Prenup Situation - how to move forward?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mid 30s male is engaged to early 30s female. She is a from a very well to do family and will be anticipating a high eight figure to low nine figure inheritance. She already has a substantial amount in a trust. Her personal income is in the high five figures. He will be completing his medical fellowship next year and will be make in the high six figures to start and will likely make low seven figures once he becomes a shareholder at the practice he is joining in two years.

Her family has proposed a prenup which shelters any premarital/trust assets that she has while his income would be considered marital/community property. He is concerned over this for several reasons as they met after he had already graduated from medical school so she was not a significant support during this time. He is also concerned that he may end up paying alimony to a far wealthier ex-wife in the event of divorce. Furthermore, he is concerned he will be expected to fund an expensive lifestyle with his income while her trust is untouched - thus limiting his ability to save.

What is a fair way to structure a prenup in these circumstance to respect his hard work and long term financial security while doing the same for her family wealth?

So let's get this straight. A man who just got out of med school would like to marry a woman who is earning "high five figures." So, counting my fingers, that amounts to less than $99,999 per annum. However, wild card, she will likely inherit close to $100,000,000. And he is concerned about having to pay her alimony in case they divorce. Because he is sure he is going to earn "seven figures" two years out of med school.

Oh, this is sure to be a wonderful marriage. Sounds like true love.

It's reasonable for super wealthy families to protect themselves from predators and their heirs making dumb choices. The fact that you are worried that the love of your life is going to garnish your doctor wages is just... bad. And you're not even married yet. Be honest. Are you marrying her because of her inheritance? Because you sound exactly like the kind of man that needs an ironclad pre-nup.

OP here. You completely misunderstand his position. He is about to complete seven years of post medical school training. Medical school is long in the rear view mirror. In terms of your skepticism towards his income the high six figure income is already contractually guaranteed. The low seven year income is what is earned by all practice shareholders - as long as you stick around for two years you can become a shareholder.

Your son should not be discussing his or his fiancé’s salary with you, nor their potential prenup. He should however discuss it with an attorney experienced in this area. If he’s smart enough for med school, I’m confident he can manage on his own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This marriage seems to be in trouble already based on your description. We are leaving our child mid-eight figures (as you would describe it). You can bet there will be a prenup.

If I were in DD’s parent’s shoes, I would probably agree to fund grandchildren’s education and chip in on a house but insist on a prenup.

Genuinely curious. How do parents get to insist on a prenup for their adult children?

I imagine that the parents still have a lot of control over the trust. There are few people who would give up that income to prove a point.

I’m sure, but it seems like such a terrible foundation for an adult relationship with your children. Yikes.

Not really. It's pretty standard for parents to want to continue protecting their children, including the money they give them from a future divorce. This probably comes up in 98% of estate planning discussions with lawyers involved.

.

I understand why people are worried about this. I am more bewildered at the idea that there are so many (?) people out there who would insist on this rather than letting their adult children ultimately make their own decisions.

So imagine going through hell and back like Cassie Ventura or some investment banker who worked 100 hour weeks and watched their coworker die from stress . Will you leave it up to your child to decide how your money is spent? The adult children are not forced to take the money. It makes sense from the donor's perspective, and it may make sense from the beneficiary's perspective. The spouse of the beneficiary has to make sure it makes sense from their perspective.

However, if I were in OP's shoes and my gf/fiancé did not at least suggest an option that protected me somehow, I wouldn't bother. Don't marry someone who will not think of how they can pelrotect you while protecting themselves. It's selfish, and they will continue to be selfish throughout the marriage.

I hear what you’re saying. My perspective is that I’m skeptical of money from parents that comes with strings. In my experience those relationships have issues.

But I’m digressing there and anyway I agree with your next point.

Strings like a prenup? As suggested above, the prenup is belt-and-suspenders. You're not getting access to your spouse's family money either way. It would be crazy not to include protetions against a possible divorce when giving your kids money. Who wants their life's work going to their kid's future exhusband?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This marriage seems to be in trouble already based on your description. We are leaving our child mid-eight figures (as you would describe it). You can bet there will be a prenup.

If I were in DD’s parent’s shoes, I would probably agree to fund grandchildren’s education and chip in on a house but insist on a prenup.

Genuinely curious. How do parents get to insist on a prenup for their adult children?

I imagine that the parents still have a lot of control over the trust. There are few people who would give up that income to prove a point.

I’m sure, but it seems like such a terrible foundation for an adult relationship with your children. Yikes.

Not really. It's pretty standard for parents to want to continue protecting their children, including the money they give them from a future divorce. This probably comes up in 98% of estate planning discussions with lawyers involved.

.

I understand why people are worried about this. I am more bewildered at the idea that there are so many (?) people out there who would insist on this rather than letting their adult children ultimately make their own decisions.

So imagine going through hell and back like Cassie Ventura or some investment banker who worked 100 hour weeks and watched their coworker die from stress . Will you leave it up to your child to decide how your money is spent? The adult children are not forced to take the money. It makes sense from the donor's perspective, and it may make sense from the beneficiary's perspective. The spouse of the beneficiary has to make sure it makes sense from their perspective.

However, if I were in OP's shoes and my gf/fiancé did not at least suggest an option that protected me somehow, I wouldn't bother. Don't marry someone who will not think of how they can pelrotect you while protecting themselves. It's selfish, and they will continue to be selfish throughout the marriage.

I hear what you’re saying. My perspective is that I’m skeptical of money from parents that comes with strings. In my experience those relationships have issues.

But I’m digressing there and anyway I agree with your next point.

I never met someone with a trust fund who hasn’t paid for it dearly. The real winners are those who grind at a startup and get out early with $$$$$, or someone who actually enjoys their job and gets paid well.

I’ve had enough marital problems and glad to not add trust fund / family ties / resentment to the list.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This marriage seems to be in trouble already based on your description. We are leaving our child mid-eight figures (as you would describe it). You can bet there will be a prenup.

If I were in DD’s parent’s shoes, I would probably agree to fund grandchildren’s education and chip in on a house but insist on a prenup.

Genuinely curious. How do parents get to insist on a prenup for their adult children?

I imagine that the parents still have a lot of control over the trust. There are few people who would give up that income to prove a point.

I’m sure, but it seems like such a terrible foundation for an adult relationship with your children. Yikes.

Not really. It's pretty standard for parents to want to continue protecting their children, including the money they give them from a future divorce. This probably comes up in 98% of estate planning discussions with lawyers involved.

.

I understand why people are worried about this. I am more bewildered at the idea that there are so many (?) people out there who would insist on this rather than letting their adult children ultimately make their own decisions.

So imagine going through hell and back like Cassie Ventura or some investment banker who worked 100 hour weeks and watched their coworker die from stress . Will you leave it up to your child to decide how your money is spent? The adult children are not forced to take the money. It makes sense from the donor's perspective, and it may make sense from the beneficiary's perspective. The spouse of the beneficiary has to make sure it makes sense from their perspective.

However, if I were in OP's shoes and my gf/fiancé did not at least suggest an option that protected me somehow, I wouldn't bother. Don't marry someone who will not think of how they can pelrotect you while protecting themselves. It's selfish, and they will continue to be selfish throughout the marriage.

I hear what you’re saying. My perspective is that I’m skeptical of money from parents that comes with strings. In my experience those relationships have issues.

But I’m digressing there and anyway I agree with your next point.

I never met someone with a trust fund who hasn’t paid for it dearly. The real winners are those who grind at a startup and get out early with $$$$$, or someone who actually enjoys their job and gets paid well.

I’ve had enough marital problems and glad to not add trust fund / family ties / resentment to the list.

Fair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People really think it is unreasonable for a family with a nine-figure trust to request a prenup, and for the counterparty to that prenup to make sure his interests are protected?

The amount of idiocy and envy on this thread is really astounding.

Nooooo

Don't worry, your little snookums is safe

None of their eligible intendeds will even blink at this setup

But this is a higher class level than I'd want for my kids. I think they'd be happier with those that match them.

No trust-level inheritance here, either coming to us or going from us, and no pre-nup required.

But I guess we can agree that your kids will be lower class, given their parents (or at least one of them).

This typical DCUM level insult doesn't offend me in the least.

Lower class... the bogeyman of strivers