Back to Learning Center

Blog

Specialty tag(s): Divorce

Reimbursement in Texas Divorce: The Essentials

Kathryn J. Murphy | August 28, 2026

Introduction

Reimbursement is an equitable remedy designed to prevent one marital estate from being unjustly enriched at the expense of another. The court will look at all the facts and circumstances and determine what is fair, just and equitable. Reimbursement claims can arise from a variety of circumstances. Community funds may be used to reduce debt on separate property real estate, improve separate property assets, capitalize a separate property business, or pay liabilities of a spouse from before the marriage. Similarly, separate property may be used to benefit the community estate. Moreover, a spouse might spend a significant amount of community time, toil, and effort increasing the value of their separate property business without receiving adequate compensation.

The Texas Legislature substantially revised the reimbursement statute effective September 1, 2023. Although reimbursement remains an equitable doctrine, the revised statutory framework provides more clarity regarding the elements required to prove reimbursement claims and how to value them.

Reimbursement Claims

A claim for reimbursement exists when one or both spouses use property of one marital estate to confer on the property of another marital estate a benefit which, if not repaid, would result in unjust enrichment to the benefited estate. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(a) (emphasis added).

Proving a Claim for Reimbursement

Various fact patterns can give rise to a claim for reimbursement, and the statute addresses the three most common of these scenarios. However, the remedies provided in the statute are not exclusive so other fact patterns not specifically addressed in the statute may still give rise to claims for reimbursement. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.411.

A spouse seeking reimbursement to a marital estate must prove the following three elements:

1. that the spouse or both spouses used property of one marital estate to confer a benefit on the property of another marital estate;
2. the value of the benefit conferred; and
3. that unjust enrichment of the benefited estate will occur if the benefited estate is not required to reimburse the conferring estate. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(b) (emphasis added).

Element 1: A Benefit Was Conferred

The Texas Family Code addresses the three most common scenarios involving a benefit being conferred between marital estates and provides that the property of one marital estate confers a benefit on another marital estate’s property if:

1. one or both spouses used property of the conferring estate to pay a debt, liability, or expense that in equity and good conscience should have been paid from the benefited estate’s property;
2. one or both spouses used property of the conferring estate to make improvements on the benefited estate’s real property, and the improvements resulted in an enhancement in the value of the benefited estate’s real property; or
3. one or both spouses used time, toil, talent, or effort to enhance the value of property of a spouse’s separate estate beyond that which was reasonably necessary to manage and preserve the spouse’s separate property, and for which the community marital estate did not receive adequate compensation. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(c) (emphasis added).

Element 2: The Value of the Benefit Conferred

Once it is shown that a benefit was conferred, the next step in prevailing on a reimbursement claim is to establish the value of the benefit conferred. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(b). The Texas Family Code establishes that the value of the benefit conferred is to be determined as of the date of the trial’s commencement. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(d).

The proper measurement of value differs depending on the type of benefit conferred. The Texas Family Code addresses the proper measurement standard for the three most common scenarios giving rise to reimbursement claims. For the scenarios in the Texas Family Code, the value of the benefit conferred by the property of one marital estate on the property of another marital estate is measured as follows:

1. if the benefit resulted from the use of the conferring estate’s property to pay a debt, liability, or expense that in equity and good conscience should have been paid from the benefited estate’s property, then the value of the benefit conferred is measured by the amount of the debt, liability, or expense paid by the conferring estate;
2. if the benefit resulted from the use of the conferring estate’s property to make improvements on the benefited estate’s real property, then the value of the benefit conferred is measured by the enhancement in the value of the benefited estate’s real property that resulted from the improvements; or
3. if the benefit resulted from the use of time, toil, talent, or effort to enhance the value of property of a spouse’s separate estate, then the value of the benefit conferred is measured by the value of the time, toil, talent, or effort beyond that which was reasonably necessary to manage and preserve the spouse’s separate property. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(d).

Element 3: Unjust Enrichment Without Reimbursement

The third element necessary to prevail on a reimbursement claim is to prove that unjust enrichment of the benefited estate will occur if the benefited estate is not required to reimburse the conferring estate. This determination is a question for the court to decide. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(e).

Types of Reimbursement Claims

Payment of a Debt, Liability, or Expense

The first scenario addressed in the statute that can give rise to a reimbursement claim is when the property of one marital estate is used to pay a debt, liability, or expense that, in equity and good conscience, should have been paid from the benefited estate’s property.

Section 3.402(d) of the Texas Family Code establishes that the value of the benefit conferred for this type of claim is measured by the amount paid. This standard is the most straightforward and easiest to prove of the statute’s different measurement standards—so long as one can show how much was actually paid for the debt, liability, or expense, nothing further is required to prove the value of the benefit conferred.

 Improvements to Real Property

The second scenario addressed in the statute that can give rise to a reimbursement claim is when the property of one marital estate is used to make improvements on another estate’s real property which resulted in an enhancement in the value of the benefited estate’s real property.

Section 3.402(d) of the Texas Family Code establishes that the value of the benefit conferred for this type of claim is measured by the enhancement in value to the real property. The claimant generally must prove both the existence of the improvements and the extent to which those improvements actually enhanced the value of the benefited estate’s real property. In practice, this usually requires valuation evidence comparing the value of the real property with the improvements to the value of the real property without the improvements, measured as of the date of trial’s commencement.

Time, Toil, Talent, or Effort to Enhance Separate Property (Jensen Claims)

The third scenario addressed in the statute that can give rise to a reimbursement claim is when one or both spouses used time, toil, talent, or effort to enhance the value of a spouse’s separate property beyond that which was reasonably necessary to manage and preserve the spouse’s separate property, and for which the community marital estate did not receive adequate compensation. This type of claim is colloquially referred to as a Jensen claim, coined for the landmark 1984 Texas Supreme Court case which laid down this type of claim.

Section 3.402 of the Texas Family Code establishes that the value of the benefit conferred for this type of claim is measured by the value of the time, toil, talent, or effort that was not adequately compensated. This is not the same thing as the increase in value of the separate property business or asset. Instead, the focus is on the value of the owner-spouse’s uncompensated or undercompensated services that went beyond what was reasonably necessary to manage and preserve the separate property. In practice, this requires comparing the compensation actually received by the community estate—such as salary, bonuses, distributions treated as compensation, or other employment-related benefits—to the reasonable value of the services performed. If the community received adequate compensation for the owner-spouse’s efforts, there may be no reimbursement claim even if the separate property increased significantly in value. Conversely, if the owner-spouse devoted substantial community time, toil, talent, or effort to grow or enhance the separate property and the community estate received less than reasonable compensation for that effort, the community estate may have a reimbursement claim measured by the shortfall in compensation, subject to equitable offsets and the court’s discretion.

Other Potential Scenarios Giving Rise to Reimbursement Claims

Although Section 3.402 of the Texas Family Code identifies three common categories of reimbursement claims—payment of a debt, liability, or expense; improvements to real property; and uncompensated or undercompensated time, toil, talent, or effort—those categories should not necessarily be read as the outer boundary of every possible reimbursement theory. Reimbursement remains an equitable remedy, and the statutory remedies are not exclusive. Accordingly, practitioners should be alert to other fact patterns in which the property of one marital estate is used to confer a measurable benefit on the property of another marital estate under circumstances where allowing the benefited estate to retain the benefit without reimbursement would result in unjust enrichment.

Capital contributions to a business are a good example. Assume that one spouse owns a separate-property business before marriage. During the marriage, community funds are contributed to the business as additional capital to purchase equipment, expand working capital, satisfy lender requirements, open a new location, or otherwise strengthen the business. Depending on the facts, the contribution may not fit comfortably within any of the three statutory umbrella categories. It may not be the payment of a debt, liability, or expense if the contribution was not used to satisfy an existing obligation of the business.

Offsets

The court must resolve a claim for reimbursement by using equitable principles, including the principle that claims for reimbursement may be offset against each other if the court determines it to be appropriate. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(f); Penick v. Penick, 783 S.W.2d 194 (Tex. 1988)(tax benefits received by the contributing estate can be offset against a reimbursement claim).

A claim for reimbursement of a marital estate by one spouse may be offset by the value of any related benefit that the other spouse proves that the conferring estate received from the benefited estate, including:

1. The value of the use and enjoyment of the property by the conferring estate, except that the separate marital estate of a spouse may not claim an offset for use and enjoyment of a primary or secondary residence owned wholly or partly by the separate marital estate against contributions made by the community marital estate to the separate marital estate;
2. The value of income received by the conferring estate from the property of the benefited estate; or
3. The value of any reduction in the amount of any income tax obligation of the conferring estate by virtue of the conferring estate claiming tax-deductible items relating to the property of the benefited estate, such as depreciation, interest, taxes, maintenance, or other deductible payments. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.402(g) (emphasis added).

Offsets are important because reimbursement is not intended to operate as a purely mechanical accounting remedy. Even if one marital estate conferred a measurable benefit on another marital estate, the court must still determine whether the conferring estate also received related benefits that should reduce, eliminate, or otherwise affect the amount of reimbursement awarded. The offset analysis prevents a reimbursement award from overcompensating the claimant, double-counting benefits, or ignoring the practical economic reality of how the asset was used during the marriage.

Nonreimbursable Claims

The Texas Family Code identifies the following items which the court may not recognize a marital estate’s claim for reimbursement for:

1. the payment of child support, alimony or spousal maintenance;
2. the living expenses of a spouse or child of a spouse;
3. contributions of property of a nominal value;
4. the payment of a liability of a nominal amount; or
5. a student loan owed by a spouse. Tex. Fam. Code § 3.409.

Use of a Financial Expert for Reimbursement Claims

An expert witness can provide significant advantages when proving the existence of a reimbursement claim and establishing its value. For smaller reimbursement claims with straightforward documents, expert testimony may not be cost-effective. However, in other cases, a qualified forensic accountant or business valuation expert can be the difference between a reimbursement claim being accepted, discounted, or rejected by the court.

Conclusion

The 2023 amendments to the Texas Family Code provided welcome guidance regarding reimbursement claims, however they don’t answer every question that will be encountered in practice. Reimbursement will still be a debated concept, as it continues to be governed by equitable principles that require courts to evaluate the unique facts and circumstances of each case. Because the statutory remedies are expressly nonexclusive, practitioners should remain alert to alternative equitable theories and other possibilities for relief.

This article was originally written for the TAFLS newsletter and is co-authored by Kathryn Murphy and Aaron Ballard.

Sign Up For Our Blog.