Would you ever get a divorce for financial advantage?

[raeoflyte]

Yep. I started a thread about it because if dh uses ibr for his student loan payments then my income is the driving force behind his repayment requirements and that just pisses me off to no end.

The collective ym response was that it would be immoral and that since I supported him going to school that I should happily pay off hisloans.

Sent from my ADR6410LVW using proboards

[Deleted]

DH and I are seriously considering it. We never wanted to be married in the eyes of the state, anyway, just the church, but a clergy member can lose his/her license if they perform a marriage ceremony and don't report it to the state. (DH requested that if the priest had to say, "by the power vested in me by the state of NJ..." that he mumble it while facing the wall. Fortunately that's not a required part of the service.)

It was sort of OK while I was working and could keep DH on my company health insurance, but that's no longer relevant. We'd save about $7K right off the bat because his SS would no longer be taxed. There are other state tax benefits (writing off estimated sales taxes on food) that he could get because of his age, but that don't apply because of our joint income.

I'm not as concerned about the nursing home/Medicaid part of it. DH is 76 now so I'm not sure what advantage divorce now would have, if any, if he entered a nursing home before the age of 81. He's also got enough health problems that I can't picture him lingering in a nursing home for decades, especially since I could probably get by taking care of him at home (with respite care) if necessary.

I would LOVE to get back the darn taxes on the SS, though.

[Bonny]

For those of you interested in the Medicaid (not medicare) ability to tap assets here's a link to a Nolo Q&A.

www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/how-medicaid-recovers-the-cost-long-term-care-from-your-estate-after-you-die.html


You may want to follow up with a link to your state's program regarding asset recovery and exemptions. Here is one for CA:

www.canhr.org/factsheets/medi-cal_fs/html/fs_medcal_recovery_FAQ.htm

I was surprised to see that 401ks, IRAs with beneficiaries other than the estate or a Trust are exempt.

[Shooby]

I would not divorce for a tax gain , benefit, perk otr whatever.

[whoisjohngalt]

my dad's childhood friend and his wife did that when they came to US.

She was too "sick" to work, so she has been collecting all kinds of assistance, all, while making money on a side.

He has always been a hard working guy so he has been working this whole time,

They are vacationing together as we speak.

[Knee Deep in Water Chloe]

I really don't think I would . There would have be probably at least close to a six-figure financial benefit. 
Maybe because I had a really crappy first marriage, I don't want to damage this one. 

[thyme4change]

When we got married our wedding was in November.  We did our taxes a few months later and paid so much more than we had the prior year, and I suggested that we legally divorce, but not tell anyone.  My DH was not on-board.  I probably wouldn't have gone through with it anyway.

[tallguy]

My younger bro and his wife divorced for financial reasons. She was widowed when they married. When she turned 60 they divorced so she could collect on her first DHs SS. After she started collecting the funds they got married again.

I wouldn't go that far.  Of course, I wouldn't have to.  I have no intention of getting remarried before age 60 for exactly that reason.  I'm guessing it would likely make a six-figure difference over time.  If I meet someone much before then she's going to have to be VERY understanding!  

(I am thinking, however, that the extra money and travel would help compensate....) 

[❤ mollymouser ❤]

Aug 7, 2014 17:02:33 GMT -5 Firebird said:

Still plan to live together, still love each other, just no longer legally married - would you have any moral or other issues with divorcing solely because of some financial advantage? 

Would you tell people or keep it to yourselves?

I would not divorce my wonderful DH for some financial advantage.

[truthbound]

Would you ever get a divorce for financial advantage?

No. i married my wife....oh I am sorry....my life partner (gotta be politically correct) because I loved him, her, them for love. Not to mention getting married to cheat the system is dishonest.

[giramomma]

This is an interesting discussion.

People don't marry for financial gain. My aunt was widowed in her late 40's/early 50's. One of my cousins was under 18 and had a baby herself.

My aunt didn't know how to not be in a relationship. She married my uncle very young. Like, after graduating HS. It's what you did where they lived.

She moved on to someone else rather quickly. The lived together and were a couple for at least a decade. She wouldn't get married, because of finances. Once she got remarried, the pension she was getting would be reduced. There was other money coming in, specifically because my uncle died, that would have been reduced or taken away if she would have gotten remarried.

They finally did marry. It wasn't because of my cousin. She wasn't 6 when she got knocked up

So, if it's bad to divorce for financial gain, is it also bad to not marry for financial gain?

Or is divorce bad, but avoid marriage good? (Know I'm opening myself to snark on the last one.. )

[The Captain]

Aug 7, 2014 19:24:09 GMT -5 Bonny said:

For those of you interested in the Medicaid (not medicare) ability to tap assets here's a link to a Nolo Q&A.

www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/how-medicaid-recovers-the-cost-long-term-care-from-your-estate-after-you-die.html


You may want to follow up with a link to your state's program regarding asset recovery and exemptions. Here is one for CA:

www.canhr.org/factsheets/medi-cal_fs/html/fs_medcal_recovery_FAQ.htm

I was surprised to see that 401ks, IRAs with beneficiaries other than the estate or a Trust are exempt.

Interesting.  You post prompted me to do a little digging.  As usual, my state doesn't really have good information posted online, other than "We're not sure yet".

I did find this:

www.elderlawanswers.com/medicaids-treatment-of-the-home-12140

What's published in this article is very different then what I was told by someone regarding their own situation.  Can't call them out on it to figure out what the real story was though.

So any home where a minor is living is pretty much off limits if I understand this correctly.  In addition, as long as the equity is below a certain amount, a sale will not be forced and a lien will be placed to be collected only upon the (voluntary) sale of the home.

That's reasonable, and certainly not in the "The STATE forced me to sell my home!!!" category.

Maybe DH will be stuck with me after all...

[Sam_2.0]

I've known people that had to do it in their 30's when a spouse was horribly disabled. Mom did it to get assistance caring for him and to help her raise their kids. He passed a few years later but I dont think her kids ever forgave her. They saw it as abandoning their dad and didnt understand. The kids are in HS/college now and she has since remarried and had another kid.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using proboards

[Wisconsin Beth]

Aug 7, 2014 17:34:17 GMT -5 The Walk of the Penguin Mich said:

I know one woman who divorced her Alzheimer's stricken husband in order to protect her remaining retirement.  By divorcing, she was able to protect her share (what she earned) and he blew through his share of the funds that was spent for his nursing home care.  He died before he needed to go onto state aid, but had they not divorced, she would have been left almost destitute if she needed to pay down enough for the state to step in to cover his nursing home costs.

I've heard of older couples doing this.  Haven't run into anyone that I know personally who has. 

[Deleted]

Aug 8, 2014 6:45:28 GMT -5 giramomma said:

So, if it's bad to divorce for financial gain, is it also bad to not marry for financial gain?

Or is divorce bad, but avoid marriage good? (Know I'm opening myself to snark on the last one.. )

Plenty of seniors avoid marriage because of financial consequences. Mostly it's because the woman will lose her Widow's pension or SS, and the SS she'd get as a wife isn't as much.  It also avoids some nasty estate issues if they've got families. I'm not sure now if I'd remarry if I outlived DH. Companionship and relationships? Absolutely. Life is so much better with them than without them. I just wouldn't want the legal implications of being married, particularly if it were to someone who brought less-than-substantial assets into the relationship. (No, I don't want someone else's money. I just don't want to end up impoverishing myself propping up someone else.)

[raeoflyte]

Aug 8, 2014 6:45:28 GMT -5 giramomma said:

So, if it's bad to divorce for financial gain, is it also bad to not marry for financial gain?

Or is divorce bad, but avoid marriage good? (Know I'm opening myself to snark on the last one.. )

Excellent point!

I think people have a hard time separating the relationship from the piece if paper. For me, that paper is a contract with the government and has nothing to do with my commitment to dh.



Sent from my ADR6410LVW using proboards

[ArchietheDragon]

I can't say never, but I would not get divorced for financial reasons. 

[hoops902]

Would I?  Yes, because I think marriage is pretty well meaningless for the most part other than what it means financially.  I don't think my wife would ever agree to it though.

[Deleted]

Aug 8, 2014 7:49:28 GMT -5 raeoflyte said:

I think people have a hard time separating the relationship from the piece if paper. For me, that paper is a contract with the government and has nothing to do with my commitment to dh.

I agree. If DH and I were to divorce, the first thing I'd do is have the lawyer draw up papers that would allow us to make each others' healthcare decisions, would provide for DH if I died first, etc. (The house and 99% of the investments are in my name, so as a "friend" he'd be left with nothing and I don't want that.) We live in a state that doesn't recognize gay marriage so I'm certain there are attorneys who know how to deal with unmarried couples who want to define their own obligations towards each other rather than take what the state imposes.

I've mentioned this story before but it's worth re-telling in this context: my first husband had a pile of medical bills (inpatient alcohol rehab) that he was too lazy to submit to the insurance. He ignored them. I was busy trying to work for a living and pay the other bills and too stressed to deal with them and besides, they were in his name. Eventually they took him to court, got a judgment against him, and because he was unemployed they sent a Garnishment Notice to MY employer. The amount they were requesting to take out of my pay would have severely impaired my ability to keep food in the house and the mortgage paid. We were in the process of divorce so my attorney fought them off, and they got paid after the divorce from my Ex's share of the proceeds. I then submitted it all to the insurance company and gave the reimbursement to my Ex.

And that's what they can do to you if you're married, whether you like it or not.

[chapeau]

I have a friend in her mid-30s. She is currently in a nursing home because of severe dementia. She doesn't recognize her husband, child, parents, or anyone else (except another friend that she has known for 25+ years and I'm not even sure that's still the case, actually. She's gone horribly downhill in the last few months.). There is no hope for a cure or recovery.

She made more than her husband, and they live in a HCOL. They did own their own home (mortgaged). Her husband somewhat recently quit his job, partly because his job required evenings and weekends and he was having trouble finding a sitter for their 4 year old [and his job had been wonderfully flexible for the years before she was diagnosed and eventually put in a home and he had to run out and pick her up from random locations when she was found, wandering, with or without the child. He knew they were sick of dealing with him, and he was worried about being fired and what that would do to his re-hirability], and partly because of Medicaid. Their son's college money is gone (there's a small amount in a 529 that some of her friends have started, but another friend owns that account for now], as is their equity in the home. Not sure if he's considering selling/foreclosure, etc. I don't know a lot of the details, mostly because that's a level of nosy even I won't stoop to.

But he has the possibility of DECADES of nursing home care for her, and really not a whole lot of time to have established the nest egg that would be needed to even start caring for her. I said at the very beginning, when they first diagnosed her, that he should divorce her. First he should be declared her legal guardian, then he should divorce her. It's horribly sad, but in his shoes (and anyone similar, like Captain and her family could be) I don't begrudge a divorce and sticking the taxpayers with the bill. To me, that's what the safety net of Social Security, Medicaid, etc. is for. Flame away.

[Deleted]

Aug 8, 2014 8:50:46 GMT -5 chapeau said:

But he has the possibility of DECADES of nursing home care for her, and really not a whole lot of time to have established the nest egg that would be needed to even start caring for her. I said at the very beginning, when they first diagnosed her, that he should divorce her. First he should be declared her legal guardian, then he should divorce her. It's horribly sad, but in his shoes (and anyone similar, like Captain and her family could be) I don't begrudge a divorce and sticking the taxpayers with the bill. To me, that's what the safety net of Social Security, Medicaid, etc. is for. Flame away.

No flames here. It could happen to any one of us and I agree that it's impossible for the average person to foot the bill and still provide for themselves and the remaining family.  Her husband shouldn't be doomed to having every dime he makes confiscated for her care for decades. 

[wvugurl26]

Her husband still has a 4 year old to take care of. That's a horrible situation to find yourself in. Yes, at a certain level it is gaming the system so to speak but I feel like his priority should be to the 4 year old.

[Sam_2.0]

Aug 8, 2014 8:50:46 GMT -5 chapeau said:

I have a friend in her mid-30s. She is currently in a nursing home because of severe dementia. She doesn't recognize her husband, child, parents, or anyone else (except another friend that she has known for 25+ years and I'm not even sure that's still the case, actually. She's gone horribly downhill in the last few months.). There is no hope for a cure or recovery.

She made more than her husband, and they live in a HCOL. They did own their own home (mortgaged). Her husband somewhat recently quit his job, partly because his job required evenings and weekends and he was having trouble finding a sitter for their 4 year old [and his job had been wonderfully flexible for the years before she was diagnosed and eventually put in a home and he had to run out and pick her up from random locations when she was found, wandering, with or without the child. He knew they were sick of dealing with him, and he was worried about being fired and what that would do to his re-hirability], and partly because of Medicaid. Their son's college money is gone (there's a small amount in a 529 that some of her friends have started, but another friend owns that account for now], as is their equity in the home. Not sure if he's considering selling/foreclosure, etc. I don't know a lot of the details, mostly because that's a level of nosy even I won't stoop to.

But he has the possibility of DECADES of nursing home care for her, and really not a whole lot of time to have established the nest egg that would be needed to even start caring for her. I said at the very beginning, when they first diagnosed her, that he should divorce her. First he should be declared her legal guardian, then he should divorce her. It's horribly sad, but in his shoes (and anyone similar, like Captain and her family could be) I don't begrudge a divorce and sticking the taxpayers with the bill. To me, that's what the safety net of Social Security, Medicaid, etc. is for. Flame away.

You did a much better job of explaining it, but this is what basically happened to the couple I knew. Only it was the man that was disabled. She was able to get assistance and not completely ruin themselves financially while caring for her two small children and still caring for him until he passed.

[raeoflyte]

Aug 8, 2014 8:50:46 GMT -5 chapeau said:

I have a friend in her mid-30s. She is currently in a nursing home because of severe dementia. She doesn't recognize her husband, child, parents, or anyone else (except another friend that she has known for 25+ years and I'm not even sure that's still the case, actually. She's gone horribly downhill in the last few months.). There is no hope for a cure or recovery.

She made more than her husband, and they live in a HCOL. They did own their own home (mortgaged). Her husband somewhat recently quit his job, partly because his job required evenings and weekends and he was having trouble finding a sitter for their 4 year old [and his job had been wonderfully flexible for the years before she was diagnosed and eventually put in a home and he had to run out and pick her up from random locations when she was found, wandering, with or without the child. He knew they were sick of dealing with him, and he was worried about being fired and what that would do to his re-hirability], and partly because of Medicaid. Their son's college money is gone (there's a small amount in a 529 that some of her friends have started, but another friend owns that account for now], as is their equity in the home. Not sure if he's considering selling/foreclosure, etc. I don't know a lot of the details, mostly because that's a level of nosy even I won't stoop to.

But he has the possibility of DECADES of nursing home care for her, and really not a whole lot of time to have established the nest egg that would be needed to even start caring for her. I said at the very beginning, when they first diagnosed her, that he should divorce her. First he should be declared her legal guardian, then he should divorce her. It's horribly sad, but in his shoes (and anyone similar, like Captain and her family could be) I don't begrudge a divorce and sticking the taxpayers with the bill. To me, that's what the safety net of Social Security, Medicaid, etc. is for. Flame away.

That's about as worst case scenario as you can get. How heartbreaking.

Sent from my ADR6410LVW using proboards

[Deleted]

Even if I think of that situation from a practical point of view, it would be better for everyone if the state took over 100% of the cost of her care. He could go back to work, pay taxes, and not have to rely on government assistance himself.

Years ago, my parents knew a guy who developed MS back when there wasn't much you could do about it. His wife divorced him and remarried but he continued to live in the marital home and she cared for him until he died. It seemed to me the best solution in a tragic situation.

[Bonny]

Aug 8, 2014 7:37:49 GMT -5 @athena53 said:

Aug 8, 2014 6:45:28 GMT -5 giramomma said:

So, if it's bad to divorce for financial gain, is it also bad to not marry for financial gain?

Or is divorce bad, but avoid marriage good? (Know I'm opening myself to snark on the last one.. )

Plenty of seniors avoid marriage because of financial consequences. Mostly it's because the woman will lose her Widow's pension or SS, and the SS she'd get as a wife isn't as much.  It also avoids some nasty estate issues if they've got families. I'm not sure now if I'd remarry if I outlived DH. Companionship and relationships? Absolutely. Life is so much better with them than without them. I just wouldn't want the legal implications of being married, particularly if it were to someone who brought less-than-substantial assets into the relationship. (No, I don't want someone else's money. I just don't want to end up impoverishing myself propping up someone else.)

It's why my Dad and his girlfriend don't get married. Dad brings very little to the table financially other than paying "rent" for the upkeep to the house and a contribution to the household. They have a reverse mortgage on the house. She has property and some other investments which should go to her family.

[Bonny]

You should probably tag her...if you really want the answer.

[Firebird]

Maybe because I had a really crappy first marriage, I don't want to damage this one.

So this is an interesting statement to me because on a gut level, I agree with you but I don't really know WHY.  I can see how marriage is just a legal agreement and to some couples, makes zero difference in their level of commitment.  And I obviously wouldn't stop loving DH or being his partner or anything like that just because we were no longer legally married. 

But on the other hand, the legal marriage does mean something to me and I would definitely feel a sense of loss if it was taken away.  I think part of me really wouldn't feel married anymore even if nothing else changed.  And I wonder if that would have a negative impact on our actual relationship.

I'm sure it wouldn't change anything for DH because he never cared about the legal commitment anyway.  Like many here, he was committed to me in his heart before we ever signed the papers.  And I was too, in a way - but I wasn't (for example) willing to have kids with him before taking that step, whereas he would have been.

I don't know why the legal commitment matters to me.  It FEELS like it shouldn't make any difference because what does a piece of paper have to do with a person's private relationship?  I don't really understand it myself.  I just know that even though it's not the whole of my commitment to DH, it's not unimportant either. 

One thing is for sure, though, I would definitely not tell my kid(s) if we ever did this.  I wouldn't want them to think, like Sam_2.0's friend, that we were abandoning each other.  It would be hard for a kid to understand why Mommy and Daddy were getting a legal divorce but staying privately married, I think. 

[CarolinaKat]

Here's my personal opinion short answer:
Being married/not being married should not be the buisness of the government. Since it is, and they set up systems that both reward and punish married/unmarried people, then Yes *I* would get married/divorced for financial concerns.

Long Answer:
With the husband I have, I would not ever divorce or marry him based on financial situations. Getting a divorce, for and reason, including reasons that have nothing to do with our relationship, would crush him. He doesn't care. He loves me and therefore wants to be married to me. I love him and want to be married to him, so married we stay. He does not feel the same way I do about the census checkbox denoting maritial status, which is fine and valid and I respect those feelings. However having a wedding didn't really change our relationship at all, it was just an excuse to throw a great big party with our family and friends (Our wedding was awesome, all of you should be jealous).  Being married is also the easiest way to gain the leagal protections needed to be a life-parter with someone.

That and I promised his mother she could kill him instead of the two of us getting a divorce

[Bonny]

CarolinaKat said:

Being married is also the easiest way to gain the leagal protections needed to be a life-parter with someone.

I think is especially important if:

1) You have children together and/or

2) One of the partners takes a slower track for either childcare or to support the other spouse's career.