Why would a spouse sign a post nuptial agreement unless it favored them? If it favored them, then it would be a disadvantage to the other spouse. Therefore, I'm not sure it makes sense to sign a post nuptial agreement.I hear a lot about wills and trusts, but it seems rare to hear martial agreements being mentioned. Why is that? Shouldn't such an agreement be an essential part of retirement planning? Why isn't this something that's considered a must do for planning purposes?
In divorce both the assets and the individuals future income potentials are considered martial property to be divided up.
From a retirement planning perspective, it seems important to know how that division would happen. Without planning we don't know what percentage of assets and the individual future income they will retain. Perhaps 50/50, 72/25, or 90/10, the outcome is totally unknown without any upfront planning
Drafting such a plan while both parties are on good terms seems optimal as well from a cost savings perspective to minimize legal and discovery fees
Also it seems there would be room for thinking about tax optimization in such a plan, for example given a high earner + low earner couple, it would be tax optimal to give the low earner pre-tax assets and low cost basis taxable assets. Such a division could make a 50/50 split be more like a 60/50 split after factoring in tax arbitrage. This seems particularly relevant for retirement planning since it adds yet another factor to consider when weighing pre-tax vs roth contributions
I do hear more about prenups now, but postnups seem much less talked about, for couples without a prenup wouldn't a postnup be a very logical planning document to reduce risk and potentially yield a larger pie for both individuals to receive a slice from?
Statistics: Posted by Ependytis — Sat Jan 24, 2026 11:26 am — Replies 35 — Views 895