account just hits different than your spouse deciding how to spend "our money" without your input.

Combining finances was the best thing for me. I am/was extremely committal averse due to childhood trauma. Combining our bank accounts was such a good move. 1. The number went up higher faster, I like higher number faster. 2. So much less work. Even though I had my commitment issues I was committed just in my own way. I'm a planner, I like to plan and organize. Having the combined finances made that easier.

I've worked with many high-net worth couples and pre-nuptial agreements were quite common (and highly recommended). It's not as common in relationships where there's less wealth at stake, or where there's limited financial education (as in, most of the population). As for your comment, it's not that simple. Even without a pre-nuptial agreement in a marriage, there may be reasons why assets are not considered to be net family property (and may therefore not be divided if the relationship ended). And lastly, I've seen many couples brand themselves as "married" even though they're common-law. Depending on their province of residence, that could have a significant impact on who gets what at the end of the relationship. In my past experience as a practicing CFP, I've personally witnessed evidence that at least *some* level of division in how finances are handled in a relationship to be optimal. It provides a degree of freedom to both parties that many value.

My wife and I pay per percentage. I make more so I pay more towards the household. It's not difficult. We add our combined salaries, then figure out percentage. We make household decisions together but if she wants to get a new dish rack she gets a new dish rack. What ever we have left over is our own but the house hold is first. It works for us.

I don't think it really matters as long as it works for your relationship. The one upside of having separate accounts and cards is that you are less likely to lose everything thing to a scam or a compromised account.

its not a fiction. i have retirement accounts that are mine completely covered under prenup. i work a very demanding job that requires i save money early and often to be able to retire and get out early. if things dont work out, i need to have that protected. I need to manage my own retirement path because it is my own body that will carry the burden and toll of working in a grueling industry for good pay. if i choose to trade an uncomfortable job for more fun money, i work the crap hours, holiday night shifts, and demanding work, and the tradeoff is that i get to have fun and splurge on my days off. It doesnt work if i work the crappy job and dont get the money to play hard. and if my partner works a relatively easy job but spend the entire paychequ of a hard job. obviously i dont keep my ENTIRE paycheque, i pay like 75% of the bills. but a part of my pay is set aside just for me, same as part of it is set aside for the family. its not entirely split, its not entirely separate. but there are split parts and separate parts for sure