Will you consider getting married with a prenup?

[xmanz3]

I have been married 3 times and I'm currently in a new relationship with a very nice lady and she has her own business and assets + 0 debt.

I'm not too incline about getting married, but if I decide to make that decision down the road it will have to be with a prenup agreement. For those of you that have been through this situation before, are prenups good enough to keep all of my assets safe in case of some major "disaster"?

[Brat]

With your track record, unless you are a widower, I don't think it is a good idea for HER.

[teejayevans]

Unless you plan to have kids, then no.

Editorial comment: 3 times!!! I question your sanity.

[samm]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brat With your track record, unless you are a widower, I don't think it is a good idea for HER.

LOL!

[aja8888]

*subscribed*!

[Ready]

Has she been married before? Is she looking to get married? If you are not planning on having kids and you want to keep your assets separate, there may not be enough benefits to justify taking the risk of a fourth marriage not working out.

[street]

I sure wouldn't get married.

I had a friend his name was Henry. He was married 8 times when I knew him well. I always called him Henry the VIII even thou the real Henry the VIII, had only 6 different wives. He was so high on life when he found a new love. I'm not sure I could have lead his life style but he was always happy in life.

[Amethyst]

I know a gentleman who cautioned his beloved that two of his three previous wives had died - but she married him anyway, and they seem quite content (she's healthy - for now, anyway, bwah hah!).

I don't know if they have prenups, though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by teejayevans Unless you plan to have kids, then no. Editorial comment: 3 times!!! I question your sanity.

[Stormy Kromer]

Never.


I should say....I would never get married again. No need for a prenup.

[Chuckanut]

Quote:

Originally Posted by street I sure wouldn't get married. I had a friend his name was Henry. He was married 8 times when I knew him well. I always called him Henry the VIII even thou the real Henry the VIII, had only 6 different wives. He was so high on life when he found a new love. I'm not sure I could have lead his life style but he was always happy in life.

I’m amazed at wives number four through eight. What were they thinking?

[street]

^ Yeah! I always though the same thing. He was no freeloader either was a good hard working great person. They kept marrying him. Lol

[socca]

Two prenup cases within my family:

Case #1: a frugal but poor relative married a wealthy guy. My relative described negotiating and signing the prenup as being extremely unpleasant. She was treated like a gold-digger by her fiance's lawyers (yes, plural). Her fiance showed her his investments while they were dating. I remember how excited she was by his wealth, so his lawyers may have had a point. A certain kind of honey attracts a certain kind of bear .

Case #2: a wealthy relative married a relatively poor guy. I was actually seated at the table for that prenup signing event. For years the guy had lingering resentment over being "forced" to sign a prenup. His argument: "If you really love me, you would trust me to dispose of your assets as you desire after your death." Ouch! How do you respond to "If you really love me ... " type arguments?

To me, the whole prenup situation is rather strange: you agree to get married under the laws of a certain state and then try to replace a certain portion of those laws with your own directives. Why get married in the first place? Well, like paying off a mortgage the decision to get married might be both an emotional issue and financial issue. The emotions say "yes!" and the finances say "no!". Who do you listen to?

As to whether prenups actually work, google might be your friend. There are plenty of anecdotal stories around of prenups failing to do the job.

[W2R]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stormy Kromer Never. I should say....I would never get married again. No need for a prenup.

+1

Frank and I met back in 2000 on an internet dating site. I told him on our first date that I wanted a relationship with no limits on emotional commitment but no marriage, no living together, and no mixing of money or financial assets.

Having heard many horror stories about gold diggers, he thought that was a great idea. We both feel like we are too old to start over again from scratch.

We are simply NOT interested in government enforcement of any financial agreements. We just want to be with each other.

A very top notch attorney once told me that all preconceptions aside, there is no such thing as a completely bullet-proof prenup if confronted by a good enough legal team. I tend to believe him, but either way it's irrelevant to me since I have no desire to marry again.

[harllee]

After my father died my mother (in her 60s) married a very nice man (in his 70s). Both had their own assets and wanted to keep them separate so they mutually agreed to do a prenup. Worked great for them.

[Souschef]

I was widowed and remarried. We keep all our stuff separate, so there is no problem. Even in a community property state, if the assets are not commingled, there should not be a problem.

[Amethyst]

I've always felt your approach was a wise one.

For one thing, it puts off any swains who are thinking wistfully of having someone around again to make sandwiches, ensure the toilets get cleaned regularly, and remember his grandchildren's birthdays.

Quote:

Originally Posted by W2R +1 Frank and I met back in 2000 on an internet dating site. I told him on our first date that I wanted a relationship with no limits on emotional commitment but no marriage, no living together, and no mixing of money or financial assets. n.

[harllee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Souschef I was widowed and remarried. We keep all our stuff separate, so there is no problem. Even in a community property state, if the assets are not commingled, there should not be a problem.

There could be a problem at death. In many states if there is no prenup a surviving spouse has the right to a certain percentage of the estate of the first spouse to die. This right to inherit can be waived by a prenup so that each spouse can give his or her assets to his or her children at death.

[Chuckanut]

Quote:

Originally Posted by socca His argument: "If you really love me, you would trust me to dispose of your assets as you desire after your death." Ouch! How do you respond to "If you really love me ... " type arguments?

The above argument is pure nonsense.

Trust based upon love does not mean that you trust a person to go very near the flames of temptation, but somehow not get burned by them. Trust means you trust that person to walk away from the flames before he/she can feel the heat or see much of the light.

[Scratchy]

I don't have an opinion on whether you should get married, but I do know there are significant potential financial benefits to being married as opposed to simply living with a person. These may or may not apply to your situation. Some of them include:

Spouses are eligible for social security spousal benefits while alive and survivor benefits upon the death of one spouse. These are most relevant if one spouse has a significantly higher SS benefit than the other.

A 401k or IRA has better RMD options when left to a spouse as opposed to a non-spouse.

If you live in a community property state, if you elect to make some of your assets community property, a surviving spouse gets a full step up for the community property. So, if John and Mary each have $100,000 in non retirement assets each of which has a $50,000 basis and they combine their accounts and declare them community property, then upon the death of either, the survivor has $200,000 with a basis of $200,000. Better than $200,000 with a basis of $150,000 which would be the case if they did not get married and left the account to the survivor.

In California, a spouse may inherit a residence's property tax basis from a spouse. This could be a very valuable benefit due to Proposition 13, if one spouse has held a property for a long time.

Many other potential benefits related to employment and insurance.

Sorry but I would like to go on a little rant: I often hear or read derogatory comments directed toward couples that opt for a prenup. When I married my spouse, we had a prenup executed. We got married fairly late in life and will not have children. We each have our own assets that we would like to see go to our own relatives when we are both deceased. With the advice and help of a few attorneys, we put a plan in place to do this by executing a prenup wherein we keep separate property (including our retirement accounts). Our estate plans are coordinated with our prenup such that a surviving spouse can use the assets of the first deceased spouse. Upon the death of the surviving spouse, the unused assets of each spouse pass to each spouse's designated beneficiaries. My point in saying all this is that for us a prenup was crucial to assuring our wishes have the best chance of being executed. Anyone who tells me prenups are useless or taint a marriage is in my opinion displaying ignorance and intolerance. There are many other reasons couples elect to have prenups and my opinion is that as long as a couple is in agreement on the terms without coercion, no one is qualified to pass judgment on their choices.

Regarding the enforceability of a prenup, we were told by several family and estate attorneys that in California it is very difficult to successfully contest a well executed prenup. In California, the standard for throwing out a prenup is that it be "unconscionable", or not have met some statutory requirement such as each side having their own counsel et. al. Now, if one of the parties is a billionaire, or one of the parties is being left with meager resources, the calculus will be different. But if a couple has a prenup executed properly with reasonable terms, it is very unlikely to be contested at all, let alone contested successfully.

Anyway, to the OP, be aware there are some financial benefits only marriage can confer. A properly executed prenup is a legal option to substitute mutually agreed upon divorce terms over the default in your state and no one should feel their marriage is any less if this is elected. Finally, best wishes to both of you whatever you decide!

[Amethyst]

Let us not forget the lower income tax rate for "married filing jointly" as opposed to "single." Although that may be more relevant to a widow/widower who receives a survivor benefit, than to a couple who choose to remain unmarried.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scratchy I don't have an opinion on whether you should get married, but I do know for a fact that there are significant potential financial benefits to being married as opposed to simply living with a person. These may or may not apply to your situation. Some of them include: !