Equitable distribution is the legal principle most states use to divide marital property in a divorce. In so-called equitable distribution or common law property states the court attempts to divide the spouses’ assets equitably (fairly) and may consider the value of a spouse’s separate property in making an unequal division of the spouses marital property.

In deciding what is an equitable distribution of the spouses’ property, the court may consider factors such as the relative education, employability, earning capacities, and separate property assets (acquired before marriage) of the spouses, and whether one spouse’s infidelity or abusive behavior, for example, was a greater factor in the breakup of the marriage.

In contrast, if the spouses live in a community property state the court generally begins with the presumption that the spouses’ marital or community property will be divided equally.

But in practice, the difference between the division of assets in community property states and in equitable distribution states is sometimes not as great as it may seem, as the court in a community property state may have the discretion to divide the spouses’ community property on a 60-40, 70-30, or other unequal basis—and to order one of the spouses to pay all or most of the community debts—based on factors such as the relative education, employability, earning capacities, and separate property assets (acquired before marriage) of the spouses, and whether one spouse’s infidelity or abusive behavior was a greater factor in the breakup of the marriage.

Community property states generally include Alaska, Arizona, California, Idaho, Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin.

Minnesota is an equitable distribution state, which means that during a divorce, the court divides marital property in a manner that is fair but not necessarily equal. The court considers various factors, including each spouse's education, employability, earning capacities, and separate property assets (those acquired before the marriage). Additionally, the court may take into account whether one spouse's infidelity or abusive behavior contributed significantly to the dissolution of the marriage. Unlike community property states, where there is a presumption of a 50-50 split of marital assets, Minnesota courts have more flexibility to determine what is fair based on the circumstances of each case. However, it's important to note that even in community property states, courts can and do make unequal distributions based on similar factors considered in equitable distribution states. Therefore, while the starting point for asset division differs between community property and equitable distribution states, the outcome may not be drastically different due to the court's discretion in both systems.