Duxbury Tables in Divorce: Useful Tool or Blunt Instrument?
When it comes to financial settlements in divorce—especially for long-standing marriages where one spouse is financially dependent—the Duxbury Tables often come into play. But while they offer a starting point, they are far from perfect. As a financial planner, I often work with family lawyers and barristers to bring real-life context to what is otherwise a very theoretical tool.
So, let’s demystify the Duxbury Tables, explore the recent updates, look at their limitations, and consider how working with a financial planner early in the divorce process can add clarity and confidence to the outcome.
What Are the Duxbury Tables?
Think of the Duxbury Tables as a set of actuarial calculations designed to work out how much capital a person would need today to receive a specified annual income for the rest of their life. They’re commonly used in divorce to calculate lump sum payments in place of ongoing maintenance (especially for spousal support).
The key assumptions baked into these tables include:
A notional rate of investment return (typically around 3% real return)
Life expectancy based on age and gender
The assumption that income needs remain relatively stable over time
So, if a court wants to award a clean-break settlement—no ongoing maintenance—these tables help calculate a capital lump sum intended to generate the required income for the recipient’s lifetime.
What’s Changed? Updates from the 2024 Duxbury Working Party
In November 2024, the Family Law Bar Association published the final report of the Duxbury Working Party, leading to updated tables and revised guidance. Key changes include:
Updated mortality assumptions: Reflecting current life expectancy data from the Office for National Statistics, which has shifted in recent years.
Updated investment assumptions: Although still based on a 3% real return, the underlying methodology has been refreshed to reflect the current economic environment and market expectations.
Adjusted withdrawal figures: With more nuanced projections that better reflect the realities of modern retirement planning and longevity risk.
While the structural foundation remains, the new updates aim to modernise the Duxbury Tables, making them more reflective of current financial realities. But the underlying assumptions are still generalised—and that’s where the problems begin.
The Problem? Real Life Doesn’t Always Fit Neatly into Tables
While the Duxbury approach can simplify negotiations, family lawyers and barristers often highlight its limitations:
Overly Generic Assumptions: Everyone’s financial situation is different. A 55-year-old woman receiving a Duxbury-calculated lump sum might not actually achieve the assumed investment returns—or she might live longer than expected and run out of money.
Inflation and Cost-of-Living Variability: The real cost of living isn’t static. Rising school fees, care costs, or property maintenance can quickly outpace the gentle 3% return assumed in the tables.
Tax Considerations: The tables assume net-of-tax income, but tax efficiency depends on how the capital is invested—something a financial planner can optimise but the tables don’t account for.
Investor Behaviour: In the real world, people don’t always invest rationally. A nervous investor may hold too much in cash, while a more aggressive one might take risks that don’t align with their income needs.
Ongoing Investment Charges: One of the most overlooked factors is the impact of investment and pension charges. Providers can vary widely in their fees, and over time the compound effect of ongoing charges can be significant. For example, a 1.5% difference in annual fees over 20 years can materially reduce the available income—yet the Duxbury Tables assume charges are effectively absorbed in the net return.
Where Financial Planners Can Add Real Value
The Duxbury Tables offer a good starting point, but they are essentially a rough sketch.
Financial Planners can fill in the detail—and colour.
This Is Where Financial Planners Add Real Value
Here’s the reality: the Duxbury Tables offer a good starting point but they are essentially a rough sketch. Financial Planners can fill in the detail—and colour.
When involved early in the divorce process, we can:
Model lifestyle-specific cashflow projections: We build a personalised plan based on real-life income needs, changing circumstances, and spending patterns over time.
Stress-test scenarios: What if she lives to 95? What if investment returns are lower than expected? We test the plan against different outcomes.
Help make the lump sum work: Once a figure is agreed, we ensure it’s invested tax-efficiently and aligned to the recipient’s goals and risk profile.
Factor in investment charges: We model different platforms and portfolios to show the real impact of charges and avoid nasty surprises years down the line.
Rebuild financial confidence: For many, divorce is financially disorientating. Our role isn’t just technical—it’s emotional, too. Helping clients understand their new financial future is powerful.
A Collaborative Approach Makes for Better Outcomes
Divorce is never easy. But with a collaborative team—lawyers, barristers, and financial planners—clients can walk away with not just a settlement, but a strategy.
The Duxbury Tables can be a useful tool in settlement discussions, especially with the 2024 updates, but they shouldn’t be the only one. By bringing in a financial planner early, we move from rough assumptions to meaningful, tailored planning that supports real lives—not just formulas.
At Ella Rose Financial, we regularly support individuals and legal professionals through divorce proceedings—translating theoretical numbers into practical futures. If you’re navigating this yourself, or supporting a client who is, feel free to reach out for a confidential chat.