What happens to your ability to borrow money based on our joint finances?
Several factors are considered in loans as significant as a home mortgage.  I believe the most major factors are 1) Credit report, 2) Income, and 3) Employment status If you borrow jointly, all joint factors are included, not just the favorable ones.  Some wrinkles this can cause may include: Credit Report - The second person on the loan may have poor credit or no credit.  This can/will hurt your rate or even prevent them from being listed on the loan at all, which will also mean you can't include their income. In addition, there are future consequences: that any late payments, default, foreclosure, etc. will be listed on all borrower's reports. If you both have solid work history, great credit, and want to jointly own the home, then there shouldn't be any negatives.  If this is not the case, compare both cases (fully, not just rates, as some agents could sneakily say you can get the same rate either way but then not tell you closing costs in one scenario are higher), and pick the one that is best overall. This is just information from my recollection so make sure to verify and ask plenty of questions, don't go forward on assumptions. The bank will consider total of both parties income for the loan qualification. Provided both parties will be listed on the mortgage. It might be worth talking to a mortgage broker, even if you don't actually end up doing business with them. Upfront Mortgage Brokers explained Finding an upfront broker near you In a nutshell, upfront brokers disclose what they are paid for their services openly and transparently. Many brokers don't, and you can't be too careful. But a consultation should be free. An experienced broker can help you to navigate the pros and cons mentioned by the other responders. Personally, I would never do business with a broker who can't/won't show me a rate sheet on the day of the lock. That's my personal acid test. You might be surprised by what the broker has to say regarding your situation. That was my experience, anyway.
"Is there any way through this? Yes, but you're not going to like it. If your friend has guaranteed the loans, then it's your friend's obligation to pay them when the brother-in-law is not cooperating. That's what it means to guarantee a loan.  (Obligatory: ""Before lending your friends or family money, ask yourself which you need more."")" "There are different approaches, but here is what we do and what I recommend.  Now that you are officially a married couple, open a joint bank account, and eliminate your individual accounts.  There are several reasons for this. Having a joint account promotes unity and teamwork.  When you only have a joint account, you do not have ""your income"" and ""her income,"" or ""your expenses"" and ""her expenses.""  You work together in everything.  You discuss your goals and set your household budget together.  If one of you makes more money than the other, that person is no longer ""worth more,"" because your incomes are pooled together.  If one person with a higher income has more in their account than the other person does, it can lead to envy, which you do not want in your marriage. Having a joint account is more efficient and makes more sense.  With separate accounts, who pays the rent/mortgage?  Who pays the utilities, or buys the food?  If you have separate accounts, it takes a lot of work to worry about what is ""fair"" when deciding how to divide up the expenses.  With a single household budget and a joint account, you decide together what the household expenses are, and they get paid from one account.  If one of you has debt, you both have debt.  You work together to get it paid off and strengthen your financial situation in the process. Having a joint account forces you to discuss your finances together.  Working toward common financial goals together is crucial in a strong marriage, but if you maintain your separate accounts, you might be tempted to put off these discussions until you are forced to by life circumstances.  It is better to work together from the start, and joining your finances facilitates that. You are intending your marriage to last.  Live your financial life like you believe that you are a team for life.  If you live in a community property state, separate accounts are a fiction anyway; everything is treated as if it was pooled together in the event of a divorce. I understand that if you are used to having your own money, it can be difficult to give up that sole control over your income, but in my opinion, it is worth it.  You will certainly hear of examples from couples who maintain separate accounts and make it work.  In my humble opinion, combining your finances completely is easier to do right." There is no issue - and no question - if you get married.  The question is only relevant in the event that you go separate ways.  Should that happen, you imply that you would want to refund whatever amount your girlfriend has paid toward the mortgage. The solution, then, would seem to be to exempt her from any payments, as you will either give that money back to her (if you break up) or make her a co-owner of the condo (if you get married).  If you actually need her contributions to the monthly nut, you could give her a written agreement whereby you would refund her money (plus interest) at her discretion. Myself and my partner do things a little differently to most. We split accommodation and utilities payments by net income proportion to ensure that we both have the same amount of spending money. For example;  The really important bit is net income. We take off a whole bunch of payments, e.g; Our contributions go into a joint account and the rest is our money to spend. The upshot is that we both get to enjoy the same minimum quality of life because we both get the same amount to spend at the bar. 'If i co-sign that makes me 100% liable if for any reason you can't or won't pay.  Also this shows up on a credit report just like it's my debt.  This limits the amount i can borrow for any reason.  I don't want to take on your debt, that's your business and i don't want to make it mine'. Idk if I would ask on reddit, personal finance will tell you the only way is joint bank accounts and relationship advice will tell you to break up. Personally I will always want my own bank account, with a joint account for a mortgage or utilities. I think it depends on if you are both financially savvy, if one of you aren't you might want to have a joint account to keep an eye on spending.  I think this site give you a good pro/con: https://www.thebalance.com/should-you-have-joint-or-separate-bank-accounts-1289664 Generally speaking, granting rights to one bank account (e.g. making a joint account) does not extend rights to other accounts or otherwise let one joint owner create new obligations on the other owner (e.g. opening a line of credit that the other owner must pay for), except to the extent of the joint account.  I assume there are no UK rules that would change this feature. The other party can of course withdraw all the money without need for your approval.  This also means that the joint account could be exposed to all the creditors of either party.  If your account joint tenant has huge debts, the creditors could theoretically look to the joint account for satisfaction.  At least, that would be an issue under US law. Frankly, it may be simpler to get a separate account for the other person (if possible) and make transfers with online banking.  It could also make sense to get a rechargeable banking card, if those are in the UK, which works like a debit card and can be reloaded through various means (sometimes a call, sometimes online deposits, sometimes in physical stores).  There may be fees to getting such a card or a second account, of course.  The benefit is that the cardholder has no access to your account and you control recharging.  Such cards are widely available in the US to people who otherwise would not qualify for traditional bank accounts. Note also the FATCA complication with adding a US person to your account.  My understanding is that a number of non-US banks will simply close the accounts of Americans, rather than deal with FFI hassles under FATCA. I can't quite follow your question, so I'm proceeding under the following assumptions: - You paid £31,000 - Your partner paid £4,242 - You have at least one mortgage, which you both pay equally. If the relationship terminates, sell the property. You are reimbursed £31,000 and your partner is reimbursed £4,242. Any remaining proceeds from the sale are split 50-50. If the result is a net loss (i.e. you are underwater on your mortgage), you split the debt 50-50. If you are not both paying the same toward the mortgage, I'd split the profit or loss according to how much you each pay toward the mortgage. Of course, this is not the only possible way you can split things up. You can use pretty much any way you both think is fair. For example, maybe you should get more benefits from a profit because you contributed more up-front. The key thing, though, is that you must both agree in writing, in advance. This is reasonable; this is what I did, for example. Note that if the relationship ends, one or the other of you may wish to keep the property. I'd suggest including a clause in your written agreement simply disallowing this; specify criteria to force a sale. But I know lots of people are happy to allow this. They treat that situation as a forced sale from both people to one person. For example, if your partner chooses to stay in the house, he or she must buy the property from you at prevailing market rates. "Personally, I avoid making business deals with friends and relatives. There's just too much of a possibility that things can go wrong.  Let's assume that you're honest people and you have no intention of cheating your mother-in-law. Still, all sorts of things could happen that could make it difficult for you to repay the loan. You could lose your job. You could get some big medical expense. Etc. Then what happens? Then your financial problems become family problems. There's a strong temptation when people borrow from relatives to make paying the loan the lowest priority in their budget. ""I know I promised to pay \$X per month, but things are really tight right now and Mom should understand."" Maybe she does understand and can manage without it. But maybe not. And then it becomes a family fight. ""You promised you'd pay it back."" ""And we will, we're having a hard time right now. Can't you just give us a break?"" Etc. Or she might have some extra expense, and say, ""Hey, can't you pay a little more this month? I really need some extra cash."" ""I'm sorry, we're struggling just to make the regular payments, we can't."" ""Well I was willing to loan you all this money. The least you could do is pay me back when I need it."" Etc. You can end up ruining family relationships over money. Your wife can find herself in the position of having to choose whether to side with her mother or her husband. Etc. I'm sure plenty of people do things like this and it works out just great. But there are big risks. And by the way, apparently this was your idea, not your mother-in-laws. I wonder what her reaction is. Is she eager to help out her daughter and son-in-law and had nothing in particular to do with the money anyway? Or is she feeling very imposed on? It's one thing to ask relatives to let you borrow their car for the weekend. Asking someone to loan you $50,000 is a very big request. If one of my kids asked me to loan them $50,000 from my retirement fund, I'd consider that a very presumptuous request. (Unless they needed the money for life-saving surgery for my grandchild or some such.)" Basically, what you describe exists in many countries - not in the USA though. In Europe, people have checking accounts with allowed overdraft, typically three month net salaries. You can just this money any day as you like, and pay it back - completely or partially - any day as you like. Interest is calculated for each day on the amount used that day; and the collateral is 'future income', predicted / expected from previous income. In the USA, credit cards have taken its place, with stricter different rules and limitations. In addition, many of the extra rules in loans were invented to take advantage of the ignorance or situation of the borrower to make even more money. For example, applying extra payments to future due payments instead of to the principal makes that principal produce more interest while the extra payments just sit around. "Does the money lending between us need to be reported in our tax   reports? No. Will he be taxed more because of lending the money to me? Yes. Will I be taxed more because of borrowing the money from him? No. How shall we report it so as to minimize our taxes? You cannot. What is reported on your tax returns is the income. A loan is not an income, so nothing gets reported. However, when you repay the loan, assuming it has interest, the lender has income: the interest. Interest income is reported on schedule B of the regular (1040/1040A) tax return (or, in the case of non-resident for tax purposes, on line 9 of 1040NR). It is taxed as ordinary income, and since you're both foreigners - the lender should look into the treaty provisions that might be relevant. Generally it is not exempt from taxable income based on treaty exemptions for students (which is only for earned income), but there might be other rules in the treaty regarding interest income. If there's no (fair market or higher) interest, then there's ""assumed"" interest at the IRS mandated rates, which is considered a gift. If it amounts to more than the yearly gift exemption, the lender may be liable for gift tax (depending on the lender's and your status, and again - see treaties). ""Loan"" without an obligation to repay and without actual repaying will also be considered a gift for tax purposes. If the lender has no intentions of having the loan repaid (i.e.: making a gift), it will be better to pay your tuition bills instead of actually giving you the money: tuition is exempt from gift tax. Talk to a CPA/EA licensed in your state for a proper tax advice on this issue." After more than 30 years of married life the only thing that has worked is to partner with someone who is your opposite. I am a saver, my wife is a spender. Each pay period we establish a budget. Only those things to which we both agree go into the budget. If we violate the budget the other one holds the violator accountable.  Be sure to put some 'slop' into the budget, you cannot perfectly predict the future. The budget can, and will, change throughout the pay period, but only if both agree to the change. Other than the two answers (both of which recommend waiting until marriage to actually combine finances, and which I agree with), there's the general question:  how does a couple choose to manage finances? In our marriage, it's me.  I'm more numbers-minded than my spousal-unit.  I'm also more a sticker for time.  I work and spousal-unit does not. We had some good friends -- upon marriage, spouse1 felt like he should take on the role.  He went on a several-week trip (leaving spouse2 at home), and upon returning home asked spouse2 about the late fees.  Spouse2 was appalled.  Spouse2 ended up keeping the job of managing household finances. There's enough pieces to the puzzle that it can be divided any way you choose -- any way that works for you and your spouse/virtual-spouse. One other point:  talk about how to manage your money, before you marry.  Dave Ramsey recommends a strict monthly budget.  I like listening to Dave Ramsey, but we've never had a budget.  Instead, we agreed during marriage counseling two things: "I don't think it would be counted as income, and if it's a short-term loan it doesn't really matter as the notional interest on the loan would be negligible. But you can avoid any possible complications by just having two accounts in the name of the person trying to get the account benefits, particularly if you're willing to just provide the ""seed"" money to get the loop started." I am in Australia, but I think the banks in the UK would use similar wrkings. Your options 1 and 2 are basically no. Why would the bank consider your wife to be paying you rent when you live together. These are the type of practices that led to the GFC, and since then practices have been tightened. Regarding option 3, yes banks do take into consideration rent in their analysis of your loan. However, they would not include the full rent in their calculations, but about 70% to 75% of the full rent. This allows for loss of rent during vacant periods and adds a safety factor in their caluclations. But they will not include the rent itself, you would have to have other income as well to support your loan. Saying that, we do have Low Doc Loans in Australia (loans with little documentation required to get a loan). With these loans you basically have to make a declaration that you are telling the truth regarding your income sources and you can only usually borrow a lower LVR as these loans are seen as a bigger risk. These type of loans have also been tightened up since the GFC.