Why this question keeps coming back
Because it touches on two sensitive things: fairness and personal freedom. If even one of these feels off, conflict follows.
The classic models (and why they often fail)
We often default to the "classic" models, but they all have flaws.
The 50/50 split is easy to apply, but can be deeply unfair if incomes differ significantly. Proportional splitting is logical and fair, but some people feel it's "too mathematical" for a romantic relationship. Taking turns works fine for dinner, but falls apart with bigger, uneven expenses like rent or travel. And the "one pays bills, one pays daily expenses" method works for a while... until life changes or inflation skews the balance.
The only real metric: impact, not amount
Two people paying the same amount does not mean it affects them the same way.
A €100 expense might be 4% of one person's salary and 12% of the other's. Same number, but a very different emotional weight. That difference is where resentment grows.
How to find your rule
First, agree on what counts as "shared". You'd be surprised how different your definitions can be. Is a personal Spotify account shared? What about work lunches?
Second, look at impact, not precision. A fair system acknowledges effort, not just receipts.
Finally, choose a flexible model. Your structure needs to survive irregular months, unexpected expenses, and life changes. Rigid rules eventually break.
How Boney simplifies it
Boney doesn't force a model on you. It lets you set your exact split—whether that's 50/50, 60/40, or 73/27—and apply it automatically.
It allows you to see balances without confrontation and keep personal spending personal. Less talking about who should pay, and more clarity about how things already work.
Related guides
- Splitting fairly when incomes differ
- Staying fair without micromanaging
- Why money becomes a taboo