Prenuptial agreement and common property state

[stillpremed]

Hello All,

I am looking to get hitched in the next year or so. I live in California, which is a common property state. I make more than the significant other.

I have a few questions for you:

1) If I have 100K, and I put that in a house that I buy before marriage and only my name is on the title.... I'll have 400K to pay off in principle during marriage. Since California is a common property state, even if we both sign a prenuptial agreement stating that the house is mine, because I will be using my salary (which is her salary) to pay off the rest of the home, that home would still be hers in the event of a divorce, despite the prenup "protecting" my house, which I bought before marriage right?

Next scenario:

2) If I use that 100K and instead, put it in stocks and specify in the prenup that the 100K is mine and that future dividend reinvestments are "protected" and I dont put any future, "common" income into that account, then that *should be protected, including the appreciation, right?

It sounds like option number 2 is the best way to "protect" my assets if I am thinking outloud correctly.

I don't mean to plan for the worst, but I think its worth thinking about these things.

Thank you for your responses!!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[PistolPete]

Good questions. I'd like to know this as well.

 

[dpmd]

If it is truly important to you it is probably worth paying for a lawyer to advise you.

 

[InvestingDoc]

I am in a similar situation here in Texas about to meet with a lawyer soon. We didn't get too much into many of the details over an email but it sounds like whatever assets are accumulated in the marriage then they might be subject to division in event of a divorce. Let me know what your lawyer says and after I meet with mine I will post the results here.

 

[dynx]

In California I've had my wife sign off of the house with each refinance as it accumulates value. Otherwise I don't live in a community property state.
If you buy, marry. Refinance each 100k or so of equity have a lawyer or a bank redraft title in your name on that date and wife sign saying it's in your name only. "You just need to sign this to get the refinance through saying the house is only in my name". Which it is. Which seems legit if she's not considering divorce at the moment.
Can usually get low/no cost refinance and in a falling rate environment that's the best solution my lawyer/my dads lawyer came up with. Better then a pre-nup. It's updated regularly and continually acknowledges the house is yours and yours alone.
To clarify in case that's not clear it's a second home, I live in another state now.

 

[RangerBob]

I'm of the opinion that if this is your first marriage, unless one of you has kids or significant assets (like a business, huge inheritance, etc), a prenup is a rather toxic thing. In the grand scheme of things, $100,000 is not that much considering your earning potential, and I honestly think it's best to not even bring up the topic of a prenup. A prenup shifts the balance of power to the person with more assets--what if your spouse (presumably with much less money/assets) doesn't agree with you? Well his/her options are to either agree, or not get married--that can leave them feeling rather helpless. That's rather unfair and I think a terrible way to start a marriage.

I realize a lot of marriages end in divorce these days, and prenups have their place in society, but I think it's really worth thinking about if $100k is worth starting your marriage off on (potentially) the wrong foot. Everyone's relationship is different, so I can't say what's right or wrong for each individual couple--that's up to the two of you. But, I'm just saying to really think about it. $100,000 is just not that much money, and in my mind, definitely not worth starting your marriage on the wrong foot over.