What debts are both partners liable for in a 'community property' state?
No two states have the same exact laws regarding community property.  I would recommend asking a competent financial advisor in your area, as they would be more familiar with the local statutes. "(Yes, I know this is a seven year old question.) Does this only apply to debts that were taken on during marriage  Yes or to all debts of both partners? No. The important thing to remember is that it's both debts and assets acquired during the marriage which are shared. This comes from the reality that men in the olden times were the ones in business, accumulating wealth, etc while the woman ""made the home"".  The working assumption was that the woman who made the home was an equal partner with the man, since he benefited from a good home, and she benefited from his income. The fact that pre-marriage debts and assets were not community property also protected the woman, because she was able to then take back her dowry and use that to support herself. (N.B. - I live in a CP state.)" I know one piece of information that can help you (in a macabe sort of way) - from what my wife has told me, if your partner dies, you are not responsible for paying for their debts, especially student loans. I expect the same thing for credit cards - if someone were to happen to charge $2,000 on their credit card and get hit by a bus, the credit card company can cajole and plead for you to pay for it, but you have no legal requirement to do so.  Unfortunately I do not have as much information about as if you spouse is living.
Both a trust and an estate are separate, legal, taxpaying entities, just like any individual. Income earned by the trust or estate property (e.g., rents collected from real estate) is income earned by the trust or the estate. Who is liable for taxes on income earned by a trust depends on who receives or retains benefits from the trust. Who is liable for taxes on income received by an estate depends on how the income is classified (i.e., income earned by the decedent, income earned by the estate, income in respect of the decedent, or income distributed to beneficiaries). Generally, trusts and estates are taxed like individuals. General tax principles that apply to individuals therefore also apply to trusts and estates. A trust or estate may earn tax−exempt income and may deduct certain expenses. Each is allowed a small exemption ($300 for a simple trust, $100 for a complex trust, $600 for an estate). However, neither is allowed a standard deduction. The tax brackets for income taxable to a trust or estate are much more compressed and can result in higher taxes than for individuals. In short, the trust should have been paying taxes on its gains all along, when the money transfers to you it will be taxed as ordinary income. 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. "There are actually a few questions you are asking here. I will try and address each individually. Down Payment What you put down can't really be quantified in a dollar amount here. $5k-$10k means nothing. If the house costs $20k then you're putting 50% down. What is relevant is the percent of the purchase price you're putting down.  That being said, if you go to purchase a property as an investment property (something you wont be moving into) then you are much more likely to be putting a down payment much closer to 20-25% of the purchase price. However, if you are capable of living in the property for a year (usually the limitation on federal loans) then you can pay much less. Around 3.5% has been my experience. The Process Your plan is sound but I would HIGHLY suggest looking into what it means to be a landlord. This is not a decision to be taken lightly. You need to know the tenant landlord laws in your city AND state. You need to call a tax consultant and speak to them about what you will be charging for rent, and how much you should withhold for taxes. You also should talk to them about what write offs are available for rental properties. ""Breaking Even"" with rent and a mortgage can also mean loss when tax time comes if you don't account for repairs made. Financing  Your first rental property is the hardest to get going (if you don't have experience as a landlord). Most lenders will allow you to use the potential income of a property to qualify for a loan once you have established yourself as a landlord. Prior to that though you need to have enough income to afford the mortgage on your own.  So, what that means is that qualifying for a loan is highly related to your debt to income ratio. If your properties are self sustaining and you still work 40 hours a week then your ability to qualify in the future shouldn't be all that impacted. If anything it shows that you are a responsible credit manager.  Conclusion I can't stress enough to do YOUR OWN research. Don't go off of what your friends are telling you. People exaggerate to make them seem like they are higher on the socioeconomic ladder then they really are. They also might have chicken little syndrome and try to discourage you from making a really great choice. I run into this all the time. People feel like they can't do something or they're to afraid so you shouldn't be able to either. If you need advice go to a professional or read a book. Good luck!" It's more complicated than that. Governments raise money in a number of ways.  First, they tax economic activity within their borders and for connected companies and individuals.  Then, some governments have actual revenues from state-owned enterprises (licences, patents, courts, business revenues, and so on). Whatever shortage arises between state expenditure and this income is the deficit which is usually financed through debt. Government usually issues a bond (Wikipedia for a list of government bonds) of various types, some with extremely lengthy maturation dates.  These bonds can be purchased both locally and by foreign investment funds.  The nature of who buys is important. From the Wikipedia link you'll see that most government debt is very highly rated based on the ability of the state to simply raise taxes in order to fund redemption.  Pension funds are legally bound to only invest in highly-rated investment classes and the bulk of bonds may be purchased to support local pensioners. A state that defaults on debt will first hit its own most vulnerable citizens.  In addition, the fall-out will result in a savage cut in ratings.  Countries like Argentina and Zimbabwe, which have both refused to repay their debts even to the IMF, are currently unable to raise investment at all.  This has a tremendous impact on local economic development. So, default is out of the question without severe penalties. The second part of your question is about paying down the debt.  As debts increase, more and more of the revenue that a country does earn is spent on servicing debt repayments.  Sometimes bonds are issued merely to refinance old debt.  A country that spends too much on refinancing debt is no different from an individual.  Less and less money is available to do other things. In conclusion: governments can neither default nor binge-borrow unless they wish to severely limit economic opportunities for their citizens. "This might get closed as an ""opinion"" question. Tough to say up front.  You are kind to be willing to do this, and if just you and GF, it would be simple, split the costs the same as the ratios of your incomes. Say you have twice her income. You pay 2/3 of bills and she pays 1/3. In effect, you are subsidizing her, but this is often the case for working married couples, one earning more than another.  But, this will mean subsidizing the friend as well. In theory, he has 1BR, and should pay 1/2 rent, 1/3 utilities and common food, etc. If he makes 1/2 your income, and so does GF, for simple math, he'll pay 1/4 of rent and utilities. That's an emotional issue, will you be ok with that? You'll be subsidizing a friend, instead of having a stranger pull their own weight." You may have a few options if the company continues to ignore your communication.  Even if none of these works out, the debt should still probably be paid out by the estate of your friend. "I expect that the loan documents show both you and your ex-partner as ""jointly and severally liable"" for the debt, and thus you're both responsible for it.  It doesn't really matter what other paperwork you have that says otherwise or what other promises might have been made.  Certainly, the other agreements give you legal ground to go after your ex-partner for the money, but they give you no leverage with the bank. If you end up paying this debt off to save your credit, you need to make sure that the account is closed.  Make sure you have paperwork showing it as closed, and showing that it was paid in full, and then keep that paperwork forever. Re #1: I think it will eventually show up on your credit report.  You could ask the bank for proof that you owe the money, if you like, but that will probably just delay the inevitable. Re #2: His bankruptcy filing really has no bearing on you and your obligation to repay the loan.  If he didn't list this debt, then he is still liable for it as well (and you can still go after him under your other agreements).  But either way, you're still on the debt." My basic rule of thumb is that if the the bill come from a government office of taxation, and that if you fail to pay the amount they can put a tax lien on the property it is a tax. for you the complication is in Pub530: Assessments for local benefits.    You cannot deduct amounts you pay for local benefits that tend to increase the value of your property.   Local benefits include the construction of streets, sidewalks, or   water and sewer systems. You must add these amounts to the basis of   your property.  You can, however, deduct assessments (or taxes) for   local benefits if they are for maintenance, repair, or interest   charges related to those benefits. An example is a charge to repair an   existing sidewalk and any interest included in that charge.  If only a   part of the assessment is for maintenance, repair, or interest   charges, you must be able to show the amount of that part to claim the   deduction. If you cannot show what part of the assessment is for   maintenance, repair, or interest charges, you cannot deduct any of it. An assessment for a local benefit may be listed as an item in your   real estate tax bill. If so, use the rules in this section to find how   much of it, if any, you can deduct. I have never seen a tax bill that said this amount is for new streets, and the rest i for things the IRS says you can deduct. The issue is that if the Center City tax bill is a separate line or a separate bill then does it count. I would go back to the first line of the quote from Pub 530: You cannot deduct amounts you pay for local benefits that tend to   increase the value of your property. Then I would look at the quote from the CCD web site: The Center City District (CCD) is a business improvement district. Our   mission is to keep Philadelphia's downtown, called Center City, clean,   safe, beautiful and fun. We provide security, cleaning and promotional   services that supplement, but do not replace, basic services provided   by the City of Philadelphia and the fundamental responsibilities of   property owners. CCD also makes physical improvements to the downtown, installing and maintaining lighting, > signs, banners, trees and landscape elements.  and later on the same page: CCD directly bills and collects mandatory payments from properties in   the district. CCD also receives voluntary contributions from the   owners of tax-exempt properties that benefit from our services. The issues is that it is a business improvement district (BID), and you aren't a business: I did find this document from the city of Philadelphia explain how to establish a BID: If the nature of the BID is such that organizers wish to include   residential properties within the district and make these properties   subject to the assessment, it may make sense to assess these   properties at a lower level than a commercial property, both because   BID services and benefits are business-focused, and because   owner-occupants often cannot treat NID assessments as tax-deductible   business expenses, like commercial owners do. Care must be taken to   ensure that the difference in commercial and residential assessment   rates is equitable, and complies with the requirements of the CEIA. from the same document: Funds for BID programs and services are generated from a special   assessment paid by the benefited property owners directly to the   organization that manages the BID’s activities. (Note: many leases   have a clause that allows property owners to pass the BID assessment   on to their tenants.) Because they are authorized by the City of   Philadelphia, the assessment levied by the BID becomes a legal   obligation of the property owner and failure to pay can result in the   filing of a lien. I have seen discussion that some BIDS can accept tax deductible donations. This means if a person itemizes they can deduct the donation. I would then feel comfortable deducting the tax because: If you can't deduct it that would mean the only people who can't deduct it are home owners.  So deduct it. (keep in mind I am not a tax professional)