Ex-footballer faces €15,000 monthly alimony in Spain divorce case

€15,000 a month in alimony: the divorce draining a footballer

Could an agreement signed during a period of depression ruin a former footballer for the next eighteen years? That is the core of the case pitting Jota Peleteiro against Jessica Bueno: a monthly maintenance payment of 15,000 euros for her and their children, settled in a prior agreement that he is now contesting, alleging he signed it during a mental health crisis. The figure, totaling 180,000 euros a year, has upended discussions regarding family law and spousal maintenance (pensión compensatoria) in Spain.

The matter arises at a time when spousal maintenance—a legal mechanism intended to balance the standard of living after a divorce—is being questioned from several angles. Some argue that an agreement is an agreement, while others contend the system turns marriage into a high-risk contract for the higher earner. The Peleteiro case is the extreme version of this debate.

What is spousal maintenance and why is it paid?

Spousal maintenance is not the same as child support. It is an amount one spouse pays to the other when the divorce causes an economic imbalance compared to the situation they had during the marriage. The logic is: if one partner gave up their career or never developed it because the other provided the income, that imbalance must be compensated.

The problem is that, in practice, this legal concept has become a source of endless conflict. According to a participant in the debate, a friend of theirs divorced last year and has spousal maintenance for a couple of years; another close contact also has it on a temporary basis. These cases show that while maintenance can be temporary, it depends on judicial discretion.

That is the crux: there is no fixed rule. The duration and amount are left to judicial interpretation, creating legal uncertainty for both parties. The payer does not know when they will stop paying; the recipient does not know if they will be able to maintain their standard of living.

A staggering calculation: €3.24 million over 18 years

If the maintenance continues until the youngest child turns 18, the total amounts to 3,240,000 euros. A calculation circulating in the debate breaks it down provocatively: assuming 100 sensual encounters during the marriage, each would have cost 32,400 euros. If there were 324, the figure drops to 10,000 euros per encounter. The exercise is crude, but it illustrates the magnitude of the financial commitment.

The fundamental question is whether these types of agreements are proportionate. A first-division footballer may earn a lot during their career, but their working life is short. Most retire before age 35. If the maintenance extends for nearly two decades, the money has to come from somewhere.

Some argue that a well-managed estate generates sufficient returns: 10 million invested at 4% produces 400,000 euros annually, more than enough to cover the maintenance. The pessimistic scenario assumes that not all footballers possess such financial discipline.

The ex-footballer's assets: reality or smoke?

One of the most discussed points is Peleteiro's alleged fortune. There is talk of an estate that could exceed 700 million euros in 2025, built through five active companies after leaving football. This figure comes from information that he himself reportedly disseminated, according to the debate.

The doubt is reasonable. What lies behind that valuation? A soil sensor application, created two years ago, is mentioned as a primary asset. For some, it is impossible for that to be worth 750 million. For others, the data is irrelevant: if he has the money, let him pay; if he doesn't, let him prove it in court.

The discussion regarding assets matters because it conditions the maintenance. If the ex-footballer's income drops after retirement, the maintenance can be reviewed. However, if the agreement is already signed, the review is not automatic.

The social debate: maintain a lifestyle or work?

Beyond this specific case, the issue connects to a broader discussion: should a person pay so that their ex-partner maintains the lifestyle they had during the marriage? Some see it as an injustice: «in the middle of 2025, having to spend years and years of massive sums to maintain a lifestyle» is, for many, nonsensical.

The opposing view also has merit: if someone gave up their career to care for children or accompany a spouse during relocations, that sacrifice has an economic cost that must be compensated. The problem is determining how much time and how much money.

In Peleteiro's case, the discussion is complicated because he claims he signed the agreement while suffering from depression. If the judge accepts this argument, the agreement could be annulled or modified. If not, he will have to pay.

What is at stake for the future

The case remains in the courts. There is no final ruling. What does exist is an uncomfortable precedent: divorce agreements signed during moments of emotional vulnerability can become lifelong financial traps.

The practical lesson is clear: anyone marrying someone with significantly higher income should think twice before signing any agreement without independent advice. And those who earn a lot should know that marriage, in Spain, can cost more than any failed investment.

Ultimately, the question is not whether 15,000 euros a month is a lot or a little. The question is whether the system is designed to protect the weaker party or to punish the wealthy one. And the answer, as almost always, depends on whom you ask.