[Direct answer]In the Beijing area, the core of the rebuttal is to make the other party bear the burden of explanation and proof regarding "how the money was spent". According to Article 1092 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China, if a spouse conceals, transfers, sells, damages, or squanders the couple's joint property, or forges joint debts in an attempt to appropriate the other party's property, the court may award the other party a smaller share or no share in the division of joint property. In practice, if one party claims that a large amount of joint property has been consumed within a short period of time, but fails to provide a reasonable purpose and corresponding evidence, the court usually does not accept it and may determine that the party has engaged in squandering or transferring the property based on property declarations, bank statements, and common sense. The party may apply to the court to order the other party to truthfully declare their property, apply for investigation and evidence collection or investigation orders, and claim that the other party should be awarded a smaller share or no share in the division of property in the litigation. If necessary, the party may apply for property preservation to prevent further loss of property.

I. Problem background and typical scenarios

In divorce litigation, when one party is asked about the whereabouts of their joint assets, they often respond with "I spent it all" or "My business failed," but cannot provide any proof. The other party is both angry and helpless: the money clearly existed before, so how could it just disappear? There are three typical scenarios: first, large-scale cash withdrawals or spending within a short period of time before and after the litigation, with no explanation of the purpose; second, using excuses such as investment losses or goods damage to evade responsibility, but without contracts or accounting records; third, claiming that hundreds of thousands of yuan were spent within a few months on daily expenses. Whether such defenses are valid depends on the evidence and common sense of life.

II. Key points of contention

Firstly, whether the party who has already consumed the assets needs to provide evidence, and to what extent such evidence should be provided. Secondly, under what amount and time span might a claim for consumption be deemed unreasonable. Thirdly, how to apply the property declaration system, and what consequences there are for refusing to declare or failing to declare. Fourthly, whether it is possible to determine whether the assets have been squandered or transferred and accordingly award a smaller share. Fifthly, the path of investigation and evidence collection and the timing of property preservation. These disputes focus on two points: "the obligation to provide explanations" and "objective evidence".

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Lawyers

Henglue Lawyers have summarized three counter-arguments in divorce property cases. Firstly, requiring explanation and evidence: For large-scale joint property expenditures, the party claiming that the money has been spent should explain the purpose, time, and recipients, and submit corresponding receipts. If there is only an oral explanation, the court usually does not accept it. Secondly, using property declaration: Many courts in different regions implement property declaration in divorce cases. The parties can apply to order the other party to truthfully declare all their property. Those who refuse to declare, fail to declare, or make false declarations can be used as unfavorable evidence against them. Thirdly, judging based on common sense: Large-scale cash withdrawals, frequent transfers to specific accounts, and expenditures far exceeding the family's daily consumption level within a short period of time can be presumed as transfer or squandering. The claiming party should request a reduced or no division of property based on this. Fourthly, pursuing two parallel approaches: On the one hand, questioning the claims of expenditures; on the other hand, tracing the funds through bank statements, payment records, and industrial and commercial information. For verified transfer behaviors, the party can claim corresponding consequences according to Article 1092 of the Civil Code. Fifthly, securing evidence in time: When discovering signs of abnormal disposal, apply for property preservation as soon as possible to prevent funds from continuing to flow out.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

Action suggestions: First, require the other party to provide a written explanation of the large-scale expenditures and submit the relevant receipts; Second, apply to the court to order the other party to declare their assets and formalize their statements; Third, investigate and collect evidence or use investigation orders to trace the flow of funds; Fourth, claim a smaller or no share of the transferred or squandered assets once they have been verified, and apply for property preservation in a timely manner. For matters involving debts and enforcement, you may refer to the relevant provisions.Creditor's rights and debts, and enforcementFor cases involving the confusion of companies and accounts, you can refer to the following examples for reference.Business and contract disputes in enterprises; For overall family disputes, you can refer to the following for more information.Divorce litigation and family disputesLegal basis: Articles 1092, 1062, and 1066 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (all effective from January 1, 2021), and the relevant provisions of the Interpretation (I) of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Marriage and Family Chapter of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (effective from January 1, 2021). The specific application shall be subject to the currently effective laws, regulations, and judicial decisions.

5. Henglu Law Firm's Reminder

Firstly, claiming that the money has been spent does not mean exemption from liability, indicating that the burden of proof may be transferred under certain conditions. Secondly, asset declaration is an effective means of verification. Refusing to declare or reporting incomplete information may lead to unfavorable determinations. Thirdly, common sense in daily life is an important criterion for the court to judge whether the claim for consumption is credible. Fourthly, if any abnormalities are found, immediate preservation measures should be taken to avoid winning the judgment but failing to enforce the property. For cases involving the intertwining of fund tracking and inheritance of property, reference can be made to relevant provisions.\nInheritance of property and division of family assetsFor more information, please visitThe official website of Beijing Henglue Law FirmI understand.

VI. Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: If the other person says they've spent all their money, how should I refute them?

It can be required to explain the time, object, and purpose of the expenditure, and to submit supporting documents. For large-amount, short-term, and unexplained expenditures, it can be claimed that they are not credible based on bank transaction records and common sense. If necessary, it can be requested that the court order the person to truthfully declare their property and fix the content of their statements as evidence against them.

Q2: What is a property declaration order, and is it useful?

Some courts require parties in divorce cases to truthfully declare all their assets, including deposits, real estate, equity, and creditor's rights. Parties can apply to initiate this procedure. If the other party refuses to report, reports incompletely, or makes false declarations, the court may make unfavorable findings based on this, which plays a practical role in identifying the assets and claiming a smaller share of the property.

Q3: How to prove that the other party transferred the money instead of actually spending it?

It can be approached from three aspects: the flow of funds, time, and amount. Large-scale cash withdrawals or transfers within a short period of time, transfers to specific relatives or related accounts, and amounts that clearly exceed the family's daily consumption level may all be identified as transfers or squandering of funds. Obtain transaction records by applying for investigation and evidence collection, and compare them with the statements and supporting documents to verify their consistency.

Q4: If the other party squanders the jointly owned property, can I request a smaller share of the assets in the divorce settlement?

Yes. According to Article 1092 of the Civil Code, if a party conceals, transfers, sells, damages, or squanders the marital property or forges the marital debts, the court may award a smaller share or no share to that party during the divorce settlement. When making such a claim, the party must provide corresponding evidence, and the court will determine the amount of the squandered property, the subjective fault, and the degree of verification on a case-by-case basis.

Q5: What can I do if I'm worried that the other party will continue to transfer money?

It is possible to apply for property preservation in a timely manner, freeze the corresponding accounts or seize the property to prevent the funds from further outflow. Property preservation requires providing a guarantee and explaining the necessity. The court will make a decision after reviewing the application. If any abnormal transfer or disposal activities are detected, it is necessary to evaluate the situation with a lawyer as soon as possible and initiate property preservation to avoid difficulties in enforcing the judgment.

This article is written based on the common judicial interpretations in the Beijing area. If the case occurs in other regions, it is recommended to consult local lawyers to verify the regional differences.

If you are facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the relevant evidence materials to avoid missing the statutory time limit.Divorce litigation legal services·Beijing Henglu Law Firm

Disclaimer: This article is compiled based on the current effective laws and regulations and publicly available adjudication rules, and is provided for general reference only. It does not constitute a formal legal opinion on specific cases. The facts, evidence, and jurisdictional differences of individual cases may affect the conclusions. If a dispute arises, please consult a practicing lawyer in a timely manner.