Married out of COP with accrual

Pitbull said:
But yea, I think the Cons very heavily outweighs the Pros of marrying in COP.
Click to expand...
Disagree profoundly.

The proprietal consequences of divorce are the least important, almost to the point of insignificance when compared to the other pains.

Marriage has a far, far lower chance of working if both parties aren't in and committed 100%, for life. The obverse is also true: if you enter the marriage hedging your financial bets, you increase the chances that when relationship stress arrives -- as it most certainly will, if you're lucky -- the option of ending the relationship becomes more plausible, which is precisely when you both and the marriage is most vulnerable, and that increases the odds of divorce.
 
Arthur said:
Disagree profoundly.

The proprietal consequences of divorce are the least important, almost to the point of insignificance when compared to the other pains.

Marriage has a far, far lower chance of working if both parties aren't in and committed 100%, for life. The obverse is also true: if you enter the marriage hedging your financial bets, you increase the chances that when relationship stress arrives -- as it most certainly will, if you're lucky -- the option of ending the relationship becomes more plausible, which is precisely when you both and the marriage is most vulnerable, and that increases the odds of divorce.
Click to expand...
Im OUT COP with Accrual, this was chosen to protect the financial stability of the marriage unit so debt couldnt cross over, divorce and subsequent consequences were not the reason. Wife is in a job where there is seriously high risk involved.

BUT that said we pull as a team 100% joint finances, joint financial goals etc, we in this together and in if for the long haul! I win we win, you win we win!

Also married for almost 10 years and together for almost 17 years so this is not "new"
 
Arthur said:
Disagree profoundly.

The proprietal consequences of divorce are the least important, almost to the point of insignificance when compared to the other pains.

Marriage has a far, far lower chance of working if both parties aren't in and committed 100%, for life. The obverse is also true: if you enter the marriage hedging your financial bets, you increase the chances that when relationship stress arrives -- as it most certainly will, if you're lucky -- the option of ending the relationship becomes more plausible, which is precisely when you both and the marriage is most vulnerable, and that increases the odds of divorce.
Click to expand...
You shouldn't see it as hedging bets. You should see it as protecting each other.
COP - if you start a business and it goes bad, your creditors go after all your wife's assets. Similarly, your wife runs up a massive debt, it's your stuff that gets attached.
Do you really want to have to co-sign every single financial agreement? Want to buy a car? Make sure you wife comes along to co-sign all the docs...

It's about far more than "the end of the marriage".
 
Sinbad said:
You shouldn't see it as hedging bets. You should see it as protecting each other.
COP - if you start a business and it goes bad, your creditors go after all your wife's assets. Similarly, your wife runs up a massive debt, it's your stuff that gets attached.
Do you really want to have to co-sign every single financial agreement? Want to buy a car? Make sure you wife comes along to co-sign all the docs...

It's about far more than "the end of the marriage".
Click to expand...
Spot on said similar here

1676550436208.png
 
Arthur said:
Nope.
You're betting 100% of your stuff. As is your spouse.
Love has nothing to do with it. Love is neither necessary nor sufficient. It's simply a question of remaining married to one another.
Click to expand...

aka commitment :cool:
 
Sinbad said:
Biggest difference is wtf aren't you using dark mode!? :D
Click to expand...
look I was so used to MYBB on light mode that when I tried it on dark mode everything just felt too different. hated it :P not the first person to point that out though :)
 
RedViking said:
I don't understand the question, but I have a friend who does not want to inherit anything from the family as it comes with major issues. Specially the property. Its not a spouse though. So she made sure the family member's will state that she won't inherit anything. She has a good relationship with the member, just does not want to inherit issues.
Click to expand...
That is an easier, more straightforward issue. If you inherit something and you do not want it you can repudiate the bequest and it falls back into the deceased estate.
 
Candystore said:
That is an easier, more straightforward issue. If you inherit something and you do not want it you can repudiate the bequest and it falls back into the deceased estate.
Click to expand...
And this will likely come with a tax impact that should not be forgotten
 
Sinbad said:
It's about far more than "the end of the marriage".
Click to expand...
I thoroughly understand the legal consequences of the various matrimonial regimes. After all, I'm a business person and entrepreneur who knows business risk, I studied Law at Wits, and come from a long line of lawyers.

The part where I disagree with you and most people in our contemporary culture is summed up in your last sentence.

You say "it's [proprietal protection through an ANC] about far more..."

For me it's about far less. It's really about fundamental attitudes and postures to materiality and property (the lesser important bits) vis-à-vis the intangible dimensions (the primary bits) of the relationship.

I know it's counter-cultural.
 
Last edited:
Arthur said:
I thoroughly understand the legal consequences of the various matrimonial regimes. After all, I'm a business person and entrepreneur who knows business risk, I studied Law at Wits, and come from a long line of lawyers.

The part where I disagree with you and most people in our contemporary culture is summed up in your last sentence.

You say "it's [proprietal protection through an ANC] about far more..."

For me it's about far less. It's really about fundamental attitudes and postures to materiality and property (the lesser important bits( vis-à-vis the intangible dimensions (the primary bits) of the relationship.

I know it's counter-cultural.
Click to expand...
Surely out of COP with accrual is a best of both scenario? The convenience and protection of out of COP with the safety of in COP.

What are the cons of this route?
 
Snyper564 said:
Its not as clear cut as you think.

Here is some reading its for your so do it :)

www.mondaq.com

Renunciation Of An Inheritance – SARS Clarifies Tax Consequences

A person nominated to receive an inheritance, whether in a will or by virtue of the laws of intestate succession, may choose to either adiate or repudiate that inheritance.
www.mondaq.com
Click to expand...
Per the article, no donations tax and no capital gains tax in case of repudiation. Possible estate duty implications, again not for the beneficiary.
 
Speedster said:
Surely out of COP with accrual is a best of both scenario? The convenience and protection of out of COP with the safety of in COP.

What are the cons of this route?
Click to expand...

Not that many:

Economically stronger spouse must share his/her profits made during the marriage.

Parties need an ANC in order for the accrual system to apply, so paperwork.

Calculation of accrual at the end of the marriage can be a bit complex, but that is what lawyers and accountants are for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X