Protect Assets

[lawsjs]

Protect Assets - Marriage Counselling 101

Reply: 1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.2.1.1
From: Jeremy Laws


Not sure about the young and naive Sim, but the rest was true! Your strategy of never buying anything is the perfect defence of course - so I suspect you too are also placing little faith in the 'finding the perfect spouse' idea!
Simple facts. Two out of three marriages fail.
No one goes into a marriage expecting it to fail.

That means 66% of the population are wrong about the perfect partner.

I am not naive enough to assume I will be in that 'lucky' 33%.
I was talking about this with a friend last night. A marriage lasts, on average, 7-8 years apparantly. The average male in Australia lives to 73 (I think - may have changed) so an obvious time to look at marriage therefore is say 65. This would allow the female to live happily on (in this case) his assets for the remainder of her life.

 

[Mr. Fabulous]

Some basic advice

Reply: 1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.2.1.1.1
From: Mark Laszczuk


Anon,
Okay, here's what I would do if I were you:
1. Read all the posts here and think long and hard about them.
2. Consider just how important asset protection is to you.
3. If not important, leave as is. If important, speak to your accountant/solicitor.
4. Transfer your assets into an asset protection structure, if applicable. Do not worry about costs, remember you have 1.3 mill. in assets to protect. What's several thousand dollars in costs, to protect this much value?
5. Speak to your future wife (before or after the fact of setting up sturcture, I guess it doesn't really matter) about your intentions. Be HONEST - tell her exactly why you're doing it, and how you feel about it. If she gets upset, bad luck, you're risking a lot of money if you don't structure yourself properly. Remember to also listen to her side of the story.
6. Sleep well knowing that if you ever need it (which I hope you don't) your structure is keeping your assets secure. As a point here, I would like to recommend Dale Gatherum Goss to help you set something up, he uses trusts, so will know how to set yours up properly. He can be contacted at: [email protected]

 

[WebBoard]

Some basic advice

Reply: 1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1
From: The Wife


Goodness me, so much talk about women wanting to take take take. I am sure a lot of the property most hold is heavily mortgaged, so you are guessing a woman wants to take half your debt. I seriously doubt that there are THAT many women who marry for money today, its to easy for a woman to make her own, I would like to know the average age of the single men here hoo harring about their asset protection, really are you such a good catch.

Behind every good man, there stands a good woman, this saying is now defunct, as there is equal footing today, its when you stand toe to toe there is a problem.

I do not agree with the women ( and men, although to a lesser extent as woman arent ruled by their hormones) who 'catch; a man and let him do all the work whilst she can now declare herself "free of work", there are however partnerships that have had children, and the decision is made that one partner stays home and the other goes out to work,remember guys, you helped to make the children, this is why she is at home, she is now only able to support her family in this way, she is still entitled to half of anything, besides , any woman worth anything, will be trying to assist her families financial situation by doing something beneficial, no matter how small.

asset protection? You pop along to a solicitor, as JL mentioned, make it an expensive one, the cheap ones rarely have enough balls to do anything of any consequence, and tell them what you want, and how you want it, like any good contract, have something drawn up, that she or he can sign, that waivers their right to a pre marriage amount of money ( not houses, as these can be sold over time and money goes into a mutual account), after that, a post marriage agreement of who owns what, try to predict what will happen, this part isnt worth as much, but its a good argumentive point for any good QC. Build along the way, different trust accounts that you "give" to your spouse and others you "give" to your children, and again, others to yourself ( IF you can achieve this amount, i think some people spend a lot of time squabbling over to few assets), the different set trusts make division of assets much fairer, and easier, and less costly in solicitors fee's.

Finally, I think nearly everyone thinks they have married the right person in the beginning , so it is difficult to judge the right from wrong person, especially when "love" is in there clouding ones vision, when you say "Darling, I would like you to sign this contract that excludes you from my total worth as of the moment you sign this contract, will suddenly clear the air.Guaranteed.

TW

~Who owns everything in my relationship? from marriage onwards, both of us, 50/50, but my goodness, if one partner doesn't pull their weight, they are out!, none of this slip shoddy dribble carry on for years and years of no love and now they have taken all my assets, boo hoo, carry on.- anonymous~

 

[WebBoard]

Some basic advice

Reply: 1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.2
From: Sergey Golovin


As Warren Buffet sais - You do the job I'll do the thinking...I'll take the responsibility...Good business partner it is like good marriage, we do not expect too much from each other...

Serge.

 

[michele_b]

Protect Assets - Marriage Counselling 101

Reply: 1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.2.1.1.2
From: Michele B


Sim, a realist accepts that nothing lasts forever, often despite our very best intentions and efforts.

There's simply no such thing as the perfect partner. People change, hopefully for the better and often in different directions, so it's never a question of being "lucky" as Jeremy puts it - it's more a matter of taking a chance with someone and then hanging in there. You are right Sim, this takes effort, but there are no guarantees.

Knowing this, the realist will do what's needed to protect him/herself but not obsessively or with bitterness and certainly not at the expense of being happy. Really, there's a lot of wisdom in the old saying "better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all" Worth thinking about

Michele

 

[lawsjs]

Protect Assets - Marriage Counselling 101

Reply: 1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.2.1.1.2.1
From: Jeremy Laws


TW - after only the first sentence of your reply you are IMHE wrong. A LOT of people marry for money. I am firmly of the opinion that they earn every cent of it, but in the process they screw their spouse - badly and unfairly! You should get out more!

As you said, you can't marry the right person cos people change! You are talking about 50+ YEARS!!!!
PS TW - You keep telling us you own nothing - whats this 50% of then??? Are you even qualified to comment - as you have no assets?

 

[DaleGG]

Reply: 1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.2
From: Dale Gatherum-Goss


Hi Michelle

I apologise for being offensive. I had posted a serious post earlier and thought it time to "lighten" the mood on a subject that had the potential to be ugly.

Dale

 

[michele_b]

Reply: 1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.2.1
From: Michele B


Hey Dale
No offense taken!! Nothing wrong with my sense of humour and btw I've very much liked your input on this and all previous threads.

Michele

 

[Lissy]

Reply: 1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.2.2
From: Felicity W.


I would like to suggest you read the following books to help with your asset protection situation:
"Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus"
"Five Love Languages"
"His Needs, Her Needs"
a good book on personality types...
Believe me, if you invest as much effort into understanding your spouse and nurturing your relationship with him/her as you do in building up your investment property, you'll never have to worry about your assets.
Keep smiling
Felicity

 

[asy]

"Protect Assets (sorry, bit of a ramble)"

Reply: 1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.2.2.1
From: Asy .


OK, guys, these are my thoughts on this thread:

I note with interest, how it seems that the thread is heavily weighted toward men commenting, and men believing they are the ones that need protection in this. I grant that this is probably most often the case, however, it is not always true. I think this is an area where it will not pay us to over-generalise.

There are predators out there of both sexes, and really, they will find a way to use others, whether this be through marriage, or shonky business dealings. (Although with businesses one would imagine less emotional involvement than a relationship.)

Although this does bring up the quandary, why do emotional involvement and due-diligence seem inversely proportional?

Now I am not saying you should investigate a prospective partner, but I feel sometimes it is a good idea to step back and "smell the roses" as it were. Think about the relationship critically (Which I grant can be very difficult) and ensure that you, and as best you can tell, the other partner is entering into the relationship for the right reasons.

In the end, it's largely a matter of perception, this brings to mind something I heard:

An English Professor wrote the words,
"woman without her man is a savage"
on the blackboard and directed his students to punctuate it correctly.

The men wrote: "Woman, without her man, is a savage."

The women wrote: "Woman: Without her, man is a savage."

Be careful, but remember to LIVE life, not just PLAN to live life.
Don't get analysis paralysis in your relationships.

asy


"The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard. "

 

[DaleGG]

Reply: 1.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.2
From: Dale Gatherum-Goss


Hi Michelle

I tried to email you privately but my email bounced. Can you contact me please on 03 9723 7699

Thanks

Dale

 

[WebBoard]

Protect Assets - Marriage Counselling 101

Reply: 1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.2.1.1.2.1.1
From: The Wife


I have been multiple married, I am qualified.

TW

 

[Mr. Fabulous]

"Protect Assets (sorry, bit of a ramble)"

Reply: 1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.2.2.1.1
From: Mark Laszczuk


Peoples,
I stand by my posts, asset protection going into a marriage is of the utmost importance, whether you're male or female. Why should your partner (m or f) get any of what you worked and sacrificed so hard for before the marriage. If there are children involved, then it is up to your conscience to decide whether you are going to look after them (which you should be doing). My theory on why this discussion is so heavily weighted towards men is because in court, in the majority of cases, it is the male of the relationship that gets screwed. I've even come across cases where the judge has found so favourably towards the ex-wife that the husband, after paying alimony is left with just barely enough to pay the rent and buy food. Yes, there are bastards (and bitches) who sherk their responsibilities and don't help towards supporting children, etc. but why should someone lose everything they've worked so hard for, cause the relationship didn't work? Here's how mine and my partners works: We TALK ABOUT THINGS. If we have an argument, we discuss it afterwards, sometimes this takes several hours, but it is discussed until it is resolved. Any issues, no matter how hairy are also discussed until resolved. We made a pact with each other when we started seeing each other that we would do this, and we stuck with it. Sometimes it is really, really hard, but it works, and as long as we continue to do this, our relationship is going to be as strong and vibrant as it was the first day. Now this might sound all airy-fairy, but this is the reality of the situation if you want something to work. And you can read all the books on the subject of relationships you want, but if you don't put the advice into practice, then you've wasted your time. And people, don't try to understand the opposite sex. IT AIN'T GOING TO HAPPEN! People have been trying to do it for centuries, and come up with nothing. Just be open, honest and above all, listen to your partner when they talk to you. And I mean LISTEN, don't just wait for your turn to speak. Something 99% of the population is guilty of these days.

Mark
'no hat, some cattle'

 

[Robert]

Reply: 1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.3
From: Robert Forward


After reading all of this LONG thread I was wondering when "Super" was going to bought up.

Nowadays the courts are even providing $x's upfront on a proportional value to (usually the ex-wife) for the "Perceived Value" of the fund at retirement age.

This means the one that has the Super has to pay out the $$$'s NOW for a forecasted dollar amount in 10-20 or 30 years.

I'm in agreance with Jeremy about having things written up so that the structure remains in tact, and the spouse receives an income/cashflow from the structure. This would make so much more sense to me.

And as Jeremy posted earlier Pre Nups ARE now legal, in NSW anyway. They have been for since Jan 1st last year I think.

Cheers
Robert

The Sydney "Freestylers" Group Leader.

 

[asy]

"Protect Assets (sorry, bit of a ramble)"

Reply: 1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.2.2.1.1.1
From: Asy .


Mark,

Believe it or not, I agree with you, pre-marital assets should be protected from the marriage/relationship, unless otherwise discussed.

One must consider this when buying properties/investments and this is why I believe in putting things in a company/trust structure, because it is a lot easier to say, everything in company x belongs to him, everything in company y belongs to her, and our joint ventures in company z are split. This way there is no "But I sold this house to buy those two". Keep it in your own structures, then there is no problem.

You would have to discuss household expenditure, and child maintenance (on both sides) pre-marriage.

However, I believe in what I said in my previous post, in that you CAN overanalyse things, and sometimes you need to risk a little to gain a lot.

asy


"Don't forget what happened to the guy who suddenly got everything he ever wanted...
He lived happily ever after.
(Willy Wonka).

 

[DaleGG]

"Protect Assets (sorry, bit of a ramble)"

Reply: 1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.2.2.1.1.1.1
From: Dale Gatherum-Goss


Hi

In my role, I see and often act for all 3 sides of the story. The aggrieved party, the one leaving the marriage and the government employee who works for either the CSA or Centrelink.

For what it is worth . . . if Sue and I ever part ways, I am happy to give her everything and I'll start again.

Why?

Why not. Life is too short to argue over a few dollars (even with lots of noughts at the end of them) the relationship we have is special and I would not want my children to go without.

More importantly, if I am seen to have given everything then I cannot be punished by an unfair and unjust legal system that does not understand the concept of equity.

Finally, if you have the capacity to build wealth, you can do it again and whilst I may give away the lot I know that I can replace it in a reasonably brief time.

As others have said, if you do not trust your intended spouse, you should not marry him/her as you are dooming the relationship to fail.

Sure, be smart and use the legal structures available to you to protect assets, but, at the end of the day be aware that your partner is just that.

Have fun

Dale

 

[Lissy]

Reply: 1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.3.1
From: Felicity W.


I believe there are moves afoot to actually split superannuation accounts in divorce, so that one partner doesn't have to pay cash up front for an asset that they won't have access to themselves until retirement age. Seems like a good idea to me.
Keep smiling
Felicity

 

[michele_b]

Reply: 1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.3.1.1
From: Michele B


Absolutely Felicity!! My brother borrowed money to pay out half the value of his super. Repayments on this plus child support took all his income. Without family help he would have starved - literally.


Michele

 

[GoAnna!]

Reply: 1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.3.1.1.1
From: GoAnna !


The wonderful thing about this thread is that we can all be right. The "cynics" will have no trouble pointing out all the disastrous marriages they know and the even more disastrous divorce settlements. The "naïve" can point to the solid long term marriages they have witnessed. Both parties see themselves as realistic and the funny thing is all of us will probably be proven right.

For the record I speak from the position of the realistically naïve. )

I think while we are all focusing on the fear of loss, the cash flow negative partner with a love of money greater than the love of us, we have forgotten that a partner may not just be a doodad.

A strong partnership with shared goals and dreams comes close behind knowledge as your most powerful financial asset. With the right partner you can achieve more than double you could alone. A partnership means more time, the ability to specialise, greater breadth and depth of knowledge and experience, and the second opinion of some-one who shares the same risks and successes as you! And for the "realists" out there - even if you do split chances are you will walk away with more than you would be holding had you remained single.

I grant you GoMichael and I have made the majority of our money together so that does bias my perspective. However had he been more protective of the money he brought into our relationship and less trusting of me we would not have been able to achieve what we have so far.

Life is too short to live in fear.

GoAnna !
"Obstacles are those frightful things you see when you take your eyes off your goal."
-Henry Ford

 

[Rixter]

Reply: 1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.2.3.1.1.1.1
From: Rixter ®


Ahh ...whats the name of that song by Madness??

It mustn't be love love love?

Happy Investing,
Rixter