Pre- nup

[modmodgirl 2]

My fiance wants a pre nup agreement. He is the beneficiary and he wants to make sure that he won't be held resposible for debts that I have. I have been through a divorce before and California is a 50/50 community property state ( no fault divorce). He wants me to draw up a document. I was actually relieved, but I just read that the i-864 document can nullify a pre-nup agreement. Is that true and if it is, should we even bother with having a pre nup drawn up. If our marriage didn't work, it seems like I would be giving him 1/2 of my retirement ( I don't own property). Would his debts that he incurred in the marriage ( if any) become my responsibility?

[aaron2020 11,651]

My fiance wants a pre nup agreement. He is the beneficiary and he wants to make sure that he won't be held resposible for debts that I have. I have been through a divorce before and California is a 50/50 community property state ( no fault divorce). He wants me to draw up a document. I was actually relieved, but I just read that the i-864 document can nullify a pre-nup agreement. Is that true and if it is, should we even bother with having a pre nup drawn up. If our marriage didn't work, it seems like I would be giving him 1/2 of my retirement ( I don't own property). Would his debts that he incurred in the marriage ( if any) become my responsibility?

The I-864 does not nullify a pre-nup. A court may disregard a pre-nup to enforce the I-864 obligation - so the I-864 obligation supersede any disclaimer for spousal support.

For example: Pre-nup said spouses are not responsible for debts incurred by the other spouse. However, the I-864 has an obligation for repayments of certain means tested benefits. So, immigrant spouse gets a means tested benefit. Under pre-nup, the US citizen spouse would not be liable for the debt. However, the I-864 will trump the pre-nup, and the US citizen spouse will be liable for this debt.

Your retirement accounts are covered by ERISA. Under ERISA, your spouse would only have a claim to 1/2 of the amount you contributed and the earnings from your contributions for the time you were married. Anything you contributed before the marriage is solely yours. A pre-nup will not trump ERISA. ERISA will trump any pre-nup.

Whether any debt will be yours jointly will be determined by how the debt was incurred. Joint account = both of you are responsible - lender can collect full amount from either of you. He incurs a debt in his name only and you didn't sign anything - you could be responsible if you had a benefit - husband sign apartment lease and you live there - landlord can come after both of you. The lender is always going to assert that you receive a benefit. It could be hard to show that you didn't get a benefit.

[modmodgirl 2]

Thank you Aaron for clarifying this.. I think I'll skip the pre nup since it seems like a waste of time.

Since I don't own any property, I don't think it's worth it; it looks like I'll be responsible through out the marriage. Makes me a bit nervous.

[kcoyclay1 98]

My fiance wants a pre nup agreement. He is the beneficiary and he wants to make sure that he won't be held resposible for debts that I have. I have been through a divorce before and California is a 50/50 community property state ( no fault divorce). He wants me to draw up a document. I was actually relieved, but I just read that the i-864 document can nullify a pre-nup agreement. Is that true and if it is, should we even bother with having a pre nup drawn up. If our marriage didn't work, it seems like I would be giving him 1/2 of my retirement ( I don't own property). Would his debts that he incurred in the marriage ( if any) become my responsibility?

The sponsor is responsible for the relative for 10 years unless the relative becomes a citizen or, of course, the sponsor dies. Divorce does not change the sponsor's responsibility, and I strongly believe that a pre-nup cannot void it. This is a legal and binding immigration law that cannot be superceded by a personal pre-nuptial agreement. In other words, what is between you and your husband cannot overwrite immigration laws.

[VanessaTony 3,567]

The sponsor is responsible for the relative for 10 years unless the relative becomes a citizen or, of course, the sponsor dies. Divorce does not change the sponsor's responsibility, and I strongly believe that a pre-nup cannot void it. This is a legal and binding immigration law that cannot be superceded by a personal pre-nuptial agreement. In other words, what is between you and your husband cannot overwrite immigration laws.

It's not 10 years, it's working for 40 SSA quarters. If the beneficiary never works they never earn the SSA quarters. It is 10 years if the beneficiary works full time for 10 years

Thank you Aaron for clarifying this.. I think I'll skip the pre nup since it seems like a waste of time.

Since I don't own any property, I don't think it's worth it; it looks like I'll be responsible through out the marriage. Makes me a bit nervous.

I suggest you speak to a lawyer rather than relying on advice here. Go to a firm that has an immigration department as well as family law (pre-nups) so that you can be totally advised on where you stand. Sometimes pre-nups are good, depends on your circumstances.

[modmodgirl 2]

It's not 10 years, it's working for 40 SSA quarters. If the beneficiary never works they never earn the SSA quarters. It is 10 years if the beneficiary works full time for 10 years

I suggest you speak to a lawyer rather than relying on advice here. Go to a firm that has an immigration department as well as family law (pre-nups) so that you can be totally advised on where you stand. Sometimes pre-nups are good, depends on your circumstances.

Thank you so much. i think I will do that.

[modmodgirl 2]

I talked to an immigration lawyer today and yes the i-864 is for protecting the immigrant. No pre nup agreement

would ever stand against a 1-864,so that was important information to know. My fiance and I are rethinking this whole thing and are considering me moving to France, which doesn't charge fees for immigrants, and if the immigrant ends up a ward of the state, the French government provides some assistance not to the cost of the French citizen.

Sounds like a better plan too me.