Would you sign a prenup?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would. I did not marry so I can be somehow into my husbands work life. Why would I care what happened at his work. I have a job and I support myself plus a few others.

His job is not my job. I could no imagine my H showing up at my work just because he is married to me.

Bizarre, what does the bride want to be CEO or vice president or something.

Doesn't she have a job already?

Good lord, you have no idea what this thread is about do you? Its about money, without a prenup (or other legal protections), the STBXW would claim a portion of the business as marital asset and get paid for her "share". She does not have to be involved in the business, all that matter is that her husband "owns" a piece and/or is actively involved in running it.

Thank you! Someone with knowledge of what is involved is commenting instead of these posters who are totally clueless about the complexities of what is really involved here.

If the future DIL really has no interest in acquiring a share of the family business in the event of divorce, all that is needed is limit the prenup to her giving up any rights or interest in that entity.

If she refuses to do so, I'd be quite wary of her intentions. The reality is that she has had no role in making the business what it is today so why the heck does she think that she should have any rights to it after she gets married?

You're being shortsighted in your response. She may not have ulterior intentions, but what if she ends up a SAHM, takes care of the kids while fiance works at family business. He works long hours and doesn't even take home a good/competitive salary because the family wants all profits returned to family business so it could grow, the house they chose together and lived in was purchased by the family business. 10 or 15 or 20 years later, the company grew 10-fold and fiance now wants a divorce. She would get nothing. I'd say she put a lot into that business - living below their means, taking care of her DH while he worked to build the business, and then when divorce time comes, her DH's $10 million share of the family business isn't counted, but his $35,000/year paycheck for running the business is what's counted in marital assets? Not even the value of the house could be considered marital assets because it's owned by the business, as well as the cars, etc.

Yes, it sucks for the business to have to valuate and liquidate part of it, but she does deserve a part of that.

I suggest they value the business at the time of marriage (obviously the ILs want a high valuation and the fiance a low one) they come to a consensus somewhere in the middle. Then, if they divorce, she's entitied to half her DH's ownership portion of the growth of business since they were married.

Oh, and I'd be sure as hell to say the prenup is void in the event of cheating, emotional or physical abuse.

[Anonymous]

It seems there are a lot of hypocrites out there. People wouldn't sign/have a prenup if they have something to gain BUT if they have something to lose they would/have. How convenient!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would. I did not marry so I can be somehow into my husbands work life. Why would I care what happened at his work. I have a job and I support myself plus a few others.

His job is not my job. I could no imagine my H showing up at my work just because he is married to me.

Bizarre, what does the bride want to be CEO or vice president or something.

Doesn't she have a job already?

Good lord, you have no idea what this thread is about do you? Its about money, without a prenup (or other legal protections), the STBXW would claim a portion of the business as marital asset and get paid for her "share". She does not have to be involved in the business, all that matter is that her husband "owns" a piece and/or is actively involved in running it.

Good lord, you know nothing about business. If he owns part of the business, without a prenup, she owns part of the business, yes, she can be involved. See why the FIL does not want some dingbat involved in the family business.

[Anonymous]

No. She does not deserve any of it. It would be nice for her to get a prenup so they can determine what she does "deserve" like enough to live on long enough to get a job and support herself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would. I did not marry so I can be somehow into my husbands work life. Why would I care what happened at his work. I have a job and I support myself plus a few others.

His job is not my job. I could no imagine my H showing up at my work just because he is married to me.

Bizarre, what does the bride want to be CEO or vice president or something.

Doesn't she have a job already?

Good lord, you have no idea what this thread is about do you? Its about money, without a prenup (or other legal protections), the STBXW would claim a portion of the business as marital asset and get paid for her "share". She does not have to be involved in the business, all that matter is that her husband "owns" a piece and/or is actively involved in running it.

Thank you! Someone with knowledge of what is involved is commenting instead of these posters who are totally clueless about the complexities of what is really involved here.

If the future DIL really has no interest in acquiring a share of the family business in the event of divorce, all that is needed is limit the prenup to her giving up any rights or interest in that entity.

If she refuses to do so, I'd be quite wary of her intentions. The reality is that she has had no role in making the business what it is today so why the heck does she think that she should have any rights to it after she gets married?

You're being shortsighted in your response. She may not have ulterior intentions, but what if she ends up a SAHM, takes care of the kids while fiance works at family business. He works long hours and doesn't even take home a good/competitive salary because the family wants all profits returned to family business so it could grow, the house they chose together and lived in was purchased by the family business. 10 or 15 or 20 years later, the company grew 10-fold and fiance now wants a divorce. She would get nothing. I'd say she put a lot into that business - living below their means, taking care of her DH while he worked to build the business, and then when divorce time comes, her DH's $10 million share of the family business isn't counted, but his $35,000/year paycheck for running the business is what's counted in marital assets? Not even the value of the house could be considered marital assets because it's owned by the business, as well as the cars, etc.

Yes, it sucks for the business to have to valuate and liquidate part of it, but she does deserve a part of that.

I suggest they value the business at the time of marriage (obviously the ILs want a high valuation and the fiance a low one) they come to a consensus somewhere in the middle. Then, if they divorce, she's entitied to half her DH's ownership portion of the growth of business since they were married.

Oh, and I'd be sure as hell to say the prenup is void in the event of cheating, emotional or physical abuse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would sign something saying I had no claim to his family business (assuming I would not be working with the family business) but I would not sign anything with regard to our marriage or earnings or assets outside of the family business.

The problem is what if he takes over the family business at some point and that is his main source of income and he puts *all* of his savings into it? He could easily tie all of his assets to the family business, assets he earned while married to the OP. And she would have signed her right to any of them away. Let's add to the scenario, what if she had a few kids and took some time off work, decreasing what she earned/saved to take care of his kids?

Then she's screwed.

I would not sign a prenup.

If you feel a prenup is necessary, then don't get married. If you don't want to combine finances/assets, there actually is no reason why you need to get married. Period. If you want your partner to have power of attorney if you're in the hospital, you can do that without getting married.

[Anonymous]

He could also take all their savings and buy his mistress an apartment. Um! Yes. They need a prenup so that all parties agree before marriage what is a fair way to deal with assets.

The prenup might actually protect her in the end.

I won't even get into she needs her own money and way to support herself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would sign something saying I had no claim to his family business (assuming I would not be working with the family business) but I would not sign anything with regard to our marriage or earnings or assets outside of the family business.

The problem is what if he takes over the family business at some point and that is his main source of income and he puts *all* of his savings into it? He could easily tie all of his assets to the family business, assets he earned while married to the OP. And she would have signed her right to any of them away. Let's add to the scenario, what if she had a few kids and took some time off work, decreasing what she earned/saved to take care of his kids?

Then she's screwed.

I would not sign a prenup.

If you feel a prenup is necessary, then don't get married. If you don't want to combine finances/assets, there actually is no reason why you need to get married. Period. If you want your partner to have power of attorney if you're in the hospital, you can do that without getting married.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the bigger issue are the parents trying to force their values on the couple. They are threatening to boycott the wedding??? But I assume they will keep him in the family business all the same if he marries the woman??? Major relationship red flag there and I question the priorities of the parents.

I commend the groom for sticking up for his wife to be. If I was him, I would contact a lawyer to investigate other ways for the family business and his parents assets to be protected besides just a prenup. Then he could go to his parents with a proposal of other options to ease their concerns. His individual assets are shared between him and his future wife and his parents should mind their own beeswax regarding those. The joint family asset should be their only concern and I believe those could be protected under a trust or corporation entity.

OP here, the DIL suggested other ways of keeping herself of out of the business without a prenup.
FIL stated that he won't be told how to run his business by a young twenty something.FIL wants a prenup.

I believe the children have part legal ownership.

If I was her, I would think long and hard about marrying into a family like that. Imagine trying to deal with in laws like that for 20-30 years. Whoa. I see a whole lot of crap hitting the fan other than this prenup issue unless a stand is made now.

For the groom to be, is he willing to walk away from the family business in support of his future wife? He has terrible parents if they want to destroy his happiness over money. The fiancé was just offering alternatives, not telling the father how to run his business. The parents are also using purse strings to control the life of their children. Horrible people.

If they are not even open to suggestions, I wouldn't marry the guy unless he was willing to sever his ties with the business and draw a clear boundary with his parents. If they chose not to come to the wedding or future important events like grandchildren, I would say they made their bed and let them lie in it. They can die as miserable, lonely, old people with no family. Nursing homes are full of them.

+1 except I just plain wouldn't marry him, because he might later resent losing any claim to the family business over me.

Of all of the marriages I have observed (family, friends, et cetera), it actually seems to me that it's not money that breaks up most marriages or causes the most misery in a marriage; it's inlaws.

I realized that one of the big things to look into before agreeing to marry someone was whether I could deal with the inlaws. If inlaws are intrusive, manipulative, controlling, that's a red flag. It's not even that you have to like your inlaws, but you do have to feel relatively confident that they're not going to interfere in your marriage. And usually there are flags before getting married.

[Anonymous]

DIL's motives are questionable.

No wonder the future FIL is not willing to risk his family business.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DIL's motives are questionable.

No wonder the future FIL is not willing to risk his family business.

what is questionable? I bet you don't answer that.

[Anonymous]

Bizarre, what does the bride want to be CEO or vice president or something.

That's what I see as the problem though - you never know what will happen. For a number of years, I was a VP in my husband's family business and worked full time at it, and I think I contribued a lot to its success (now I have a separate job). As long as she is contributing to running the family business and it isn't just a title, why would she be entitled to no part of it at all?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Bizarre, what does the bride want to be CEO or vice president or something.

That's what I see as the problem though - you never know what will happen. For a number of years, I was a VP in my husband's family business and worked full time at it, and I think I contribued a lot to its success (now I have a separate job). As long as she is contributing to running the family business and it isn't just a title, why would she be entitled to no part of it at all?

I dont think the bride really wants anything to do with working at the company.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I married a man with significantly more money and earning potential than me. He made more than 3x as much as I did and came into the marriage with a pretty big stock portfolio. He will also likely inherit quite a bit of money upon the death of his father. I did not sign a prenup, but I also would not have felt entitled to any of his "family money" any more than I would have felt entitled to stocks he bought before we were in a relationship at all. We had a child together, but are now divorced. If I marry again, I would want to sign a prenup with FutureHusband that addresses my DD and her future. I also stand to inherit a decent sum of money upon the death of my father (who got it from his mother), and I would want that money to go to DD.

I would not, as an exwife, want to bankrupt a family business demanding half of my ex-husband's stake in it. That seems unnecessarily vindictive. I would expect him to pay his legal child support obligations, but I would not expect alimony or anything of the kind. I am an adult who is perfectly capable of supporting myself without the money of someone I chose to divorce.

As for whether agreeing to a prenup taints the marriage vows or sets you up for divorce, would you say that writing a will sets you up for death? Because in my opinion, a prenup is a will that would be exercised in the event of the death of a marriage. I would think that the terms of the prenup would also apply to a woman whose husband died - if my hypothetical FutureHusband with the family business died, I would not want to inherit his share of the business. If I was another member of the family, I would not want for my husband's widow to inherit his share of the business. Something, maybe, but not a partner's share.

the difference between a will and a prenup is that death is inevitable and certain. Are you saying divorce is inevitable and certain? If so, then why get married in the first place? That's how I feel. All of the arguments about "half of all marriages end in divorce" don't convince me people should get prenups -- it convinces me that people shouldn't be getting married. Instead of setting up a legal arrangement in case a marriage fails, just set up a legal arrange to co-habitate (i.e. establish power of attorney, et cetera). The whole point of getting legally married is to become legally and financially entangled/merged. You don't have to get married because you're in love. Just be in love!

The problem with prenups, as with any legal document (like a will), is that they can still be contested. So then it becomes a matter of both parties getting lawyers to go over things to make sure it's airtight, et cetera, et cetera. It seems ridiculous. Again, just don't get married!

Even with a prenup, once you get married, your spouse affects your credit. There's no avoiding every possible thing. If you don't want to be entangled, don't get married!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He could also take all their savings and buy his mistress an apartment. Um! Yes. They need a prenup so that all parties agree before marriage what is a fair way to deal with assets.

The prenup might actually protect her in the end.

I won't even get into she needs her own money and way to support herself.


My point, though, is that if there is so much distrust/concern, don't get married.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He could also take all their savings and buy his mistress an apartment. Um! Yes. They need a prenup so that all parties agree before marriage what is a fair way to deal with assets.

The prenup might actually protect her in the end.

I won't even get into she needs her own money and way to support herself.


My point, though, is that if there is so much distrust/concern, don't get married.

What makes you assume the bride cannot support herself?

[Anonymous]

I dont think the bride really wants anything to do with working at the company.

I didn't think I did either, but my husband needed my help, and I wound up liking the work more than I thought I would. The point is, I would be reluctant to close myself out, since you don't know what is going to happen. Perhaps if there was a provision included that said something along the lines of "provided that she did not hold a position above the level of X for X number of years with the company."