Washington state
Washington is one of nine community property states, and one of the few where courts may award a spouse's separate property to the other at divorce. A prenup lets both partners define their own terms rather than relying on these default rules.
Flat fee of $5,000 per couple. Two independent attorneys.
Community property
Under Washington law, property acquired during the marriage is generally presumed to be community property. At divorce, courts are not required to split property equally. Instead, they may divide it in any proportion deemed "just and equitable" given the circumstances.
Property acquired during the marriage by either spouse is generally presumed to be community property, regardless of whose name is on the title. This includes income from employment, property purchased with that income, and growth in community assets.
At dissolution, the court divides community property in whatever proportion it finds "just and equitable." This is not an automatic 50/50 split. Courts consider factors like the length of the marriage, each spouse's economic circumstances, and each partner's contributions.
Your attorney can explain how these presumptions apply to your specific situation.
Unlike most states, Washington courts may award one spouse's separate property to the other at divorce.
Under RCW 26.09.080, courts have discretion to distribute all property owned by either or both spouses, including property that would otherwise be characterized as separate. This means assets you owned before the marriage, inherited, or received as a gift could potentially be awarded to your spouse.
A prenup can address how separate property is treated and may help both partners retain clarity about what belongs to whom.
Enforceability
Washington has not adopted the Uniform Premarital Agreement Act. Instead, courts evaluate prenups under a common law framework established inIn re Marriage of Matson (1986). The burden of proving the agreement is enforceable falls on the spouse seeking to enforce it.
The court first asks whether the agreement is substantively fair at the time enforcement is sought. If the agreement appears fair on its face, taking into account the circumstances that exist when enforcement is sought, the inquiry typically ends here and the agreement is upheld.
If the agreement is found to be substantively fair, courts generally do not proceed to the second prong.
Only if the agreement appears substantively unfair does the court examine procedural fairness. This includes whether there was full and fair disclosure of assets, whether both parties entered the agreement voluntarily, and whether both had the opportunity to seek independent counsel.
In In re Marriage of Bernard (2009), the court invalidated a prenup that was both substantively and procedurally unfair.
Neptune's process addresses these factors by connecting each partner with independent counsel, facilitating financial disclosure through a guided intake, and building in time for both parties to review and negotiate terms without pressure.
Tech equity
In re Marriage of Short (1995) established Washington's "time rule" for characterizing unvested stock options. The court looked at the ratio of time worked before marriage versus during marriage to determine what portion of unvested options might be considered community property.
This framework is particularly relevant for employees at Amazon, Microsoft, and other Washington-based tech companies where equity compensation can represent a significant portion of total pay. RSUs, ISOs, and NSOs that vest over multiple years may be subject to this time-based analysis.
A prenup can address how equity compensation is characterized as it vests, potentially simplifying what could otherwise become a complex tracing exercise. Your attorney can explain how the time rule might apply to your specific vesting schedule and grant dates.
RSUs vesting during marriage
Restricted stock units granted before or during marriage that vest over time may be partially characterized as community property based on the time rule.
Stock options (ISOs and NSOs)
Unvested options that span the marriage boundary may be subject to allocation between separate and community property interests.
Startup founder equity
Equity in a pre-marriage startup that grows during the marriage may raise characterization questions about appreciation and effort contributions.
Refresher grants
New equity grants received during the marriage for continued employment may be treated differently than pre-marriage grants.
Requirements
Under RCW 26.16.120, Washington prenups must meet certain formal requirements. Unlike some states, Washington has not adopted the Uniform Premarital Agreement Act, so courts rely on common law standards.
Must be in writing. Oral prenuptial agreements are not enforceable in Washington.
Both partners must sign the agreement. Electronic signatures may or may not satisfy this requirement depending on circumstances.
Must be witnessed, acknowledged, and certified in the same manner as deeds to real estate under Washington law.
Full and fair disclosure of assets and liabilities is expected. Inadequate disclosure may weigh against enforceability under the Matson test.
While there is no statutory waiting period, signing well before the wedding helps demonstrate that both parties entered the agreement voluntarily and without undue pressure.
While not strictly required by statute, having independent counsel for both parties is a strong factor in demonstrating procedural fairness under the Matson framework.
Prenup cost in Washington
Costs vary across Washington, with Seattle metro generally at the higher end due to the concentration of tech professionals with complex equity compensation. Hourly billing means final costs depend on negotiation complexity.
Seattle metro area
$6,000 - $10,000+
Statewide average
$4,000 - $8,000
Neptune flat fee
$5,000
No payment to get started. Free consultation with your attorney.
How it works
Answer questions about your finances, assets, and goals. The guided intake covers common Washington asset types including tech equity, real estate, business interests, and retirement accounts. No payment required at this stage.
Each partner is paired with a separate, independent attorney licensed in Washington. You each get a free consultation to discuss your goals and ask questions before committing. Independent counsel for both parties strengthens enforceability under the Matson framework.
Your drafting attorney prepares the agreement. The reviewing attorney ensures the other partner's interests are represented. Both attorneys coordinate to meet Washington's witnessing and acknowledgment requirements. The process is designed to address the Matson fairness factors.
“Neptune make it so easy to find qualified reasonably priced lawyers I could trust for creating a prenup. And the process of asking questions to an AI chatbot really helped surface critical conversations early with my partner. Highly recommend checking them out!”
Tracy & Steven
Physician & Software Engineer
“The lawyer that I found through Neptune was such a valuable asset for our prenup not only as a sounding board to make sure our needs were met, but also to help write a document that me and my partner agree on while also ensuring it will hold up in court.”
Martha
Product Manager
“Process was surprisingly easy and fast! I expected tons of back and forth with lawyers, but Neptune streamlined everything beautifully. From start to finish, we had our signed prenup in about 6 weeks. Loved the flat fee pricing.”
Liza & Patrick
Account Executive & Investment Associate
Washington is one of nine community property states. Under this framework, property acquired during the marriage is generally presumed to belong to both spouses equally. However, Washington courts are not required to divide property 50/50. Instead, the court may divide community property in any proportion it deems "just and equitable" based on the circumstances. A prenup allows both partners to define their own terms rather than relying on this default framework.
Under RCW 26.09.080, Washington courts have the authority to distribute all property at divorce, including property that would otherwise be considered separate. This is unusual compared to most states, where separate property generally stays with the spouse who owns it. A prenup can address how separate property is treated and may help partners retain clarity about what belongs to whom if the marriage ends. Your attorney can explain how this applies to your specific assets.
Under In re Marriage of Matson (1986), Washington courts evaluate prenups using a two-pronged test. First, the court asks whether the agreement is substantively fair at the time of enforcement. If the agreement is fair on its face, the inquiry typically stops there. If the agreement appears substantively unfair, the court then evaluates procedural fairness, including whether there was full disclosure and whether both parties entered the agreement voluntarily. The burden of proving the agreement is enforceable falls on the spouse seeking to enforce it.
In re Marriage of Short (1995) established a "time rule" for characterizing unvested stock options in Washington. The court looked at the ratio of time worked before marriage versus during marriage to determine what portion might be considered community property. This framework is particularly relevant for employees at Amazon, Microsoft, and other Washington-based tech companies with equity compensation. A prenup can address how RSUs, stock options, and other equity are characterized as they vest over time.
In the Seattle metro area, prenuptial agreements typically cost $6,000 to $10,000 or more per couple when each partner hires their own attorney. Statewide, couples generally spend $4,000 to $8,000 total. Neptune offers a flat fee of $5,000 per couple that includes two independent attorneys, one for each partner, with no hourly billing regardless of complexity.
When both partners use Neptune attorneys, turnaround is typically around 3 to 4 weeks. Complex financial situations involving significant tech equity, real estate portfolios, or business interests may require additional time. A good rule of thumb is to begin at least 60 to 90 days before the wedding to allow for thorough review, negotiation, and finalization without time pressure. Rush pricing applies when the wedding is within 45 days.
Two independent attorneys. One flat fee. No payment to get started.
Start your prenup