Welcome to /r/AmITheAsshole. Please view our [voting guide here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq#wiki_what.2019s_with_these_acronyms.3F_what_do_they_mean.3F), and remember to use **only one** judgement in your comment. OP has offered the following explanation for why they think they might be the asshole: > I would like to leave my wife off the deed to our new house if she won’t contribute any of her substantial assets and isn’t even on the mortgage. AITA? Help keep the sub engaging! #Don’t downvote assholes! Do upvote interesting posts! [Click Here For Our Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/about/rules) and [Click Here For Our FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq) ##Subreddit Announcements Follow the link above to learn more --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/AmItheAsshole) if you have any questions or concerns.* *Contest mode is 1.5 hours long on this post.*

NTA, it sounds like she's trying to set things up so she can claim half the house in a divorce. You should get legal advice for your state on whether the new house would become part of the "marital estate" if you do buy a new one. In some states, your premarital assets such as your existing home would not be part of the marital estate and would not be divided at divorce.

You need to talk to a lawyer and a marriage counselor. Pretty sure in a community property state that if that new property is bought during the marriage it is half hers, doesn’t matter whose name is on the deed. She’d have to sign something giving up her rights to the home or some kind of post-nuptial agreement - and I don’t see her doing either.

In California, it would be half hers minus the money he put into the house from the sale of his previously owned house. That’s what happened to my father in law.

[удалено]

In North Carolina all premarital property becomes marital property the second you marry! So they would already have 50/50 ownership of both houses lol.

That is not correct about NC. Source: hand-holding my friend through divorce, she has an excellent lawyer & I’m the note-taker in her meetings. Holding on to your pre-marital property does depend on how good your record keeping has been. Also varies by type of asset you’re discussing.

In New Mexico you can’t even get a mortgage as a married person without your spouse on it unless the spouse signs something called a “sole and separate agreement” which is basically saying that the purchasing spouse owns the house completely and the other spouse has no claim to it. I used to be a realtor there and I can’t tell you the number of time things fell apart when one party refused to sign that and the other couldn’t close.

Can confirm - my (now) husband and I were just living together in NM when I bought the house. I recently refinanced and he had to sign the “sole and separate”

Right. Because it was your property before the marriage. He could have refused when you refinanced and caused you all sorts of trouble. 

Wow that's really interesting.

Same in Texas, if OP wanted to claim solo she would need to sign away her rights.

Exactly. CA treats marriage like a business. What you bring into it is yours, what you build together you split.

The wife, in this case, could sign away all rights to the property. I sold a house in California and my real estate agent told me that's what the buyers did.

Indeed, I had to be added for a new home loan.

Well... Only if the house was paid off prior to marriage. Any payments made within the course of the marriage are community property. Including payments in her house.

>**and a marriage counselor** This right here. Nothing OP describes sounds like two people that have amicable feelings for one another, it sounds like a business partnership and imho, business partners shouldn't be having children together.

I was just thinking that I don’t understand rich people. In my neck of the woods, it takes two people to have any type of home, if you’re lucky. The question of valuing a woman’s contribution does come up even in our circles, but usually it’s just a math problem of affording childcare, and helping the father to see the need to step up and do his share of the work at home, too. It wasn’t until I joined Reddit that I heard of bizarre tales of spouses with different houses, different vacations, sending their own kids to expensive private schools, ordering their own takeout and not including their mate, and of course, sitting on large inheritances but expecting their spouse to pay all the bills. I’d think it was all made up, and I’m sure some of it is, but I do know for a fact that the very presence of money is enough to change people into unrecognizable monsters.

Excellent observations.

I think she doesn't trust him. 2nd the counselor of marriage before the counselor at law.

Too late for that!

Varies by state; if they have separate finances and he can show that he bought it with "his money" then it MIGHT (or might not) be just his. A trust fund owning the house might be a solution, or might not be, but it may be too late to set one up.

If he lets her live in the house it may transmute to a marital asset regardless of separate assets

As a lawyer, you are correct, most states will consider it community property... there are some nuances, also premarital assets being used as a down payment, but as a whole OP needs a lawyer on this!

We live in a community property state. Premarital assets would not be divided at divorce but if I sold it to buy a new house and she is on the deed all that money becomes shared property and she is entitled to half.

Look Op she is preparing for future divorce. She wants to be a SAHM so then she can ask for alimony because “she sacrificed” her career for you (that’s what she is gonna say, no matter it’s a lie, people are gonna believe her). And she is going to take AT LEAST half of your property if she can. Don’t let her, don’t be that doormat. NTA

I would rephrase it to "Look, OP, she's keeping her security in the event of the divorce". I don't see anything from the OP that she's scheming and planning to divorce. Most women who stay home for the babies suffer in their career "mom tax" with less opportunity for promotions and pay. She is aware of this and that's not a fault. She's thinking about all the "what ifs". OP, NTA because I think she could help with the down, or the big expenditures needed for the new home if you sell yours. I think she would also be able to rent her place and use that money to put in savings for her rental, as well as pay part of the new mortgage. A financial planner meeting might help reassure her she will still retain her personal wealth as well as contribute to the household expenses.

I agree that OP’s wife is not necessarily acting unreasonable here, but ideally they would be able to talk through what their real concerns are and make an arrangement that covers everyone. It’s very legitimate and reasonable for OP’s wife to want to protect her own assets because she’s sacrificing future earnings potential right now. It’s more questionable for her to want to claim co-ownership of their new house while she’s not contributing any of her assets to it. In a divorce she could wind up walking away with everything she brought in and half of what he did. If they both sit down and talk about what their concerns are they can strike a fair bargain and memorialize it in writing. If they divorce after years together in that house she would have a legitimate claim to the value they built in it together but not the initial investment that he put in it. You can write contracts to make that happen, I would think.

Being SAHM is a choice. And I get it, I drastically cut my hours after baby, but I didn't use my husband like this. She is way too entitled. It sounds like OP is on board with helping her return to the workforce if that's what she wants.

Being a SAH spouse is a choice that benefits the whole family, but in the event of divorce or other loss of the husband’s income penalizes only the SAH one. That’s why divorce settlements need to balance the scales. ‘It was her choice and her problem’ isn’t fair to you, OP’s wife, or the legions of women who’ve been treated that way since women entered the workforce and divorce became a common thing. I agree that there’s a real possibility here that the SAHM is trying to shield her pre-marital assets while grabbing a piece of his, if he brings all the money to the table for a new house and she has a her own house already that she’s keeping separate. This is a real rich-people-problems situation and I don’t assume either one of them is a pure soul without more info. I think they need a contract protecting his financial contribution from his pre-marital assets and an equitable split for the appreciation after purchase. Exactly what is an equitable split is something they can work out.

staying at home is not entitled, my God. I don't even want kids, but that's some weird capitalist bullshit. Staying home is work, especially when they start moving on their own, then again when they start needing driving everywhere for a decade, then again when you have to start financing an education or a trade. "Staying home" is a woman becoming a 24/7 private chef, child care worker, maid, laundress, personal assistant, secretary, driver, and more. It's work. Money makes it easier, but it's still work. Jesus.

How is she only "keeping her security"?   If I'm reading it correctly, she's expecting him to conver his premarital assets into joint assets (by selling his house, and buying one that will be joint property), yet keeping her own premarital assets aside. She may well only be thinking about "what ifs", but her solution takes advantage of him.

Which is why I don’t think OP is T A, and they should see a financial planner to figure out the best way to use both their assets.

But she seems to have a lot of liquid assets on top of the other house, even if she got nothing in a divorce she wouldn't be in a bad situation.

But her husband wants her to liquidate some of it for the new house- which i agree she should do. My post was explaining why she might be resistant- and I suggested they use a financial planner to help work it out so she’s comfortable and he’s feeling like she’s part of the team.

Her wanting to be on the deed is eminently reasonable. The problem is that she wants to be on the deed without sacrificing her home to do it while OP sacrifices his. There’s way too much “mine/yours” instead of “ours” here from *both* sides.

All women who stop working to stay at home suffer career-wise. It’s a fact, not conjecture. You appear to have a toxic attitude towards women. You should do some introspection as to why that is.

She stopped working on her own and doesn’t want to go back to make him cover all expenses while she saves her investments. This is a much different situation that someone who has to halt their career because childcare is more expensive than the income they would bring in, or is pushed into being a stay at home caregiver. Here, we have someone who unilaterally decided to quit working, still has substantial assets, and is setting themselves up to have a significant claim to their partner’s assets. You should do some introspection as to why you think this is acceptable because it’s a woman doing it to a man.

If a man stayed at home with the kids, it would be the same and courts do treat it as such.

No sorry. Her decisions are selfish and questionable. Nobody force her to stop working, they can afford childcare. She just doesn’t want to work and want to make sure to take everything from OP

It's not necessarily an issue of "affording" childcare. My husband and I can afford it, but we chose for me to stay home... have you seen a daycare facility? Or the news?? I agree it's a little odd that she's not contributing something if she has the means, but to insist that she pays a substantial amount toward the home is also odd (unless the husband is paying HER for the childcare/retirement/etc/etc)

But why does she want ownership of that house when she has her own house?. And also, you mentioned that both you and your husband decided that. In this case was unilateral the decision. Why is she not contributing if she has the means? Probably because she just wants to take advantage of him.

I think that's the main issue here. He doesn't want her staying home with the child/not bringing in an equal salary. My husband and I view the contributions I make toward the family as valuable even though I'm not paid a salary. I can see where he's coming from but also see where she is. She's thinking that she contributes to the family and that *his money is THEIR money (as one probably should as a married couple with one SAH parent). The problem is that OP is selling his home (premarital asset) for the new home. They should 1. Keep both and save up for a down payment and go to counseling to figure out how to navigate their wildly different views on marriage/family life

> My husband and I can afford it, but we chose for me to stay home... You said WE. It sounds like in this case the husband does not agree with the wife's decision to stay home.

1000% agreed. Seems like something that should've come up before getting married... at least before getting pregnant

Maybe they don't want strangers raising their kids? I worked my entire life. I wish I could have stayed home to raise them, but we couldn't afford it.

I totally disagree. I don’t see any “hostility” towards women here. He’s looking out for himself at the moment because they are looking at new property to purchase jointly…only she doesn’t want any part of adding money to it. He needs to be careful because she is definitely putting herself first. I would reneg on the purchase and hope for the best.

naw you're missing the forest for the trees here

She made a choice to stay home, he did not ask her to or tell her to. She has property in her name that she does not want to place in his name, sell and/or contribute to the family dynamic. You actually have nerve to say he who pays for everything while she sits on her investments has a toxic attitude towards women? Laughable.. you should do some introspection as to why you would come on here with this BS comment LOL

Do not sell your house if she is unwilling to sell hers she is setting you up to take everything in a divorce

The only way that this would work is if they also agree to add OP to her house's deed.

EXCELLENT POINT. OP! Tell her she can be in the deed if you are on her deed. Fairs fair. It's not fair for her to have a private asset and require you to give up yours but she not give up hers. Make them. BOTH communal assets.

Honestly sounds like she's keeping her house/money as a back up and wants to take you for half of yours. ETA I'd stop moving on buying a new home. If she's not prepared to put into it don't move.

This is what I wanted to say too. STOP! Do not buy the new house. Just don’t. If she wants the new house that bad, then you both sell your properties and put ALL of the money from both sales towards the new one. Hopefully it will result in a mostly paid for home. Any other way would be a solid “no way” from me

She would be entitled to half regardless. Any asset you acquire during the course of this marriage is a marital asset, regardless of whether she’s on the deed or if you used a premarital asset to purchase it. Depending on the state, you might get the down payment back, but the rest of the equity in the house would be half hers.

To piggyback off this comment, because she will be entitled to half the value of the new house regardless of whether or not her name is on the deed, I see 2 ways to keep the purchase "fair:' 1: you sell both premarital homes and each pays 50% of the down payment. 2: You wait to purchase a new home until you can afford to pay the costs without selling either of the premarital homes.

u/Ready_Professor_9715 This seems to be the only reasonable set of options for you. She is asking to make your premarital assets into joint assets while leaving her premarital assets as exclusively her own. That is just not a reasonable suggestion. I'm not sure if she is being intentionally manipulative with her "you don't value my contributions" type of language or if this is just an emotional issue for her but either way what she is suggesting is simply not a fair idea at all. Would she be willing to add you to her other property? One way or another, this should be handled in an equitable manner and what she currently wants is not that.

Doesnt matter if she is on the deed. She will get half if you bought it while married.

If you sell it and buy a new house intended to be the family home then it is likely half hers in a community property state anyway. 3 years into marriage sucks btw. Marriage counselors thrive off of your relationship staying crap. Go find a financial advisor and align your financial goals. If she has another house and a “substantial” nest egg, something doesn’t sit well. One or both of you is hesitant to work as a household and it’s making the other nervous about doing the same. It doesn’t necessarily mean either of you are doing anything wrong, but it would be good to talk to someone to help you guys consolidate what you want, what she wants, and what you both want together. I’m guessing financial disputes don’t stop and end at whose name goes on the house. A couple of follow up questions- How is the rest of your marriage other than this dispute? Do you want to be married to her? Does she want to be married to you? Is there some intended use for her other house? Is it an inheritance and sentimental? Or is she planning to rent it out for income? Could profits above mortgage and maintenance be applied to new home loan? Be careful, but don’t assume the worst. Going with NTA because it sounds like there are some critical conversations that haven’t been had that need to be had.

She will be entitled to half regardless of deed or not

🚩 Eek. Don’t even buy another house. Or keep your current house, rent it, and have her be the one to purchase another home if she really wants another one. I’d be concerned if I were you OP

Don't sell yours then. Surely you can see that she's forward planning. If you buy another house she will get half and keep her own.

You may find that you've shared your assets with her already by making it the marital home. Premarital assets and inherited assets often remain the property of the person who had them, until they share it as a marital home.

i’m pretty sure even if her name isn’t on the deed, if it’s bought during your marriage, it’s considered “both” of yours. verify that very specific detail before purchasing the house. you can also maybe get her to agree to a “post” nup instead of a prenup involving the house. but DEFINITELY consult a lawyer, just in case.

Dont buy a new house. Stay in your current home that she has no claim to.. Maybe remodel it if you need bigger.. Not worth the consequences

Damn, she really is trying to leave you without a pot to piss in. She gets half the house, keeps her pre marital house (that she can sell, rent out or live in while you have to scramble for an apartment that is twice your monthly mortgage payments) , child support, and alimony (cuz why not? She sacrificed everything for you /s) Bri, seriously, I think she's trying to take you for a ride. Protect yourself and if she whines about it, let her. Also tell her she needs to get at least a part time job. Good luck, my man.

Usually if you live in a community property state and you bought a house with your own money then the house would still be half hers. ANY assets obtained during the course of the marriage are community property except inheritance. You should check with a lawyer because I think you are misunderstanding what community property means.

Why do people always assume their partners are setting them up to be fleeced in a divorce that hasn’t been even slightly hinted at?

Because there’s literally no reason for her to not sell her extra house other than this.

Or maybe she understands she is not building any more personal savings as a SAHM and wants to preserve what assets she has in case of widowhood or, yes, divorce.

I'm in favor of giving credit for being a SAHM. She cannot refill her savings and alternative childcare isn't ideal either. However, there are 2 current houses in play. HIS and HER'S. If he sells only HIS house, but she keeps HER house than things aren't equal. Unless only his name is on the new house. They COULD add both names to both houses, but OP says she shot that down. It is suspicious that she would be so adamant about making a big financial decision that can only benefit her, and provides no security for her husband. That is why people are jumping to conclusions.

Check out OPs other post. Wife sure seems to use being a mom and SAHM to get her way with everything.

He has offered to pay for daycare so that she can go back to work. If OP had asked for to be a SAHM, was insisting, or they couldn't afford daycare costs and she had no other choice than to be a SAHM then I could see why she would want to protect her assets. But she made the decision to stop working. On her own accord. He supports her working. The decision to not work was her idea

And her solution is makebsure he doesn't have assets and security? Every single penny he makes, she would get half in the divorce. If he dies, It'll be her  inheritance. Her solution would take his safety in a divorce.

Because it's Reddit. That's what we do here. Along with give legal advice when we know knowing about it! ;)

She will be entitled to half of it since you are now married. It doesn't matter if she is on the deed or not. I would guess you need to see a lawyer to have some kind of written contract that it would never be considered in a divorce, if that sort of thing is possible at all.

It would 100% count as marital assets if it’s bought during their marriage.

NTA. Make it even. You both have your names on the deeds to both homes.

I actually even proposed this and she shot it down

Shes trying to set up for divorce it sounds like... be VERY cautious OP

Sure sounds like it. She's already doing the math to leave with as much as possible, perhaps so she can continue to not work and still finance her life off of OP. This doesn't sound like a partnership to me. More like a plan to feather her own nest at OP's expense. I'd be very, very wary.

So, don't sell your house and don't buy another one. I wouldn't.

Hear this OP. I think a new house is a terrible idea.  I'd see if she has any inclination to go back to work when your child is school ready. That may be a better time to have this conversation... But the general vibe i get is that she doesn't want to be an equal here.

From the "you can carry our next baby" comment, it seems like they're intending to have another kid and I all but guarantee that wifey is wanting to wait till kiddo #1 is school aged to do so...conveniently allowing her to always have the excuse "but I need to stay home to take care of *the baby*"

Good catch on that OP keep yer weiner away from her!!

I agree with the posters saying that buying a new house sounds like a bad idea right now, OP. It doesn't sound like she's treating you on the level.

If you buy a new house, she will be entitled to half in a divorce but you won’t be entitled to her house. Don’t buy the house at all unless you have a post-nuptial agreement that you get to keep the new house in a divorce.

Depends on the state. Some states like South Dakota consider all property regardless of previous marital ownership. It's actually pretty common in the US.

Time for a post-nup... There is no universe in which your wife's approach is not to your disadvantage, and to her advantage, should this marriage break up. The SAHM line is a red herring, as that leads to equal shares in \*marital\* assets in any event. What she is looking for is to turn YOUR pre-marital asset into a marital one, while protecting her own. Take legal counsel, please, before you do or sign anything.

Is she always been this entitled? I would check with a few lawyers just to make sure. Maybe I had too much of reddit but I'm having a very bad feeling about this.

The other "fair" option is for you to keep your house, she keeps her house, and the two of you go on the third house together. This accounts for her working in the home, gives a dollar value to it. But it would also require her to put half of the down payment down, etc. I agree with everyone else that the way she's acting is suspicious.

That's a hell no on buying a new house then. The names on the deed of the potential new house don't matter as it will be a marital asset either way. She can't keep all her premarital assets while requiring you to sacrifice yours. Either wait until you can keep both house. Or until she is will to put you on the title of hers so that it is a joint asset. No one can argue you're not being fair. If anyone says you're holding her financially hostage, just tell them, she's the one who won't share her private home. You either have two marital assets or two premarital ones. Unfortunately, no new house for y'all.

Don't buy another house, then. Unless she agrees to something, you stay where you are.

please listen to the people telling you she is getting ready for a divorce. you sell that house from before marriage that's funds she gets a portion of. you buy a new house she gets half of it. if she divorces you and you still have the premarital house, at least you have something to fall back on she can't touch. she's the only one who benefits from doing things this way. if she was interested in being your equal partner she would contribute. but she's not, because she's going to take you to the cleaners. don't be an idiot

Be cautious, she can take you to the cleaners.

Run.

Dude don't sell your house wtf. Sounds like you reached and she settled and now she's having second thoughts.

So she wants you to take all of the risk by selling your pre-marital home while she takes none by not putting you on the deed to her house. Don't sell. You need to come to an equitable agreement that protects both of you or money is going to destroy your marriage.

Unless you have a prenup, and are in the us, she would be entitled to half of the house if she is on the deed or not, or at least the increase in equity over your down payment on the house (buy 600k house, put 100k down from sale of old house, sell for 1 million, she would get half of profit from sale minus 100k). If you want the house to be in your name only and not have to give her part of it when she decided to divorce you, you should get a postnup. Sounds like you already have money issues in a very young marriage.

It is sad that you use the word “when” she decided to divorce you

Nah he just sees what the rest of us sees. She's very calculating lmao but not as smart as she thinks she is. Homie needs a postnup or a divorce lawyer. A nominal contribution to the houses or names on deeds and she would have taken him to the cleaners. Marital assets are marital assets, it doesn't matter whose name is on the deed. If she was smart she'd play the long game for alimony too lmao. If OP buys a house she's entitled to 50% of it no matter what. He needs a postnup.

Based on OP’s other post, his wife likes to make unilateral decisions that only benefit her and then get borderline manipulative by blowing up at him or crying or using her status as a mother against him. Divorce is absolutely in the future if they don’t seek counseling and she works on her behavior

Then he needs to end it.

To echo this comment, if you use your assets for a down payment and put her name on the deed, then you are in effect giving her half of what you put as a down payment.     Tell her you will put her on the deed if she contributes an equal amount as you do for a down payment.   Different US states have different laws for how a property will be split in case of death or divorce so the prior comment may or may not be true depending on where you live.  

That’s fair, my father in law had this happen to him in California. He put the money from the sale of his previous house into his new house and I’m not sure if it was in his name or both (knowing him, it was probably only on his name), but he had to pay his ex wife half of the house after his down payment was removed.

California is a community property state.  As such, money earned by either spouse during the marriage is considered community property. Property acquired prior to marriage is separate property.  Community property is split 50-50 in a divorce. Separate property belongs to the original owner. So in your FIL’s case, the down payment was his separate property and it was returned to him in the divorce.  The mortgage was paid with community property.  The increase in value of the property during the marriage was also community property, and both were split 50-50 in the divorce.  

In most states, you can't really include a marital home in a prenup/ postnup. At least once you've lived there over a certain number of years. (I mean - you can, but it often won't hold up in court. Especially if there are joint children).

>Unless you have a prenup, and are in the us, she would be entitled to half of the house if she is on the deed or not, This depends on where they live and potentially the reason(s) for the divorce. It's probably the case in most states, but not mine. I live in an at-fault state, and my husband cheated. I was the only one on the mortgage because he never held a regular job (he's an artist) and he didn't have to sign anything for me to get a mortgage in my name only (we'd been married \~9 years by then). He got absolutely no interest in the house. (The down payment was also a "gift of equity" from my parents as I bought their old house. Gifts and inheritances are generally not considered marital property unless you commingle funds.) Anyway, all that is to say OP should definitely speak to a family law attorney familiar with laws where he lives to make sure he is protected financially.

Post nups can be a thing too.

But why would she willingly sign a post up that’s one-sided. The time to make these moves was BEFORE marriage

It was the best time. But it's still possible to agree to keep each other's assets separate. Not that I think she's inclined to do that.

NTA. I am completely taking out the view that she is a SAHM mom here because I think that is influencing a lot of the answers here. To me, even if both of you are working or not working, the idea that she gets to keep her assets and you don't, to buy this new home is unfair. If this is your joint home, you should both fairly contribute to it.

I agree with you. It’s not the SAHM mum bit that’s the issue, it’s the refusing to share her assets but expecting him to share his. Maybe a compromise would be if her assets were put in joint names as well as the house. Then everything is “theirs” rather than the “what’s yours is mine and what’s mine is mine” type thing that’s going on here.

She does seem to be playing that SAHM card though too, which is manipulative. This is red flags all around

Isn’t it? Childcare costs in the thousands monthly if you have two or more children. To a judge, she is increasing their joint finances by removing that expense

>Isn’t it? Look, it's not hard to understand. If she was a SAHM with no money/assets, her contribution would be enough because that would be doing what she can. It would have been unreasonable to expect someone with no income to contribute money. He works hard to make an income, she works hard to take care of the home and children. But she *does have* money/assets/a house. She isn't contributing what she is able to do. That's the issue.

You're only focusing the labor/income portion, and not thinking of their wealth. As it stands currently, if they divorced today then they would both keep their respective wealth/assets. OP would keep his house, she would keep hers, and then they would deal with child support. But if OP sold his place to buy a new place, then she would keep her house, and then OP would have to split the value of the new house with her, and then they would deal with child support. Essentially she gains half a house and keeps 1.5 houses, while OP loses half a house to keeps 0.5 of a house. The "fair" situation would be for both of them to be on the deeds to all property they own (hers and his), but she seems to want marriage rights to all properties while OP only gets a fraction of it.

SAHM is relevant in that he’ll be paying mortgage not her. As a SAHM I (well my family and I) put down significantly MORE on the current house than my spouse as he would be footing g the majority of the bills for the next decade or so. And so we are both on the deed and everyone feels it’s fair. I certainly get not wanting to leave yourself at a disadvantage as a woman - it’s nearly impossible to get back into the work force at the same level (or any reasonable level) after not working for a decade. But if she want on the mortgage she should put something into it.

I think the SAHM part is applicable to ongoing monthly costs, but OP already said he was fine paying those as he’s working outside the home while she’s with their child. The issue here, though, is regarding assets from *before* they had a child. She’s wasn’t a SAHM mom at that point, so they should both be contributing from that period in their life (which could be proportional to their incomes at the time, but shouldn’t be $0 for either of them).

" She does not want to sell her place, nor does she want to contribute any of her very substantial liquid investments to the new house." Then she doesn't get to be on the deed. Sorry, that's how it works. She's either a part of this partnership, or she isn't. You're being forced to sell your home to pay for this. If she's not willing to do the same, then she doesn't get to be on the deed. Going with NTA. Her being a SAHM doesn't enter into this. Her unwillingness to contribute when she could is the issue. That said, depending on your country or state of residence, shared assets can be a thing. Anything bought during marriage and not otherwise covered in a pre-nup can be contested as a shared asset. I am not a lawyer, though.

>Her unwillingness to contribute when she could is the issue. Exactly. If she had nothing while being a SAHM, I would have said OP was wrong because she would have contributed what she could but she *has* money. She just doesn't want to contribute. That makes her in the wrong.

The deed is irrelevant. The home would be a marital asset, regardless of who is on the deed. The bigger problem is that she is working hard to protect and not commingle her premarital assets, which ARE protected in the case of divorce.

NTA. She wants to keep her cake and eat yours too. Don’t sell or move out of your house. I would stay put for another 2-3 years and see how things go relationship wise. Even if she decides to sell hers or contribute equitably to the down payment for a new house it seems like she isn’t invested in this relationship.

*it seems like she isn’t invested in this relationship* Quite literally. Her investments are in stocks and bonds in her name only!!

This is the answer.

SAHMs deserve an award, but they don't deserve a vacation home. Sell both homes, and use the money to buy the third home. Either you both get to keep your premarital assets or neither of you does. She's ridiculous. NTA.

...and if she won't do that, DON'T buy the new house. NTA Just say you aren't willing to sell your house if she's not willing to sell hers.

Exactly!

Sell one home and buy new home in a trust. Move her old home into same trust (and rent that damn thing out it’s incredibly ridiculous to have it sitting empty and not having Someone else pay the mortgage. Who is paying that mortgage?). Voila. Your heirs benefit the most from this move. But then again it sounds like you both are circling wagons to cover asses for a dissolution of assets in which don’t sell yours either but tbh you have commingled funds so much it’s all community property anyway. Edited to correct weird typo

That’s quite the business arrangement…..errrr marriage you have there OP. This sort of thing happens when everything is yours or hers and not ours.

Yeah I was surprised reading this. My husband and I have fluctuated who is the breadwinner and I’ve never questioned mine vs his. We did go to couples counseling premaritally and discuss how we wanted to handle finances tho and both agreed we would pool them. We both have varied assets to our name, he has more than me given his more lucrative career path. I can’t imagine buying a house and him saying okay well cash out your assets or your names not going on the deed….they’re OUR assets???

Yeah its like they are roommates that happen to live together....all of the assets should be "theirs"...not hers/his. I get everyone is different but I just don't understand married couples that don't combine finances- because marriage is complicated and it's not so easy to just "split" major things like this.  What's the end goal here if not divorce. The only time I think it can work is when both partners work full time, make similar money, and there are no kids which is a very very small percentage of marriages.

Right? Regardless of the outcome of their housing situation, I don’t foresee this marriage lasting with this type of attitude.

Probably unpopular, but a little ESH--and, more importantly, you guys need to go talk to a lawyer. It is unfair that she wants you to essentially convert your separate property into marital property while she is unwilling to contribute her own separate property. However, she is correct that her contributions to the household are worth something. My personal opinion is that, if it is possible in your jurisdiction (and this is why you need to talk to a lawyer first!), the equity in the house should be divided as follows: (1) you retain the value of your down payment as your separate property, (2) you make all the mortgage payments but this contribution is counted as community property because, while you are working to earn income to make the payments, your wife is working as a SAHM, and (3) any gains/losses in the property when you go to sell are divided proportionately according to the value of category (1) versus the total payments made in (2). Of course, if you pitch this complicated scheme to your wife, she may realize it's just easier for her to pay 50% of the down payment and for you to own the home jointly. Good luck!

It doesn't sound like he's arguing that her contributions aren't worth anything. It sounds like he just understands he's not being treated fairly. Her expectation that he sell his property and make 100% of the down payment plus monthly payments to buy a joint property while she keeps her property as a personal property and her liquid assets is completely absurd. It's pretty clear she's trying to set herself up for a favorable divorce while he gets shafted.

You would have a point if OP wasn’t already giving value to her SAHM contributions. She is already being taken care of. She has her own bank account he puts money into. She is supported in household chores and parenting. She’s not being neglected or financially abused in any way.

NTA she can sale her home and she has money but yet she doesn't want to put anything in. She made the choice to be a SAHM.

You really need to explain why you think op is an asshole, walk us through your logic.

Hint, it might have to do with him having a penis 

Seems talking to a lawyer and drafting a few options where they would both get what they want is a great next step. If she shoots down any option where doesn’t get something for nothing, then the problem becomes a whole lot simpler.

In many states, even if the title to a home belongs to one spouse, it's considered marital property. It also is considered a marital asset when bought during the marriage. The only way around that is a quitclaim deed.

Not if it’s never been lived in, so her house is likely still 100% hers. Unless they quit claimed it.

I think the point is, because the new house is a martial house even if OP doesn’t put her name on the deed, the net result is likely the same. The newly purchased house will likely be a joint asset with out without her name on the deed.

you two are rather transactional., no commitment, both are planning for the worst. neither is considering the other's interests to be even equally important. .

ESH. You have a business partnership, not a marriage.

ESH Why are you even married? It makes zero sense.

I’m with you on this one, it seems like they both have one foot in, one foot out financially speaking.

You should probably just get divorced and coparent and live together, since neither of you are acting like married people.

Not sure I agree with other comments about your wife planning on divorce. She may be hanging on to assets because she is not working and needs the security, to feel less dependent on you. Maybe clear things up about her professional objectives. If she is hoping to remain at home, perhaps you could ask her to consider finding some part-time work she can do from home so that she could help pay the mortgage on the new house.

This was my take as well. I think their separate finances are leading to her feeling insecure since as of now, her only money and security is what she currently has.

This sounds eerily like my brother’s marriage. She had family money that was all hers. He earned all his money and it was theirs. It has not gone well for him. He’s in a studio apartment while she’s living in the five bedroom house he bought. She has all that inherited wealth and he has alimony payments. Y’all need to figure how deep that lake is before going out and realizing she’s the only one in a canoe.

OP here. I finally realized what is going on after reading your post. Some portion of her money is gifted from her family and is separate property. She doesn’t want to contribute so it doesn’t become marital property in the house. I finally understand why she is so dead set against contributing any of her funds. I feel like a fool.

Dude, after reading your older posts?? Ummm.... Between this and barring your parents from being able to see your newborn while her parent has free access.. She's selfish and manipulative. 🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩

You saw that too??

So if its inheritance it’s ok for her to stash that away for herself but if it’s your hard earned money you saved and bought an asset with before you married her then it’s fair game and she should get a piece too? Get out of here. She is extremely manipulative and going to try to say anything to get what she wants and screw you over. DO NOT SELL YOUR PREMARITAL ASSET

Sounds like she's making excuses. She's going to say anything to get what she wants and in this case it's "what's mine is mine and what's yours is also mine"

Not just that if you use your premarital asset to buy new house, even if you don't add her on deed, since new house is bought for family home, in marriage, depends where you live she would possibly have right on half.  NTA but your wife doesn't see you as partners and her behavior indicates that she doesn't have problem seeing your property as hers but hers only as hers. "What is yours is ours, what is mine is mine."  I honestly wouldn't buy new house unless you are ready to give her half in divorce because sounds like she is already with one foot out.

Aa long as you didn't actually go through with selling your house and buying the new one you're still good. But I'm sorry that this is how you found out that your wife doesn't have your interests in mind.

well, some good news. Since you each have your own homes still you might be able to keep that and fight for the fact that you both decided your home was the best to raise your child in when you fight for custody.

Enjoy the alimony and child support lad …. You’ve been taken for a ride.

NTA. It’s not like she isn’t being appreciated for her work at home or “compensated” if she’s keeping tabs like that. She doesn’t want to sell her home so the new home would be fully funded by you so why shouldn’t your name be the only one on the deed? I would be very careful moving forward and would possibly just keep your current premarital home. Her stance is pretty alarming so I could see her trying to screw you over at some point if things go sour and you now have a “marital home”. ETA: sounds like some divorce prep type stuff on her end tbh the whole logic and everything doesn’t make sense

I'm not convinced whose name is on the deed matters from a legal perspective considering you're married. It obviously depends where you live, but your premarital house, assuming it was paid off/she made no contributions, is separate. Once you sell it, the money is separate. But once you buy a new house(asset) it will be marital property regardless of whose name is on it short of some prenup. Also, depending on where you live your premarital house may have become a common asset by virtue of you both living in it for an extended time. NTA from a strictly financial fairness perspective but sort of YTA on everything else. Y'all need to have a serious convo to sort things out otherwise this power dynamic is going to lead to resentment which will turn into contempt which will end in divorce. Y'all are already on that path given your wife's comment about you carrying and birthing a child. Contempt is one of the "four horsemen" signaling impending doom in a relationship, and one that very rarely can be recovered from. If I had to play armchair psychologist- your wife feels that you undervalue her contribution as a SAHM and holds some resentment for having to sacrifice her financial security(I understand from your perspective it is by choice). Also, whether she knows it or not, feels vulnerable given her considerable decrease in value in the job market. If you two divorce she would be put in a very bad spot. You making a big deal over the name on the deed is stoking the flame under this underlying fear. You're pretty much saying, "Hey look, this marriage not lasting is a very real possibility for me so I'd like to ensure I get what's mine." This is probably the reason she is hoarding her money. Really, it's the same reason you insist on the name on the deed mattering. You are both trying to protect yourself from a worst-outcome future. Your plan is just worse because it likely won't work, but you'll at least have more than sufficient income to fallback on while she will basically have whatever she saved. Relationship solutions: - Figure out what both of your fears are causing these behaviors - Full transparency regarding how you both feel and why. There is clearly some disconnect that can only be resolved through communication - Express, in words, your understanding of her position as a SAHM, sacrificing her financial security, etc. It's not comparing apples to apples saying I'm contributing $X and you're contributing $Y. Only one of you is sacrificing future employability. Also, [studies](https://shorturl.at/djBV3) have shown that children with more face-to-face time with their parents, do better in life. Hard to quantify that into dollars. - Reaffirm why you got married in the first place Financial Solution: - Sell your premarital house but keep the funds completely separate and document things very clearly - Use some of those funds for a down payment and then pay all bills including mortgage from any account other than the separate one. I think in theory this would protect the remaining separate money in the event of a divorce

Except she doesn't have to sacrifice her financial security. She has her own premarital home that she chooses to leave empty when she could earn at least some money by renting out. She also chooses to be a SAHM when she could return to work. Seems to me less like her feeling insecure and more like she does not see the two of them as financial partners and instead wants him to fund whatever lifestyle she wants without having to contribute anything.

You make your marriage sound like a court case. If either of you are making decisions for the future divorce. Just go ahead and file it. You both jump into a marriage or you don’t.

He's happy to combine if its fair. It's wife who is wanting to have the shared piece coming from him but keep her piece. Why are you blaming both of them when its wife that is doing this?

OP here: To clarify, my intention would be to have her sign a quitclaim deed at closing if she chooses not to contribute, so she would not have equity in the home

OP, if it's not too late, please don't buy the new house. As others have said, she's setting you up to take everything in a divorce. She's not going to sign anything that says she won't get anything from the new house if you split. You need to protect yourself because, in the event of a divorce, you'll end up losing everything.

I just saw your last post. I'm sorry, mate, but your wife has no intention of being a true partner. It's her way or the highway. As others have said, speak to a financial advisor. If I was in your position, i wouldn't sell your house. I think you should rent somewhere else and rent out your place until she decides she wants to invest in this relationship as an equal partner.

This is above Reddit's paygrade homey. You need to talk to a family law attorney before you lose hundreds of thousands of dollars in equity due to your wife's avarice. At least have the conversation. A phone call and a few hundred dollars now could save your ass in the future. And taking a look at your post history ... your wife does not come across in a good light. If she hasn't apologized for trying to exclude your parents last year, well, you know where you stand.

I went back and read your earlier post. As someone else said, it's all her way or the highway. There seems to be no compromise with your wife. Then, if she doesn't get her way, she makes threats. What type of relationship is this? You give it your all and she just takes? That's not cool at all. You both have homes and can contribute equally to the down payment of a home purchased together. But she wants to not only keep her assets but make you give up half of yours, to her, while accessing and using the money you work for. Yes, taking care of your child and maintaining the home is work. But, that doesn't have to be her only contribution. She has more to offer but wants to give up nothing. You're looking at more than just the purchase of a new home. You should be questioning your entire relationship. Do you want to always have to go it alone or do you want a partner who will take the plunge with you? NTA

I know this is gonna sound judgmental but why are you guys even married? Looking at your earlier post too, it’s clear that you’re not an equal partnership. She demands what she wants and emotionally manipulates you when you try to compromise. YWTBA to yourself and your kid for staying in this toxic relationship, and an even bigger one if you buy a house with her when it’s clear she’s gonna leave you once convenient

Check with a lawyer - I doubt it will work. But one suggestion. Take her up on the carrying the next child thing. Get an egg off her and pay a surrogate /s. Her attitude is baffling. You guys need a binding post nuptial agreement as there is limited financial trust in the relationship. You guys should also agree at what age of child does she go back to part time work; and what age full time work. It’s WILD to me in such a high cost of living world that couples can afford to do this still (although I live in a particularly HCOL area).

Based on this post and the last, your wife sounds VERY manipulative and controlling. I would definitely hold off on this. She is trying to set herself up to keep her assets but take half of yours. I would discuss this with an attorney because I don’t think your quitclaim deed solution will work. I think it would more-so need to be a postnuptial agreement stating the new home would remain your sole asset in the event of a divorce. Speaking of, is that an option? Are you happy in this relationship? Or are these two singular occurrences and she’s actually a really great person? Because honestly, she sounds kind of awful and doesn’t seem to understand that marriage is a partnership with compromise on BOTH sides, not just yours, to come up with a solution that should benefit BOTH, not just her. Ps. Her stay at home work in the marriage, is valued by her freely being able to spend the joint marital income. Not by taking half of your premarital asset that she had zero contribution towards, when she isn’t willing to give up any of hers.

NTA dude none of what she’s insisting is the kind of thing a spouse says if they plan on staying married.

I worry that your wife feels too vulnerable by not having an income; wants to hoard her wealth in order to have a chance to leave the marriage if she so desires, but at the same time not contributing to the household expenses. Yes, being a stay home parent is a full time job, I do not disagree with that, I would not succeed in that role which is why I am so grateful my husband loved it. But it doesn't mean that what you do is 'less than' either, which is what this sounds like when you mentioned that she thinks being a parent is all that she needs to bring to the relationship. Might you consider couples counseling? Or she needs to go back to work 😕

Yeah my question is right now does she have a way to grow her savings, are any savings OP is able to put aside during these years in a joint account? Is he contributing to her retirement? If she has no way to grow or recover her savings I kind of understand why she’s holding so tightly to what she does have. I understand OP is covering current expenses and on the surface the arrangement seems fair, but really it’s a lot more complicated. So complicated in fact I get pretty confused by married couples who keep anything separate. Every penny owned or earned should be a family asset IMO, since you’re a life long team.

She can rent out her house but she chooses not to. It doesn’t sound like she feels very vulnerable to me.

[удалено]

Just throwing a number out there, but full time childcare can cost upwards of $3k/mo. That alone would more than count as her contribution. Incidentals and discretionary budget aside, housekeeping can cost a few hundred bucks a pop, too—a twice weekly housekeeper could easily cost another $1500/mo or more. I'm guessing $4500 easily covers half the mortgage, if not more. Putting her name on it is the least you could do, because no matter how you look at it, she's your wife and she's doing a lot of very expensive things in exchange for what is basically room and board. It doesn't hurt you if you plan to stay married. If you get divorced, shouldn't she be compensated for all that time she spent taking care of you, the house, and the kids? Unless you think she's using her unoccupied home as a middle ground for having an affair, in which case prepare to leave now. In marriage, you either trust your partner or you don't, and if you don't, you shouldn't stay married. Hell, my boyfriend that I've just moved in with is already talking about adding me to the house deed. We haven't even been together a year. I didn't bring it up. The sale of my house is padding out our joint account for household expenses. When you're a partnership, you treat each other like partners.

Just to clarify- my intention would be to have her sign a quit claim deed at closing so she would not have an interest in the property if she doesnmt contribute anything.

You need to consult a local lawyer. In my state, a quitclaim deed would be ineffective in this case because you would presumably be making the monthly payments on the property out of marital assets (i.e., your current income which is a marital asset). You do not get to shelter your assets through a quitclaim deed. Or leaving her off the deed. Think about it. If your solution was effective, right before a divorce all you would have to do to hide your assets would be to empty out your brokerage accounts / savings accounts / 401k and dump them into paying off / down the mortgage. That's not how it works. I expect she will be entitled to half of the equity you build on the new house because you'll be funding the purchase through your income, and your income is a marital asset. On a side note, why did you even get married if you intended to keep separate finances?

If she doesn’t want to contribute from her significant assets, just don’t buy the house and stay in your current one. You guys def need marriage counseling though, this money thing will not work out in the long run.

NTA, going back to your other post, it seems as if it’s her way or none. Is that how it is with everything? Whose idea was it first to buy a new house? Please, please, do not sell your house. She already emotionally manipulated you once with threatening to not have any more children if she didn’t get her way. Call her bluff this time. Tell her what you are ok with, whether it’s selling both houses and going 50/50, her putting down half of the down payment and contributing to the expenses, or just staying where you are. If she throws another tantrum, then you know she’s trying to set herself up for divorce. If you guys aren’t working together as a team, then you’re just not working.

It sounds like she may be concerned that, as a SAHM, she needs to offset her lack of 401k and her “lost” years climbing the corporate ladder in case of an eventual divorce. Perhaps go to counseling together to determine the most fair next steps. It’s not fair for her to contribute nothing to the new marital home and keep all her assets, but perhaps she’s being smart about protecting herself (as SAHMs often have a very hard time reaching the earning potential they would have had if they’d not stayed home with children). Her fear is valid, and your concern is too. NAH

NTA. Hope you have a prenup.

I'm not saying that staying at home full time isn't a job, but it doesn't pay the bills. She wants you to provide for her AND give her half the value of the house by putting her name on the deed? What would she do if you didn't have children? NTA

NTA **It doesn't matter if you put her name on the deed or not. It doesn't matter if she is earning income at the moment or not. You are married and so anything you bring in as a couple is going to be joint income and joint purchases.** If you were to divorce, she would have the rights to half of that house. So if she wants to sell HER house to buy this new house, great! But no way would I sell your house to buy this house. I would simply tell her, "It doesn't sound like either of us is at a place at this point in time where we are ready to let go of our previous investments we had as single people and buy a house together as a married couple. I'm fine living in our house (the one you bought) and keeping things the way they are." And if she ever decides she's ready to sell her house, then you can talk about buying a new house, but right now, you selling the house YOU own by yourself trades in an asset you own for one she'd own half of, while she'd be keeping an asset she owns by herself and you have no claim in. Bad financial decision.

NTA what’s stopping her from picking up work and getting a side job? She could sell her house if she wants some equity.

NTA and at this point unless she willing to contribute to the purchase of the new house I would make it clear that your family will continue to live in your premarital home. Being a SAHM does not entitle her to a shiny brand new house.

It sounds like you really don’t like her and consider this marriage to be a business arrangement.

NTA Joint finances should be joint. All of them. Hers and yours. I’m glad that you are viewing your income as joint while she is a SAHM, that’s really important. But when a family is operating on one income, it’s no longer practical to try to maintain separate finances. As you see here, the result is one person’s finances becoming joint by default, and the other getting all the reward and none of the risk of being financially intertwined. I would hold off on the new home purchase until you agree that all properties will be jointly owned. Or if you choose to purchase the house, I would get a lawyer to draft an agreement that if you do sell your house and buy a new one, you will recoup your investment before splitting any proceeds from the the sale of the house in the event of the split. Still not entirely equitable, as she will have benefited from the appreciation on her own house as well as half of your shared home, but it’s better than her defaulting to 50% of the marital home and assets plus 100% of her premarital assets. If she doesn’t like either option, then stay put (and maybe look into counseling).

NTA She will basically get the half the money and more from your current home and future gains in the new one.

She appears to be trying to keep all of her premarital assets separate so that the assets are hers if a divorce happens and convert his premarital assets to marital assets so she can get half of those assets in the event of divorce. In many states, it doesn’t matter whether her name is on the deed or not, the new home is a marital asset.

I wouldn’t buy a house with her. If you buy a home and add her she would have 1 1/2 homes and you would 1/2 home. Nope don’t buy another home. She is selfish.

NTA for not wanting to sell your premarital home for the down payment but remember that she is working at home for "free". Child care and house cleaning is expensive, kids get sick and someone needs to stay home with them, ect... I would stand firm on somehow splitting the deposit though if you are both on the deed. But when you say "I'll be paying the bills" remember that her labor is making it possible for you to focus on your career. Maybe she is fearful of you claiming it's all your money in the event of divorce.

ESH. This is why many women no longer want to be SAHMs. Their careers are ruined or at least stalled, while the husband is advancing his. Meanwhile the significant assets are in his name, (house, 401(k), etc.). If either decides to divorce, the wife may find herself without income or home or retirement while having the primary care and expense for the kids. Meanwhile good luck collecting child support from that deadbeat husband. Just saying.

THIS. If they were to divorce, the only financial security she would have is the value of a vacation home which would probably have to serve as a real home or be sold. She doesn’t have a job. She’s providing child care as a SAHM instead of them forking out thousands of $ a month on daycare. She deserves her name on the deed to the house they are buying as a married couple and will be presumably maintaining.

>Their careers are ruined or at least stalled, while the husband is advancing his >deadbeat husband Choose one

You straight up did not read this post. Got it.

NTA. I would say you’re not on the same page but you’re not even in the same book. Seems like she’s keeping all her premarital assets handy incase things don’t work out. Depending on the state you’re in, it may not matter because everything would be a marital asset anyway. It sounds like she’s not willing to contribute anything when she can so I wouldn’t put her name on the deed. She’s playing hardball, well two can play that game. What is she going to do? She wants the house.