25yearsmlc 10 yrs later I File D (part 4)

[25yearsmlc]

If he has the money to buy you out I would take it.

Knowing h, there is no way he'll make a decent offer. He lacks negotiation skills (and it's something I've always managed for us.)

H doesn't want to pay ANY spousal support, just split the pensions and retirement savings. (I cannot access the retirement accounts for 2 years and he earns a lot as an anesthesiologist).





One of my big regrets is that we did not have the kind of money it would have taken for ex to buy me out instead of alimony - and as a result, he has been resentful over what he was paying me (or what he mistakenly THOUGHT he was paying me) and so stuck me with every other expense for our adult children that he could weasel out of.

point taken, KML. God knows I'll hear his crap the rest of my life. Plus I'd like to work and not worry that every time I get a promotion or bonus, h will want to return to court. As conflict avoidant as he is, when it comes to money, suddenly he's all about confrontation.

He's also not able to HEAR what is said. He hears what he fears.

My L said that when the judge ordered "temporary support in the amount of X", that h turned and blurted out that he's "not paying her that for the rest of my life!"


I often think that if it had been settled at the time of the divorce, we would be on much friendlier terms now.

I have thought of that^^^.

So - things to think about in the buyout:

- how long an alimony would you likely qualify for if you went to court, given your ages and length of marriage?

Assuming it goes like most, after 35 years of m, the advantage h has is that he can retire at age 65 at which point it would stop. Which is just 5 years and that makes me sad/mad

OR he'd keep working until whenever, and then I'd get some until then. So whichever is later, I'd get spousal support

unless I earn big bucks like h says I can!

Ironically, if we had divorced 10 years ago, or 15, I'd get spousal support at least half the length of the m, and CS...by sticking it out, I get less.

I'm not saying the guy has to be hitched to the plow for ME...but we all know h's resume is pristine and mine's the opposite, our moves all helped his career and hurt my career.

but that's life. At least I got all that time with the kids.

- It was my understanding that at least in my state, alimony could ALWAYS be revisited - that is, if my ex became disabled or was fired or something, he could always go back to court and get the alimony changed.

true in CA (though the law has changed about military disability if it hits 40% -- IF H goes that way - Congress says we both get it. Based on a case in which an amputee returned from combat and became an abusive alcoholic. 22 year marriage and he was fully disabled and the wife got nothing b/c disability is not divisible as marital property.

The law changed, thankfully, so that once a soldier hits 40% disability (I'm mostly sure of the numbers here) then both spouses get it so she won't be punished for the divorce but the disabled soldier won't lose his disability).

At this point none of that is relevant but it's something to bear in mind at time of signing.




So having a bird in the hand is better than a possibility of future income that may or may not come true.

if the numbers work, I agree


- He should not have cancelled the insurance, I suspect the court would have something to say about that. In my divorce my ex had to let me maintain insurance on him in case he died before paying me all the alimony he owed. (He did however insist I reduce it from the $500k policy we already owned to a $250k policy - lol, he didn't want me to have an "incentive" to have someone rub him out!!!!!!)


wtf? We have kids & i bet h leaves them nothing. I really think so. H is gone

- the buyout should be based on his imputed income and yours, not on his retirement "non-income"

Good God, let's hope so


- the buyout is calculated taking taxes into account. So, for instance, let's say alimony was going to be $25k for 10 years. That would have been tax deductible to him, so if he's going to be in a high tax bracket (say his top rate is close to 50% between state and federal), it would only have cost him say $13k/year. You on the other hand have to pay taxes on alimony, so assuming your top combined tax bracket turns out to be 30%, you would possibly only net $17,500 a year. Times ten years that would be $175,000 total BUT they also calculate in the interest you could make investing that lump sum. Assumptions here make a big difference - for instance, assuming that you will put it in a mutual fund and it will make 7% a year is a very very bad assumption. But they will probably want to use something overly optimistic like this. You on the other hand might want to use something very pessimistic, like current bond or CD interest rates which are quite low. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

i will have my cap/cfp (I think she is both) do this calculations. Good call


A quick rough calculation using the Financial Mentor ultimate retirement calculator online (a handy easy tool which lets you change a lot of assumptions - although in this case I'm missing the relatively small amount of taxes you might pay on your investment income) shows that for ten years of alimony at a take home of 17,500, he would need to give you a lump sum of around $171k and change if we assume a 2% interest rate on that investment. If we assume a 7% interest rate, he only needs to pay you $131k. (this assumes that the lump sum he is giving you is marital assets that you do not have to pay taxes on).

how would they Not be marital assets?

Now - if you're in a position to use the money to pay off a mortgage on a home for yourself (that is, you can earn enough income to cover your other expenses until retirement) then you can actually make a guaranteed 4% on that money (or whatever your mortgage interest is.) There are arguments for and against paying off your mortgage this way, depending on your situation.

i now have zero real estate. But thats something I need to get

If you opt for the alimony route instead, then he HAS to allow you to keep an insurance policy on him, and I would fight to make him pay you the difference between the cost of a new policy and the (probably cheaper) cost of the old policy. Also insist on an automatic withdrawal.

I'm still smh...idiot crazy jerk

Also, bear in mind, if some of the money that he is going to use to buy you out is in a 401k or some such, you will have to pay taxes on it when it comes out, just as you would on the alimony. In that case, you would need $187 k if assuming 7% annual growth of investment, or $244k if assuming a safe 2% growth rate. (If you use 4%, you would need a lump sum of $219k).

evidently if you are under 59, the 401k is taxed much less than an IRA is, at time of divorce. Don't ask me why, ask Congress.

Odds are, if he hears the actual figures, he will want to pay you alimony instead as it's a better deal for him (and hope that you drop dead or he truly retires before he's done paying it all). So you will have to consider how much is it worth to you to negotiate, in order to have the bird in the hand.

I think if he gives me ALL of the retirement accounts, he'd still come out ahead over spousal support but I'm not counting the tax consequences, but I'd agree that it's better for me than dealing with this crap.

Plus I could remarry (I mean someday!)

What a fool...stupid greedy fool.

I guess OW makes a lot of money b/c that is clearly very important to h. Along with lots of adoration.

My son is trying to be the man of the house. He submitted an affidavit today. UGH...

and d19 is really hurt that h won't pay her college. It's $60k a year (- the $15k scholarship and we paid the others college).

H says I can pay it from all the money HE is giving me. Which is odd, given that I'm getting nothing from him above random small amounts I discover in my bank account.

Let's hope that means he thinks he will have to pay and thus, he's only a selfish jerk blaming me, as opposed to blaming me insanely and not paying me...

Sometimes I want to reach out to say "this CANNOT be what you wanted..."

which is a really bad idea of mine.