Separate finances: how to deal if one spouse isn't saving enough for retirement

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Please go see a financial advisor ASAP so they can help you figure this all out.

Shed doesn't need a financial advisor. She needs a marriage counselor or a a divorce lawyer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you really love this guy, you could consider cross subsiding him. This is what (virtually all) men do for (virtually all) women and have done since the dawn of time.

+1 I married a woman with 2 kids and few assets but I knew it and it was what I accepted as part of the package deal. While I wish she had had a lot of assets it was my choice and I’m happy with it. I didn’t rush into the relationship until I knew I really liked her children and they liked me.

NO OP..do NOT do this!

don't worry, she won't lol

Right. Chipping in to support kids that are not your biological kids is something only males are stupid enough to do. Women know better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. DH is a professor, and his college belongs to an association of colleges. He and his kids are counting on going to one of these. They will receive a massive break on tuition. All are top tier, some in the top 20 colleges in the country. So there is a range of options the kids should get into, the kids know these are their options and are happy with that. So this is a saving grace.

What gets my goat is that DH's ex earns a decent salary but spends it 100% on herself, including a new home, car, trips, etc. So she has an ability to contribute but does not. She is difficult, so DH has chosen not to "upset" her by taking her to court. We have the kids 5-6 days/week.

So he’s upsetting you by needing your assets to retire.

Why does he not want to upset her further? I’ll bet you he cheated.

No, he did not. She has borderline personality disorder, bipolar, and is on the autism spectrum. She admits all this and that she was a horrible wife. She is just a very selfish and not very functional person. She has said she regrets having children because it ruined her lifestyle. She sees herself as a victim and thinks it's unfair that she contribute any $ to the kids because she makes "only" 2/3 what my DH does. Generally, in life, she is looking for what she can get. When DH has asked her to contribute anything, she claims complete poverty and that she doesn't have it (but then is taking vacations, always wearing new outfits, etc.). By doing all the parenting work and paying for it, DH doesn't have to have much contact with her, and I understand why that's easier. When she's upset, she sends him a barrage of texts/emails and he'd prefer not to deal with that.

If she’s borderline, then yea, I totally get why he’s not pushing on the money issue. Any child support he’d actually get is not worth invoking the wrath of person with that disorder. He’s lucky to be out of the marriage and the kids are lucky that he’s their primary parent.

[Anonymous]

My husband and I had significant pre-marriage assets. He has retirement taken care of even though I make more money. I have a child and he doesn't. He knows we are paying for my child's college and he is even giving something he earned to my child. On the flip side, his retirement is his of we divorce, but together its ours. That's marriage. You do it together.

I'd suggest you do the same or wind up divorced again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please go see a financial advisor ASAP so they can help you figure this all out.

Shed doesn't need a financial advisor. She needs a marriage counselor or a a divorce lawyer.

+1

OP and her husband aren’t 30. You’re not going to see a financial advisor who is going to be able to correct the fact that OP probably had a couple of decades of saving ahead over her DH. Either get comfortable with the fact that your assets will eventually benefitting him, or divorce.

What if he has a stroke? Even if he had nothing in his name, he wouldn’t be able to get a Medicaid bed due to your situation.

I think these two just got married to save the $1,500 on health insurance, and maybe for tax reasons. Short term thinking, indeed. (Are we noticing a pattern here?) I don’t buy it about consulting with attorneys and financial planners about how this made sense. This whole thing is too harebrained. If you did consult with someone who should know better, you should ask for a refund.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
What if he has a stroke? Even if he had nothing in his name, he wouldn’t be able to get a Medicaid bed due to your situation.

What if OP has a stroke? She also can't get a Medicaid bed...right?

So what does that have to do with the price of beans?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What if he has a stroke? Even if he had nothing in his name, he wouldn’t be able to get a Medicaid bed due to your situation.

What if OP has a stroke? She also can't get a Medicaid bed...right?

So what does that have to do with the price of beans?

It’s that she could be alive and healthy with many years left where she will need to live in retirement off of her assets. If they remain married, Medicaid will consider many of her assets fair game in determining whether he qualifies for Medicaid to pay for his assisted living or skilled nursing care.

If OP has a stroke and doesn’t qualify for Medicaid, she has her own assets to cover her care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What if he has a stroke? Even if he had nothing in his name, he wouldn’t be able to get a Medicaid bed due to your situation.

What if OP has a stroke? She also can't get a Medicaid bed...right?

So what does that have to do with the price of beans?

It’s that she could be alive and healthy with many years left where she will need to live in retirement off of her assets. If they remain married, Medicaid will consider many of her assets fair game in determining whether he qualifies for Medicaid to pay for his assisted living or skilled nursing care.

If OP has a stroke and doesn’t qualify for Medicaid, she has her own assets to cover her care.

To be even clearer, she’ll have to use the money she is so protective of to pay for her husband, who she clearly does not want to subsidize.

[Anonymous]

He makes less money than you, you share the household expenses, yet you’re surprised he has less savings?

Did you graduate from college? Can you do basic math?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If he has a good salary, FA might have already been out of the picture. OP, I think you're going to have to accept that you will subsidize his retirement. If you were a man, you would be broiled here for suggesting otherwise. As for his kids college, I agree with one of tg he PPs that ypu need to push him to get money from his ex. His kids deserve your advocacy for their future.

This. If he can max retirement, he probably earns too much for his kids to qualify for meaningful aid anyway.

How long has he had primary custody? Agree that he should go for CS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If he has a good salary, FA might have already been out of the picture. OP, I think you're going to have to accept that you will subsidize his retirement. If you were a man, you would be broiled here for suggesting otherwise. As for his kids college, I agree with one of tg he PPs that ypu need to push him to get money from his ex. His kids deserve your advocacy for their future.

This. If he can max retirement, he probably earns too much for his kids to qualify for meaningful aid anyway.

How long has he had primary custody? Agree that he should go for CS.

Op has said that the ex is mentally ill, with borderline personality disorder. I have such a person in my family. Whatever they get in CS, they’d pay for dearly in abuse from the ex. It’s not worth it. The less interactions they have, the better. I think op was very disingenuous to leave that bit of information out of her first post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What if he has a stroke? Even if he had nothing in his name, he wouldn’t be able to get a Medicaid bed due to your situation.

What if OP has a stroke? She also can't get a Medicaid bed...right?

So what does that have to do with the price of beans?

It’s that she could be alive and healthy with many years left where she will need to live in retirement off of her assets. If they remain married, Medicaid will consider many of her assets fair game in determining whether he qualifies for Medicaid to pay for his assisted living or skilled nursing care.

If OP has a stroke and doesn’t qualify for Medicaid, she has her own assets to cover her care.

To be even clearer, she’ll have to use the money she is so protective of to pay for her husband, who she clearly does not want to subsidize.

check that, OP. In some states, retirement assets of a spouse do not impact Medicaid eligibility.

https://www.medicaidplanningassistance.org/medicaid-eligibility-401k-ira/

Generally liquid assets (assets that are easily converted to cash) owned by either spouse of a married couple are considered jointly owned, regardless of whose name is on the asset. For example, say a long-term care Medicaid applicant is married and his/her non-applicant spouse has a checking account that doesn’t have the applicant’s name on it. For purposes of Medicaid asset calculation, this bank account will still be counted towards the applicant’s asset limit. As far as retirement accounts, some states view them as jointly owned, regardless of whose name is on them.

Other states do not. In Pennsylvania and California, the retirement plan of a community spouse is exempt from being counted as an asset for the applicant spouse. In other states, such as New York, the non-applicant spouse’s retirement account is exempt from being counted as an asset as long as it is in payout status. Yet other states, like Colorado, count the retirement savings plans of both spouses, regardless of if only one spouse is applying for Medicaid.

[Anonymous]

It would be really helpful for a post like this to list out the specific information (i.e. annual salaries, total respective retirement savings, ages, etc.).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It would be really helpful for a post like this to list out the specific information (i.e. annual salaries, total respective retirement savings, ages, etc.).

Why?

This is about money but it's not. Reading the OP and her follow up, I'm guessing OP would be happy to "subsidize" her DH's retirement and be all in, if he were. As long as he's choosing his ex's feelings over hers about child support, he's not all in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be really helpful for a post like this to list out the specific information (i.e. annual salaries, total respective retirement savings, ages, etc.).

Why?

This is about money but it's not. Reading the OP and her follow up, I'm guessing OP would be happy to "subsidize" her DH's retirement and be all in, if he were. As long as he's choosing his ex's feelings over hers about child support, he's not all in.

The child support issue notwithstanding, I would be interested in knowing just how short he is with respect to retirement savings. I mean, on the first page she says he's not saving for college for his kids but then a few pages in we find out they can go to school at a number of colleges for free and the kids are happy with these choices so it turns out the college savings probably doesn't matter.

Here, current income information would be helpful because if he makes a lot as a professor (for example, law professors are paid very well) then he could make up the difference in his shortfall in a few years. At some point, one has what they need for retirement and the extra money is just surplus.