Required Reading for Involved Grandparents

/in , , , , , /by

Recommended reading: “Well Into Adulthood and Still Getting Money From Their Parents” Wall Street Journal, January 26th, 2024.

In order to help their family thrive, many grandparents financially support their adult children and grandchildren. For example, let’s think about a couple that lives in Manhattan with an income of $350,000 – $400,000 a year. In many places, that would be a decent amount of money. If someone’s living on the Upper West Side, Upper East Side, or SoHo, it’s not nearly enough. In these situations, grandparents often give their children very large sums of money on a routine basis as well as make direct payments towards expenses like the grandchildren’s private school tuition and high-end camp experiences. 

I wrote an article called “Good Samaritan Divorce,” which talks about how the Good Samaritan often gets “punished” in some way. For your convenience, you can read the article here.

What does this have to do with matrimonial law? There are standards and statutes in matrimonial law, and grandparents’ consistent and unwavering financial support can affect the support payments. The general support standards are set forth in “The Child Support Standards Act” and “The Notice of Guideline Maintenance” – advisory guideline statutes for child support and spousal support (aka maintenance and alimony). 

The golden rule is maintaining the standard of living.

At the outset of a divorce case, both sides are required to accurately complete, legally acknowledge, and file with the courts a comprehensive document called a Statement of Net Worth, which sets forth the standard of living. 

The standard of living analysis is the most critical and guiding factor in negotiating support and arriving at a final agreed upon amount. The system wants children’s material lives to remain intact. The system wants the lower income earning spouse to have a window of time when they are getting support from their higher earner ex to give them a cushion and bridge towards being more self-supporting. 

I’ve had many cases where grandparents steadily gave money to their children’s family throughout the marriage to subsidize housing, car payments, parking, vacations, and tuition – like a weekly or monthly allowance, but for adults.

If the couple divorces, the idea of imputation comes into play.

Imputation: The assignment of a value to something by inference from the value of the products or processes to which it contributes.

Let’s say it was the husband’s father that helped support the family, the wife is going to want to come after that additional money, even though it doesn’t show in the husband’s W-2 or tax returns – that’s the inference.

Some grandparents feel like imputation codifies an agreement that would have happened anyway. Other grandparents react differently and chafe at the idea of being required to do anything. They also don’t want to be passengers on the roller coaster of their child’s divorce. 

In many instances, grandparents enter into promissory notes with their child for some or all of the funds they give – thereby making their child their debtor. They are trying to ensure that the monies are legally recorded as debts and not gifts or supplemental income. This is done to shield both the grandparent and their child in the event of a divorce. Both the grandparent and child should, however, consult with a qualified attorney when navigating this strategy. 

Understanding imputations and standard of living analyses takes a skilled matrimonial attorney – and the more experience they have, the better. Contact me at The Law & Mediation Office of Cheryl Stein to schedule a consultation.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

The Interplay Between Divorce and Immigration: Part 2

/in , , /by

In last month’s article, we spoke about the intersection between matrimonial law and immigration in broad brushstroke terms. In this article, we parse out specific red flags and nuances to look out for in cases where immigration is a factor. 

Prenuptial Agreements:  

Many citizens who marry immigrants choose to have a Prenuptial Agreement in place prior to entering the marriage. 

Prenuptial Agreements are a sound measure for their protection and I highly recommend them. But, if you are doing a Prenuptial Agreement, you need to do it the right way. Make sure you are not just pushing meaningless ineffective paper around that isn’t worth the paper it’s written on. 

Many marriages involving immigrants happen in a speed of lightning way to offer the immigrant protection. The problem is that Prenuptial Agreements should not be done in such a mirrored manner. Chik chak hurried for a Prenup is asking for problems if the Prenup is later questioned and challenged. 

It is especially important that the Prenup be objectively fair and one that a reasonable person of sound mind and not at the heels of utter desperation would sign. 

It is also critical that both parties be represented by attorneys. I am often the lead drafting attorney. My clients time and again ask me if their soon to be spouse really – truly – absolutely needs their own attorney? Like they are willing me to respond something other than an unequivocal, affirmative, and trumpeting YES! 

These Prenups also tend to demarcate all property as exclusive separate property of the parties as dictated by title of ownership. 

While many Prenups do this, the Prenups involving immigrants do so at a higher average than others. Exclusive separate property Prenups, such as these, are an opt out of the New York Domestic Relations Law that dictates that acquisitions after the marriage date are marital, and to be split equitably, regardless of how title is held. 

See, https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/DOM; https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/DOM/236.

As we noted in “The Intersection between Divorce & Immigration: Part 1,” joint and commingled finances is one of the cogent persuasive points of evidence the immigration authorities look for to satisfy them that a marriage involving an immigrant is a bona fide marriage. 

So, we need to satisfy the seeming contradiction of a Prenup that designates all property as separate and the immigration authority’s criteria of evidence demonstrating joint ownership and commingled finances. 

We do this by carving out an allowance in the Prenup for a joint household account held in joint names. There is no minimum the parties must maintain in this account. The question becomes how the account funds would be split in the event of a divorce. Cash accounts are most typically split equally in divorce, but for these couples, we often specify in the Prenup that the funds will be split pro rata to contribution so that the spouse who funded it more heavily does not lose out. 

International Travel with Children:

What comes to mind most commonly is a fear that the immigrant parent will abscond with the children back to their native country and create hardship and aggravation for the American parent to get the children back. Depending on the immigrant parent’s country of origin and such country’s recognition of international law and conventions, this can be a real concern. We often work with international experts for these cases. You would also want to look at the Hague Convention and signatory countries to better grasp your situation. Non-signatory countries should justifiably evoke a healthy dose of trepidation and concomitant precautionary measures to ensure the children remain safely on American soil. See here to learn more:

https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/International-Parental-Child-Abduction.html

Another aspect though is the perspective of the immigrant parent. They want protection and assurance that the children will be able to travel to their native country to spend time with grandparents and cousins for, say, a summer or long holiday break. The desire for the children to develop a strong relationship with family members abroad and also be immersed in the native culture of the immigrant parent sings loudly. This is often honored by the American parent as they too recognize the enriching benefits this can have on the children. We can address this by specifying in the parties’ divorce agreement the times and parameters for such extended travel and visits the children may have with extended family abroad. So long as the visits are to a country that is a signatory to the Hague Convention, the cost benefit analysis of them weighs in favor of the benefits. 

To learn more about these and further nuances of marriages and divorces involving an immigrant spouse and how to handle them, including: a) VAWA (The Violence Against Women Act, 34 U.S.C. § 12471 et seq.) claims and protections where domestic violence is involved (See here:  https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/abused-spouses-children-and-parents); in addition to those cases where, unfortunately, VAWA is manipulated and domestic violence is falsely claimed to gain an advantage; as well as b) difficulty locating your spouse when it’s time to serve them with the summons for divorce because they conveniently disappeared into the thickets of their ethnic enclave communities, contact The Law & Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein at https://www.cherylsteinesq.com.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

 

The Interplay Between Divorce and Immigration: Part 1

/in , , /by

With the upcoming presidential election, crisis at the border, flood of migrants, and New York City being a sanctuary city, the topic of immigration has been getting a lot of air time, with all its inherent controversies and polar view-points.  

The magnified “crisis” is confined in scope to the illegal immigration issue.  

Untarnished by the mass media coverage is the uncontroversial paths towards legal immigration that have been steadfast and secure bastions for many years.  

A longstanding path is legally obtaining United States citizenship via marriage to an American citizen. See also, https://www.ice.gov.  

United States citizenship is one of the greatest assets we have. We sometimes take this for granted. It is incredibly sought after by many have-nots.  

America on its worst days is better than many other countries on their best days.  

We interviewed renowned immigration attorney Candice L. Ackermann, Esq. of Visa Law Pros – www.visalawpros.com – to discuss the intersection between divorce and immigration.

The golden rule is that a marriage entered into between a US citizen and non-US citizen needs to be a “bona fide marriage” at the time it is entered into to be recognized by immigration. A bona fide marriage forges the legal path of citizenship for the immigrant spouse. 

A bona fide marriage must be proven to the immigration authorities with evidence and documentation.  

The two most powerful pieces of evidence are proof of joint residence and commingling of marital funds, such as a joint bank account.  

None of us are so naive as to believe that all these marriages are authentic. We all assume that a percentage is based on artifice – a couple portraying the surface layer optics of a marriage – a citizen helping an immigrant friend or acquaintance as a benevolent gesture or in exchange for something tangible or intangible promised.  

But a percentage – larger than you may think – of these marriages are based on a genuine desire to build a life with the other person.  

Notwithstanding such aspirational marital goals at the outset, with an overall high divorce rate in this country, these marriages are, obviously, just as likely or unlikely to fail and end up in divorce as any other.  

Trouble comes when the marriage irretrievably breaks down within the first two years and before the final immigration interview to remove conditions to the immigrant spouse’s green card.  

Timing is critical. If the immigrant spouse can prove the marriage was bona fide when entered into, they usually don’t have to worry if a divorce action is commenced prior to their final immigration interview, but this is not a bullet-proof catch-all. There are exceptions and nuances that need to be accounted for on a case-by-case basis.  

If you and your spouse find yourself in this conundrum and you have questions about an inevitable and impending divorce, contact us at The Law & Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein – www.cherylsteinesq.com – to learn more.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

Victimhood Has Currency

/in , , , /by

Most people spin conflict so that they are the victor or the victim. Here’s why it’s important to keep that instinct in check.

The legal community focuses heavily on the topic of domestic violence with continuing legal education seminars and pro bono clinics. There is even a specialized court called the IDV court (integrated domestic violence), where the family law cases that have alleged elements of domestic violence are adjudicated.

Abuse comes in many forms – emotional, physical, sexual, and financial. Courts take abuse into consideration and use it as a factor in equitable distribution and spousal support, often increasing the amount of money an abused party will get. So, there is monetary compensation for it.

There is a case J.N v. T.N., in which the abuse was found to be so grave, the court awarded the abused party 85% of the marital assets. The case can be found here: https://law.justia.com/cases/new-york/other-courts/2022/2022-ny-slip-op-22310.html. See also, DRL Section 236(B)(5)(d)(14), which can be found here: https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/DOM/236.

Abuse is also an obvious factor in custody determinations, as logically, children should have measured and protected engagements with an abusive parent. Trouble comes, however, when one party exaggerates or fabricates allegations of abuse to gain monetary and custodial advantages. The irony being that such a party abuses the abuse claim as a punitive and self-enriching weapon.

For example, conjure the not uncommon case of a wife calling the police on her husband, purely as a child custody tactic. In doing so, she thinks she can get the upper hand by forcing the creation of a police record for her husband – all without thinking of the implications. The wife here is so blinded by her personal ambition of gaining full custody that she fails to see the bigger picture – that her husband would get fired if there was any hint of an abuse allegation in his private life. Whether or not the allegation was true, the allegation’s mere existence was a glaring indelible black mark against him. What she thought would help her in her custody case turned out to be a very silly move for the financials. Since her ex is now unemployed and virtually unemployable at the level of income he was making at a top bank, she is limited in the support she can get. Moreover, because the court felt her call to the police was disingenuous, she ended up being penalized on the custody front.

Everything done in divorce has a cost-benefit analysis. As highlighted above, when vindictive parties are too myopic in their strategy, they end up losing on multiple fronts.

One of the consequences of the victimhood claim is that it often keeps very unhappily married couples married.

I have seen many situations where a theme of the marriage is – “You are the reason for all my unhappiness and misery, and if we get divorced, I will make your life a living hell.”

The party being blamed chooses to stay in the marriage because they view this as a real threat. Despite their misery, it is a misery they know and have lived with for years, which to them, beats the unknown behemoth of misery their spouse vows to ascend on them if the parties divorce.

I often get postnuptial agreement inquiries from this category of married couples.

To learn more about how genuine and fabricated abuse allegations can impact a marriage and divorce, contact The Law & Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

Protecting Your Business Partners from Your Marital Fallout

/in , , , /by

Most people are prepared to undergo intense scrutiny and background checks when entering into a business partnership or for consideration to high-level corporate and finance positions. 

It’s a common occurrence meant to unearth skeletons and expose red flags in your life. 

The business partners or corporation want to know how your problems may become their problems if you are onboarded and welcomed into their fold. 

Your prospective or current marriage may be one of the things they look at with discomfiting interest. 

There is ostensibly a good reason for this personal invasion of privacy. Divorce has the potential to shine a spotlight on your business interests and investments in what’s called “Discovery.”

Discovery is a mutual exchange of financial documentation during divorce. It includes all income, assets/investments, and debts. It is an exhaustive and time-consuming process meant to ensure that all cards are on the table and there is full transparency relating to the divorcing parties’ individual and collective finances. The intended endgame is a fair and equitable financial settlement agreement. 

The inevitable consequence is the required production of documentation relating to business interests and investments. This makes prospective business partners queasy as they typically don’t want confidential documentation relating to their business exposed in your divorce. 

To give you some examples, one of my divorcing clients had 3 business partners. It was a very successful hands-on business and all 4 of them were actively involved on a day-to-day basis. Typically, I meet with my clients alone and we loop in their accountant and other professionals when needed. In this instance, all 4 business partners insisted on being at all meetings relating to the business, its valuation, forensic accounting, and documentation that would be produced. My client’s wife was seeking a marital portion of the business (of which my client was a quarter owner). She was also trying to understand its income structure and claimed there had been downward manipulation of income in anticipation of divorce – a fallacious assertion, which we needed to refute. 

Another example is a frantic phone call I received from a new client. He was in Europe for a corporate meeting with his business partners. His wife called him during the meeting to tell him she was seeking an immediate divorce. His business partners overheard and became so concerned as to how they would be affected that they told him to call me immediately on speaker phone and explain to them the process of discovery, equitable distribution, and allocation of business interests under NY divorce law. 

Fortunately, there are preventative measures to cut such problems off at the pass, including prenuptial and postnuptial agreements. 

For prospective or current business owners a very popular prenuptial or postnuptial clause is making a business separate property, and moreover, barring discovery of the business. 

This clause is one I am strongly in favor of when I represent the business owner and one that I am strongly against when I represent the non-business owner. However, everything can be made possible for the right price. If it is used as a barter for something worthwhile I can get for my client, it is open for discussion. 

Negotiating any prenup or postnup involves a lot of listening and diplomacy because we are trying to foster a marriage and engender love, endearment, and a sense of fairness between the parties. It needs to work for both parties, not just one. 

However, prenups and postnups are also instruments where strong advocacy for one’s client is needed to ensure the client is protected.  

We need to walk a fine line and be careful how we tread and define terms. If we are too inflexible with our own client’s interests in complete disregard of the other party’s interests, it can backfire. 

For more information on prenuptial and postnuptial agreements and walking the fine line of negotiating your ideal terms, contact The Law & Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein. 

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

Title Doesn’t Matter

/in , , /by

In marriage, title doesn’t matter. Titles to houses, cars, accounts and businesses can all get overridden by the statute and court system in a divorce.  

I often do consultations where people say things like, “I’m married, but we keep everything separate.” They operate under the assumption that, because each party has assets in their own name, it’s separate property under the law. They think that the default in a marriage tips to individual title, and that the only things that are jointly owned are whatever has been purchased jointly and/or is held in joint names – unfortunately for them, this is a gross misconception. 

Everything purchased during the marriage is presumptively marital property, regardless of title. The burden of proof is on the person who wants to prove otherwise. 

For example, someone might purchase a property in their separate name during marriage. However, title in their sole name doesn’t matter. The overriding presumption is that everything purchased after the date of marriage is marital property. 

Inheritance is, by definition, separate property. That said, if someone uses their inheritance money to purchase a property that they put in their separate name — and then they use money earned during the marriage to pay towards the equity and the principal on the mortgage — then that person has commingled and made a portion of that house marital property. 

Businesses are handled a bit differently. When it comes to businesses, the titled spouse does get a leg up, and the non-titled spouse is typically entitled to smaller percentages than other aspects of equitable distribution, such as accounts, that weigh in favor of 50/50 splits. Non-titled spouses typically get approximately 5% – 33% of the value of the business interest, and where they fall on the spectrum and whether the court would go outside of this most common range is based on the direct and indirect contributions each spouse has made to the business. Let’s say a husband has a contracting business in his exclusive name, as appears on the corporate and business documents, his wife is presumptively entitled to a portion of the business, even though she is a non-titled spouse. 

Prenuptial and postnuptial agreements offer a means to explicitly delineate personal separate property from joint marital property. Their flexibility allows us to go above and beyond what the law provides and create unique solutions that make sense for the situation. 

To learn more and appropriately protect your rights and interests, contact us.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

Spouse or Competitor

/in , , , /by

Over my career, I’ve seen many cases in which the parties act more like top-tier competitors as opposed to loving spouses and partners. This almost always causes one of them to feel badly about the relationship because they can’t help but compare their “worth” to their partner’s. They may feel like they’re always outwitted and somehow beaten by them. 

Usually, dynamics like these involve two highly skilled and highly successful professionals. For example:

A couple was running a medical practice together, and it just worked out that one of them drummed up a lot more business. Projects were dominated by that spouse, and patients asked for them, specifically. 

While married, the couple kept the profit distribution for the business at 50/50. It’s a great business with great clients, so they want it to continue. As part of the settlement, they agreed to change the profit model of the business to account for who brings in more dollars. 

When divorcing spouses are business partners, they may end up hoarding business relationships, just as we see when parties to a divorce become territorial with their mutual friends.    

Another common dynamic I see in all types of high achievers, whether they work for themselves or someone else, is that both partners work hard during the week — but one of them really prefers to do nothing on the weekends. Their spouse is someone who takes every pottery class, goes to every wine tasting, and learns every language. That, too, will plant a seed for some type of inequality of effort. To be clear, there are some situations where two people like that can coexist if there is one that doesn’t mind doing things on their own. 

I’m often very inspired by my clients and my cases. I see my clients go through tremendous grief, stuck in a relationship that’s supposed to be loving, yet feeling like they’re constantly competing. You wish that — somehow in their adult life — they can manage to overcome that and reach a happier place within themselves. It’s rewarding when they start dating other people and see first-hand that there are much more peaceful individuals out there. 

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

It Ain’t Over ‘Til the Fat Lady Sings

/in , , , /by

A basic tenet of “fight or flight” is that when people are in an extreme state of anxiety, they’ll do nearly anything to relieve that immediate pressure and discomfort to get themselves to a more bearable state. This describes what divorced people go through quite well. People crave resolution and a path forward. There’s this hope that when you finally enter an agreement, everyone will be able to breathe a sigh of relief

I don’t relish being a party pooper, but I always remind clients, “It’s not over ‘til the fat lady sings!” 

What does this mean in the context of divorce? It means that, if you have unemancipated children, you will likely be revisiting parts of your divorce agreement time and again as they grow older and unanticipated events occur, one of you wants to relocate, one of you loses a job and needs to modify child support and for a plethora of other reasons. Many divorced parents end up going back to court until their children are emancipated — and possibly afterwards if there are child support arrears. 

Sometimes, the divorce agreement is just the beginning of the legal battles. Unfortunately, this can be true even for prescient, well thought out and meticulously drafted agreements, but obviously in the latter instances, there is less exposure, so having a really solid tight-knit initial agreement in place, which leaves room for less loopholes, is key, albeit not bulletproof.  

Maintenance and spousal support are modifiable. Even if someone waives spousal support in their agreement, there is case law in which — 10 years after the agreement — one party was going to be a ward of the state and sued for maintenance. The judge ruled that maintenance had to be paid, which sounds perturbing and off-base, but the court will first look at the ex-spouse rather than let the other person be a ward of the state. Even if you try to waive support, or negotiate a certain amount, that is all modifiable. Notably, maintenance is harder to modify than child support, which has a much lower bar for modification, and includes the classic 3 bases: passage of 3 years; 15% increase or decrease in either party’s income; and a substantial change in circumstances. 

The permissibility of modification for custody holds true as well. You can have one party awarded custody because the other party was a total disaster at the time of divorce. The parent unfit at the time of the divorce can always come back later and say, “I rehabilitated myself. I need to be the joint custodial parent now” and proceed to demonstrate substantial changes in circumstances since the initial agreement and judgment of divorce were signed off on to prove their point and elevate their custodial standing.   

These requests to change custody agreements and modify child support and maintenance are very common and the post-judgment part in court is more backed up than the parts that handle the initial divorces. 

The same occurs with challenges and attempts to overturn prenuptial and postnuptial agreements. People often state that their prenup or postnup was signed under duress or coercion, or perhaps they didn’t have an attorney look at it and didn’t understand what they were signing. It is critical that attorneys who represent clients in these agreements strategize and have the necessary foresight to prevent such an eventual catastrophe to their client. 

Life circumstances change. People change their minds. Whatever reasons that they come up with, valid or invalid, people often want to get out of deals — and there’s nothing unusual about that.

To learn more about your specific circumstances, please contact us at cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

Divorcing an Addict

/in , , , , /by

I’ve had many situations where one party is an addict and the other party has to deal with the repercussions or where both parties are addicts but one is more functional. In several cases, the parties actually met at AA. I’ve represented the addict spouse, the non-addict spouse, and neutrally mediated many cases involving addiction.

Studies show that addicts don’t necessarily get better — instead it’s about containing or channeling the addiction. Oftentimes, for a multitude of reasons, the partners of addicts are willing to cut the other party some slack because they don’t want to throw in the towel on the marriage. Sometimes, a post-nuptial agreement is done instead of a separation or divorce, sometimes nothing is done.

When thinking of addiction, most people conjure images of alcohol, drugs, and smoking, but there are so many other forms of addiction that can have deleterious effects on relationships and marriage, like sex addiction, gambling, video games and screen time, and engaging in dangerous and high-risk sports and behavior to test one’s edge and get their adrenaline pumping towards making them feel more alive, or on the flip side, to numb themselves from feeling anything.

I have a case in which a woman was married to someone who is a sex addict. He spent the down payment for a new house on his addiction. Because they have three young children, the wife took a wait-and-see attitude. For his part, the husband went to a rehab facility and found 12-step meetings to attend afterward. Unfortunately, as time went on, it became clear that his addiction was a factor once more. While it did not affect his career, he was not able to juggle his addiction and his marriage. I represented the wife in the divorce getting her 75% of the parties’ assets in an equitable distribution relief package to compensate her for the money the husband dissipated on prostitutes, escorts, and his porn addiction.

Another common situation I’ve come across is when there is a combination of addiction and rather acute mental illness, such as bipolar disorder. This is especially relevant when there are changes to medication used to treat mental health issues, or the person simply stops taking their prescribed medications. These situations can change overnight, and often cause people to want an immediate divorce in order to protect the children, in addition to protecting assets, and their own mental health and sense of safety.

Gambling addiction is also widespread. A client’s husband recently revealed to her that he has $150,000 in gambling debt and a co-debt with someone else for over $50,000. She is obviously very concerned about her assets, which primarily consist of the marital home. One option for this couple would be a post-nuptial agreement, putting everything in the non-addict spouse’s name.

Within more religious and tight-knit communities, I’ve seen many miserably unhappily married people choose to stay married to an addict solely because they fear stigma. Often, they have children and are afraid that others will think the addiction is inherited. If people live in a community where addiction is a highly stigmatized black marker, they don’t want people to know, so they choose to “stick it out” in their marriage — a very loveless marriage for the sake of maintaining a facade.

Feel free to contact me if any of this resonates and you or your spouse struggle with an addiction.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

When Your Spouse is on the Wrong Side of the Law

/in , , /by

People find themselves on the wrong side of the law for various reasons. They get in trouble with work, with business, with taxes, with government officials. So sometimes, divorce becomes necessary in order to disentangle and protect the family’s assets. Other times, it’s a matter of conscience.

I had a case where the husband had been put in jail because he had been stealing money from a fund that he was responsible for. Over the course of many years, he began taking money to subsidize his lifestyle with his wife. His wife made a good living, and he wanted to present that he was contributing towards the marriage as well. In truth, the wife didn’t know that much about the husband’s job, and she didn’t ask. He was a consultant, and they filed their taxes separately. 

The fund that the husband was responsible for eventually discovered his embezzlement. He ended up doing a stint in jail, and the wife stayed with him throughout this ordeal. The wife was not prosecuted or implicated in any way. This marriage did eventually disintegrate into divorce – the seed being planted with the husband’s criminal activity — but it took many years. 

In another instance where the husband was found guilty of embezzlement, the couple owned many joint assets together. They wanted to get a divorce in order to protect the wife’s share of the assets and transfer all the assets into her exclusive name, thereby protecting them. 

Sometimes, people trigger an investigation into their (ex-)spouse. For example, a wife may know that her husband used fuzzy math on his tax returns. They may stay married, and benefit from the questionable returns while they’re married. It’s only after the divorce — or during a very, very contentious divorce — that they will call the IRS. That is not only personally distasteful to me, it is also illogical to facilitate the imprisoning of your ex-spouse because then they cannot work and make support payments. Further, the children are deprived of a parent and have to deal with the emotional turmoil and stigma of an imprisoned parent.   

Finally, there are extreme scenarios of finding out your spouse committed a crime and got away with it. For example, finding out your spouse has affiliations with a supremacist or hate group, a terrorist organization, has stolen hundreds of thousands of dollars and gone undiscovered, and in the most extreme scenario, has committed rape or murder in their past and never got caught. These are not just scenarios that play out in mystery novels; while not run of the mill, these events happen and need to be handled delicately. 

There are ways to build up some armor and distinguish yourself from your law-breaking spouse. Post-nuptial agreements can address all kinds of different issues. If the marriage is in a more advanced stage of deterioration, you can pursue a separation agreement or divorce. Contact me at cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com to learn more.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

Empowerment Is the Best Deal

/in , /by

In our last post, we discussed the fallout that happens when a husband is accused of sexual harassment in the workplace. I had another interesting situation where my unmarried client was having an affair — for 15 years — with a married man from work without knowing he was married because he hid it well while living a double life. 

He represented himself to be single from the get-go and the work romance got serious. He even presented fabricated divorce papers to my client to prove his alleged divorce. My client, blissfully ignorant to divorce-decree fraud, believed him. She admits to noticing red flags along the way, but she ignored them because of the “divorce papers” she saw. 

The 15-year lie came to an end when my client discovered this man’s deception and immediately broke off the affair. She was worried because she enjoyed a very high position in her company and was unsure whether her supervisors would want to know or would prefer to stay in the dark about the unethical behavior within their matrix. However, she also didn’t want this to happen to anyone else. 

My client had read about this exact scenario and none of the stories ended well. She had to go through the expense of hiring an employment law attorney to make sure that she was protected once she came out about the affair and deception to her employer. 

The man was also in a very leading position within the company. There were younger women under his watch, who were less sophisticated than my client, and she wanted to make sure he didn’t victimize them. 

This story is important because events at the workplace, like sexual harassment, have ramifications in the setting of divorce. If the perpetrator is fired, the equation for child and spousal support will be impacted. That’s why it’s important to contact an attorney as soon as you sense a “Me, Too” situation developing in your marriage. 

Speaking up early will allow you the time to divorce accordingly and to make sure you get the best deal for yourself. This speaks to the perpetrator’s wife — once she learned about her husband’s indiscretions and double life, she needed to lawyer-up. 

There was a whole web of attorneys involved to represent both women — my client who was having the affair and the perpetrator’s wife, including matrimonial, employment, ethics, and social media attorneys, to contain the damage. 

The two women got to know each other, felt a connection in being blind-sided and duped by the same person, and worked to mutually help each other. 

It is often disheartening to the spouses of perpetrators that they fell in love with someone like that. They start to see themselves as victims as well and join in on the “Me, Too” chorus. 

My client worked hard to help herself and the perpetrator’s wife out of the unseemly situation, and in so doing, she also protected other potential “Me, Too” victims.

That’s why there’s an empowering and strengthening stage that I do with my clients as we lay the groundwork and advance their case. Inner peace and enlightenment aside, getting a good deal is the ultimate source of empowerment. 

Feel free to contact me with any questions. 

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

“Me, Too” Divorces: A Case Study

/in , , /by

Whenever we hear about a case of sexual harassment in the news, there is often a divorce happening in the background. The divorce part is just not the centerpiece of the story. I’ve had several situations where the wife’s husband was accused of sexual harassment at the office, and it became a major consideration in our strategy. 

For example, I had a case where the husband was a charming, easy-to-love guy. The wife was successful in her own right, and he pulled out all the stops for her. She ended up relocating for him — and a few years later he was asked to resign from his job due to multiple sexual harassment claims.

He ended up going from a high salary to $30,000 a year scraping together various consulting gigs. The wife went from being the less-monied spouse to being the monied spouse. When the marriage broke down, having a financially ruined husband became an urgent problem. His reputation had been tarnished within his industry so much that it was unlikely he would ever get another high-paying position. 

My client abhorred the idea of paying support to someone whose career came crashing down because of his own actions. Despite what was morally right, it appeared that the black and white letter of the law was on the husband’s side. According to the statutory maintenance guideline calculations, my client would have had to pay a sizable maintenance to him. The wayward husband’s attorney requested this relief to shake up my client and put her on the defense; he picked up on my client’s (understandable) particular revulsion to paying support — and liked to bring it up to unnerve her. He requested the relief in his pleadings, audaciously filed a motion for support, and sent barrages of correspondences on the subject. 

Despite the guidelines, I advised my client that the judge would not rule in the husband’s favor.

That’s because judges look at the “whole package” and exercise several factors afforded to them to deviate from the statute as they deem fit towards a fair and judicious outcome. I expected the judge would be sympathetic to my client because her story was so indicative of the moral character of the husband. Ultimately, we prevailed, obtaining a judgment that freed my client and that she felt great peace about. 

One of the judges I’ve admired in my career always emphasized the importance of providing a “whole picture” to the judge. The relevant laws allow for a degree of discretion to the judges, which makes it possible to do things like bypass spousal support guidelines in the interest of fairness. In this case, the whole picture showed a cloud of bad behavior that obscured the one issue that seemed in the husband’s favor. 

As ludicrous as it might sound for a wife in this instance to have to pay her husband support, it’s not so simple, for example, the courts typically prefer that a former spouse pay support than that the befallen spouse become a ward on the state. Further, as mentioned, the statutory notice of guideline maintenance, in its most literal form, favors the husband, and seeking maintenance is also often used as a strategic scare and intimidation tactic of the husband’s legal counsel to get the wife to settle on other terms, such as equitable distribution.  

Join me next time when I discuss another “Me, Too” divorce, and feel free to send me your story to cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com.

Until next time…… 

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

The Best Revenge Is Living Well

/in , , , /by

Recently the country has witnessed the difference between demanding justice and demanding revenge. The lens of 2020 made it clear that they are two distinct things that may overlap in places, but differ in fundamental ways. The toll wrought by the desire for revenge was far more destructive than anyone seeking justice through peaceful protests. 

Divorcing people are all too familiar with the murky, gray area where justice and revenge overlap. All too often the initial desire for justice transforms into a yearning for revenge for one or both spouses. Maybe one spouse looks like they’re really enjoying life and it just rubs the other spouse the wrong way. What’s worse, anxiety — in no short supply nowadays — amplifies every other negative emotion and inches us ever closer to the edge. 

I happen to be working on a case in which the mother made it very clear that she wants a 60/40 split on custody. The father wants a 50/50 arrangement, but the mother held firm. There was no monetary benefit attached to the 60/40 arrangement; the mother would receive the same support package either way. As it turns out, life just unfolded in a way where the father was getting the 50/50 split he initially desired. Then, out of some kind of desire for revenge, the mother started to alienate the youngest child — who is the most vulnerable and malleable. This is incredibly unhealthy, and none of the members of this family can be said to be thriving. 

Sometimes the revenge dynamic takes on a more competitive quality. One spouse might look at the other and, based on something like their spending, feel left out of an apparently amazing life. It may look like the other is spending a fortune on what seem to be luxuries, like going for massages or buying an expensive humidor. (Meanwhile, neither one of them has reined in their spending!) 

A much more simple way to get revenge is to live well and enjoy your life. The idea of living well encompasses more than just meeting the marital standard of living. It is forward-looking, previewing what you need to live well in the future. That includes physical, emotional, and spiritual well-being.

Even though support packages are based on the standard of living during the marriage — in other words, hindsight — a lot of what we seek in support packages or equitable distribution has to do with projection into the future. Traditional “wisdom” says the best projection of the future is the past, but in a divorce, you may be doing things you’ve never done before, so the past isn’t much of a guide.

As an attorney, it is my duty to make sure a client never settles a case with terms they later regret. Invariably that leads to a feeling of betrayal, creating an environment for things like vengeance to flourish. And what the vengeful person does not release on their spouse, they release on the rest of the world.

Realistically speaking, the best revenge is getting the best deal. To ultimately live the best life, and create a support system that includes everything that you need to bolster and support yourself — whether it’s therapy, job training, education, or a new wardrobe for presenting yourself to the world. 

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

When Your Spouse Asks You to Move Out — Breaking the Seal on the Marital Home

/in , , , /by

As the pandemic stretches on, I’ve been doing a lot of early terminations of residential leases as part of divorces. It seems that some people who were “hanging in there” with their spouse are starting to reach the end of their rope. Perhaps these marriages would have lasted longer, but the pandemic moved up the expiration date on everything.

Many clients just don’t know what to do or how to answer when they are asked to move out. My first response to them is always, “Well, tell them they should move out. If they feel that the two of you shouldn’t be together, shouldn’t you be the one who gets to stay?”

That’s because moving out of the marital home is a big deal. The person who moves out loses a lot of power just by not being there — especially on day-to-day child care issues. That is why it is imperative to seek out an attorney to help you with a formalized move-out letter, and preferably, a parenting agreement before you agree to anything.

A formalized move-out letter most often states:

•it was a mutual decision that one of you should move out;
•thoughtful consideration was given to who that should be;
•the person who is moving out has the right to move back in at any time;
•the person who is moving out is not abandoning any of their rights; and
•the move has no bearing on equitable distribution, maintenance, custody, and visitation.

That document is signed and notarized by both parties. In an ideal situation, you also would have pulled together a parenting agreement to be incorporated and signed along with the move-out letter. If you cannot pull together an agreement fast enough, then one can be made at a later time.

In addition to protecting your legal rights, the agreement can protect you against your spouse reneging on promises. Sometimes this happens unintentionally, and sometimes with malice. The protection you get from the memorialized agreement works in both cases.

Please feel free to contact me if you have an impending dissolution or move out.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

The Halo of Fear Surrounding Alimony

/in , /by

Educate yourself about alimony payments and know your options.

Alimony, maintenance, and spousal support refer to the same thing. Attorneys tend to use the term maintenance, since its purpose is to maintain the receiving spouse’s standard of living for a certain duration of time after the marriage.

The lay public tends to use the term “alimony.”

The maintenance calculation was standardized in January 2016; the way it used to be allocated was less streamlined and too subject to judicial discretion. If there are no children or if the payor is not paying child support, it’s now based on the lowest total of two calculations: 30% of the payor’s income minus 20% of the payee’s income OR 40% of the combined income minus the payee’s income. If child support is also being paid, then it’s the lower of 20% of the payor’s income minus 25% of the payee’s income and 40% of the combined income minus the payee’s income. Agreements must consider how much net income the parties have so the payor is still able to pay his or her own bills and living expenses.

Maintenance is calculated based on adjusted gross income; the money left after Social Security, Medicare, and New York City Tax are paid but before retirement contributions are deducted. Maintenance used to be tax-deductible to the payor and taxable to the payee, but this is no longer the case, which is still causing confusion and disappointment among payors.

Judicial discretion can still be an issue when deciding the duration of maintenance payments. If the marriage lasted up to 15 years, the duration is 15-30% of the length of the marriage; for 15-20 years, it’s 30-40% of the length of the marriage; for a marriage over 20 years, it’s 35-50% of the length of the marriage. There is room for discussion when determining where people should fit in those ranges and even whether there is room to deviate from the ranges altogether. 

Maintenance causes much grief for payors because it’s so difficult to modify. The standard to reduce maintenance is much higher than to reduce child support, and judges can be hard to convince. Some payors would prefer to offer more in child support and less in maintenance, because if their income decreases, they are more likely to be able to reduce the child support payments. This was not the case when maintenance was tax-deductible to the payors. Then, obviously, the payors wanted to beef up their maintenance payments relative to their child support payments, the latter not be tax-deductible then or now. 

One client’s husband negotiated very hard to get language in the agreement that if his income went down, he could get a certain amount of reduction in his maintenance. We did not have to give him that concession, but they wanted to keep it an amicable, uncontested divorce. We created room in the agreements to allow for modification, provided his support would never go below a certain amount. The payee is often afraid because she’s dependent on him continuing to be able to make a certain income.

Another attorney had a client whose ex-husband got fired due to the “Me Too” movement; he’s having a hard time finding new employment, so she can’t get her maintenance. She wants to sue the husband’s former employer for interfering with her separation agreement. In litigation, you go after the person with pockets, and her ex-husband doesn’t have the pockets anymore. Whether or not she has a valid claim, people get desperate; they have bills. 

Alimony recipients have legitimate fears of what might happen if the money suddenly stops flowing. Maintenance payments are sometimes huge, $7,000 – $8,000 a month or more. When a payee’s rent is $8,000 – $9,000, if they suddenly don’t have that money, their whole life could spiral into chaos very, very quickly. 

By law, maintenance ends upon a person’s remarriage. Language is often added to the agreement during negotiation that maintenance ends upon cohabitation with a new romantic partner. A provision that maintenance stops at cohabitation can create fear and resentment in certain cases. 

Let’s say a woman was married for 20-plus years so she’s entitled to maintenance payments for a significant duration. Two and a half years post-divorce, she meets someone that she would like to move in with. She may be afraid to move the relationship forward, because she will be cutting herself off from a tremendous amount of money that she really was entitled to. She invested over 20 years in that other pernicious spouse, standing alongside them, running their household, going to work events with them, but now she’s going to lose that hard-earned income prematurely if she moves in with someone.

Sometimes the divorcing parties just say money is money and they negotiate equitable distribution. This can be favorable to payors because sometimes they can haggle over that lump sum. They have leverage when offering a buyout amount on the maintenance because cash is king. Payors often prefer this option because they won’t have to share future paychecks with their exes. It’s also easier from an emotional standpoint; payors feel they’re just ripping off the band-aid rather than prolonging the agony. 

I recently had a case where the husband really wanted to pay it all upfront and the wife rejected it; she refused, saying, “I want monthly payments.” I actually think based on her circumstances and what she wants in her life, she would do much better with taking the lump sum. But she is not a financially sophisticated woman, and some people with less financial savvy are afraid of getting a lot of money very quickly. Monthly amounts are somehow easier for them to conceptualize. 

When alimony is paid in conjunction with child support, the child support gets adjusted when the alimony duration ends. Sometimes the agreement is written to specify the future adjustment; other times the agreement just states that the parties will adjust the agreement at the time child support is modified. People who prefer to specify feel the whole point of the agreement is to pin things down once and for all, since re-negotiating can be very emotionally burdensome and anxiety-producing. 

The halo of fears surrounding maintenance, for both spouses, can be mitigated by careful attention to these details during the global settlement negotiation. Care and caution now can save future pain! 

Please contact the Law & Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein with related questions.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylstein

Good Samaritan Divorce

/in , /by

Is there a price tag to being a Good Samaritan in Divorce? 

“A Good Samaritan — a charitable or helpful person.” 

There are infinite ways of exercising kindness to one’s spouse during a divorce, but we will focus on the timing of divorce here.  

Sometimes, in a divorce, one party needs more time while the other wants the divorce finalized immediately. The one that wants the immediate resolution will try to exercise grace, extend the other party significant latitude, and give them more time, sometimes years to ease the blow and transition for the party having a harder time with the concept of the divorce and disentanglement. What can happen is that two, three, or even more years go by before the divorce process is underway. 

Due to that wait time, the spouse that has exercised patience can end up having to pay much more than if the divorce had been commenced earlier, because of the equitable distribution cut-off date being postponed and the maintenance entitlement, as a correlation to the length of the marriage, being longer. 

For example, wages/income earned, bonus payments, retirement accruals would be subject to equitable distribution, so you have cases where parties have been living separate and apart and want half of the other’s bonus payments and funds in separately titled accounts that income has gone into, in addition, to support payments.  

The cut-off date for equitable distribution is demarcated by the filing of a summons for divorce or the parties entering into an agreement, such as a postnuptial or separation agreement specifying the equitable distribution cut-off date. 

On the maintenance end, the formula states that for a marriage up to 15 years, maintenance is 15-30% of the length of the marriage; at 15-20 years of marriage, maintenance is payable for 30-40% of the marriage; and for a marriage over 20 years, it’s payable for 35-50% the length of the marriage. So, the longer you’re technically attached to someone, the longer you’re paying them. 

In one extreme case, a well-off husband, who worked for 5 years trying to negotiate an agreement but never filing a summons or doing anything to cut off equitable distribution, ended up being obligated to pay his wife a lot more due to the patience he extended to her during that 5 year period when they were still married, although living apart. 

In this situation, the more monied spouse exercised kindness and allowed the other spouse more time, which in turn cost him more than it needed to. Both spouses knew the marriage was over, and the spouse who needed more time was totally unsympathetic in the final divorce. 

Sometimes, the waiting spouse is acting from pure altruism — out of empathy and compassion towards their spouse; often, there is also an interlaced self-serving quality, as the waiting party thinks their spouse will be cooperative and less aggressive in their demands when they finally come around. 

Sometimes, this works in the reverse, where the non-monied spouse gives the other party latitude and by the time they are ready to proceed, there is a lot less money to divide, as assets have dwindled. 

The “feel good” concept we’ve all heard: “You attract the energy you put out” simply does not always unfold as such; far too often, the party putting out gracious energy gets taken advantage of, as cynical as it sounds.  

Unfortunately, being a Good Samaritan can get a divorcing party taken advantage of and leave them feeling beaten down and resentful.  

There are practical solutions to stop-gap this, including but not limited to, stop the clock agreements; equitable distribution cut off agreements; postnuptial agreements and interim agreements; filing a summons but holding off on filing a request for judicial intervention while the agreement is being negotiated.  

Feel free to contact us to discuss the various containment methods and best strategy approach where these Good Samaritan dynamics operate in the shadows.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

Beware Selling Clients the Brooklyn Bridge

/in , /by

When parties first engage in the divorce process, they often do not know the law, how their situation looks from the outside, and how things unfold in court. Part of the attorney’s role may be to give the client a gentle wake-up call. Sometimes when you’re strategizing with them, they’re not sure what tools you may use to try and seal their case.

In part because clients aren’t always telling you the full stack and sharing all their skeletons, I would not tell a client that I could get them relief such as sole custody, 100% rights to a business formed during the marriage, a guarantee that the statutory cap will apply for maintenance and child support when the income exceeds the cap, or the ability to relocate with their children — all of which are big-ticket, multi-dimensional items of relief.

In sharing the personal details of their lives, clients are often vulnerable — opening themselves up to outsider’s judgment and/or disapproval of how they are managing their lives. Attorneys need to know the larger context and help the client see it too.

During a recent client intake, the client revealed that she wanted to not have to pay her husband a penny, even though she earned more than him, to get primary residential custody, and to carte blanche be able to relocate with the children domestically. The latter one, being the one she desired most was the biggest wild card in her case, carrying the greatest improbability.

Her argument that she could offer them a better life elsewhere (perhaps questionable in it of itself in light of them already having the garden, backyard, family nearby, good schools, and residing in a good neighborhood in New York) was overshadowed by the overarching question — Can you offer the children a better life elsewhere than the life of having a father regularly present in their lives who they’ve seen daily to date and have a good relationship with?

Another case presented a high performing husband and father who worked long hours in finance. He wanted custody of his children stating his wife was an alcoholic and good for nothing. When we dug deeper, we learned that he, in fact, drank more than she did, but in light of his high performance at work, he considered himself a highly functional drinker and avoided using the term alcoholic altogether to describe himself. It appeared his wife had unraveled some several years back after she was let go from a prestigious job and never managed to regain her footing after that, but his contempt for her undermined who she was now, which was a functional enough mother, perhaps sloppy at times, but still quite present and active.

A case in point on the support end was a father making over $600,000 for the 5 years preceding the divorce who was adamant that he would only pay the statutory caps for maintenance and support, stating that they were modest spenders and quite frugal. There was some truth to this, except that they lived in New York City, and that alone meant that their modest living would require payments above the caps to sustain the accustomed lifestyle.

There is also the controlling personality type who called the shots during the marriage with the other spouse going along. These clients often think they will be able to navigate the divorce in a way to continue to get their spouse to go along with them, except that their spouse, self-aware enough of their namby-pamby quality, typically hires an overly aggressive attorney to compensate, who pushes back at every turn.

We all get these laundry lists of desired reliefs. As a service provider, we work for the client and are their cheerleaders, but realistic ones, that don’t overpromise and underdeliver; this is a key element of being supportive and effective for the client.

Being a cogent advocate and mouthpiece for the client and helping them to see the full breadth of their situation’s appearance to an outsider when all the relevant factors are weighed are not mutually exclusive; they are part of the same overarching role.

Please contact The Law & Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein with any related questions.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

Are You an Innocent Spouse?

/in , , /by

One of the benefits of marriage is being able to file joint tax returns with a spouse. However, marriage brings a double-edged sword. On the one hand, spouses reap the benefit of being able to collectively have more money to live on if they’re drawing from the same pool during their marriage and maximizing their tax benefits. The downside, though, is when the spouse with no knowledge of marital finances signs off on tax returns and it later comes to bite them. Often the spouse in control of the finances just tells the other person to sign, because they’ve waited until the 11th hour to file, and have no time for explanations or mincing meat.

Every now and again, a spouse will even sign the other spouse’s signature, which often comes out during the divorce. I’ve had a few clients over the years that said their spouse signed for them, but when I’ve dug deeper, that client has told their spouse to sign for them if they ever needed to.  

In one classic situation, the wife asked for child support and claimed that her husband made $600,000, but the joint tax return showed that collectively they made $180,000. In this case, the husband said that she signed to that amount and should be held to it for child support calculations, thereby imposing a significantly lower child support obligation on him. The wife claimed that she didn’t know what she was signing. She simply believed and acceded to him. Of course, assuming the wife knows basic math, she would know she was living on $600,000, rather than $180,000.

I recently worked on a divorce case, where the wife signed an addendum to the couple’s prenuptial agreement, executed many years ago, that gave the husband carte blanche discretion and authorization with regards to filing their joint tax returns; akin to a power of attorney relating to their taxes. This is an extremely bright and savvy woman — starry eyed in love, in her youth, with who she thought was an incredibly charming millionaire; her romantic notions and desire to be taken care of created thick naïve glasses through which the reality was obscured, and she trusted him wholeheartedly. Years later, his macho charade started to unravel, and IRS letters claiming tax evasion and liabilities exceeding 15 million dollars started to pour in. After her initial shock and numbness, she ran for cover under the safety haven of “innocent spouse relief.” See IRS Publication 971 and IRS Form 8857 (Publication 971;  Form 8857.pdf).

In these case, I’ve looped in accountants, tax lawyers and forensic experts, if needed, to provide the necessary perspective, releases, and maximize the relief to the client. It becomes very interdisciplinary, and a team of professionals who work well together and communicate fluidly, efficiently, and effectively, while also communally keeping an eye on the client’s pocketbook and spending is key.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com