Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Financial Issues

Financial Issues This forum is for discussing any of the financial issues involved in your divorce.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 02-13-2017, 02:10 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 160
zanman is on a distinguished road
Default Salary Question

I'm just asking a question and wondering some peoples thoughts.

My base Salary is $67.000 and my work has a Product Incentive Plan which is a variable bonus program, paid monthly. This bonus is budgeted to pay monthly of approximately 20%. but it is never the same.

If and when the STBX's Lawyer serves me for a spousal claim do they just base it off of you tax returns or do I have any argument that its not the same every month sometimes its only 2 to 3 hundred and other months more. I just would hate that if she does get all that she is asking for that some months I would be negative big time.. not that I am not already with child support and mortgage, taxes , bills and then all the kids expenses.


The main question would be is this a valuable argument ?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 02-13-2017, 02:47 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 2,891
rockscan will become famous soon enough
Default

You could counter that its based on the base amount and you settle up differences after tax time?
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 02-13-2017, 03:30 PM
Janus's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,294
Janus will become famous soon enough
Default

Why not just base it off of the previous year's return?

Over time, on average, you will pay the tabled amount.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 02-13-2017, 04:57 PM
Rioe's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,213
Rioe will become famous soon enough
Default

It's like any other expense that varies. You budget for it.

Use your last year's line 150 as your income (or this year if you will have that before court), and it should all average out in the end.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 02-13-2017, 07:37 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 54
Newfie76 has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

Zanman, there is really no incentive for any man to work beyond their base salary (No OT, No bonuses, No second job etc). Out of every dime you make 7 cents goes to Child and Spousal. 7 for her 3 for you. No incentive to work more or be proactive to get yourself ahead, because you cant on these CS/SS rules. However, your ex will gratefully take more if you are willing to work for it. More you work the less she needs to work....

So why do it.....?

Courts in Canada allow the lazy deadbeat ex-wives to rape the working man...and if we try to compensate in anyway like working more or attempting to get ourselves ahead somewhat, we are knocked down again by giving our ex's more of our hard earned money.

The court only supports deadbeat mothers....ITS THE LAW... no sense in attempting to fight it.


So in short...your most likely going to calculate you SS/CS on last years income. If that included bonuses...and next year you fall short on your bonuses, yes you are correct...you will take it in the teeth.

I refuse to put more money in my ex's pocket so I refuse OT...and I spend more time with my kids....however my employer's patience is running short.

Good luck....

FYI. In Boston family law states that OT, second jobs and bonuses can NOT be used for CS/SS calculations....that's called equality.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 02-14-2017, 08:12 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 160
zanman is on a distinguished road
Default

Thanks Everyone
I kinda Figured that
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 02-15-2017, 04:40 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Southern Ontario
Posts: 137
North of 40 is on a distinguished road
Default

^^^^ Do you think the law would ever change here? I.E. by working a second job, it wouldn't have to be inputted as income.

I agree....if your hungry/hardworking the system seems quite prepared to knock you down. I liken the whole process to a jail sentence, except the penalty goes far longer.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 02-15-2017, 08:34 AM
Janus's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,294
Janus will become famous soon enough
Default

Generally, the following equation is considered to be axiomatically true:

More CS = better for kids

Any law that reduces CS would be bad for kids, and is therefore quite unlikely to happen.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 02-15-2017, 11:05 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Kingston
Posts: 76
KW_Divorced is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Janus View Post
Generally, the following equation is considered to be axiomatically true:

More CS = better for kids

Any law that reduces CS would be bad for kids, and is therefore quite unlikely to happen.
That is only true IF CS goes to benefit the children. I can tell you that in my situation, my ex put CS into her own bank account and my kids seldom saw even a single dime. She used it as tax free spousal support and even admitted it in a mediation session.

This is what is pathetic in Canadian Family Law. It assumes all parents are responsible and will provide for their children (which most do) however in cases such as mine, she was free to pocket the monies for herself and my kids went without, until I had to step in and help out directly.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 02-15-2017, 11:05 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 54
Newfie76 has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Janus View Post
Generally, the following equation is considered to be axiomatically true:

More CS = better for kids

Any law that reduces CS would be bad for kids, and is therefore quite unlikely to happen.

I CHALLENGE THIS!!!!

More CS - better for kids???? I call BS!

How can you say that taking a money from one parent to give to another equates to better for the kids?? exactly how?

In my situation...I made good money when married, had a education fund setup for both children, took vacations in the South, visited family members across the country, exposed the kids to different cultures, enrolled the kids into extra programs such as dance, hockey, martial arts and had memberships at local kids facilities.

Today....they are lucky to get a candy on the weekend. Even pizza days at school had to be cut. It tears me up inside to have this happen to the kids...and people like you for some odd, uneducated reason think that increasing CS will improve their life!!!! NO reducing CS will improve their life!!!!!!

Exwife takes both CS and SS....nothing is spent on the kids!!!!! NOTHING!!!!

Explain THAT ONE!!!

REDUCTION
OF CS PUTS THE MONEY DIRECTLY INTO THE KIDS HANDS!!!!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Question in respect of enforcement of interim spousal support dana2 Divorce & Family Law 1 02-26-2016 10:24 PM
Newb with a question Mackbraemmett Introductions 8 11-20-2013 08:38 PM
Hello and child support question noelle78 Introductions 13 01-25-2011 08:55 PM
another question about child support frustratedwithex Introductions 23 07-08-2010 08:58 PM
Determining Child Support - Full or Half Year's Salary? #1StepMom Financial Issues 6 06-17-2009 08:11 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:46 PM.