How Much For PRE-Nup
- Thread starter HOUND_DOG
- Start date
I'm not sure I understand your question. Each pre-nup is different and the terms of the split are determined in a different way. But part of the equation is how much he can afford, how much he earns, and how much she needs. I don't think there is a set formula for a pre-nup. On the other hand, if there is no pre-nup and the couple goes to court, the law will spell out what each partner is entitled to. The intent of the pre-nup is to avoid this calculation.
I never understood this shit.... If I'm wealthy & the woman isn't, & she wants to leave then why is she entitled to anything over & above what she contributed?
If she doesn't want to be with me... then she can do without the benefits that come with being with me. Period. doesn't matter that she will be on her own....
Sure if she has NO earning power then some support should be paid... but survival level... NOT to the lifestyle to which she has become accustomed....
Best thing your friend can do is get a fairly written prenup that is explained to & negotiated for her by very competent independent council... That will make it as enforceable as possible in this country..
But beforehand.. even before you meet a woman take whatever assets you can & Hide Hide Hide them!!!! If you run your own business don't take a crazy salary & find ways to keep the profits low... find ways to enjoy life with material goods that aren't necessarily yours.. Barter... trade in kind... etc...
Whatever funds you can safely dissappear put into gold & silver... Hide the fuck out of them in many different places..
The best thing is to ensure that you have a modest but sufficient enough income to live the life you want & be able to afford a family if you wish... If nothing else, you will have a happy home life with your woman/family & have a nice nest egg/contingency fund in case you need it....
However if things go south... You have the resources to live a decent life no matter what the courts try to steal from you....
In a world where justice is replaced by "application of law" Anyone who doesn't make sure they have the resources to quickly dissappear comfortably set aside if they can is an Idiot...
If she doesn't want to be with me... then she can do without the benefits that come with being with me. Period. doesn't matter that she will be on her own....
Sure if she has NO earning power then some support should be paid... but survival level... NOT to the lifestyle to which she has become accustomed....
Best thing your friend can do is get a fairly written prenup that is explained to & negotiated for her by very competent independent council... That will make it as enforceable as possible in this country..
But beforehand.. even before you meet a woman take whatever assets you can & Hide Hide Hide them!!!! If you run your own business don't take a crazy salary & find ways to keep the profits low... find ways to enjoy life with material goods that aren't necessarily yours.. Barter... trade in kind... etc...
Whatever funds you can safely dissappear put into gold & silver... Hide the fuck out of them in many different places..
The best thing is to ensure that you have a modest but sufficient enough income to live the life you want & be able to afford a family if you wish... If nothing else, you will have a happy home life with your woman/family & have a nice nest egg/contingency fund in case you need it....
However if things go south... You have the resources to live a decent life no matter what the courts try to steal from you....
In a world where justice is replaced by "application of law" Anyone who doesn't make sure they have the resources to quickly dissappear comfortably set aside if they can is an Idiot...
Yes, and also considered common law by civil courts when she sues for support and/or a settlement, if I am not mistaken.
And if she happens to be making $250,000 a year while the man is flipping burgers for a living, I think he can also sue for support/settlement.
Thx guys. It is a family member involved in this, and your opinion mexi is shared by many.
To clarify for Questor, what I meant is, do they calculate based on his income, assets, keep a certain lifestyle.
If you live with someone for 12 months you are considered common-law by CRA.
Unless there is a child in the house - then you are considered common-law the day you move in together.
Best thing is to date but maintain seperate residences. That way you, if wealthy, can give her as much stuff as you want and be generous but the common law thing doersn't apply so if she breaks up with you you don't have to split assets.
While I understand the divsion of assets if a marriage breaks down, I don't get the common law rule. If you don't decide to marry and have no kids, why should the law treat the gf/bf as a spouse?
P.S. Yes, I know why - once the social stigma of living together outside of marriage was eliminated, guys thought "I can live with a g/f, not marry her, and she can't divorce me and get half my stuff - sounds like a great plan." So with this situation becomig common, lawmakers thought to preserve the institution of marriage for the social good, they need to write into law the common law jazz, thus removing the loophole, thus making marriage more popular again.
While I understand the divsion of assets if a marriage breaks down, I don't get the common law rule. If you don't decide to marry and have no kids, why should the law treat the gf/bf as a spouse?
P.S. Yes, I know why - once the social stigma of living together outside of marriage was eliminated, guys thought "I can live with a g/f, not marry her, and she can't divorce me and get half my stuff - sounds like a great plan." So with this situation becomig common, lawmakers thought to preserve the institution of marriage for the social good, they need to write into law the common law jazz, thus removing the loophole, thus making marriage more popular again.
Hound Dog, that is (or should be) spelled out in the Pre-Nuptial Agreement itself.
I have seen this particular pre-nup, the dollar amount is spelled out and floored me. Was hoping for more insight into how this figure is derived.
I'm guessing that it all depends what the two parties agree upon.
Also guessing that if the pre-nup is "unfair" there might be a good chance of a court overruling it. Ie you make tons and tons of money yet the prenup says she only gets $500/mth sort of thing.
Yes, I believe Aardvark has stated it in a nutshell. Each pre-nup is different. It is a negotiation between the 2 partners and their legal counsel. They calculate it by whatever they feel most comfortable with. The richer partner wants to protect his financial interests in case the marriage breaks up, particularly if the woman is a gold digger or turns out to be from Toronto (just kidding...its a joke from another thread). So the pre-nup might state "one time payment of $100,000 or "one time payment of $5,000,000" or "$5,000,000 a year for the next 20 years." It all depends on how rich he is, how much she wants, and what they can agree upon.
Good to see a man with some balls.....
Seriously.. the family (ie women's) courts system has almost completely removed any incentive for successful males to marry N American women....
why the fuck would I, looking at the statistics & considering the odds, risk MORE than half of my wealth & resources of someone that can basically bail with no penalty or risk to herself????
If the government wants to encourage marriage they shouldnt broaden the net to trap men into it they should simply MAKE IT FAIR.....
Assuming thry have no kids, I believe common law splitup in ontario works as follows:
- He keeps all of his assets that he owned prior to their common law setup. She keeps all of hers as well. I believe if he owned a stock at, say, 60$(at start) and it went up to 80$ at breakup, they both split the 20$ minus costs.
- they are both entitled to 50 percent of assets acquired during their common law relationship. That would include capital gains(minus capital losses), interest,, etc.. and whatever savngs they have accrued. If they have bought a house(since common law began), absent any specific pre nup statement, they are each entitled to 50 percent.
Of course the prenup can chage this and I am not sure of the law if the changes are draconian.
Actually, the system advocates divorce. It all started that the injured party could extract payment from the party with money. It sort of make sense, if 3 people are involved in a car accident, an insurance company with money will pay. Extend this to marriage between woman and man. If the woman is poor, then the man pays. If the woman has a kid, and somehow gets another man to step up, the other man still pays???
The effort to ensure every father pays, ensures that no one wants the financial risks of fathering someone else's kid. This discouraging fathers, and increases single-parent families.
Additionally, if the women is damaged goods in any way, you should divorce her as soon as you find out. The longer you try to stay in the marriage and try to overcome the situation, the higher the legal liability. Legally, you should be completely irresponsible, and ideally make no money.
It isn't right, but it is what the system encourages.
It's also sad that statistically speaking.... A man has a far better chance of getting away with murder in a criminal court than receiving anything approaching justice in a family court..... For all those like me that abhor violence against anyone, especially women & children & wish to see it eliminated.... Eliminating these types of injustices that trigger such things would be a good start in the right direction....
LOL. Looks like you have never been divorced. You bring n 99%, she brings in 1%. Upon divorce she wants 99%, she thinks you are entitled to 1%.
This may sound nasty and cold hearted but you don't need a good prenup (which in Ontario can be amended AFTER the bloody tings was signed by her). You need a good divorce lawyer you talk to duringthe marriage and ask him questions how to "rearrange the assets". You can loterally make a lot of money and investments untouchable with good advice. Not illegal either,
I think you missed the entire point of the post there.....
If you read carefully I gave sound advice on how to increase your Chances that the prenup may be upheld...... The other 3/4s of the post pretty much Directly addresses the likely outcome (the "family" court rips the prenup away from you like a rapist tears off a dress.....)
Besically all one can do is TRY to make a prenup as unassailable as possible.... If you are lucky you will get a judge that understands fairness a little.... But more often than not if you failed to HIDE your assets BEFORE you met the woman.... You. are. fucked....
But no I have never been divorced... I've already taken the steps necessary to protect my assets from the innumerable directions the government can rob me.... (taxes, divorce, child support enslavement... etc)
If/When I get married my wife will NEVER know my full net worth... So long as we live a good lifestyle & aren't starving & there are no debts lurking in the shadows that may bring her harm even after I die my assets are NOT her business. They're not anyone else's either...
A fuck might be given about what the almighty "law" makers dictate to it's servants..... But that fuck is NOT given by me...
That is not to say however that I would not choose to be fair to an ex or whomever if need be.... In actuality looking out for my own freedom beforehand will likely make me more generous than i would be if cornered....
After all... if it's a matter that we grow apart or heavan forbid I do something unforgiveable.... I'll want to make her as comfortable as possible.... However on the other side of the coin.... I will NOT reward anyone for betraying me & I I'd rather burn everything I own before I'd let the government basically rob me to support their tainted version or morality...
Voluntary giving will always me higher from me than government compelled robbery.... Freedom of choice is funny that way...
