How do you folks handle shared expenses (clothes, college)?

[ProtoLawyer]

Just getting a pulse here. For context: For once, this is not about my situation, but a divorce I'm handling at work.

In this family: Mom wants to split clothing 50/50 (with a yearly cap on reimbursement), Dad wants each party to be responsible for clothes at their own house (with the understanding that some will travel). I see a 50/50 arrangement being a disaster in our house, but I know for some it works.

Also, both agree on splitting college to the best of their abilities--the language is very convoluted on that point (they're both now responsible for half, but that can be adjusted based on future earnings)--but they are disagreeing about the source of the $. Apparently Dad has a very wealthy brother, who has no children, and who has seeded a *very* generous 529 plan for the son. Mom does not consider this to be Dad's contribution, and wants Dad to "struggle like she does" (her words) to pay for his portion. I see her point, but at the same time, I don't. I'd like to see them split, to the best of their abilities, any portion of college that is not covered by external sources, be them scholarships or family contribution, but they don't like that, either.

What say you?

[guestmama 9918]

We buy DSS clothes that stay in our home, his mom buys him clothes for her home. We send him home in the same clothes he comes in (washed.) If the weather would change or something like that, we might send him home in jeans vs the shorts he came in. If they make it back here, fine. If not, we buy another pair of jeans. I wouldn't want to get into splitting clothes 50/50. You'd need receipts for everything and there could always be debate over why the child needs Gap vs Target clothes, why can't you get this on sale, I don't think he needs another pair of sakteboarding shoes, etc.

The way it works with college in my state is that the expectation is set that parents both will contribute. The amount of the contribution is TBD when the child is in college and the costs and incomes of both parents are known. I think it's petty for the mom to object that her son has a 529 plan. What if she gets an inheritance down the line? Or wins the lottery? Is it not fair for her to use that money to cover the child's college related costs? I think you are right that they should share the remaining costs after scholarships/grants/529 plan is exhausted.

[Ione]

For us, neither are addressed in our agreement. Given our situation, it is pretty much understood that I, as CP, am responsible for 100% of "regular" clothing but that her father is welcome (and has once or twice) to also buy her any clothing he sees fit. All clothing is hers, however, and goes where she goes since it is ridiculous for him to maintain a wardrobe for her use 5 weeks out of the year at his place. I do not, however, provide him with some specific, bulky specialty items (came up with snowpants specifically) as they take up too much space in her/our suitcases, given that she has a cousin the same size as her near her father from whom she can borrow most such items if/when a need arises.

For college, I operate under the assumption that her college choices will be dictated in part by what is financially possible for her and I (how much I have managed to save, plus whatever financial aid/loans she can obtain) when the time comes supplemented by whatever her father is willing/able to chip in. This is less of an issue for us that it would be for a 100% American couple since the French university system is excellent and practically free--which means that she (dual citizenship) has options that are not usually available to US kids.

For the family you mention, I would be tempted to suggest (don't know if either would go with the suggestions) the following.

Clothing: A combination of both. i.e. Each party responsible for general, all-purpose clothing at their own houses with the understanding that some will travel, and a 50/50 split (with or without a cap) of the purchase of "obligatory/mandated" clothing (defined in the agreement as those items of clothing whose style is determined by third parties such as school uniforms, uniforms/outfits/equipment for agreed-upon activities such as sports/band/etc., specialty items requested by school, etc.).

For college, that's tougher. I fully agree with you on wanting to "see them split, to the best of their abilities, any portion of college that is not covered by external sources, be them scholarships or family contribution".

One possibility is to maintain splitting college to the best of their abilities (pro-rated %), listing the sources to be taken into account when determining their respective abilities and include on that list "voluntary contributions by private individuals other than the parents" (vague/specific enough to include the uncle, AND others who wish to contribute) as being "allocated" to the parent through whom the relationship exists. And specifying that external sources by entities (scholarship funds, grants, etc.) be deducted from the total before the calculations. And that loans if needed come AFTER the calculations, to cover the respective amounts owed.

That sort of removes the issue of whether or not the uncle's contribution is part of the dad's as it is both taken into account when calculating his % of contribution, AND clearly a separate thing.

HTH. Good luck getting them to agree!

[ProtoLawyer]

Originally Posted by Ione

For us, neither are addressed in our agreement. Given our situation, it is pretty much understood that I, as CP, am responsible for 100% of "regular" clothing but that her father is welcome (and has once or twice) to also buy her any clothing he sees fit. All clothing is hers, however, and goes where she goes since it is ridiculous for him to maintain a wardrobe for her use 5 weeks out of the year at his place. I do not, however, provide him with some specific, bulky specialty items (came up with snowpants specifically) as they take up too much space in her/our suitcases, given that she has a cousin the same size as her near her father from whom she can borrow most such items if/when a need arises.

For college, I operate under the assumption that her college choices will be dictated in part by what is financially possible for her and I (how much I have managed to save, plus whatever financial aid/loans she can obtain) when the time comes supplemented by whatever her father is willing/able to chip in. This is less of an issue for us that it would be for a 100% American couple since the French university system is excellent and practically free--which means that she (dual citizenship) has options that are not usually available to US kids.

For the family you mention, I would be tempted to suggest (don't know if either would go with the suggestions) the following.

Clothing: A combination of both. i.e. Each party responsible for general, all-purpose clothing at their own houses with the understanding that some will travel, and a 50/50 split (with or without a cap) of the purchase of "obligatory" clothing (defined in the agreement! e.g. clothing whose style is determined by third parties such as school uniforms, uniforms/outfits/equipment for agreed-upon activities such as sports, specialty items requested by school, etc.).

For college, that's tougher. I fully agree with you on wanting to "see them split, to the best of their abilities, any portion of college that is not covered by external sources, be them scholarships or family contribution".

One possibility is to maintain splitting college to the best of their abilities (pro-rated %), listing the sources to be taken into account when determining their respective abilities and include on that list "voluntary contributions by private individuals other than the parents" (vague/specific enough to include the uncle, AND others who wish to contribute) as being "allocated" to the parent through whom the relationship exists. And specifying that external sources by entities (scholarship funds, grants, etc.) be deducted from the total before the calculations. And that loans if needed come AFTER the calculations, to cover the respective amounts owed.

HTH. Good luck getting them to agree!

Thanks! This is very helpful (as was the PP)...I do like your suggestion of splitting "obligatory" clothing and will pass it on to my supervising attorney. (I'm doing almost everything for this divorce, but since I'm not a lawyer yet, I can't do it without direct supervision.)

The Target-vs.-Gap problem would be a big issue here, too...we're champion thrifters (and we're attempting to reduce our consumption of new stuff in general); SD's mom likes the mall.

[Ione]

Glad it helps. I was editing for clarity as you posted, so you might want to re-read my first post.. But the changes were minor.

Are you ever in contact one-on-one with the parents? Because the appropriate legal wording for the college arrangement I suggest can be "sold" in different terms while still being clear about what it implies.

To the mom, you could stress that including the uncle's contribution makes sure that she is not left struggling unfairly to provide more than her fair share (I would think--I don't quite get her objections, nor the father's basis for objection).

And to the father you can stress that this ensures that any future changes in circumstances will be taken into account, or whatever aspect of his objections is "fixed" by the suggested wording.

[JustVanessa]

As for clothes, I buy stuff in my house and ex buys stuff for his house. I always send him to dad's in the clothes he came home in last time.

College....well nothing was in our agreement. I have full custody and he has visitation. I am saving for his education and knowing his dad, he is not.
I don't know if what I save will cover all his expenses....but hey thats what summer jobs are for. I never had my education paid for at all, so I figure anything I do manage to save is a bonus for him.

[ProtoLawyer]

Originally Posted by Ione

Glad it helps. I was editing for clarity as you posted, so you might want to re-read my first post.. But the changes were minor.

Are you ever in contact one-on-one with the parents? Because the appropriate legal wording for the college arrangement I suggest can be "sold" in different terms while still being clear about what it implies.

To the mom, you could stress that including the uncle's contribution makes sure that she is not left struggling unfairly to provide more than her fair share (I would think--I don't quite get her objections, nor the father's basis for objection).

And to the father you can stress that this ensures that any future changes in circumstances will be taken into account, or whatever aspect of his objections is "fixed" by the suggested wording.

Thanks for pointing me to the edits.

We're representing Dad, so I'm not going to be in contact with Mom (we go through her lawyer). I'm not sure why either of them are objecting--often, people object for the sake of doing so. They don't want to appear like they're giving in (which many people equate compromising with).

[mama41]

I take it Dad's significantly better-off than Mom is and that Mom's family is pretty much bust, financially.

If this is so, and Dad is amenable, I would do a lump yearly contribution for clothing and other incidentals (sports, trips, etc), to be revisited not more often than every five years, unless income changes significantly. I see far too much squabbling over these minor things, and I think it's much simpler to say, "Here's the budget; work with it." If Dad wants to be involved in activities decision-making, I'd separate that from the money, and write in the mechanism for discussion and tiebreaking. Just nail it down.

As for college, I'd take "struggle" off the table right away -- this is about the kid going to school, not revenge. I also think it's a bad idea to revise responsibility on the basis of future income, because at that point you may as well drop the idea of responsibility. If at the time the kid goes to school the parents don't have the money, and haven't saved, of course the kid is out of luck for the moment. But later, if the parents come into money, the kid can recover some of the college costs, because the responsibility stands. On the whole I'd say the "if I have money right then" thing is a cowardly stance. Either commit to your kid's education or don't.

What concerns me more about the 529 is the question of whether the brother can later change the beneficiary, because the brother is not bound by this decree. If the brother has that power, and you've got some sort of requirement in there for college saving, I'd say don't count the 529 as the father's contribution. If the father is the only custodian over the 529, though, then I see no problem with it.

[mama41]

Oh, as for how the college responsibility's divided here, we've both committed to 45% of reasonable in-state public U costs. 10% is still a sizeable chunk of change for a kid just out of high school, and neither of us wants her walking out with debt. She can go whenever she wants, but our contribution lasts four full-time years, all told. We have a monthly savings requirement built into the decree; it isn't onerous and will do the job. If she wins enough scholarships to leave money over, it's still hers for future ed.

[pranamama]

I like the idea of a mandatory contribution to an education account before hand. My ex still hasn't paid any of my judgements against him. I can only imagine how it would feel to take your dad to court to get a judgement for your college expenses.

[bronxmom]

I think letting each parent buy clothes makes sense. If the kid is at the mom's house the majority of the time and thus needs more clothing there, then I could see a lump sum yearly amount for clothing.

On college, if the uncle has money set aside for the college fund - and this is guaranteed - then I think they should calculate what needs to be paid on top of what that fund will pay and split it. The uncle contribution is a gift that I think both parents should benefit from because the gift is to the kid not the parent. I don't believe in splitting 50-50 because people have different financial circumstances. I would like something proportional scaled to the income of each.

Of course, I say this as someone who's ex barely pays anything because he's broke all the time, unemployed a lot and I just assume that I am the primary person financially responsible. I dream of the day when my ex gets a real, stable job future and can begin to kick in for some of her expenses - but I'm not holding my breath. You could say it's not fair, and it's not, but my ex just doesn't have the money so it's irrelevant.

[mama41]

Originally Posted by pranamama

I like the idea of a mandatory contribution to an education account before hand. My ex still hasn't paid any of my judgements against him. I can only imagine how it would feel to take your dad to court to get a judgement for your college expenses.

Suckage, I would think. But possibly less so than watching your dad live it up while you struggle to pay off loans because he ditched his commitment, or because your ed was poorly timed with his ups and downs. An ethical dad who'd made that promise and came into money would write the check voluntarily.

[violet_]

Well, personally, I think it's ridiculous to require divorcing parents to commit to paying for college. Married parents don't have these requirements, and if it's in the decree then the parents can't withhold tuition for, say, flunking classes. The kid is answerable to no one. I think it's absurd. But if they want to put it in there I'd say just split it. And if Dad gets money from his brother to help, well, that's Dad's business where he gets the money, not hers. And yes, that should "count" as part of his contribution.

On clothes, I'd say whoever gets CS should buy the regular clothes. Splitting it with no cap on spending is a recipe for disaster.

We have a weird college scenario over here. When DH and his ex split up, DH's mom went a little crazy with her (religious-based) disapproval of the divorce, and set up a college account in DH's ex's name where she put 10 grand. Yes, DH's mom gave his ex 10 grand when they split. Now, the way she tells it, it's like she got swindled. She was all proud of it being a 529 and seemed to think that meant neither DH nor ex could touch it and therefore she had been neutral in giving money to the kids. But a 529 is owned by an adult and that adult is DH's ex. Not sue if MIL understood this or not. So if it ever comes down to fighting over paying for college, she'll probably use MIL's money as "her" contribution, even though MIL thought it was a neutral gift to the kids. I'm not sure how it all happened but either ex swindled MIL and stole her money or MIL gave 10k to the person who was trying to rob her son blind. I find it unforgivable either way, but not sure which one to not forgive... But as it stands there's no policy in the decree about college, and anyway I'm a prof so they can go to school for free wherever I'm teaching and DH's ex can keep her ill-gotten money.

ETA: oh yeah, and DH's ex actually offerred to let him contribute to HER 529 account "for the kids" and give her extra money instead of investing it himself. Seriously.

[mama41]

Originally Posted by violet_

Well, personally, I think it's ridiculous to require divorcing parents to commit to paying for college. Married parents don't have these requirements, and if it's in the decree then the parents can't withhold tuition for, say, flunking classes.

Violet, the states do that because the dads had made a habit of using the "I won't help pay for college" card to get the moms to reduce c/s below state mandated. It backfired.

As for married parents not having the requirement... not by law, no. However, some of us regard it as an obligation before we even get around to conception. And if you reeeeeally want your kids to be paying off ed loans at age 50, well, that's up to you, but it's hardly self-preserving. Rich children are good when you're old.

Personally, I don't think flunking classes is a problem, so long as the kid is actually doing something in college. Besides, I don't want to know the grades. Not my business unless the kid is falling apart, in which case college is the wrong place anyway. How she uses the time is up to her. I just hope she doesn't wander off into the humanities, would make dinner conversation unbearable. (Please, please, no disquisitions on the politics of porn.) If she must, though, she must.

Finally -- keep in mind that the tuition benefit, if you're teaching at an institution that still offers it, is free to them, not to you. For you, I believe it's still taxed as income. With SLAC tuitions running at $35-40K/yr, that's not trivial, so don't leave that out of the planning.

[pinksprklybarefoot]

I would say part of this depends on their parenting time arrangement.

We are in and every-other week situation, and since that really got off the ground, it has been each house provides its own clothing. That includes, for the most part, extras. DSD had dance leotards at each house, for instance. We provided the dance shoes, but we paid for the lessons. That sort of thing will probably eventually be split 50/50. If you read my recent thread, you know how specially requested clothing items from the school goes down.

When DF just had DSD every other weekend, her mom provided clothes, end of story. He figured his CS covered clothing. He would buy her things now and then that her thought were cute, but they didn't stay at his house.

As far as college goes, we will be paying for that (or at least will be the only contributors). Not because the parenting agreement addresses it (it does not), but because by that time we will have the means to do so. I will be done with school by then, and in theory, making good money. I would be surprised if DSD's mom will have the resources to help with DSD's higher education. It would be ridiculous to put something in the parenting agreement (it is in progress), because DSD's mom would fight tooth-and-nail to remove it. I don't think that she places the same value on a college education as we do.

Because my college education was not funded by my parents, I don't necessarily feel that it is a parent's responsibility. If [arents have the means, great, but if they don't, that's what loans are for (or in my case, the US Army). So while I plan on helping the kids with college, I won't feel like a terrible person if I cannot bankroll the entire thing (especially since I will be bankrolling DF's college as soon as the ink is dry on my Pharm D diploma).

In the case of your clients, if the 529 is a guaranteed thing (I don't know that much about these types of funds), I would count it as part of the father's contribution. If it is something that could be transferred to another person, then I would not count it, because it isn't a sure thing.

[ProtoLawyer]

Originally Posted by violet_

ETA: oh yeah, and DH's ex actually offerred to let him contribute to HER 529 account "for the kids" and give her extra money instead of investing it himself. Seriously.

Yeah...no.
My partner's ex/SD's mom blew a gasket when his father and stepmother funded 529s for their grandchildren. Why? Because SD's mom had gone through the trouble of setting up a 529 for their daughter, had notified all extended family and ex-family, and the grandparents chose to contribute to a different fund. She felt she was being undermined as a parent. And she didn't seem to understand why her ex parents-in-law wouldn't want to put money in a fund that she controlled (they got along superficially but never liked each other), and that could be used for a family member of *her* choosing (meaning: a sibling, future child, spouse, whoever) that they have never even met and is in no way their family.

Here in WI, parents aren't required to commit to their child's higher education in case of divorce, but plenty of parents put it in their parenting plans anyway. Usually, there are some restrictions--the parents are only on the hook for the equivalent of tuition/room/board/fees at a state school, and only through a bachelor's degree or trade program. Sometimes, the agreement says the parents (and child) have to approve of the school itself (and one agreement I've read even includes very narrow grounds on which disapproval may occur, so that disapproval isn't used as a pretext for not paying).

Heck, I've heard of parenting agreements that address the child's wedding costs.

[pinksprklybarefoot]

Originally Posted by ProtoLawyer

Heck, I've heard of parenting agreements that address the child's wedding costs.

Man, I wish my parents would have heard of this (says the woman who - with her df - is largely paying for her own wedding this Sept). Heh.

[violet_]

Originally Posted by mama41

Violet, the states do that because the dads had made a habit of using the "I won't help pay for college" card to get the moms to reduce c/s below state mandated. It backfired.

As for married parents not having the requirement... not by law, no. However, some of us regard it as an obligation before we even get around to conception. And if you reeeeeally want your kids to be paying off ed loans at age 50, well, that's up to you, but it's hardly self-preserving. Rich children are good when you're old.

Personally, I don't think flunking classes is a problem, so long as the kid is actually doing something in college. Besides, I don't want to know the grades. Not my business unless the kid is falling apart, in which case college is the wrong place anyway. How she uses the time is up to her. I just hope she doesn't wander off into the humanities, would make dinner conversation unbearable. (Please, please, no disquisitions on the politics of porn.) If she must, though, she must.

Finally -- keep in mind that the tuition benefit, if you're teaching at an institution that still offers it, is free to them, not to you. For you, I believe it's still taxed as income. With SLAC tuitions running at $35-40K/yr, that's not trivial, so don't leave that out of the planning.

Well, personally, I regard it as my obligation to my kids, but that's just me. It doesn't need to be enshrined in law. Also, as a college prof, let me assure you that LOTS of kids in college right now have no business being there. Some will get nothing out of it because their aptitudes lie elsewhere, and many more are simply woefully underprepared and wasting their time and money.

On the tuition benefit, I'm not 100% sure, but my understanding was that it is taxed as income if it's not for a degree program, but not taxed if it is.

[MamaChel]

Is there going to be a financial support order? If there will be, then get rid of the clothing issue entirely. The purpose of financial support is to help provide things (clothing, shelter, etc) for the child from the NCP. Really, the mother does not need to dictate how much dad spends on clothes for the kids. That's what the support order is for, to support the kids however the CP sees fit. Otherwise the NCPs could go in and try to set up a budget and dictate that this much goes to school supplies, that much for food, that much for clothes, etc. It doesn't work that way, both parents are going to have to learn to deal with some loss of control.

Re: college, I think it's reasonable to split 50/50 any costs NOT already covered by other assistance. However, I think it should be written so it does NOT become a burden if the other parent loses a job or downsized. Again, the mother does not need to dictate *how* the funds come, if dad wants to set up an ed savings account and use that he should be allowed to. Also, it should be written so the child cannot just slack off and force the parents to pay for it. So, if a pattern of failing grades develops, the kid can pay for themselves. This comes from personal experiences, a friend has been paying for TEN years for their child to go to college while that child has repeatedly failed, changed their mind, switched schools, left mid-term, etc. At this point, the "child" is no longer a child with no degree in sight.

It looks (from the tiny bit of info I saw) that she is looking for ways to "stick it" to her ex, which is not beneficial for the children at all.

[mama41]

violet, it seems to vary by school, though I'm not sure I understand why; I do know that there have been menus of tax choices for institutions on other items, though.

MamaChel, I think it depends on the relative incomes. State-mandated support may not come close to paying half the costs for the way the child's been living, and presumably -- if this dad is interested in things like paying for college -- he's not looking to see her standard of living suffer just because he and his wife are divorcing. (Yes, I know that in many cases the kid's SOL does suffer. Many parents work to see that this doesn't happen, though, apart from loss of parent in the home.) So in that case a top-up would be a reasonable thing for him to do, and would also let the parents avoid the many-times-a-year tug-of-war over this extra and that, which is all to the good. But you're right, there's no way to dictate what it would be spent on. If I were in that situation, I might say "let's try it for a few years, here's a list of items this money can go for, let's see how it goes". If the mother was willing to do the recordkeeping, it might be a decent thing to do.

Re college, yes, I think it's important to put limits. I don't think that grades should be a limiting factor, though, because there are too many legitimate reasons for poor grades, including using college for one of its purposes: trying things out to see if you're interested in them. I'd be more inclined to say, "You have this many years fulltime, up to you to use them wisely and walk out with a degree."