Explain to me the financial risk of SAH if partner is a high earner

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP. My sister didn’t quit working, despite her desire to and her husbands desire for her to, until they could put 5M explicitly in her name (they have over 10 M in assets). That seems low risk to me.

If the working parent is making 2M and you have 6M in assets (all earned during the marriage, so half or close to half would go to SAHP) I don’t see the risk.

That dude is a sucker! And she is obviously a selfish gold digger. OP, there isn't really much of a risk for the SAH parent because the high earner is making a boatload of money. I can see how it could be risky when you are talking about middle class incomes, but in that situation it becomes risky for both partners.

[Anonymous]

A colleague at my former law firm left his SAH wife for a client several years ago. They had three young kids and lived in Virginia. He told me he was required for as long as he stayed in big law to pay her no less than $500k a year in child support and alimony until the kids were 18.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:State mandated levels of child support are very low compared to what it really takes to raise a child. Think bare minimum in terms of food, housing, etc. Also, divorced parent is not legally obligated to pay for tutors, out of network medical care, private school or college nor, in many states, any child support beyond age 18. (Although DC mandates child support until age 21).

Anyone who earns a decent income and pays child support knows this is BS. And if your income is approaching 1 million, you are getting hosed in most states. We are talking big bucks. I'm not sure how you could possibly spend that much raising kids unless you blew it on designer clothes or private schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A colleague at my former law firm left his SAH wife for a client several years ago. They had three young kids and lived in Virginia. He told me he was required for as long as he stayed in big law to pay her no less than $500k a year in child support and alimony until the kids were 18.

I've known cases in which the high-earning man quit his job so he didn't have to fork over the money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A colleague at my former law firm left his SAH wife for a client several years ago. They had three young kids and lived in Virginia. He told me he was required for as long as he stayed in big law to pay her no less than $500k a year in child support and alimony until the kids were 18.

I believe it. I have a friend who has a kid with a well known musician. They never got married. He makes several million a year just on royalties. She hasn't worked in the last 10 years and has a lifestyle that is approaching UMC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The way I've seen this play out is that the high earner spouse limits the funds that the lower earning spouse has access to during the divorce, then they hire a shark and slow the process down, so it could take years for c/s and alimony to be decided and during that time the low-earner is also racking up high legal bills. Additionally, I know a number of cases where the high earner threatened to pursue full custody with their endless resources and got the low-earner to settle for less in exchange for 50/50.

Person with divorce attorney friend here. This is exactly right, and unfortunately common.

The thing is, anyone who has the competitive drive to earn millions of years also is more likely to see divorce as a zero sum game battle. And they will fight hard.

[Anonymous]

OP, is your job hindering your family? Are you unable to travel and vacation the way you want bc you only get X amount of leave, etc? Do you have, or want to have, multiple houses and your job is in the way? I think these are good reasons to quit.

You might just lowkey dislike your job. Consider looking around for a job that captures your interest better.

Re the threats of poverty, its just not likely. Even if you get a fully paid for house and 60k/year- with him covering tuition, healthcare etc, you will have a cushy life. I know a divorcee with that arrangement, spends her says days on the ski slopes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:State mandated levels of child support are very low compared to what it really takes to raise a child. Think bare minimum in terms of food, housing, etc. Also, divorced parent is not legally obligated to pay for tutors, out of network medical care, private school or college nor, in many states, any child support beyond age 18. (Although DC mandates child support until age 21).

Anyone who earns a decent income and pays child support knows this is BS. And if your income is approaching 1 million, you are getting hosed in most states. We are talking big bucks. I'm not sure how you could possibly spend that much raising kids unless you blew it on designer clothes or private schools.

Well like a typical family in this tax bracket we do send our kids to private schools? What a weird comment. That said given real estate trends in this area it would cost $$$$ for an ex wife to maintain a household in the previous school district as a single mom. So no, it makes perfect sense that a high income father needs to pay major child support or risk his kids having a very different quality of life post divorce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A colleague at my former law firm left his SAH wife for a client several years ago. They had three young kids and lived in Virginia. He told me he was required for as long as he stayed in big law to pay her no less than $500k a year in child support and alimony until the kids were 18.

I've known cases in which the high-earning man quit his job so he didn't have to fork over the money.

Yup that’s why NW matters much more than income. And it’s not even necessarily just spite. Sometimes the guy just cracks up.

[Anonymous]

Buy a lot of RE on your joint names. don’t keep money on brokerages or 401k. It’s all easily dissipated during divorce. My exH was liquidating and moving cash to offshores at a speed of $150k/month and cashed his pension unilaterally. My divorce attorney advised there was nothing I could do to freeze the accounts. Real estate stayed and I got half of it. Total NW 15mm got $4mm in RE settlement I work

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, is your job hindering your family? Are you unable to travel and vacation the way you want bc you only get X amount of leave, etc? Do you have, or want to have, multiple houses and your job is in the way? I think these are good reasons to quit.

You might just lowkey dislike your job. Consider looking around for a job that captures your interest better.

Re the threats of poverty, its just not likely. Even if you get a fully paid for house and 60k/year- with him covering tuition, healthcare etc, you will have a cushy life. I know a divorcee with that arrangement, spends her says days on the ski slopes.

Spending her days on the ski slopes doesn’t mean she has sufficient funds for life. There are so many elderly former SAHMs in borderline poverty and I am not talking ones who started MC or LMC. Many people just spend what comes in and don’t plan for being elderly. It is so commonplace.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Buy a lot of RE on your joint names. don’t keep money on brokerages or 401k. It’s all easily dissipated during divorce. My exH was liquidating and moving cash to offshores at a speed of $150k/month and cashed his pension unilaterally. My divorce attorney advised there was nothing I could do to freeze the accounts. Real estate stayed and I got half of it. Total NW 15mm got $4mm in RE settlement I work

Yes, this is so common. Cash disappears extremely quickly in divorce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:State mandated levels of child support are very low compared to what it really takes to raise a child. Think bare minimum in terms of food, housing, etc. Also, divorced parent is not legally obligated to pay for tutors, out of network medical care, private school or college nor, in many states, any child support beyond age 18. (Although DC mandates child support until age 21).

Anyone who earns a decent income and pays child support knows this is BS. And if your income is approaching 1 million, you are getting hosed in most states. We are talking big bucks. I'm not sure how you could possibly spend that much raising kids unless you blew it on designer clothes or private schools.

Well like a typical family in this tax bracket we do send our kids to private schools? What a weird comment. That said given real estate trends in this area it would cost $$$$ for an ex wife to maintain a household in the previous school district as a single mom. So no, it makes perfect sense that a high income father needs to pay major child support or risk his kids having a very different quality of life post divorce.

Nobody is entitled to go to private schools, they are unnecessary. You are also not entitled to the same lifestyle when you get divorced. This is an old school way of thinking. How long do you expect someone to support your lifestyle that you think you deserve? You should focus more on being independent instead of mooching off of someone.

[Anonymous]

Op, if you decide to do this, at minimum you should put in 7K for ROTH per year plus whatever the match amount 401k you would have been getting through work under your name! Basically pay yourself first and continue to save for retirement as you would have been if you were to continue to work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. My sister didn’t quit working, despite her desire to and her husbands desire for her to, until they could put 5M explicitly in her name (they have over 10 M in assets). That seems low risk to me.

If the working parent is making 2M and you have 6M in assets (all earned during the marriage, so half or close to half would go to SAHP) I don’t see the risk.

That dude is a sucker! And she is obviously a selfish gold digger. OP, there isn't really much of a risk for the SAH parent because the high earner is making a boatload of money. I can see how it could be risky when you are talking about middle class incomes, but in that situation it becomes risky for both partners.

He may not be that much of a sucker as you think. Depending on the state and what exactly he did to put the money in her name, it is possible it is not hers alone. Just changing a name doesn’t necessarily change the marital asset status in some states, for instance.

Also, stop it with the rank misogyny.