Saving or building, which is more sensible?

Maybe this attitude belongs more to two half-dumb people. On one hand, the man who apparently doesn't understand that he only has more net income because he receives the basic tax allowance from his wife transferred to his income tax card. On the other hand, the woman who thinks her work is worth little, although her husband has more accordingly due to her move into the IV. I think in 90% of cases it's just a matter of mindset because, as I said, in the end it comes down to the same thing.

Regards

Maybe this attitude is more about two half-wits. On one hand, the man who apparently doesn't understand that he only has more net income because he gets the wife's basic allowance transferred to his tax card. On the other hand, the woman who thinks her work is worth little even though her husband has correspondingly more because of her move into the disability insurance. I think in 90% of cases it's simply a matter of mindset, because as I said, in the end it makes no difference.

Regards

Yes, definitely it's a matter of mindset and probably mostly subconscious on both sides. Unfortunately, that's probably exactly why it's not so easy to change anything about it.

Just to be correct. For the woman, it should of course be tax class V and not IV. It’s not supposed to cause any confusion here.

Since this whole thing is anyway completely deviating from the actual topic: Changing the tax class, as described by other users, does not bring any tax advantage but only a liquidity advantage for the joint married couple! For parental allowance, however, changing the tax class really brings actual money! The parental allowance is calculated based on the net income of the party who then takes parental leave. Usually, this is the woman. Therefore, it is advisable that the woman temporarily switches to tax class 3, even if she earns significantly less, and the man to tax class 5.

When I read that we have a 3-account system, [...], I shake my head and think to myself, they haven’t understood marriage/love.

When I hear that it’s only love if you have just one account together, I think the same about you. Sorry, I often appreciate you, but here I find you on a high horse that doesn’t suit you.

From time to time, people fall in love who have significantly different opinions about how to handle money. Different handling of money is, besides parenting issues, by far the number one reason for separation.

In my (our) special case, there will be no parenting issues. And the system with joint fixed costs and otherwise separate accounts is a highly efficient dispute preventer, because I am clearly less inclined to consume than my better half. But since there is full, own income: Let him handle his money as he sees fit. I am totally relaxed about it and there is no reason for arguments. Simply because I don’t have to pay for things I consider completely pointless.

Just as an example: Until recently, unused fitness equipment worth 2.5k was standing in the office. Now, after a year of non-use, sold at a loss (like one or the other game console, one or the other kitchen utensil, one or the other protein powder (which was purchased together with the equipment), an aquarium that lived with us for a year, etc.)

I know(!) beforehand(!!) 100%(!!!) that this will happen, simply because it’s not the first time nor the last. That’s how well we know each other. If this were done from a joint account, I would be having fits. This way I don’t care at all. Own money for own (bad) decisions.

Honestly: In such a constellation, this model is a relationship saver. So much for not understanding love... You can soften a partner’s quirks that annoy you by a few clever routines – financially, too. And if someone now says: Just find someone else without such quirks: Then we can talk about love and such again, about who didn’t understand what here.

The money I earn today is not earned by me, but by us, because it is a collaborative work, I couldn’t have pushed so hard at 35-40 when the kids were smaller and wouldn’t be where I am now

That’s why I said before that in such a constellation the model doesn’t work. But look, no kids, always double income. Classic DINKs. That works so well there.

Yosan, the problem with 30-year-old guys is how my generation, whose children they are, raised them. Pashas in the Mama's hotel, driving license paid by grandma and grandpa, Playstation, PC, mobile phone, Australia trip, class trip to Rome, etc.... all without having to pay a single penny. Never worked, never delivered newspapers, worked at McDonald's or something, I don't know why my generation did that, pampering them like that, and now they behave that way in marriage too. Things went badly. Karsten