Should couples have joint or separate bank accounts?

[Misterman]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm not even convinced he likes her. He said he'd rather her bang other dudes than spend too much money.

Sure lets just pretend I said that.

It's cool that you don't value money, but it's not that way for everyone. Screwing with finances is a pretty major violation of trust............................just like infidelity. The difference is, a person can stop cheating and that's the end of it. A person can stop screwing with finances and it's not over. You could be digging your way out of a hole for years to come.

[Misterman]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If you DO trust your partner, then not combining/consolidating your finances and accounts is just an unnecessary inefficiency.

It's weird that you struggle to grasp something so simple, while you seem to recognize the reasoning for doing so. Efficiency is the exact reason most people have described for NOT having joint accounts. Some of us would prefer having an extra date night with our wife, or doing something productive, as opposed to dedicating a night to review finances and budget together.

[Buster]

Trust is giving someone every opportunity to screw you, but assuming they won't - and then behaving in a fashion consistent with that.

Setting up safeguards to prevent people from screwing you may be reasonable in your circumstances (congrats on your choice in partner?), but it is by definition a lack of trust.

- - - Updated - - -

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It's weird that you struggle to grasp something so simple, while you seem to recognize the reasoning for doing so. Efficiency is the exact reason most people have described for NOT having joint accounts. Some of us would prefer having an extra date night with our wife, or doing something productive, as opposed to dedicating a night to review finances and budget together.

Managing discretionary spending budgets without a proliferation of bank accounts isn't the most difficult of tasks.

[firebane]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not combining finances is absolutely a sign of a lack of trust. In fact, that's the reason cited in this thread by the people who separate their finances (I think universally so). They lack trust in a) long term prospects of potential divorce b) potential for long-term mental health stability c) lack of ability to communicate and establish spending priorities within the relationship d) some other trust issues I've missed.

If you DO trust your partner, then not combining/consolidating your finances and accounts is just an unnecessary inefficiency.

This thread makes me realize that it is a real luxury that I trust my wife or that she is not incompetent or that she is not a deadbeat/goldigger.

Good god.. Seriously?

So your saying to be in a healthy relationship to ensure 100% trust and that you are 100% committed to your partner you need to combine finances? That is absolutely asinine and hilarious all at the same time.

Trust has nothing to do with how one combines their money or how they use there money. If your looking at money as a way to measure trust in a relationship how healthy is YOUR relationship in all honesty.

[Misterman]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Trust is giving someone every opportunity to screw you, but assuming they won't - and then behaving in a fashion consistent with that.

Setting up safeguards to prevent people from screwing you may be reasonable in your circumstances (congrats on your choice in partner?), but it is by definition a lack of trust.

Ahhh, so that's how it all works. If being efficient with money management has a side effect of a safe guard in place, I should virtue signal by giving up the efficiency to remove the safe guard and convince myself I trust my spouse more than I already do. You should be a marriage counsellor, you have so much wisdom in this area.

Ironically, some of the same people mentioning trust, are the same people mentioning prenups. But that's none of my business..................

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Managing discretionary spending budgets without a proliferation of bank accounts isn't the most difficult of tasks.

And if that's how you feel based on your skills in money management and your specific unique situation. Then good for you, nobody is saying that is incorrect. But it is mighty ignorant to assume that is the easiest for everyone to do it. And it is downright deplorable to suggest that the only reason not to do it your specific way is due to trust issues.

[A790]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Ironically, some of the same people mentioning trust, are the same people mentioning prenups. But that's none of my business..................

Prenups are a good idea if you enter into a marriage with considerably more assets than your partner. Given that divorces are both a reality and relatively common (as you have indicated), protecting what you bring in to a marriage makes sense.

Moreover, in my case specifically, a separation agreement is in place to guarantee a quick and no bullshit divorce should it come to that. It protects both of us from making dumbass decisions should we separate. As Buster mentioned, why pay lawyers to whittle away the wealth we have accrued? Again, in my case specifically, our matrimonial assets are separated 50/50 in the event of a divorce. We have both signed this agreement. There is no bullshit tied to it.

Neither of these contradicts the arguments made for combined finances. I'm sure you can appreciate that.

[Tik-Tok]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Good god.. Seriously?

So your saying to be in a healthy relationship to ensure 100% trust and that you are 100% committed to your partner you need to combine finances? That is absolutely asinine and hilarious all at the same time.

Trust has nothing to do with how one combines their money or how they use there money. If your looking at money as a way to measure trust in a relationship how healthy is YOUR relationship in all honesty.

He's right in one way, in that there is a financial trust issue if you don't have combined finances. However just because there is a financial trust issue, doesn't mean the marriage is going to end in divorce, someone going crazy, etc. etc. That's just asinine. I trust my wife implicitly in all other manners, just not with money. She spends it frivolously, hence the 3-account method for us. It's not even "inefficient", as it isn't as if we pay for any of the accounts.

[Buster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Good god.. Seriously?

So your saying to be in a healthy relationship to ensure 100% trust and that you are 100% committed to your partner you need to combine finances? That is absolutely asinine and hilarious all at the same time.

Trust has nothing to do with how one combines their money or how they use there money. If your looking at money as a way to measure trust in a relationship how healthy is YOUR relationship in all honesty.

Every reason people have provided in this thread for keeping separate finances can be identified as some version of a trust issue. I'm not the one saying it. I'm making no claim on the value of peoples' relationships. Although it seems like in a relationship more trust is a positive indicator and less trust is a negative indicator. But I don't judge.

[lasimmon]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

He's right in one way, in that there is a financial trust issue if you don't have combined finances. However just because there is a financial trust issue, doesn't mean the marriage is going to end in divorce, someone going crazy, etc. etc. That's just asinine. I trust my wife implicitly in all other manners, just not with money. She spends it frivolously, hence the 3-account method for us. It's not even "inefficient", as it isn't as if we pay for any of the accounts.

Except this isn't true.

[firebane]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Every reason people have provided in this thread for keeping separate finances can be identified as some version of a trust issue. I'm not the one saying it. I'm making no claim on the value of peoples' relationships. Although it seems like in a relationship more trust is a positive indicator and less trust is a negative indicator. But I don't judge.

I have separate bank accounts with my girlfriend and it has absolutely zero reason to do with trust. It simply has to do with simplicity and ease of use.

Why do something that isn't necessary just to conform to a standard?

If combined/joint accounts work for you then great! But for my relationship this isn't the case.

[you&me]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

He's right in one way, in that there is a financial trust issue if you don't have combined finances. However just because there is a financial trust issue, doesn't mean the marriage is going to end in divorce, someone going crazy, etc. etc. That's just asinine. I trust my wife implicitly in all other manners, just not with money. She spends it frivolously, hence the 3-account method for us. It's not even "inefficient", as it isn't as if we pay for any of the accounts.

That's fine and understandable. In your situation, it seems as though the 3 account method works... But that's due to a lack of trust that she won't spend shared money frivolously.

So, regardless of how anyone feels about their own relationship, it seems that trust, in one manner or another, at some level, is the major factor when deciding to separate expenses... No?

[JustinL]

One other big reason to have separate accounts is if one of the spouses is a U.S. Citizen. Any account that a U.S. citizen has signing authority over (personal or corporate) becomes subject to annual IRS reporting and the associated penalties for failing to do that.

[Misterman]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Prenups are a good idea if you enter into a marriage with considerably more assets than your partner. Given that divorces are both a reality and relatively common (as you have indicated), protecting what you bring in to a marriage makes sense.

Moreover, in my case specifically, a separation agreement is in place to guarantee a quick and no bullshit divorce should it come to that. It protects both of us from making dumbass decisions should we separate. As Buster mentioned, why pay lawyers to whittle away the wealth we have accrued? Again, in my case specifically, our matrimonial assets are separated 50/50 in the event of a divorce. We have both signed this agreement. There is no bullshit tied to it.

I 100% agree. Despite the fact I don't have a contract in place like this myself, I wouldn't ever make a judgement into someone elses personal affairs based on my own way of doing things. Marriage is not a cookie cutter model.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Neither of these contradicts the arguments made for combined finances. I'm sure you can appreciate that.

No I cannot appreciate that, as Busters ignorant comments completely contradict this.

[rx7boi]

Buster's reasons seem pretty reasonable to me. Don't take it as a dig; there's truth in that many people have misgivings about combining finances that are easily disguised by convenience or efficiency and don't want to acknowledge it.

It might sound pretty hypocritical coming from a guy like me who just said he uses a 3-account system, but part of the reason my wife and I haven't made the switch yet is that she's still slowly working towards the idea. I'm looking forward to it and I'm sure it will be an adjustment so props to those who are making things work regardless if it's combined or not.

[masoncgy]

No. Never. I'm far too much of a control freak with money and my wife is a spender. She doesn't need to know what I have tucked away and all of the possibilities she could offer up on what we should do with it... just as I don't need to know what she spends her money on after the bills are all paid.

Life is just easier that way.

[Buster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I have separate bank accounts with my girlfriend and it has absolutely zero reason to do with trust. It simply has to do with simplicity and ease of use.

Why do something that isn't necessary just to conform to a standard?

If combined/joint accounts work for you then great! But for my relationship this isn't the case.

I'm not sure what GF means...so it's a bit tricky to make assumptions.

But I will assume for a moment, that GF means you aren't married and haven't started to combine assets and liabilities to a degree that a long term marriage-type relationship can.

Setting aside @A790 s valid comments on the legality of common law relationships, as you go farther down the hole (so to speak), and it becomes managing common retirement/investment goals, tax issues, home expenses, child expenses, etc, then the inconvenience and inefficiency of managing a 3 -account system becomes more cumbersome. Not that bad, I assume, but still unnecessary.

[Misterman]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

He's right in one way, in that there is a financial trust issue if you don't have combined finances. However just because there is a financial trust issue, doesn't mean the marriage is going to end in divorce, someone going crazy, etc. etc. That's just asinine. I trust my wife implicitly in all other manners, just not with money. She spends it frivolously, hence the 3-account method for us. It's not even "inefficient", as it isn't as if we pay for any of the accounts.

It's all your perspective I suppose. In this case it seems more like a recognizance of a weakness that you have put controls in place for to save her from herself, than a trust issue. Trust issue to me is like "Hey honey, remember I said not to spend the mortgage payment, where is it?" Her-"Oops, I blew it all at the casino" Great, now you gotta choke a bitch.

My spouse will overspend as well because she just doesn't do the math to realize that all the small things add up to a big number at the end of the month. I'm not a tyrant, so I don't want to combine finances and have to put her on a hard budget. That is just unnecessary stress and way more work on micromanaging budget than I need in my life. I can't imagine having to check my bank balance daily to confirm budgets being on track. With separate accounts I just always know off the top of my head where things are at.

[you&me]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Buster's reasons seem pretty reasonable to me. Don't take it as a dig; there's truth in that many people have misgivings about combining finances that are easily disguised by convenience or efficiency and don't want to acknowledge it.

It might sound pretty hypocritical coming from a guy like me who just said he uses a 3-account system, but part of the reason my wife and I haven't made the switch yet is that she's still slowly working towards the idea. I'm looking forward to it and I'm sure it will be an adjustment so props to those who are making things work regardless if it's combined or not.

That seems like a healthy view.

It's important to remember that everyone's marital situation is completely different.

In my case, my wife has never worked and always stayed at home with the kids, while I've been the sole bread winner (damn you double income earners! )... Personally, I can't imagine any other situation where we didn't share an account; to do so would essentially require me to give my wife an allowance. There are a whole host of reasons I wouldn't want to / don't do this :

- Something like an allowance or "paying" her to be a stay-at-home mom just seems strange to me; that seems more like a professional relationship than a marriage.
- I trust her not to screw anything up.
- We are aligned in our financial goals.
- We share a similar level of taste. i.e. I'm not shopping at Mark's while she shops at Holt, etc. so we both spend equitably, even if we don't really track it.
- I feel we contribute equally to the relationship and our family. There's more to consider than simply dollars and cents, so while I contribute those, she takes a similarly out-sized role in taking care of the kids and our house (that shit is HARD!)
- We (or at least I) have some strange, preconceived romantic notion of operating as a "team". My parents were divorced when I was young-ish, so I'm not sure where it comes from, or maybe I just think this is a way to avoid a similar fate. In any case, I really can't picture it working any other way.

YMMV.

[firebane]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm not sure what GF means...so it's a bit tricky to make assumptions.

But I will assume for a moment, that GF means you aren't married and haven't started to combine assets and liabilities to a degree that a long term marriage-type relationship can.

Setting aside @A790 s valid comments on the legality of common law relationships, as you go farther down the hole (so to speak), and it becomes managing common retirement/investment goals, tax issues, home expenses, child expenses, etc, then the inconvenience and inefficiency of managing a 3 -account system becomes more cumbersome. Not that bad, I assume, but still unnecessary.

Neither one of us have any real assets or liabilities and share common goals that we pursue together.

Again it just sounds like people saying that you need to conform to a specific set of rules or thoughts and if you don't then your being dumb or an idiot. Same premise as that to be married means you need to have kids, or that to be in a healthy relationship you need to be married.

Etc.

[rx7boi]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Neither one of us have any real assets or liabilities and share common goals that we pursue together.

Again it just sounds like people saying that you need to conform to a specific set of rules or thoughts and if you don't then your being dumb or an idiot. Same premise as that to be married means you need to have kids, or that to be in a healthy relationship you need to be married.

Etc.

No, I think the incongruency comes from the fact that Buster is a family man who's been married for years and you just have a girlfriend. Different life and different perspective in that your relationship isn't even legitimized so there is no "real" investment. You're set up to walk away whereas getting married is meant to be a commitment that both of you ought not to walk away from a vow.

We're a bit beyond that but Buster has always prefaced his thoughts with children being in the picture.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I've always been fascinated by the logic whereby ramming your nethers together to make a baby is fine.

But combining accounts? Woaaah...step to far.

He's telling it from a perspective of two people who have opted to get married and build a meaningful life-long relationship together. To get the most out of it, having shared values and goals, combining finances to reflect that is one of the most optimal ways to achieve said goals.

Let's not all forget that everyone posting in this thread comes from different walks of life or simply want something different out of a relationship.

Waiting for max_boost to come back from hiatus so he can share some of his stories