June 19, 2013

Top adviser defends White House in IRS scandal

bbac1bf48cb619a3265144675a63865f Top adviser defends White House in IRS scandal

Story Highlights

Senior Dan Pfeiffer calls actions “outrageous and inexcusable”
Administration will work with Congress on “legitimate oversight”
plans a hearing Wednesday

(PhatzNewsRoom / USA Today)
— President Obama and his team are looking to move past last week’s parade of scandal stories, but it won’t be easy.

White House senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer hit the talk show circuit Sunday, but faced more questions about the than about the economy and national security, and Republicans made clear they won’t let the issue fade away.

Pfeiffer said the White House did not know about IRS targeting of until it was recently alerted about an on-going investigation.

The IRS admitted May 10 that it had a separate process for reviewing applications for tax-exempt status submitted by groups with “” and related terms in their names. In some cases it also sent intrusive and inappropriate questionnaires to those groups. The inspector general issued a report about the matter last week.

Calling IRS actions “outrageous and inexcusable,” Pfeiffer told ABC’s This Week that the administration would work with Congress on “legitimate oversight” — but “what we’re not going to participate in is partisan fishing expeditions designed to distract from the real issues at hand.”

Regardless of when the president first learned of the investigations, Pfeiffer said, the president wants to ensure such activities were not repeated. “It was stopped and it needs to be fixed to ensure it never happens again,” Pfeiffer said.

On NBC’s , Pfeiffer said Republicans are trying “to drag Washington into a swamp of partisan fishing expeditions, trumped-up hearings and .”

Republicans are gearing up for more congressional hearings, trying to find out if any high-ranking Obama administration or knew about the targeting of conservative groups.

“This is just the beginning of this investigation,” said Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., on Fox News Sunday.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., told NBC that the recent allegations reflect a “culture of intimidation” within the Obama administration.

“What we’re talking about here is an attitude that the government knows best,” McConnell said. “And if we start criticizing, you get targeted.”

The Senate Finance Committee has scheduled a hearing Tuesday featuring the first appearance by former IRS commissioner Douglas Shulman since the scandal broke.

The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform plans a hearing Wednesday that is scheduled to include Shulman and Lois Lerner, director of exempt organizations for the IRS. Lerner is the official who first announced 10 days ago the targeting had taken place.

In his string of Sunday interviews, Pfeiffer noted that Obama has installed a new temporary director of the IRS, and authorized a 30-day review of agency operation. He told Fox that there will be “a top-down review of the IRS, and everything will be looked at.”

That’s not sufficient, said Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, on ABC’s This Week. “I think a special counsel is going to wind up being necessary,” he said.

As Obama tries to move past the scandal, his schedule this week includes a meeting with the president of Burma, a speech on counterterrorism and a commencement address at the U.S. Naval Academy.

Contributing: The Associated Press

Yahoo in talks to sell 15-25 percent of Alibaba: source

dbfc1d0ddfd0163cdb6000f503513306 Yahoo in talks to sell 15 25 percent of Alibaba: source

() – could be weeks away from selling 15 to 25 percent of Group’s stock back to China’s largest e-commerce company, in a deal designed to eliminate that had scuttled the parties’ previous negotiations, a person familiar with the matter said.

The two companies have been in talks for a month, the person said, but cautioned that there is no guarantee a deal will be reached.

Numerous discussions have been held in recent years about a deal for Alibaba to reclaim some or all of the 40 percent stake in the company that Yahoo acquired in 2005.

A $17 billion tax-free asset swap between the two companies fell apart in February.

The latest deal would not be tax-free and would be much more straightforward, the person told Reuters on Friday.

“The overall complexity of this deal is much simpler. There’s no risk, there’s no complications with regards to the identification of assets,” the person said. In a , a deal could be weeks away, the person said.

The situation may have become more complicated following Thursday’s revelation that Yahoo Chief Executive ’s resume falsely stated that he had earned a computer science degree in college.

Yahoo, which initially called it an “,” has since said its board is reviewing the matter. Activist investor Third Point, which is leading a proxy fight against Yahoo’ of director and which discovered the error in Thompson’s resume, has demanded that Yahoo fire Thompson by Monday.

Yahoo and Alibaba declined to comment.

Yahoo acknowledged that it was in talks with Alibaba, during its first-quarter earnings with analysts last month. During the call, Thompson said the two companies were working on a “simplified” transaction to “monetize” a portion of Yahoo’s stake in Alibaba.

To fund the deal, Alibaba would raise capital. The valuation that Alibaba receives in the fund-raising will determine how much Yahoo earns in the transaction, the source said.

In September, Alibaba was valued at $32 billion when Silver Lake and other firms invested in the company, according to media reports at the time. At that valuation, Yahoo could make $4.8 billion to $8 billion by selling 15 to 25 percent of Alibaba.

“Of all the previous ones we’ve worked on, this one feels like it might actually have a chance of getting done. Or at least it did until a day and a half ago,” the person said, referring to the controversy around Thompson’s resume.

Details of the talks were first reported by the Wall Street Journal on Friday.

(Reporting by Alexei Oreskovic; Editing by Richard Chang)

Analysis: BCS options include exemption for Rose Bowl

d8ba4a80cabd41036d880611aef6e84a Analysis: BCS options include exemption for Rose Bowl

(PhatzRadio / ) — The is special. It has its own nickname, its own televised parade, a breathtaking backdrop (ever see the San Gabriel Mountains at sunset?) and, of course, 110 years of history. Now the even has its own decree: “The Big Ten and Pac-12 champions will always play in the .” And so it is written.

College deciding the future national championship format have narrowed their focus to four options.

In an outline first obtained by , one model, revealed for the first time, was a four-team playoff proposal that would preserve the Rose Bowl’s annual Big Ten-vs.-Pacific-12 , which dates to 1947.

MORE: BCS focused on four options

In a plan dubbed “four teams plus,” the four highest- at the end of the regular season would meet in semifinals unless the Big Ten or Pac-12 champion, or both, was among the top four. Those leagues’ teams still would meet in the Rose, and the next highest-ranked team or teams would slide into the .

In other words, six teams would meet in three , and two of those three winners would play for the national title. BCS math is never simple.

The last time the Big Ten and then-Pac-10 had teams in the top four of the was in 2005 when Southern California was No. 1 and Penn State No. 3.

In the four teams plus , it would have been No. 2 Texas vs. No. 6 Notre Dame, No. 4 Ohio State vs. No. 5 Oregon and USC vs. Penn State in the Rose.

Somehow (it’s not outlined in the BCS document), two of those three winners would have been selected to meet for the national championship.

Of course, that year brought us one of the most thrilling games of the last decade — Texas’ 41-38 win against USC, which was decided when sprinted 8 yards for the winning touchdown in the Rose Bowl, no less.

Since it’s tax season, think of the BCS like the , with the Rose Bowl getting a special tax exemption, kind of like a church. And in truth, that’s exactly how the Big Ten and Pac-12 feel about their relationship with the Granddaddy of Them All. It’s sacred.

Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delany repeatedly has expressed concern that a four-team plan would inevitably lead to a larger-scale playoff. In BCS-speak, clearly, the word “playoff” is taboo — the word isn’t mentioned once in the document. Instead, it’s called the “four-team event.” And of course, a full-scale playoff isn’t being considered.

Judging by the response from several Pac-12 and Big Ten athletics directors contacted Wednesday (crickets chirping), there’s clearly a desire to let the process play out. Presumably everyone realizes that most outside those two leagues (read: Southeastern) won’t be on board for the proposal.

The four-team model that makes the most sense would have at campus stadiums and a championship at a pre-selected site.

Home fans wouldn’t have to travel twice, and the regular season wouldn’t be compromised given the motivation to secure the sizable home-field advantage. That would be special, too.

Analysis: BCS options include exemption for Rose Bowl is a post from: PhatzRadio.com

 Analysis: BCS options include exemption for Rose Bowl

help Analysis: BCS options include exemption for Rose Bowl
009b06f38695de0d0d383c24bf894a9e Analysis: BCS options include exemption for Rose Bowl
help Analysis: BCS options include exemption for Rose Bowl
1df4af0e6e8f900d91267ca68edfd555 Analysis: BCS options include exemption for Rose Bowl
help Analysis: BCS options include exemption for Rose Bowl
7f14bbf0b0c13fca3af83ff82c0b71ca Analysis: BCS options include exemption for Rose Bowl
help Analysis: BCS options include exemption for Rose Bowl
7c7d24e16ce9807a51c9caae4d336d4f Analysis: BCS options include exemption for Rose Bowl
help Analysis: BCS options include exemption for Rose Bowl
325472601571f31e1bf00674c368d335 Analysis: BCS options include exemption for Rose Bowl

325472601571f31e1bf00674c368d335 Analysis: BCS options include exemption for Rose Bowl

NFL: Replay, injured reserve, roster sizes focus of NFL owners meetings

6f78a4b6c13a7d504bd19731df8a43dc NFL: Replay, injured reserve, roster sizes focus of NFL owners meetings

, Fla. (AP) — Instant replay and – the NFL’s IRs – will be main topics as the owners consider several at their this week.

The have proposed having the booth official make all decisions on replay reviews instead of . Under another suggestion, the booth official also would be allowed to review all just as he now does for all scoring plays.

“This is a proposal that will definitely, I think, generate discussion, but I think it was directed at trying to speed it up,” said Rich McKay, president of the and chairman of the .

“The thing about our system is we developed our system based on our experience the . That’s how we developed the idea that the would be the because we felt like he had the best ability to one, talk to the on-field official and two, have complete command of the rules and the application of them.”

Last year, the committee recommended having the booth official review all scoring plays and now it is proposing expanding his duties to all turnovers. That should help coaches in deciding when to use their challenges.

“We took scoring plays from the coaches and put it upstairs as an automatic review for him to confirm,” McKay said of the replay official. “If he felt it needed to be reviewed by the referee, then he stopped the game. We would use that same procedure for turnovers: fumbles, interceptions and the like.”

A change to the injured reserve requirements for a designated player would be the first alteration in rules for that list since 1993.

Until 1990, IR players had to sit out , and until `93 that became . Then the league clamped down on teams that “hid” they might lose if released by placing them on IR even if their injuries were minor – or nonexistent.

“I’m going to call it an injured reserve exception for major injury to a designated player,” McKay said.

“Traditionally, in our system, injured reserve players have been out for the year. In this case, if that player was on the roster all the way through the first regular-season weekend, then you could put that player on injured reserve, designate that player for return and the player could begin to practice six weeks after he has gone on that list. And play in games eight weeks after he has gone on that list. ”

Another proposal will allow each team to designate one player per week who can go on the inactive list because of a concussion and be replaced on the roster.

The NFL rarely tinkered with overtime until two years ago, when the Saints won the NFC title by winning the coin toss to start the extra period, marching downfield and kicking a field goal.

Beginning in the 2010 season, that scenario required the team that lost the toss to get a possession, but only in the playoffs.

That rule change has had no impact thus far, but the Steelers want it as part of the regular season, too. The league’s coaches subcommittee and the players’ union support the change.

“What the coaches’ feeling was … strategically they like to prepare the same way in the regular season that they do in the postseason,” McKay said, “and they really don’t want to have different rules and have to change their approach to overtime.”

NFL owners also will consider moving the trading deadline from after the sixth week of the schedule to after the eighth week. McKay said the hope is to generate more deals.

“The trade deadline has traditionally been a little disappointing,” he said. “There is a lot of talk about it but then not very many transactions because of the nature of our sport being such a team sport. But our thought is that there could potentially be more trades now because of the salary cap and adjustment to it, and this was a way to give people a little more leeway.”

Also proposed is allowing teams to have 90 players on the offseason and rosters before the first cut, but counting unsigned draft choices. In the past, those unsigned players were not part of the 80-man rosters.

McKay said the final cutdown to 53 could be moved up one day to Friday, Aug. 31 because the opening game will be played on a Wednesday night this year.

NFL: Replay, injured reserve, roster sizes focus of NFL owners meetings is a post from: PhatzRadio.com

 NFL: Replay, injured reserve, roster sizes focus of NFL owners meetings

help NFL: Replay, injured reserve, roster sizes focus of NFL owners meetings
009b06f38695de0d0d383c24bf894a9e NFL: Replay, injured reserve, roster sizes focus of NFL owners meetings
help NFL: Replay, injured reserve, roster sizes focus of NFL owners meetings
1df4af0e6e8f900d91267ca68edfd555 NFL: Replay, injured reserve, roster sizes focus of NFL owners meetings
help NFL: Replay, injured reserve, roster sizes focus of NFL owners meetings
7f14bbf0b0c13fca3af83ff82c0b71ca NFL: Replay, injured reserve, roster sizes focus of NFL owners meetings
help NFL: Replay, injured reserve, roster sizes focus of NFL owners meetings
7c7d24e16ce9807a51c9caae4d336d4f NFL: Replay, injured reserve, roster sizes focus of NFL owners meetings
help NFL: Replay, injured reserve, roster sizes focus of NFL owners meetings
325472601571f31e1bf00674c368d335 NFL: Replay, injured reserve, roster sizes focus of NFL owners meetings

325472601571f31e1bf00674c368d335 NFL: Replay, injured reserve, roster sizes focus of NFL owners meetings

Business: New rule puts a wrinkle in figuring taxes on stock sales

9a79e208c08c3478cdac060b71aa717e Business: New rule puts a wrinkle in figuring taxes on stock sales

( News / USA Business) — When investors check their brokerage websites or open their mailboxes over the next , they’re about to find out who doesn’t trust them anymore: the .

As surprising as it sounds, investors have long been trusted to use the honor system when it comes to reporting the size of their gains and losses to the IRS when they sell an investment.

But all that changes now, due to the passage of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. For the first time, the annual tax forms investors receive, called the 1099-B, from their brokers will contain dramatic changes. Beginning with the just-completed 2011 tax year, it’s up to brokers to track how much investors paid for stocks that were sold and report that information directly to the IRS. This so-called cost basis is what determines how much tax investors pay.

COLUMN: Tax software can help with cost-basis rules

The changes will be a huge shift for investors, who for decades have been used to tracking what they paid for stocks. Making things even more tricky, due to some in the law as well as in it being the first year of the new 1099-B form, investors should brace for some surprises in the forms that brokers must out by Feb. 15.

“The public at large has no idea what’s about to come down the pike here. They’re really going to be surprised,” says Nico Willis, founder of NetWorth Services, which makes software to help investors track the information.

Investors who don’t want to overpay taxes on capital gains, or face penalties for underpaying, will need to be aware of some key aspects of the new rule, including:

What investments the changes affect

Brokers are only required to report investors’ cost basis for stocks bought on or after Jan. 1, 2011, for the 2011 tax year. Mutual funds won’t be included in the new rules until the 2012 tax year, and and options are included in 2013.

But some investors might still see some . For instance, some brokerage firms might opt to report the cost-basis information on certain exchange traded funds while others may not, says Stevie Conlon at Wolters Kluwer Financial Services, which helps brokers track this type of data. Also, the same broker might report the cost basis on some ETFs but not others. For instance, TD Ameritrade, a large broker, is opting to report the cost basis on many ETFs, but not all, says the company’s Becky Groves. “There’s a wide ocean of securities that investors could have sold in 2011, that they are responsible for, and the brokerage isn’t,” says NetWorth Services’ Willis.

How the brokerage documents are changing

The 1099-B investors get this year will look entirely different. It contains several new sections that provide much more detail. First, the brokerage will signal the IRS if the stock sold is one it tracked the basis for. If so, it will be called “covered.” Additionally, the broker will parse the stocks sold based on if they were held short term (one year or less) or long term. It’s a key distinction, because investments sold in the short term are subject to taxpayers’ ordinary income tax rate, which is typically higher than the tax rate on long-term investments. The brokerage will also list transactions of shares it didn’t report the basis on and didn’t know how long were held.

Big changes in tax forms for investors

Investors who think the new forms will make filing taxes easier are in for a surprise, too. It’s still up to investors to monitor the cost basis, for instance, of any stock bought prior to Jan. 1, 2011. Due to the new tax requirements, taxpayers also are required to fill out a new form called the 8949, which might be more detailed than investors were expecting. Not only must investors break down sales by lots, but they must also choose from three options to tell the IRS how the brokerage tracks the transaction.

Additionally, investors must mathematically reconcile any discrepancy between what they report as cost basis and what the broker reported, Conlon says. “Some say it’s an ‘audit me’ form,” she says. Also, the Schedule D, where investors have long reported capital gains and losses, is dramatically changed and now more of a summary page, Conlon says.

Possibilities for more corrections

Investors who rush to file their returns might face having to file an amended return if their brokers make any changes to the 1099-B. Investors who in January bought shares of a stock they sold for a loss in 2011 might get an amended 1099-form that disallows that loss as a so-called “wash sale,” says Cameron Routh at Scivantage. That’s because brokers must notify the IRS when losses are disqualified if the shareholder buys back the losing stock in 30 days or less. Other corrections, too, might be more likely if there’s any effect on cost basis, he says.

Brokers are ready for questions. “We’ve tried to prepare investors over the past couple of years,” says Groves. But “sometimes people don’t pay attention until they receive their tax form.”

Will Money Destroy Your Marriage?

ff1336384be755b42fe6fc186e5ad48e Will Money Destroy Your Marriage?

( Blog/ Marie Clarie) - Secret bank accounts, hidden documents, foreclosure notices — women across the country are uncovering shocking signs of financial .

An award-winning performing arts professional, Robbins* had two kids, a spacious Manhattan apartment, and a successful production company built around her creative collaboration with her husband. Their glamorous, fast-paced life was the envy of her friends — until the night Robbins took the dog out and grabbed her husband’s jacket instead of her own.

The coat felt strangely heavy and stiff, and when Robbins looked inside, she discovered the lining had been cut open and stuffed with . “Out of this jacket comes somebody else’s financial nightmare, except that my name was all over it: years and years of liens, , tax notices, eviction notices, repossession notices, tuition overdue notices, cancellation — we hadn’t had in eight months, and we were about to be evicted from our apartment,” she says. “We were three weeks away from living out in the park. It was horrifying.”

When she confronted her husband, he offered no explanation. “He shut down completely,” she says.

Throughout their 13-year relationship, Robbins had managed their corporate business while her husband handled their personal finances. But while she signed their tax returns every year, he apparently never filed them. “I had no idea I wasn’t ,” she says.

Robbins eventually learned that their debts exceeded $750,000. She insisted they go into therapy, but a few months later her husband abruptly left her, and she found he had been . Robbins is now getting a divorce, negotiating with the , and struggling to make sense of what happened.

“My life as I perceived it wasn’t my life,” she says. “All I thought we had and were wasn’t true at all.”

Robbins still can’t get over the fact that her husband never shared their or let her help deal with them, a choice that left her feeling deeply betrayed. That reaction is a telling sign of the times; in previous eras, wives often had very different expectations. Back when everyone assumed that men made the money and the decisions, women didn’t necessarily believe they were entitled to share information, let alone power. But today, marriage is typically viewed as a partnership based on mutual trust, and when one partner violates that trust by keeping financial secrets, lying, or making unilateral decisions that threaten a family’s welfare, the other partner can feel profoundly betrayed by a transgression that may be even more destabilizing than an affair.

Such betrayals became increasingly visible during the last couple of years as the recession forced financial problems out into the open and people’s debts caught up with them. The latest data shows that financial infidelity is rampant. A survey by the nonprofit CESI Debt Solutions revealed that 80 percent of spouses spend money their partners don’t know about, and more than two-thirds of the respondents had had a relationship affected by financial dishonesty. Another study, commissioned by the National Endowment for Financial Education (NEFE) and Forbes Woman, found that three in 10 Americans admit to financial deception with their partners. Of those, nearly 60 percent had hidden cash; more than half had hidden purchases; an additional 30 percent had hidden statements or bills; and 34 percent said they lied about finances, debt, or money earned.

Women are victimized more often than men: According to the NEFE study, 65 percent of women said their partners had lied to them about finances or debt, compared with 47 percent of men. Among those who were deceived, more than 40 percent said it damaged the trust in their relationship, and for 16 percent it resulted in divorce.

“Money is this massive pink elephant in bedrooms all across America, and the problem has been heightened in the economic downturn, which is a painful backdrop for dealing with an issue that nobody wants to talk about,” says Manisha Thakor, a personal finance expert and author of Get Financially Naked: How to Talk Money With Your Honey.

The reasons for financial infidelity can vary. Some men conceal financial assets because they’re secretly preparing to leave their wives, while others lie to their partners even as they remain committed to the relationship and expect it to survive.

Ann Hopkins* thought she and her husband had a wonderful marriage. “He was my best friend,” says Hopkins, a stay-at-home mother who raised their two children in an affluent suburb in the Northeast.

Then one day her husband, a successful corporate executive, came home and delivered some unbelievable news. “I thought we had a few million dollars, but he said, ‘We have nothing left,’” Hopkins reports.

Her husband had gambled away everything they owned on bad investments and unsuccessful day-trading. “Not only had he lost everything, but we were $240,000 in debt, including student loans I didn’t know he had taken out to get our kids through college,” Hopkins says. “I went to see a lawyer, and she said, ‘Face it — you are destitute.’”

They sold their house and separated, although they did not divorce. Today, Hopkins lives alone in a room she rents from a friend, and she works for an event-planning company. “I have nothing — no pension, no equity, no nothing,” she says. “I don’t even have a place where my kids can come and stay with me on holidays. We have learned to be poor, but there isn’t a day that I wake up and am not afraid. There’s tons of grief. I lost my whole life.”

But she knows she isn’t the only one. “One friend was home during the day when she heard a rattling at the front door — and found that a person was putting a foreclosure notice on her house,” Hopkins says. “Another friend’s husband lost even more than my husband did. It’s ego and arrogance. These men think, I can make this money back. I’ll fix it, and she’ll never know. There’s huge denial. My husband still thinks we’ll get back together. But I trust virtually no one now. You can’t trust anybody.”

Alison Stein* had no idea she couldn’t trust her husband until he was suddenly asked to resign as treasurer of the cooperative summer community where they owned a country cottage in upstate New York. When the community accounts revealed a financial shortfall, Stein’s husband admitted to having taken the money; he and Stein had just adopted a baby, and he claimed he had borrowed the funds to cover the costs of adoption.

“I said, ‘That doesn’t make sense — we took out a loan from the bank to pay for the adoption,’” recalls Stein, a teacher. “I remember feeling so sick to my stomach — that churning feeling that your whole world is caving in around you. It was the most dreadful feeling.”

Her husband turned out to have stolen around $40,000 from the account — and to have been leading a high-rolling secret life. “I was living in a one-bedroom apartment in the Bronx, with furniture that needed to be re-covered, and he was spending thousands of dollars wining and dining other women while telling me he had to work late,” Stein says.

The embezzlement could have resulted in criminal charges, but the cooperative’s officials knew that Stein might lose her new daughter if her husband were indicted, so they offered to keep the theft private if he repaid the money. But his debts proved to be much more extensive. When his credit card tab and other liabilities were tallied, “The whole package was a little more than $100,000,” Stein says. “I never would have believed he was capable of doing what he did.” She ended up paying off his debt by herself.

No matter what the circumstances, the emotional toll of such duplicity can be life-altering. “There is no such thing as an innocent financial fib,” says relationship therapist Bonnie Eaker Weil, the author of Financial Infidelity. “Secrets destroy intimacy, and anyone who is hiding money is also hiding their feelings. They may not think they’re doing anything wrong, but they’re used to being an ‘I’ instead of a ‘we.’”

Weil compares financial infidelity to sexual infidelity, in motive as well as effect. “A lot of people get off on this — they get the same thrill-seeking, self-medicating, stress-busting high,” she says. “It’s a form of gambling.”

But while one partner is clearly the perpetrator, Weil believes that both need to re-evaluate their behavior. “It’s just like with adultery. Most of the time, two people unconsciously collude to commit financial infidelity,” she says. “The person it happened to hasn’t been minding the store; there were red flags, but she was in denial. There’s magical thinking on both parts.”

Many women are shocked to discover their own legal vulnerability as partners in a marriage, and some find they have unwittingly been implicated in serious crimes. Carol Ross Joynt, a former television producer, had been married for 20 years when her husband, a wealthy Washington restaurant-owner, died suddenly from pneumonia. Only then did she learn that he had cheated the IRS out of $3 million and was facing federal tax fraud charges —and that his death made her the defendant in the case.

“This was crazy. I hadn’t done anything wrong. How could I be the defendant in anything?” Joynt wrote in her new book, Innocent Spouse: A Memoir.

But she had cosigned their tax returns, so the IRS assumed her complicity. Joynt’s lawyers ultimately mounted a so-called innocent spouse defense, in which they described her willful cluelessness: “Throughout her adult life, Carol steadfastly avoided getting involved in financial matters because she knew they were complex and she did not understand them.”

“I should have probed. I never did,” Joynt wrote. “I didn’t ask questions. I didn’t insist on answers. I didn’t want to know. It was marital don’t ask, don’t tell.”

Such avoidance is all too common, according to financial advisers and matrimonial attorneys. “I’m disappointed in the percentage of women who are unaware of the family finances,” says Leonard Ross, a Florida divorce lawyer. “They think they’re never going to get divorced or separated, and they sign whatever documents their husbands put before them, and they don’t have any idea of what their husbands are doing. Even very intelligent women will be ignorant about what their husbands actually earn, what their assets are, and what their futures really look like.”

But when it comes to money, healthy relationships require candor and competence on both sides, according to the experts. “You have to have financial transparency,” says Weil. In order to achieve that, couples need to establish responsible habits from the outset. “Before people commit to each other, they should get completely financially naked,” says Thakor. “They should exchange a list of what they own and owe, their credit scores, what they earn and spend. You should sit down and discuss those items twice a year. If you do, you can ferret out problems before they become so large you need to hide.”

The imperative is clear, she adds: “You have to deal with them before you have a foreclosure notice on the house.”

*Names marked with an asterisk have been changed to protect the privacy of the families involved.