What Is Full Disclosure in Prenuptial Agreements?

Full disclosure means that before either spouse signs a prenuptial agreement, both lay their financial cards on the table: what they own, what it is worth, and what they owe. In Washington, that honesty is not just good manners. It is a legal requirement, and skipping it can be enough to sink an otherwise carefully drafted agreement. This topic is part of Washington prenuptial and postnuptial agreements.

Why Disclosure Matters So Much in Washington

Washington has no statute that spells out when a prenuptial agreement is valid. The rules come from case law, and the anchor decision is In re Marriage of Matson, 107 Wn.2d 479 (1986). Matson set out a two-part fairness test that Washington courts still apply, and full disclosure sits at the heart of it. Related guides cover How Do I Invalidate a Prenuptial Agreement? and What Is Unconscionability in Prenuptial Agreements?.

The first part of the test asks whether the agreement is substantively fair, meaning whether it makes a fair and reasonable provision for the spouse who is not seeking to enforce it. If the agreement is fair on its terms, the analysis can end there. But when the terms are one-sided, the court moves to the second part, procedural fairness, and this is where disclosure lives. Under Matson, procedural fairness turns on two questions. Did the spouses make a full disclosure of the amount, character, and value of the property involved? And did each spouse enter the agreement voluntarily, on independent advice, with full knowledge of the rights they were surrendering? Full disclosure is the first of those two requirements, and without it, the second can hardly be satisfied, because a spouse cannot knowingly give up rights they were never allowed to see.

What Full Disclosure Actually Requires

The Matson standard is specific about what has to be shared. It is not enough to gesture vaguely at being wealthy or to say the marriage will keep finances separate. The rule calls for disclosure of the amount, character, and value of each party's property.

Amount means the full scope of what a person owns. It is a complete picture, not a selective one. Hiding an account, a piece of real estate, or an ownership stake defeats the purpose. Character refers to whether property is separate or community in nature, a meaningful distinction in a community property state where separate property is defined in RCW 26.16.010 and community property in RCW 26.16.030. A spouse should understand not just that an asset exists but what legal category it falls into, because that affects the rights being traded away. Value means a realistic sense of what the property is worth. A business, a retirement account, or a home can carry very different implications depending on its value, and a spouse asked to waive a claim to it deserves to know roughly what they are waiving.

Put those three together and the point becomes clear. Full disclosure exists so that both people sign with real knowledge of what they are giving up. A prenup asks each spouse to trade some of the rights the law would otherwise give them. That trade is only fair if each person can see what is on the other side of the table. When one spouse conceals assets or lowballs their value, the other is signing blind, and Washington courts are rightly skeptical of agreements built on that kind of imbalance.

How Disclosure Is Usually Handled

In practice, couples satisfy the disclosure requirement by attaching schedules to the agreement itself. Each spouse lists their assets and debts, often with approximate values, and the agreement acknowledges that both have reviewed the other's disclosures. This creates a written record that full disclosure occurred, which is exactly what a court will want to see if the agreement is ever challenged.

Timing supports disclosure as well. When financial information is shared well before the wedding, each spouse has a genuine chance to review it, ask questions, and consult their own attorney. When disclosures are dumped on a spouse days before the ceremony, a court may doubt that the review was meaningful, even if the numbers themselves were complete. Honest information delivered too late can still leave an agreement vulnerable.

When Disclosure Fails

The consequences of skipping disclosure are not hypothetical. In In re Marriage of Bernard, 165 Wn.2d 895 (2009), the Washington Supreme Court applied the same Matson framework and refused to enforce a prenuptial agreement it found both substantively and procedurally unfair. While that case turned largely on the rushed, pressured circumstances surrounding the signing, it underscores the broader principle: an agreement that fails the procedural fairness prong will not be enforced. Because full disclosure is a pillar of that prong, an agreement that hides the ball on the amount, character, or value of property is exposed to the same fate.

A Requirement, Not an Obstacle

It can feel awkward to itemize your finances for a future spouse, but full disclosure is what gives a prenup its strength. An agreement built on honest, complete information is far more likely to hold up than one that leaves a spouse guessing. The disclosure requirement protects both people, and it protects the agreement itself.

What Disclosure Cannot Fix

Full disclosure supports an agreement's enforceability, but it does not expand what a prenup can cover. Even a perfectly disclosed agreement cannot decide child custody or child support in advance, because those questions rest on a child's best interests and remain with the court. Disclosure makes a property agreement stronger, but it cannot give the document powers Washington law withholds from it.

If you are preparing a prenuptial agreement in Snohomish County and want to be sure your disclosures are done right, the Law Office of Chad Foster can help you build an agreement on a foundation that will hold. Reach out to get started.