Hi Alicia If you’re working with a financial planner like Henry Elliston who I would most likely have introduced you to, you do need to have a history of the finances in order to make reasonable and accurate projections going forwards. So it certainly makes sense to request those in the interest of making a clear plan of how best to divide the assets. Your STBX can try to argue that he only needs to give you a year, but one option is to make some assumptions based on the information you have and based on his tax returns in the past - which there will be some made publicly available. It’s not great for Henry as far as accuracy, but it does mean that you can make some educated guesses - that are in your favour. And then when you present the financial projections you can say how you had to just make an educated guess, and if he could provide you please with the accurate information you’ll be able to revise the figures. But in the meantime, this is what you’re going to have to work with as far as what you think would be fair and reasonable and this is the basis for your mediation. You make it clear that either mediation or arbitration are the best options and that if you’re going to have to go to court for any reason, that you should get costs from him to pay for your legal fees because there’s no reason why you would need to be in court other than him refusing to do mediation or arbitration. Which would be completely unreasonable and not very smart on his part. At this point he may consider that he’s better off doing mediation and then what’s the point of discussing financial plans based on false information because he hasn’t provided the correct information, and suddenly that game that people play of “ Oh I don’t need to give you more than a year “ starts to feel a little bit flat. If you’ve got a good case and I think with a business that’s quite reasonable, you can try and get a court order that asked him to give more information but to be honest - I think the strategy above is more effective, quicker and far less expensive. And definitely worth a shot. The whole form E thing is a very clumsy tool designed to simply show what goes in and out and to give something for lawyers to argue over. By working with a financial expert who does long-term cash forecasting, like Henry, you’re able to do accurate projections and work out a sensible way to split things. It’s blindingly obvious to do it that way, but lawyers lose a lot of money so it’s only people like me who suggest that you should be working with a financial expert rather than the lawyer in these early stages because they’re the ones qualified to help you decide what is the fairest way to split everything looking into the future at both of your needs.