PreNups, Trusts, Offshore Accounts & Protecting yourself

[ScottinCrimea]

BillyB,  Thanks for the links.  I did the math on the links that you provided and it comes out to about 65% for Russia and if we assume the same marriage rate for Ukraine it comes out to about 63%.  I checked a bunch of other sites to try to get a more reliable figure and there really isn't one out there, but the vast majority place the rate in the range of 43-45%.  My impression is that this is closer to the truth.  The US comes in around 52-55%.

I can certainly sympathize with your divorce ordeal.  I have heard enough stories and experienced enough to confirm what you say.  Of course in any divorce neither party will feel that they were dealt with fairly.  My ex pulled all kinds of tricks trying to sway the judge to her side but fortunately for me her actions made it impossible for him to take her side and I came out relatively okay.  Of course it took tens of thousands in attorneys' fees to respond to her outragious claims, most of which I paid, so I guess that in that sense I got screwed.

[kievstar]

I guess I was lucky on my divorce.  I picked the attorney we both used.  Told her what she was getting and she was happy.  Than I went to court as she did not have to go.  I even found her current boyfriend for her who she now has two kids with - great guy too.

Hard for me to imagine how relationships go this bad in the first place. 

[UTRO]

I guess I was lucky on my divorce.  I picked the attorney we both used.  Told her what she was getting and she was happy.  Than I went to court as she did not have to go.  I even found her current boyfriend for her who she now has two kids with - great guy too.

Hard for me to imagine how relationships go this bad in the first place. 

Unbelievable and Amazing! In the Province of Ontario and probably all of Canada, it's unlawful for both Divorcing individuals to retain the same Lawyer... for obvious reasons. "She was happy"...?!?   So were you completely unbiased, honest and fair to her? You gave her what the courts would have ordered you to give her regardless? Could she have gotten more from you had she done her own footwork?? If so, does she know this?? ;)She is either unbelievably naive, unbelievably gracious or self sufficient with a well paying job. Yes you are Lucky

[BillyB]

BillyB,  Thanks for the links.  I did the math on the links that you provided and it comes out to about 65% for Russia and if we assume the same marriage rate for Ukraine it comes out to about 63%.  I checked a bunch of other sites to try to get a more reliable figure and there really isn't one out there, but the vast majority place the rate in the range of 43-45%.  My impression is that this is closer to the truth.  The US comes in around 52-55%.

Scott, I suspect most data for studies involving nations come from nations themselves if they are willing to submit data. I've regularly seen Russia's divorce rate in the low to mid 60's percentage wise since 2004. Why it dropped 20% now probably has more to do with the numbers of marriages vs. divorces Russia submitted this year than other years. That's too big of a drop in a year to be anywhere near normal IMO. Could be Russia is hiding some ugly fact. Regardless, most of us are divorced and probably going to marry divorced women. The divorce rate is about 20% higher for those who's been divorced at least once to divorce again. Most of us here are in a risky bracket as we will likely be repeat offenders. Some of us just aren't marriage material.

tfcrew, I don't think most people will get trapped for being in a common law marriage. It's hard to divorce someone without ever being married to begin with. A guy could live with a woman for for a week, a month or say 6 years and if they split up, they part ways without the court getting involved and split up assets based on whoever's name is on it. But my State recognizes meritorious relationships(I wondered who lobbied for that?) and if a guy lived with his girlfriend for week, month, or say 6 years and later got married and divorced after a year, the time before mariage will count as a meretricious relationship. A year of actual marriage can count as 6 years easily when it comes to splitting up assets. I'm sure some guys said they lived with a woman as a roomate and there was no sex or "marriage like" relationship and the woman might say there was a full blown relationship. It's a time like this when there is no clear answer a judge using his "discretion" can say he believes all, some, or none of that time should count as a meretricious.

When it comes to he say/she say, most likely judges will lean towards the woman's favor. These aren't my words but from attorney's that I've talked to.

[dobradavid]

Is this kind of thing romantic? No, but if a man has amassed a sizeable fortune or anything else he cares about then a premarital contract is necessity in todays world as are protected trusts and offshore accounts. Of course if you have nothing to loose or are the foolish trusting soul then you take your chances, as for me I have too much to loose to take chances anymore.

I was married and divorced to a FSU women - I have married again. I have a pre-nup. Marriage is a legal contract for the legal purpose of imigration. There is nothing to prevent a person from having a change of heart.

"Family law does not clarify the division of responsibilities. It says that only material rights can be discussed in a contract...An
average prenup costs Hr 800." This is money well spent.

An interesting view from UA.

http://www.kyivpost.com/nation/30897

[dobradavid]

Donna,

 Yes my lady was very aware that wihout a prenup there would be no marrage, like anything else in life it is how the informaton is presented. Once she fully understood what I was talking about and what it meant for her then she had no objections.

And mine also - if she loved me...then she isn't marrying me for my property assets. 

[dobradavid]

TigerPaws,

Over here the wife basically 'accrues' her share of gained net worth from when the marriage began. She gets a form of alimony support of which the amount depends on whether or not she is employed and how much she makes.  Kids get a fixed amount of support depending on your income. ( all the above assuming the husband makes more than the wife). Accrued retirement from both are prorated for the length of time the marriage existed. Custody of kids is shared unless abuse is proven. All quite reasonable IMHO.

To be honest with you I have never seen a prenup and don't need one, partly because I am not really wealthy and due to the fact that the legal system is still quite 'reasonable' here. (That's why Boris Beckers wife moved to Florida and established residency there.. so she could file for divorce in the 'free for all' courts in the US instead of in Europe)

I am curious though and wonder if prenups usually contain similar conditions as I listed above.  Not looking for specifics, but just want to understand better how the 'lesser partner'(bad term I know but can't think of a better one) is usually treated in these agreements.

Any insight is appreciated..

"Over here" being where? In Indiana, all property goes into the "marital pot" - and pre-nups are recognized.  My prenup protects my premartial assets.

[dobradavid]

 Tiger,

 I was wondering if rich women ever made their  fiance' sign a pre-nup before they got married?

  I saw a movie once where a rich heiress was to marry  a regular joe with nothing by comparison to her, but He was actually planning to marry her with the purpose of "scamming" her money from her, planning for her to have an "accident" and lose her life , leaving him with hundreds of millions she had.   However during the course of his plan (he had other parties to assist him)   He actually fell in love with this girl and changed his mind, but he was afraid his helpers would carry though with the plan for her murder,  and he didn't , or was afraid to tell his fiance' of the plan because she would not want him then, so in the event she would find out,  he did something to "prove he was truly in love with her"  He made up a pre-nup of sorts stating in the event of her death He rejected all her millions, all of it was to go to charities, and nothing to him. The movie is called " Masquerade" starring Rob Lowe,  I think Jennifer Tilly was the heiress.   Anyway do rich women protect their fortunes with pre-nups too?    Dave

You understand that movies are not reality, yes?

[dobradavid]

Is it automatically half or does any sense of fairness come into play?  e.g.  Having just gotten divorced, my financial assets are rather well defined.  Would a new wife who divorced me after 2 years (and getting her green card), get half of our combined increase in wealth?  I'd hope a judge would take into consideration that it took 25 years to build the wealth, for which the lady had only been part of the scene for 2.

Kevin C.

Depends on the state - and the Judge. 

[dobradavid]

That is NOT correct - Indiana is a "marital pot" state. I was divorced in Indiana. 

[SANDRO43]

Dobra David, you're answering posts from 3.5+ years ago made by someone who hasn't been seen here at RWD for more than a year, so don't hold your breath. Are you an archeologist, perchance ?.

[I/O]

Are you an archeologist, perchance ?.

Whadaya worried about Sandro? Think he might start digging into ............... you?

I/O

[SANDRO43]

Whadaya worried about Sandro? Think he might start digging into ............... you?

No, I'm an open book

I was wondering if he might have similar interests (www.floriani.it/archeo-eng.htm).

[dobradavid]

Dobra David, you're answering posts from 3.5+ years ago made by someone who hasn't been seen here at RWD for more than a year, so don't hold your breath. Are you an archeologist, perchance ?.

Uhhhh...ummm...I knew that...yeah! I was just testing to see if anyone noticed. 

[dobradavid]

No, I'm an open book

I was wondering if he might have similar interests (www.floriani.it/archeo-eng.htm).

Actually. it's a subject I occasionally teach. Are you familiar with Dr. Kenneth Harl?

[SANDRO43]

Actually. it's a subject I occasionally teach. Are you familiar with Dr. Kenneth Harl?

No, I'm not much into coins. Have you read Michael D. Coe's Breaking the Maya Code ? I think it's one of the best-written accounts of solving a centuries-long archeological puzzle.

[dobradavid]

No, I'm not much into coins. Have you read Michael D. Coe's Breaking the Maya Code ? I think it's one of the best-written accounts of solving a centuries-long archeological puzzle.

No, my area of interest is middle east and east European - spent 5 years in the middle east. Marvelous!

[SANDRO43]

No, my area of interest is middle east and east European - spent 5 years in the middle east.

Then you may have heard of our Professor Paolo Matthiae, discoverer of Ebla and director of its site expedition since 1963.

[dobradavid]

International divorce a murky pit

The laws governing European marital breakups are anything but unified.

http://tinyurl.com/55nsbb

[2tallbill]

Here is a topic that has never failed to get a bunch of people debating 

[Trenchcoat]

Here is a topic that has never failed to get a bunch of people debating

Then I shall begin

Prenups I had my own thoughts on, looked up what other people thought/found in the internet and that backed up my thoughts. That you are admitting that Divorce is an option in writing up the Prenup, almost like you are preparing the marriage to failure before it has failed, so it can be potentially a bad move. I can understand why those do it with an enormous wealth difference like film stars, millionaires, billionaires, etc as it's only common sense and right to safe guard such money. However, for the everyday guy I think it is counterproductive.

In general a marriage should be 'all in' but I believe the state should protect the parties involved rather than the individuals. Why? Because the State can potentially if it wishes so be impartial, whereas the individual has their own concerns and individuals tend to put their concerns first. Individuals try and go for the best they can get through their own self interest, but this can be a mistake. If you try and create a prenup or put stuff aside for yourself in trusts, offshore accounts whatever and it makes any divorce easy as it's all or mostly in your favour guess what you're gonna do when your Marriage hits a rocky patch, that's right your gonna hit the divorce button.

Few people have it in them to consider allowing the other in the Marriage something in a prenup that they could easily put on their side, it's a natural tendency to do so. I would say it is essential that an agreement is balanced, not to be fair but to be unfair to both. If both have something to lose then neither will want to walk away from a Marriage even if they are in a bad patch, and that happens in most marriages. Too often these days there are silly sentiments like being fair to the other, quickie divorces, protecting your assets, etc. These sound good but in reality only make divorce and split up more likely.

That all said It depends if someone feels divorce is a big deal but apparently to many it only leads to unhappiness though some of course may be happier from it. While some make a go of future relationships if you hit the divorce button once you may find it easy to do it again of course.

I personally think it is better to equally weight a Marriage. I like the system in Ukraine & Russia, etc, if one had assets before the marriage then they have them after the marriage also. Everything gained in the marriage is split equally. A lot of the time the guy might have assets gained before marriage but either way the assets gain during the marriage probably won't amount to much for quite some time. If both want to see split in such a situation then neither will gain much and economic circumstance will tend to make them see reason and think otherwise. If the guy owns assets, a house, etc before marriage but the woman has children with him then he is likely to think, 'hey I get to keep my house, etc but the woman gets custody of the child and it may become difficult for me to see them'. While the woman thinks, 'Ok great I get to keep the children but he gets to keep the house so then I'm living in abject poverty in some sh*thole/squeezed in with parents/siblings, etc'. So neither side sees much of a future in going for divorce.

The worst thing you can do I think is to make it easy for one side by it being, 'Great I divorce and I get all/most of the assets and get the children or get to see the children frequently'. That just makes it too easy a call to make but might be bad for those people in the long run, particularly the children.

[Trenchcoat]

BillyB,  Thanks for the links.  I did the math on the links that you provided and it comes out to about 65% for Russia and if we assume the same marriage rate for Ukraine it comes out to about 63%.  I checked a bunch of other sites to try to get a more reliable figure and there really isn't one out there, but the vast majority place the rate in the range of 43-45%.  My impression is that this is closer to the truth.  The US comes in around 52-55%.

I can certainly sympathize with your divorce ordeal.  I have heard enough stories and experienced enough to confirm what you say.  Of course in any divorce neither party will feel that they were dealt with fairly.  My ex pulled all kinds of tricks trying to sway the judge to her side but fortunately for me her actions made it impossible for him to take her side and I came out relatively okay.  Of course it took tens of thousands in attorneys' fees to respond to her outragious claims, most of which I paid, so I guess that in that sense I got screwed.

I think the reasons for divorce are different in the FSU to the West. I think in general they have a better system that should hold marriages together. However, it's not enough to stop couples hitting the divorce button as we see here. From what I have seen of FSU people should they are placid enough usually, when a argument kicks off I get the impression that they mostly react in the same way, very aggressive, at least verbally. So it's like two steam trains heading towards each other  .Thx closest we have here is probably people on Social Housing Estates, not all but many have similar kind of mentality, a kind of gut reaction to being verbally aggressive when they are not liking what they hear. Get two people like that and any discord that comes about means both are on collision course pelting each other with the same aggression.

For Western/FSU marriages while that might happen I think the reasons tend to get different. Difficulties managing cultural differences, the FSW losing respect for the western man, relationships entered into marriage before they got to even know each other well enough, differences in personality, deceit from the outset, etc. I believe lined up well enough and balanced well enough that potentially Western/FSU marriages might stand a better chance of succeeding than FSU/FSU marriages as the two personalities aren't necessarily at loggerheads but better able to cope with the other's personality.

[ML]

I think pre-nups are generally a very good idea.

But depends on very individualized situations.

For instance, I did not do a pre-nup.

My reasons:

1) My 2 children and their families were financially secure.  (My son has since died from Covid).

2) I had set up trust funds to pay for 4 years of college for my grandchildren.

3) I was old enough (and too tired to go through the search again) that I wouldn't care if I lost a good deal of my own assets.  I can live in a small cabin on the side of a mountain now and eat TV dinners.

Actually my now wife (after we married) asked me why I didn't require the pre-nup.  I told her the first two items above, but not the third.


If I were much younger (when I remarried) and my children were not financially secure . . . that would be a whole different ballgame and pre-nup would be a certainty.

[Trenchcoat]

I think pre-nups are generally a very good idea.

But depends on very individualized situations.

For instance, I did not do a pre-nup.

My reasons:

1) My 2 children and their families were financially secure.  (My son has since died from Covid).

2) I had set up trust funds to pay for 4 years of college for my grandchildren.

3) I was old enough (and too tired to go through the search again) that I wouldn't care if I lost a good deal of my own assets.  I can live in a small cabin on the side of a mountain now and eat TV dinners.

Actually my now wife (after we married) asked me why I didn't require the pre-nup.  I told her the first two items above, but not the third.


If I were much younger (when I remarried) and my children were not financially secure . . . that would be a whole different ballgame and pre-nup would be a certainty.

Very sorry to hear about your son ML, you're a decent guy and it was no doubt awful and difficult.

I agree though with what you say, a lot comes down to balance I think, and respective positions. If Children & Grandchildren are well set up financially and there is a fair bit of money sloshing around then no need to worry too much about it if at a later stage in life. I know a lot of Hollywood Celebrities do prenups and that can be understandable especially earlier on in their careers as their career can tank it at any time.

Myself I looked into prenup briefly and saw that for me it was just too much fuss and could likely be unnecessary and a bit of a clanger for a relationship.

[Bee Farmer]

Trench,
I think ML was trying to tell you that if you want a father figure to guide you, he might be open to adopting a replacement son.  Don't let your chance slip away.