Another finance thread

LegacyUser

The current thread on finances in relationships got me thinking about my own situation, however I don't seem to be able to post anonymously there, so have had to create a new thread (happy if the mods want to merge though).

I very recently moved in with my OH and currently we're splitting things 50/50. This is how we have always done things when dating and I've never had an issue with it. For a long time we were on a similar wage and it's only fair.

However in recent months he got a promotion and is now on a much higher wage than me (over 10k/yr, before tax). He's also on a career path that will likely see him going up in leaps and bounds annually. I earn a decent wage (not struggling by any means), but this increases only by a very small amount annually. So I'm worried about the gap in pay between us getting bigger and bigger over time.

On the one hand, I think it's perfectly fair to split things 50/50. And I am genuinely fine with this in the short-medium term while we figure out if we're compatible living together (very very early days). But personally I feel for the long term, it would be fair if we have a joint account for rent etc that we both pay into based on our income (e.g. if he earns twice as much, he pays in twice as much).

I have no idea how or when to broach this subject though! It's not something we've ever really discussed, we've always just done 50/50 by default. I'm thinking the best time would be later in the year, if everything is still going well living together (i.e. we're definitely in it for the long haul) we could discuss getting a joint account for the convenience of bills etc and try to bring it up then. I feel it's almost cheeky of me to raise the issue of him paying more though, as obviously I'd be the one benefiting from it!! I'd feel much better if he was the one to suggest it If I suggest it and he agrees, I'd be afraid that he might end up resenting me for it.

SarahMollie

IMO, relationship stage, plans for the future, and amount of commitment promised are key here.

You've only just moved in together, but it doesn't say how long you are together. In my opinion (and based on my own experience) the first year or so of living together is really a bit of a test to see how things are going to pan out. Until you're more established as a cohabiting couple, I don't think theres an issue here yet.

At this point it seems like you both want to be in it for the long haul (based on the decision to live together) but this is still new and untested. Only time will tell if you decide to make further commitments to each other like marriage, buying a home together or having children etc.

IMO, just moving in is not sufficient justification for sharing finances. However, assuming you decide to get married for example, then its more appropriate to have that discussion.

My advice is to just ride this out for a while and not worry unless he shows you some warning signs (like expecting you to still pay 50-50 if he begins to suggest more expensive pasttimes based on his new income). From the information you've provided, he's going to be about €400 a month better off after tax so maybe you'll notice him starting to bring you out for more dinners, or treating you to more things in an effort to share the wealth.

GingerLily

If your only just living together then I don't think your in a position to ask him to pay more, if he offers then that's great but unless your having conversions about your financial future I don't think you should expect to pay less then half for the time being.

Before me and my fiance decided to commit financially to each other I earned more so I bought the non essentials/ the nice to haves, and all the essentials and bills were halved. That way he didn't owe me anything!

Bandana boy

I think you should suck this up until you make a life decision that utilizes his extra earning power.

Ie
If you decide to move house to a more affluent area or buy and the split puts you under undue pressure
You decide to have kids and to save on child care you take a shorter week etc

Then i think you can have a conversation about equitable spits in the pay in for a joint account .

Having that conversation now would come across as greedy profiteering to me.

LegacyUser

OP here and thanks for all the replies so far! That's basically what I thought... too early to be having this conversation I guess I just think about and therefore worry about the future. I have the feeling he's "the one", but I suppose I'm just afraid in case we could have different views on finances down the line. For example, if he wants to buy a house in an area that technically I can't afford.

At what point do people this conversation though? It just seems like such a fundamental thing that it seems crazy to wait until you're engaged or married or have kids. And again, I don't want to come off as "greedy profiteering". That's genuinely not my motivation here, I just want to make sure we're on the same page about our future (and unfortunately money is an issue in terms of where to live etc). But is there ANY way for the lower earner to bring up this subject without coming across the wrong way? Or should the higher earner bring this up and if not, the lower earner should keep quiet indefinitely to avoid risking looking greedy?

silverharp

OP I'd leave until you either get married or you have kids . I could only see a case for it if ye buy or rent a house base on his increased income.

LegacyUser

Why should one party pay more for the exact same thing than another, purely because he/she is earning more? Should he pay proportionality more for milk? For coffee?

Tigger99

Bananarep12 wrote: »

Why should one party pay more for the exact same thing than another, purely because he/she is earning more? Should he pay proportionality more for milk? For coffee?

Because it's the fair thing to do with regard to bills and rent. Using the milk example is extreme and you know it.

A boyfriend that I lived years ago earned significantly less than me and I insisted on paying more for bills and rent. More recently I suggested it to an ex as he came home with significantly more and while he agreed in theory, he dragged his feet so much that it never happened. We ended for other reasons but I should have seen it as a huge red flag as it's so lacking in respect for your partner to earn a lot more and not offer to help out more.

I'm seeing someone now that earns a lot less than me and if we moved in together it would be only right that I'd pay more. It should be a partnership.

woodchuck

Hi OP, I'm in a similar boat myself, so I see where you're coming from. After all, everyone always says sex and money are the biggest issues in relationships, so it is important to be on the same page!

It is an awkward topic to bring up though, and as others have mentioned, it's probably too early for that conversation. However if he's a decent guy overall and there no red flags (such as counting pennys etc) then you probably have nothing to worry about. I'd say cross that bridge when you come to it in terms of deciding where to live/rent down the line.

Bandana boy

Bananarep12 wrote: »

Why should one party pay more for the exact same thing than another, purely because he/she is earning more? Should he pay proportionality more for milk? For coffee?

They should not until they want to live outside the means of the weaker earner.

If that is a decision they want to take then they should sit down and discuss up front how they want to fund that .
Having that conversation before you make a decision that moves you out of your means is certainly going to raise an eyebrow.

GingerLily

finance query wrote: »

OP here and thanks for all the replies so far! That's basically what I thought... too early to be having this conversation I guess I just think about and therefore worry about the future. I have the feeling he's "the one", but I suppose I'm just afraid in case we could have different views on finances down the line. For example, if he wants to buy a house in an area that technically I can't afford.

At what point do people this conversation though? It just seems like such a fundamental thing that it seems crazy to wait until you're engaged or married or have kids. And again, I don't want to come off as "greedy profiteering". That's genuinely not my motivation here, I just want to make sure we're on the same page about our future (and unfortunately money is an issue in terms of where to live etc). But is there ANY way for the lower earner to bring up this subject without coming across the wrong way? Or should the higher earner bring this up and if not, the lower earner should keep quiet indefinitely to avoid risking looking greedy?

If you buy a house as a couple you will pool your resources and find a house that you can both afford, he's not going to be able to buy a more expensive house without you so I don't really understand what your worry is about that?

If you don't need to pool your finances until your engaged then that okay, reasons that we used to review our finances;
-he lost his job
-we wanted to buy a car
-we moved apartment
- we got engaged

And for any more expensive holiday we'd look at who should pay for what, but generally just let the let earner buy the expensive treats that the lower earner would do without otherwise.

SarahMollie

finance query wrote: »

OP here and thanks for all the replies so far! That's basically what I thought... too early to be having this conversation I guess I just think about and therefore worry about the future. I have the feeling he's "the one", but I suppose I'm just afraid in case we could have different views on finances down the line. For example, if he wants to buy a house in an area that technically I can't afford.

At what point do people this conversation though? It just seems like such a fundamental thing that it seems crazy to wait until you're engaged or married or have kids. And again, I don't want to come off as "greedy profiteering". That's genuinely not my motivation here, I just want to make sure we're on the same page about our future (and unfortunately money is an issue in terms of where to live etc). But is there ANY way for the lower earner to bring up this subject without coming across the wrong way? Or should the higher earner bring this up and if not, the lower earner should keep quiet indefinitely to avoid risking looking greedy?

I still feel like you're really getting ahead of yourself on this one.

Naturally, as your relationship evolves over time opportunities will arise for this discussion, but no, I don't think theres any way you can bring it up in advance without seeming grabby. More importantly, I don't think there is any need to bring it up at this stage in your relationship. No good can come of it right now.

Its perfectly normal for one party to earn more than the other, just like some of your friends will earn more and some will earn less. It doesn't mean that one party has to subsidizes the other in the early stages. Its really only after you make a long term commitment (marriage, kids, house purchase) where both parties are contributing to a shared destiny that you consider either a total/partial pooling of resources and that will happen naturally as you aproach those decisions.

Taking the purchase of property as an example. You'll both be limited to 3.5x your earnings (assuming no exceptions) so the reality for both of you is that if you want to buy together, then the amount will be dictated by your respective incomes. there will be no way of avoiding the conversation. At that point you might suggest that the mortgage repayments be factored in a way so that you're both left with a proportionate amount of disposable income or whatever. Or that it will be 50/50 but he'll also cover all the bills. Different couples decide on different things, and once you can have these conversations at an appropriate time, then theres nothing to worry about.

zedhead

finance query wrote: »

OP here and thanks for all the replies so far! That's basically what I thought... too early to be having this conversation I guess I just think about and therefore worry about the future. I have the feeling he's "the one", but I suppose I'm just afraid in case we could have different views on finances down the line. For example, if he wants to buy a house in an area that technically I can't afford.

At what point do people this conversation though? It just seems like such a fundamental thing that it seems crazy to wait until you're engaged or married or have kids. And again, I don't want to come off as "greedy profiteering". That's genuinely not my motivation here, I just want to make sure we're on the same page about our future (and unfortunately money is an issue in terms of where to live etc). But is there ANY way for the lower earner to bring up this subject without coming across the wrong way? Or should the higher earner bring this up and if not, the lower earner should keep quiet indefinitely to avoid risking looking greedy?

Myself and my OH have been living together for 4 years and in the process of buying a house. When we first moved in together we were earning around the same, then I started earning more and now he earns more. We always split things 50/50 in terms of rent/bills but the person who earned more tended to 'treat' the other person a bit more. When we started talking about getting a mortgage, it was clear my OH could save a lot more than me, so he is putting more towards the deposit/furniture fund than I am - but again bills will still all be split 50/50 and he will probably continue to spend more socially and on treats.

Its happened in the past that one of us couldn't contribute their full share some months, and the other covered it and that was it. I would imagine that if one of us ever became unemployed or change in circumstances (maternity leave etc) then we would revisit the 50/50 split.

We never sat down and had a discussion about how that all worked - it evolved as our circumstances changed over time and as things came up with dealt with them and moved on. Buying a house was the biggest catalyst for any serious discussion around the area. So maybe give it time to see if it evolves naturally. If your lack of money means that you are limited in what you do as a couple - it may come up in that way.

ibarelycare

My bf and I have lived together for a year and I have no idea what he even earns. I'm pretty sure it's more than me, but we can both afford to split the rent and bills down the middle and still have money to spend on other things, so that's good enough for me. If we were looking to buy a house or get married then I guess we'd have to start actually talking about money, but there's no need for it at the moment and I don't see the point in introducing unwarranted stress into our relationship.

LegacyUser

OP here. Ok I'm obviously being taken up wrong by some posters. I don't "want more money". In an ideal world we'd earn the same amount and split things 50:50 forever. But we don't live in an ideal world. So I worry about the future. I worry that I won't be able to contribute as much towards a deposit for a house. I worry that he'll want a different standard of living than I can afford (or can afford but will have very little savings or disposable income as a result). I worry that I'll be seen as an inferior partner because of my financial "shortcomings". Already there are small differences like what supermarkets to shop in and I'm worried about this becoming a much bigger issue over time.

I guess what I'm learning here is that I worry too much!! I'll try not to worry as much and see how things progress organically over time.

Mods can you please close this thread now.

fergiesfolly

That's not always possible.
Her chosen career may not have an opportunity to increase her salary and I'd be loath to change just to earn more, if you love what you do.

For what its worth, our finances, once we moved in together and later married were pooled regardless of who earned what.
Its not my salary and her salary. Its our salaries, combined. And that came very early on(but we knew it was for keeps. Maybe you're not there yet)
Neither of us would take advantage of the other and would be responsible in our spending, while at the same time not be beholding if we wanted to splash out.
It comes from mutual respect and communication.
In all aspects of a relationship, the last sentence is key.
If you're uncomfortable, talk to him. It doesn't need to be confrontational or binding.
You're living together, he must have thought about your joint future together.
Just asks him how he thinks, your joint finances would work in the future.
You'll learn all you need to know about where your relationship is going from this.

professore

Realistically if you have kids and a mortgage, you have to pool your incomes. You are both on the hook for the mortgage. If one partner stays at home to mind kids, and has zero income, how can they contribute 50:50?

Before you embark on either or both of the above is the time to have a full and frank discussion about it.

El_Duderino 09

SarahMollie wrote:

IMO, just moving in is not sufficient justification for sharing finances. However, assuming you decide to get married for example, then its more appropriate to have that discussion.

That completely depends on circumstances. Getting married isn't necessarily the sign of commitment. For some people it would he morning I together and for there it just happens over time.

Myself and OH are together over a decade and aren't married but we're committed to each other for life.

OP, it's reasonable to raise the subject. It just seemed reasonable to us to contribute towards bills and savings in such a way that we both have about the same amount of disposable money each month. Higher earner has a bit extra disposable money and has the privilage of paying more towards joint account and contributing more towards savings etc.

If he hasn't thought about it before, it might seem to him that you're asking him to pay too much. So approach it gently and give him time to think about it. It should be one obvious to him once he thinks about it. There's no point him having loads of money for himself if you can't buy nice things and experiences to share together

GingerLily

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Higher earner has a bit extra disposable money and has the privilage of paying more towards joint account and contributing more towards savings etc.

Lol, I pay more but I certainly don't feel like it's a "privilage", it's fair and it's what I want to do, but I don't take pride in contributing more. I think my OH would be insulted if I looked at our finances that way.

El_Duderino 09

GingerLily wrote:

Lol, I pay more but I certainly don't feel like it's a "privilage", it's fair and it's what I want to do, but I don't take pride in contributing more. I think my OH would be insulted if I looked at our finances that way.

That's your way, fair enough.

When she was a student I was the main earner. The money I earned made it possible for her to study and earn a qualification. 2 years later and she did the same when I went back to uni. We saw it as a privilege to afford each other the opportunity to study while the other took care of the money.

Now we earn different amounts and we're on career paths so well continue to earn different amounts. I earn more for the moment and she'll probably earn more in the future. We see it as a privilege to earn more and contribute to the family (just the 2 of us)

Depends on how you look at money in your relationship, OP. Its worth discussing with your partner