In the Russian legal terminology, the term "property relations" is widely used. However, the category "property" in terms of its constituent elements, due to the absence of its legal definition in the Civil and Family Codes of the Russian Federation, is explained in different scientific contexts. In theory, debts are often named as one of the elements internally forming the property, along with things and property rights, and the relations of common property of spouses are no exception. The prospect of legalization of debts as a structural element of the property of spouses is considered in the draft Federal Law No. 835938-7 that proposes to make appropriate amendments to Art. 34 of the Civil Code of the RF IC, which gives rise to a special concern in identifying the legal nature of common debts. The solution to this problem determines the need to analyze the current legislation and scientific publications devoted to property relations, property rights and its objects. Due to the fact that the debts of the spouses represent unfulfilled civil legal obligations arising from participation in relations with the third parties, their merger with family legal property relations of the spouses’ property is unacceptable. Debts do not have the qualities of objects of property rights that cumulatively form the property belonging to spouses and existing in the common property regime. Thus, it cannot be added up from an asset and a liability. Regarding legal regulation of property relations, we only can compare, on the one hand, the totality of property objects belonging to spouses on the ground of common property and, on the other hand, the objects of execution of their common obligations with respect to creditors expressed in single value units. To indicate the result of the comparison, it is advisable to use the concept of "property solvency of spouses", which allows us to assess their property status for participation in civil transactions, their real property responsibility, as well as in ensuring the interests of creditors. In support of these conclusions, the author provides detailed arguments.