Instead of having a high-level job with bonuses and accolades, I ran one of his companies with no pay. I also drove his daughter\u2019s carpool, allowed his adult son and his son\u2019s children to move in with us, and ran our home in a smooth and efficient manner. I acted as a good steward of his assets so he could maximize his retirement and investments. I also added substantial assets to our portfolio with my \u201chobby\u201d of real-estate investing.<\/p>\n
I\u2019m a team player and thought that upon retirement we would live the life we dreamed about during the early days of our marriage \u2014 I expected he would retire at 65 and we would travel the world. Our portfolio is worth 10 times what it was when we married. His retirement account and several IRAs were opened after we were married.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Irrevocable trust for his children<\/strong><\/h2>\nHe put everything, even our home and my investment properties, into a trust, with his friend as trustee. I had been the beneficiary of his retirement account, but now the trust is. I believe this change of beneficiary was forged. He invested in a company that stands to make a lot of money, and that investment was put into an irrevocable trust for his children only. His children have quit their jobs to create startups with funding from their dad. At 69, he feels he can\u2019t retire because he\u2019s helping his kids.\u00a0<\/p>\n
I told him that if I outlived him, I would give everything I inherited from him to his children, and my assets would go to my family. When confronted about the trusts, he said he assumed I\u2019d be OK with that because of my promise to give his assets to his kids. I\u2019m not even a 50% beneficiary. I\u2019m terrified his kids will boot me out of my home or declare me incompetent when I\u2019m a little old lady just trying to sit on the beach. I don\u2019t even have kids of my own to look out for me.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
He can\u2019t understand why I\u2019m upset. Now I\u2019m nearing retirement age with no extra investments in my retirement account, no credit for the work I\u2019ve done and no say in my assets. I don\u2019t even have a work history for the past 10 years and can\u2019t get a job. Is this even legal? If I bring an attorney in, it will ruin the marriage. I can\u2019t even contest the will because it states if anyone contests the will, they will have nothing.\u00a0<\/p>\n
With most things, I\u2019m smart. But gosh, I\u2019ve been so stupid. What are my options?\u00a0<\/p>\n
Second-Class Wife<\/p>\n
\n <\/p>\n\n\n ![\"\"](\"https:\/\/images.mktw.net\/im-262198?width=700&height=393\" "\\"\\"\/")
\n <\/div>\n\u201cTransparency is key to marital estate planning.\u201d<\/h4>\n
\n MarketWatch illustration
\n <\/span>
\n <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/p><\/div>\nDear Ex-Wife,<\/h2>\n
Secret trusts and a possible forgery do not constitute a healthy marriage.<\/p>\n
There\u2019s nothing stopping a spouse from setting up a trust during a marriage, but they should do so with separate assets. To set up a trust with separate assets without telling your spouse is bad manners, but to create a trust with both separate and marital assets, in secret, is a recipe for a legal battle and divorce court. Marital assets are those that are accumulated during the marriage.<\/p>\n
Sometimes in life, you have to make a choice: You can stand back and allow your husband to squirrel away marital property and thereby \u201csave\u201d your marriage on paper \u2014 even though he has broken your faith in him and in the marriage. Or you can call a lawyer and perhaps a forensic accountant to examine the contents of the trust and trace their origins, and thereby risk your marriage.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhile there are legitimate reasons for a spouse to set up a trust during marriage, sometimes it is done in order to improperly shield assets from equitable distribution,\u201d according to Jewell Law PLLC<\/a> in New York. \u201cOften, the non-beneficiary spouse is not aware of the trust or thinks the money came from another source such as a family member.\u201d<\/p>\nTransparency is key to marital estate planning. \u201cA trust set up in one spouse\u2019s name can be considered separate property regardless of whether it is set up before or after marriage,\u201d the law firm adds. \u201cHowever, when it is created during a marriage, the non-beneficiary spouse must raise the question of whether any marital assets have been put into the trust.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThis is a situation in which a prenuptial agreement could have been helpful to confirm \u2014 and protect \u2014 the rights of each spouse in the event of divorce or death,\u201d says Neil V. Carbone,<\/a> a partner at Farrell Fritz, P.C. \u201dState law governs a spouse\u2019s inheritance rights. Most states provide a surviving spouse with a minimum \u2018elective\u2019 share, that is, the right to take a share of a deceased spouse\u2019s property regardless of what a will or revocable lifetime trust agreement provides.\u201d<\/p>\n\u201cThe idea of the elective share is to avoid the complete disinheritance of a surviving spouse, so \u2018no contest\u2019 clauses are ineffective to defeat the demand for an elective share,\u201d he adds.\u00a0 \u201cWhat goes into the elective share \u2018pot\u2019 will vary from state to state.\u00a0For example, in New York, life insurance is not included in determining the elective share.\u00a0Some people may seek to defeat a spouse\u2019s elective share rights by transferring property to an irrevocable trust, but they generally must survive a look-back period in order for the transferred property to be excluded.\u201d<\/p>\n
Potential forgery<\/strong><\/h2>\nSome retirement plans require a spouse<\/a> to be the primary beneficiary. If your husband changed the beneficiary on a qualified retirement plan without your consent this should be challenged. Other retirement plans, such as IRAs, do not carry the same spousal-consent requirements. You can read more about what plans are covered under the Retirement Equity Act here<\/a>.<\/p>\nMany people are surprised to learn that 401(k)s and IRAs are treated differently,\u201d Carbone says. The former are governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 and, typically, a spouse must consent in writing to have someone else named as beneficiary, he adds. \u201cIRAs are not governed by ERISA and the spouse\u2019s consent is not required to designate a non-spouse as a beneficiary.\u201d If your husband did forge your consent on a 401(k) beneficiary designation form, you should act ASAP.<\/p>\n
While you process that information, I have other questions for you to mull over: What are you hanging onto? The illusion of a happy marriage? The promise of financial security, even though that seems increasingly unlikely? The damage to your marriage has already been done by your husband. By hiring a lawyer after so many years of acquiescing to his requests, you would be merely cleaning up the fallout from his actions.<\/p>\n
One final piece of advice: If you are considering divorce, you would be better off waiting until your 10th wedding anniversary. After that date, you will be able to receive spousal Social Security benefits. If he earned more than you during your marriage, you are entitled to a maximum of 50% of your husband\u2019s full retirement benefit.<\/p>\n
You\u2019ve given up a lot for your husband. Yes, you did it willingly, but you contributed your time and financial expertise to your husband\u2019s businesses, and any right-thinking divorce court would not be likely to look kindly on your husband\u2019s actions. Not all stepmothers abide by their promise to distribute assets to their late spouse\u2019s children, but this is not an excuse for his actions.\u00a0<\/p>\n
In addition to forgery and financial skullduggery, you can add gaslighting to the list of his misdeeds.<\/p>\n
You can email The Moneyist with any financial and ethical questions at qfottrell@marketwatch.com, and follow Quentin Fottrell on X, the platform formerly known as\u00a0<\/em><\/strong>Twitter.<\/em><\/strong><\/a>\u00a0<\/p>\nThe Moneyist regrets he cannot reply to questions individually.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\nPrevious columns by Quentin Fottrell:<\/strong><\/p>\nI have $1.5 million in stocks and bonds. I asked my broker to convert my bonds to cash. He didn\u2019t and my portfolio fell by $100,000. Can I sue?<\/a><\/p>\n\u2018She was very special to me\u2019: My late 98-year-old cousin was targeted by grifters. They stole $800,000. Do I have any recourse?<\/a><\/p>\n
<\/p>\n Secret trusts and a possible forgery do not constitute a healthy marriage.<\/p>\n There\u2019s nothing stopping a spouse from setting up a trust during a marriage, but they should do so with separate assets. To set up a trust with separate assets without telling your spouse is bad manners, but to create a trust with both separate and marital assets, in secret, is a recipe for a legal battle and divorce court. Marital assets are those that are accumulated during the marriage.<\/p>\n Sometimes in life, you have to make a choice: You can stand back and allow your husband to squirrel away marital property and thereby \u201csave\u201d your marriage on paper \u2014 even though he has broken your faith in him and in the marriage. Or you can call a lawyer and perhaps a forensic accountant to examine the contents of the trust and trace their origins, and thereby risk your marriage.<\/p>\n \u201cWhile there are legitimate reasons for a spouse to set up a trust during marriage, sometimes it is done in order to improperly shield assets from equitable distribution,\u201d according to Jewell Law PLLC<\/a> in New York. \u201cOften, the non-beneficiary spouse is not aware of the trust or thinks the money came from another source such as a family member.\u201d<\/p>\n Transparency is key to marital estate planning. \u201cA trust set up in one spouse\u2019s name can be considered separate property regardless of whether it is set up before or after marriage,\u201d the law firm adds. \u201cHowever, when it is created during a marriage, the non-beneficiary spouse must raise the question of whether any marital assets have been put into the trust.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThis is a situation in which a prenuptial agreement could have been helpful to confirm \u2014 and protect \u2014 the rights of each spouse in the event of divorce or death,\u201d says Neil V. Carbone,<\/a> a partner at Farrell Fritz, P.C. \u201dState law governs a spouse\u2019s inheritance rights. Most states provide a surviving spouse with a minimum \u2018elective\u2019 share, that is, the right to take a share of a deceased spouse\u2019s property regardless of what a will or revocable lifetime trust agreement provides.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThe idea of the elective share is to avoid the complete disinheritance of a surviving spouse, so \u2018no contest\u2019 clauses are ineffective to defeat the demand for an elective share,\u201d he adds.\u00a0 \u201cWhat goes into the elective share \u2018pot\u2019 will vary from state to state.\u00a0For example, in New York, life insurance is not included in determining the elective share.\u00a0Some people may seek to defeat a spouse\u2019s elective share rights by transferring property to an irrevocable trust, but they generally must survive a look-back period in order for the transferred property to be excluded.\u201d<\/p>\n Some retirement plans require a spouse<\/a> to be the primary beneficiary. If your husband changed the beneficiary on a qualified retirement plan without your consent this should be challenged. Other retirement plans, such as IRAs, do not carry the same spousal-consent requirements. You can read more about what plans are covered under the Retirement Equity Act here<\/a>.<\/p>\n Many people are surprised to learn that 401(k)s and IRAs are treated differently,\u201d Carbone says. The former are governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 and, typically, a spouse must consent in writing to have someone else named as beneficiary, he adds. \u201cIRAs are not governed by ERISA and the spouse\u2019s consent is not required to designate a non-spouse as a beneficiary.\u201d If your husband did forge your consent on a 401(k) beneficiary designation form, you should act ASAP.<\/p>\n While you process that information, I have other questions for you to mull over: What are you hanging onto? The illusion of a happy marriage? The promise of financial security, even though that seems increasingly unlikely? The damage to your marriage has already been done by your husband. By hiring a lawyer after so many years of acquiescing to his requests, you would be merely cleaning up the fallout from his actions.<\/p>\n One final piece of advice: If you are considering divorce, you would be better off waiting until your 10th wedding anniversary. After that date, you will be able to receive spousal Social Security benefits. If he earned more than you during your marriage, you are entitled to a maximum of 50% of your husband\u2019s full retirement benefit.<\/p>\n You\u2019ve given up a lot for your husband. Yes, you did it willingly, but you contributed your time and financial expertise to your husband\u2019s businesses, and any right-thinking divorce court would not be likely to look kindly on your husband\u2019s actions. Not all stepmothers abide by their promise to distribute assets to their late spouse\u2019s children, but this is not an excuse for his actions.\u00a0<\/p>\n In addition to forgery and financial skullduggery, you can add gaslighting to the list of his misdeeds.<\/p>\n You can email The Moneyist with any financial and ethical questions at qfottrell@marketwatch.com, and follow Quentin Fottrell on X, the platform formerly known as\u00a0<\/em><\/strong>Twitter.<\/em><\/strong><\/a>\u00a0<\/p>\n The Moneyist regrets he cannot reply to questions individually.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n Previous columns by Quentin Fottrell:<\/strong><\/p>\n I have $1.5 million in stocks and bonds. I asked my broker to convert my bonds to cash. He didn\u2019t and my portfolio fell by $100,000. Can I sue?<\/a><\/p>\n \u2018She was very special to me\u2019: My late 98-year-old cousin was targeted by grifters. They stole $800,000. Do I have any recourse?<\/a><\/p>\n\n <\/div>
\u201cTransparency is key to marital estate planning.\u201d<\/h4>\n
\n MarketWatch illustration
\n <\/span>
\n <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/p><\/div>\nDear Ex-Wife,<\/h2>\n
Potential forgery<\/strong><\/h2>\n