Community property in the United States

Last updated
Map of the United States with community property states in red. Additionally, Alaska, Florida, Kentucky, and Tennessee are elective community property states, and of the five inhabited US territories, Puerto Rico and Guam are community property jurisdictions. Community property states.svg
Map of the United States with community property states in red. Additionally, Alaska, Florida, Kentucky, and Tennessee are elective community property states, and of the five inhabited US territories, Puerto Rico and Guam are community property jurisdictions.

Under a community property regime, depending on the jurisdiction, property owned by one spouse before marriage, and gifts and inheritances received during marriage, are treated as that spouse's separate property in the event of divorce. All other property acquired during the marriage is treated as community property and is subject to division between the spouses in the event of divorce. The United States has nine community property states: Arizona, California, Idaho, Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin. [1] Four other states have adopted optional community property systems. Alaska allows spouses to create community property by entering into a community property agreement or by creating a community property trust. [2] In 2010, Tennessee adopted a law similar to Alaska's and allows residents and non-residents to opt into community property through a community property trust. [3] More recently, Kentucky adopted an optional community property system in 2020, allowing residents and non-residents to establish community property trusts. [4] Finally, Florida adopted a similar law in 2021, allowing citizens and noncitizens to establish community property trusts. [5]

Contents

The commonwealth of Puerto Rico also allows property to be owned as community property, [6] as do several Native American jurisdictions. In the case of Puerto Rico, the island had been under community property law since its settlement by Spain in 1493.[ citation needed ]

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a similar statute allowing spouses to elect a community property system under Oklahoma law would not be recognized for federal income tax reporting purposes. [7] The Harmon decision should also apply to the Alaska, Florida, Kentucky, and Tennessee systems for income reporting purposes. [8]

Joint ownership is automatically presumed by law in the absence of specific evidence that would point to a contrary conclusion for a particular piece of property. [9]

Property owned by one spouse before the marriage is sometimes referred to as the "separate property" of that spouse, but there are instances in which the community can gain an interest in separate property and even situations in which separate property can be "transmuted" into community property. The rules vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

Jurisdictions

The community property concept originated in civil law jurisdictions but is now also found in some common law jurisdictions. U.S. states with community property laws draw primarily from the marital property laws under the civil law of France and Spain. [10] Division of community property may take place by item by splitting all items or by values. In some jurisdictions, such as California, a 50/50 division of community property is strictly mandated by statute [11] so the focus then shifts to whether particular items are to be classified as community or separate property. In other jurisdictions, such as Texas, a divorce court may decree an "equitable distribution" of community property, which may result in an unequal division of such. In non-community property states property may be divided by equitable distribution. Generally speaking, the property that each partner brings into the marriage or receives by gift, bequest or devise during marriage is called separate property (not community property). See division of property. Division of community debts may not be the same as division of community property. For example, in California, community property is required to be divided "equally" while community debt is required to be divided "equitably". [12]

The states of the United States that recognize community property are primarily in the Western United States; it was inherited from Mexico's ganancial community system, [13] which itself was inherited from Spanish law (a Roman-derived civil law system) and ultimately from the Visigothic Code. [14] While under Spanish rule, Louisiana adopted the ganancial community system of acquests and gains, which replaced the traditional French community of movables and acquests in its civil law system. [15]

It is to be noted that California is itself a unique hybrid. In 1849, the California Constitutional Convention wrote into the state constitution the Married Woman’s Property Act. [upper-alpha 1]

Basis

The community property system is usually justified by the pragmatic recognition that such joint ownership recognizes the theoretically equal contributions of both spouses to the creation and operation of the family unit, a basic component of civil society. [17] The countervailing majority view in most U.S. states, as well as federal law, is that marriage is a sacred compact in which a man assumes a "deeply rooted" moral obligation to support his wife and child, whereas community property essentially reduces marriage to an "amoral business relationship". [18]

If property is held as community property, each spouse technically owns an undivided one-half interest in the property. This type of ownership applies to most property acquired by each spouse during the course of the marriage. It generally does not apply to property acquired prior to the marriage or to property acquired by gift or inheritance during the marriage. [19] After a divorce, community property is divided equally in some states and according to the discretion of the court in the other states.[ citation needed ] No two community property states have exactly the same laws on the subject, and the statutes or judicial decisions in one state may be completely opposite to those of another state on a particular legal issue. For example, in some community property states (so-called "American Rule" states), income from separate property is also separate. In others (so-called "Civil Law" states), the income from separate property is community property. The right of a creditor to reach community property in satisfaction of a debt or other obligation incurred by one or both of the spouses also varies from state to state.[ citation needed ]

Community property has certain federal tax implications, which the Internal Revenue Service discusses in its Publication 555. [20] In general, community property may result in lower federal capital gain taxes after the death of one spouse when the surviving spouse then sells the property. Some states have created a newer form of community property, called "community property with right of survivorship". This form of holding title has some similarities to joint tenancy with right of survivorship. The rules and effect of holding title as community property (or another form of concurrent ownership) vary from state to state.[ citation needed ]

Because community property law affects the property of all married persons in the states in which it is in effect, it can have substantial consequences upon dissolution of the marriage from the perspective of the spouse forced to share a valuable asset that he or she thought was separate property. One of the most spectacular examples of this in recent memory was the 2011 Los Angeles Dodgers ownership dispute, in which Frank McCourt paid his ex-wife Jamie McCourt about $130 million to avoid a trial over whether the Los Angeles Dodgers were actually community property after the trial court ruled that the McCourts' prenuptial agreement was invalid. [21] Indeed, one sign of community property's importance is that the states of California, Idaho, and Louisiana have made it a mandatory subject on their bar examinations, so that all lawyers in those states will be able to educate their clients appropriately.[ citation needed ]

Quasi-community property

Quasi-community property is a concept recognized by some community property states. For example, in California, quasi-community property is defined by statute as

all real or personal property, wherever situated, acquired before or after the operative date of this code in any of the following ways:

(a) By either spouse while domiciled elsewhere which would have been community property if the spouse who acquired the property had been domiciled in this state at the time of its acquisition.

(b) In exchange for real or personal property, wherever situated, which would have been community property if the spouse who acquired the property so exchanged had been domiciled in this state at the time of its acquisition. [22]

Typically, such property is treated as if it were community property at the time of divorce or death of a spouse, but in California, at least, property acquired while married and domiciled in a non-community property jurisdiction does not become community property just because the married parties move to a community property jurisdiction. It is the new event of divorce or death while domiciled in the community property state that allows that state to treat such property as quasi-community property. [23] As of 2018, only California and Arizona have such laws. [24]

Issues

Often a new couple acquires a family residence. If the marriage terminates in subsequent years, there can be difficult community property problems to solve. For instance, often there is a contribution of separate property; or legal title may be held in the name of one party and not the other. There may also have been an inheritance or substantial gift from the family of one of the spouses during the marriage, whose proceeds were used to buy a property or pay down a mortgage. Case law and applicable formulas vary among community property jurisdictions to apply to these and many other situations, to determine and divide community and separate property interest in such a residence and other property.

Community property issues often arise in divorce proceedings and disputes after the death of one spouse. These disputes can often be avoided by proper estate planning during the spouses' joint lifetime. This may or may not involve probate proceedings. Property acquired before marriage is separate and belongs to the spouse who acquired it. Property acquired during marriage is presumed to belong to the community estate except if acquired by inheritance or gift, or by exchange for other separate property. This definition leads to numerous issues that can be difficult to ascertain. For instance, where a spouse owns a business when marrying, it is clearly separate at that time. But if the business grows during the marriage, then what of the additional property acquired during marriage? Do they not result from labor of the spouses? Were some of the funds that were used to pay for the property community funds while a portion of the funds were separate property?

Community property may consist of property of all types, including real property ("immovable property" in civil law jurisdictions) and personal property ("movable property" in civil law jurisdictions) such as accounts in financial institutes, stocks, bonds, and cash.

A pension or annuity may have first been acquired before a marriage. But if contributions are made with community property during marriage, then proceeds are partly separate property and partly community property. Upon divorce or death of a party to the marriage, there are rules for apportionment.

Options are also difficult to ascertain. A stock option is a right to purchase shares of a company at a fixed price. Companies with growth potential sometimes award stock options as compensation to employees, during times when there is not enough money to pay a suitable salary. By accepting a stock option for compensation, an employee invests his or her own trust in the belief that he or she will help make the company acquire a higher value. Thereafter, the employee works and contributes value to the company. If the company later acquires a higher share valuation, then the employee may "cash in" his options by selling them at the fair market value. The employee's trust in this future value motivates his work without immediate compensation. That effort has value. If the marriage is terminated before the shares are cashed in, then the parties must decide how to apportion the community property portion of the options. This can be difficult. Case law precedents are not yet available for all situations involving stock options.

See also

Notes

  1. ↑ “However much as it was to be desired for wives in common-law states, such remedial legislation was inconsistent with a community-property system. The upshot of this initial encounter between the two systems was to set California on a path that has left her with a hybrid marital property law nearly as foreign to community property states as it is to the common-law states.” [16]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Will and testament</span> Legal declaration by which a person distributes their property at death

A will and testament is a legal document that expresses a person's (testator) wishes as to how their property (estate) is to be distributed after their death and as to which person (executor) is to manage the property until its final distribution. For the distribution (devolution) of property not determined by a will, see inheritance and intestacy.

Alimony, also called aliment (Scotland), maintenance, spousal support and spouse maintenance (Australia), is a legal obligation on a person to provide financial support to their spouse before or after marital separation or divorce. The obligation arises from the divorce law or family law of each country. In most jurisdictions, it is distinct from child support, where, after divorce, one parent is required to contribute to the support of their children by paying money to the child's other parent or guardian.

Legal separation is a legal process by which a married couple may formalize a de facto separation while remaining legally married. A legal separation is granted in the form of a court order. In cases where children are involved, a court order of legal separation often makes child custody arrangements, specifying sole custody or shared parenting, as well as child support. Some couples obtain a legal separation as an alternative to a divorce, based on moral or religious objections to divorce.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Intestacy</span> Dying without leaving a will

Intestacy is the condition of the estate of a person who dies without having in force a valid will or other binding declaration. Alternatively this may also apply where a will or declaration has been made, but only applies to part of the estate; the remaining estate forms the "intestate estate". Intestacy law, also referred to as the law of descent and distribution, refers to the body of law that determines who is entitled to the property from the estate under the rules of inheritance.

Common-law marriage, also known as non-ceremonial marriage, sui iuris marriage, informal marriage, de facto marriage, more uxorio or marriage by habit and repute, is a marriage that results from the parties' agreement to consider themselves married, followed by cohabitation, rather than through a statutorily defined process. Not all jurisdictions permit common law marriage, but will typically respect the validity of such a marriage lawfully entered in another state or country.

A prenuptial agreement, antenuptial agreement, or premarital agreement is a written contract entered into by a couple before marriage or a civil union that enables them to select and control many of the legal rights they acquire upon marrying, and what happens if their marriage eventually ends by death or divorce. Couples enter into a written prenuptial agreement to supersede many of the default marital laws that would otherwise apply in the event of divorce, such as the laws that govern the division of property, retirement benefits, savings, and the right to seek alimony with agreed-upon terms that provide certainty and clarify their marital rights. A premarital agreement may also contain waivers of a surviving spouse's right to claim an elective share of the estate of the deceased spouse.

Matrimonial regimes, or marital property systems, are systems of property ownership between spouses providing for the creation or absence of a marital estate and if created, what properties are included in that estate, how and by whom it is managed, and how it will be divided and inherited at the end of the marriage. Matrimonial regimes are applied either by operation of law or by way of prenuptial agreement in civil-law countries, and depend on the lex domicilii of the spouses at the time of or immediately following the wedding..

Community property also called community of property is a marital property regime whereby property acquired during a marriage is considered to be owned by both spouses and subject to division between them in the event of divorce. Conversely, property owned by one spouse before the marriage, along with gifts and inheritances they receive during marriage, are treated as that spouse's separate property in the event of divorce. In some cases, separate property can be "transmuted" into community property, or be included in the marital estate for reasons of equity. Community property can also be relevant in probate law, during the disposition of a will.

In the United States, state law refers to the law of each separate U.S. state.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Capacity (law)</span> Legal aptitude to have rights and liabilities

Legal capacity is a quality denoting either the legal aptitude of a person to have rights and liabilities, or altogether the personhood itself in regard to an entity other than a natural person.

In property law, a concurrent estate or co-tenancy is any of various ways in which property is owned by more than one person at a time. If more than one person owns the same property, they are commonly referred to as co-owners. Legal terminology for co-owners of real estate is either co-tenants or joint tenants, with the latter phrase signifying a right of survivorship. Most common law jurisdictions recognize tenancies in common and joint tenancies.

In law and conflict of laws, domicile is relevant to an individual's "personal law", which includes the law that governs a person's status and their property. It is independent of a person's nationality. Although a domicile may change from time to time, a person has only one domicile, or residence, at any point in their life, no matter what their circumstances. Domicile is distinct from habitual residence, where there is less focus on future intent.

Choice of law is a procedural stage in the litigation of a case involving the conflict of laws when it is necessary to reconcile the differences between the laws of different legal jurisdictions, such as sovereign states, federated states, or provinces. The outcome of this process is potentially to require the courts of one jurisdiction to apply the law of a different jurisdiction in lawsuits arising from, say, family law, tort, or contract. The law which is applied is sometimes referred to as the "proper law." Dépeçage is an issue within choice of law.

In modern society, the role of marriage and its termination through divorce have become political issues. As people live increasingly mobile lives, the conflict of laws and its choice of law rules are highly relevant to determine:

A putative marriage is an apparently valid marriage, entered into in good faith on the part of at least one of the partners, but that is legally invalid due to a technical impediment, such as a preexistent marriage on the part of one of the partners. Unlike someone in a common-law, statutory, or ceremonial marriage, a putative spouse is not legally married. Instead, a putative spouse believes themselves to be married in good faith and is given legal rights as a result of this person's reliance upon this good-faith belief.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Same-sex marriage law in the United States by state</span>

This article summarizes the same-sex marriage laws of states in the United States. Via the case Obergefell v. Hodges on June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States legalized same-sex marriage in a decision that applies nationwide, with the exception of American Samoa and sovereign tribal nations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Divorce law by country</span>

Divorce law, the legal provisions for the dissolution of marriage, varies widely across the globe, reflecting diverse legal systems and cultural norms. Most nations allow for residents to divorce under some conditions except the Philippines and the Vatican City, an ecclesiastical sovereign city-state, which has no procedure for divorce. In these two countries, laws only allow annulment of marriages.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Canadian family law</span>

Family law in Canada concerns the body of Canadian law dealing with domestic partnerships, marriage, and divorce.

In the United States, marriage and divorce fall under the jurisdiction of state governments, not the federal government.

In South Africa, marriage exists in a number of different forms, as a result of the diversity of religions and cultures in the country. A man in South Africa may have more than one spouse but a South African woman may only have one spouse. Historically the legal definition of marriage, derived from the Roman-Dutch law, was limited to monogamous marriages between opposite-sex couples. Since 1998 the law has recognised marriages, including polygynous marriages, conducted under African customary law, as well as religious laws such as Islamic law. In 2006 the South African constitutional court ruled in favour of recognizing same-sex marriage. It is currently the only country in the world to recognise both polygamy and same-sex marriages, albeit not in conjunction.

References

Citations

  1. ↑ "Internal Revenue Manual – 25.18.1 Basic Principles of Community Property Law". www.irs.gov. Retrieved 2016-08-05.
  2. ↑ See Alaska Stat. §§ 34.77.020 – 34.77.995
  3. ↑ McDaniel, A. Stephen; Adams Jr, C. Michael. "Community Property Joint Revocable Trust" (PDF). Wyatt Tarrant & Combs.
  4. ↑ Kentucky Revised Statutes §§  386.620, 622, 624.
  5. ↑ Moore, Blakely. "Florida Community Property Trusts". Law Office of Larry E. Ciesla.
  6. ↑ "Internal Revenue Manual – 25.18.1 Basic Principles of Community Property Law". www.irs.gov. Retrieved 2016-08-05.
  7. ↑ Commissioner v. Harmon, 323 U.S. 44 (1944).
  8. ↑ "Internal Revenue Manual – 25.18.1 Basic Principles of Community Property Law". www.irs.gov. Retrieved 2016-08-05.
  9. ↑ See v. See, 64 Cal. 2d 778 (1966). Chief Justice Roger J. Traynor of the Supreme Court of California wrote: "If funds used for acquisitions during marriage cannot otherwise be traced to their source and the husband who has commingled property is unable to establish that there was a deficit in the community accounts when the assets were purchased, the presumption controls that property acquired by purchase during marriage is community property. The husband may protect his separate property by not commingling community and separate assets and income. Once he commingles, he assumes the burden of keeping records adequate to establish the balance of community income and expenditures at the time an asset is acquired with commingled property." The See family, of course, was the family that founded See's Candies, a major manufacturer and retailer of candy on the West Coast of the United States.
  10. ↑ McClanahan, Community Property Law in the United States §§ 3:1 to 3:32, 4:3 to 4:7 (1982).
  11. ↑ See California Family Code section 2550.
  12. ↑ See In re Marriage of Eastis, 47 Cal. App. 3d 459 (1975).
  13. ↑ The half-borrowed term ganancial (from Spanish sociedad de gananciales) was used in some early U.S. community property opinions, such as Stramler v. Coe, 15 Tex. 211, 215 (1855); it has been used occasionally in some more recent opinions such as Hisquierdo v. Hisquierdo, 439 U.S. 572 (1979).
  14. ↑ Jean A. Stuntz, Hers, His, and Theirs: Community Property Law in Spain and Early Texas, (Lubbock, Texas: Texas Tech University Press, 2005), 1–31. The source explains at length the Visigoths' legal protections for the property rights of married women and how later legal systems on the Iberian Peninsula continued such rights.
  15. ↑ The author of the Louisiana Code was Moreau Lislet; see Hans W. Baade, "Transplants of Laws and of Lawyers", [Doc], retrieved 3 Dec. 2010 < "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2011-07-22. Retrieved 2010-12-03.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)>.
  16. ↑ Schreter, Herma Hill (1962). "Quasi-Community Property in the Conflict of Laws". Calif. L. Rev. 50 (2): 206–244. doi:10.2307/3479162. JSTOR   3479162 – via Heinonline.
  17. ↑ See Meyer v. Kinzer and Wife, 12 Cal. 247 (1859). Chief Justice Stephen Johnson Field of the Supreme Court of California wrote: "The statute proceeds upon the theory that the marriage, in respect to property acquired during its existence, is a community of which each spouse is a member, equally contributing by his or her industry to its prosperity, and possessing an equal right to succeed to the property after dissolution, in case of surviving the other."
  18. ↑ "[F]amily support obligations are deeply rooted moral responsibilities, while the community property concept is more akin to an amoral business relationship." See Rose v. Rose, 481 U.S. 619 (1987), and in particular, the Rose opinion's discussion of Wissner v. Wissner, 338 U.S. 655 (1950).
  19. ↑ Ruesch, Eric. "Texas Separate vs. Community Property: Know What You Own". rueschlaw.com. Retrieved 23 November 2014.
  20. ↑ "Publication 55: Community Property" (PDF). Internal Revenue Service. March 2012. Retrieved January 22, 2013.
  21. ↑ Bill Shaikin, "Frank and Jamie McCourt reach settlement involving Dodgers", Los Angeles Times , 17 October 2011.
  22. ↑ California Family Code Section 125
  23. ↑ Addison v. Addison (1965) 62 Cal.2d 558, 399 P.2d 897.
  24. ↑ Divorce Support.com Divorce legal resources

Sources

  • Gail Boreman-Bird. Cases and Materials on California Community Property, 10th edn. Revised by Jo Carrillo. St. Paul, Minnesota: West Academic Publishing, 2011.
  • Jo Carrillo. Understanding California Community Property Law. New Providence, NJ: LexisNexis, 2015.
  • Jan P Charmatz & Harriet Spiller Daggett, eds. Comparative Studies in Community Property Law. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1955 (repr: Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1977).
  • Charlotte K. Goldberg. Examples & Explanations: California Community Property, 5th edn. NY: Wolters Kluwer, 2016.
  • Robert L. Mennell & Jo Carrillo. Community Property in a Nutshell, 3rd edn. St. Paul, Minnesota: West Academic Publishing, 2014.
  • William A. Reppy, Jr. Community Property, 18th edn. Chicago: Thomson/BarBri Group, 2003.
  • William A. Reppy Jr., Cynthia A. Samuel, & Sally Brown Richardson. Community Property in the United States, 8th edn. Durham, North Carolina: Carolina Academic Press, 2015.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.