Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Divorce Support

Divorce Support This forum is for discussing the emotional aspects of divorce: stress, anger, betrayal of trust and more.

View Poll Results: Chances of winning my arguement?
Good 1 50.00%
Not Good 1 50.00%
Voters: 2. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 11-08-2012, 02:11 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 28
stressfultimes is on a distinguished road
Default Imputing Income.

My wife was earning 46-50k prior to her going on mat leave in 2009 working 5 days a week, upon returning to work at the end of 2010 she elected to go back for only 4 days and now earns 37k.

I want to impute her income to 46k but she says that her work will not allow her. I know that this is not true, however, her boss is her close friend and I suspect she will provide a letter supporting this.

I work from home occasionally and her days with him are spent taking him to a swim class, watching TV and taking a 2 hour nap together. She now, I assume on the advice of her lawyer, tries to do some level of shopping on this day.

Btw, he will be going to school in September 2013

What can I do to support my argument? And what are my chances of winning this argument?
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 11-08-2012, 02:53 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: GTA
Posts: 85
SingleDad12 is on a distinguished road
Default

My ex wasn't working at the time of separation and an income of 15000 was imputed in the calculations for spousal support. I'm not sure how successful you would be...but let's say a judge sides with you and splits the difference. What you have to ask yourself is this...is it worth spending all kind of money on lawyers/court costs/other legal fees to go after a $5000 difference in salary?

If her working one less day a week means less money spent on childcare then factor that in as well. If your child is spending more time with mom, then that may be a good thing.

I'm not taking sides here, just that it's so very easy to fall into the trap of fighting over everything...and in many cases it ends up costing more than what you are even trying to get.

Check out this site and plug in your numbers....see if it's worth it....
MySupportCalculator.ca
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 11-08-2012, 03:12 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 28
stressfultimes is on a distinguished road
Default

They are trying to discredit my business expenses. I have always made approximately the same income, except for last year, whereby I made an extra 25k. They want to use an average of three years now, which I think is unfair. If she has entitlement, which I haven't seen evidence of yet, I felt it would be fair to pay child support on actual incomes and spousal on an imputed basis becuase she can and has earned that income. She says she is going to go back to 5 days in September anyway, but they're trying to base it on today's numbers.
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 11-08-2012, 03:15 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 451
Exquizique is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stressfultimes View Post
My wife was earning 46-50k prior to her going on mat leave in 2009 working 5 days a week, upon returning to work at the end of 2010 she elected to go back for only 4 days and now earns 37k.

I want to impute her income to 46k but she says that her work will not allow her. I know that this is not true, however, her boss is her close friend and I suspect she will provide a letter supporting this.

I work from home occasionally and her days with him are spent taking him to a swim class, watching TV and taking a 2 hour nap together. She now, I assume on the advice of her lawyer, tries to do some level of shopping on this day.

Btw, he will be going to school in September 2013

What can I do to support my argument? And what are my chances of winning this argument?
You are fretting over details that likely won't make a heck lot of difference in the end if you guys end up in front of a court.

Income is to be imputed to what she is and has proven to be capable of earning, which in this case is 46K.

Doesn't matter what her current work situation is - someone who is currently unemployed can still be imputed an income that they are capable of earning/have earned in the past.

As for the chances of "winning the argument" - imputation of income unfortunately is more art than science in its current form.

You also don't want to end up winning the argument, but losing the war; so to speak.

Edited to add:

Quote:
Originally Posted by stressfultimes View Post
[...] They want to use an average of three years now, which I think is unfair. If she has entitlement, which I haven't seen evidence of yet, [...]
If entitlement hasn't even been proven/established yet, don't get sucked into the game of arguing over the amount of spousal support. You risk inadvertently conceding that she has entitlement just by picking over the numbers so vehemently.

Last edited by Exquizique; 11-08-2012 at 03:18 PM.
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 11-08-2012, 04:31 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,475
dinkyface will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stressfultimes View Post
I have always made approximately the same income, except for last year, whereby I made an extra 25k. They want to use an average of three years now, which I think is unfair.
That seems a lot more favourable to you than using your last year's income (i.e. a higher amount), then attempting to adjust downwards next year.

If you are in commissioned sales, I'd expect your income will be variable year-to-year, and this blip demonstrates that. That is an excellent, valid reason to use 3yr average income. Otherwise, the other parent has difficulty budgeting because the support amounts will vary each year.

I'm guessing you want her to just ignore that extra 25K? Good luck with that.
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 11-08-2012, 04:35 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,475
dinkyface will become famous soon enough
Default

She has already said she will go back to full-time in Sept 2013. So impute based on that, and maybe offer a temporary 'respite' adjustment for the year leading up to that time. This way, you get the 'fulltime' salary number 'on the books'.

All your details about what she does during that day are irrelevant, and makes you sound resentful and petty. That is not going to help you win your case.

Remember also (other posters have said it), your goal is not to force her to go back to work full time - that is none of your business. Your goal is for your SS/CS agreement to reflect WHAT SHE *CAN* EARN.

Last edited by dinkyface; 11-08-2012 at 04:37 PM.
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 11-08-2012, 04:41 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 28
stressfultimes is on a distinguished road
Default

I want to base my income on this year, 2012. I'm usually around 100k or just over. We were together last year and she benefitted from the 135k already. It was one paticular deal that put me that high. What I am saying is that my 2012 will be an acurate reflection of my earnings. Its money that I don't have to give if they base in on me earning an extra 10k using the average!

2009 - 94k
2010 - 110k
2011 - 135k
2012 - 105k

Plus the fact that she could be earning another 10k.
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 11-08-2012, 04:49 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 28
stressfultimes is on a distinguished road
Default

Lol, yes, perhaps I am a little resentful. I would love to have that time with my son too. I also feel like I've been more than fair about everything and that she's after every penny now. Nevertheless, I'll keep your points in mind moving forward.
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 11-08-2012, 04:52 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,475
dinkyface will become famous soon enough
Default

You need to use a formula or rule that can be used EVERY YEAR to adjust CS. Agreeing on one specific number is not useful.

The fact that you were together for that 'averaging period' is irrelevant for the purposes of coming up with a formula/rule.

Your "it's money I don't have" complaint will bite you in the ass if you settle on using always the last year's income, then your income dips one year while you are still paying based on the previous year's higher income. Whenever income fluctuates, there will ALWAYS be an offset of at least 12-18 months between what you are currently making and what you are paying based on. Using the 3 year average reduces this discrepancy.

Also ... given that IN GENERAL you expect your income to increase each year, using the previous 3 year's income will result in a slightly lower number - sounds like a good deal to me.

Your "it's money I don't have" complaint can be used just as well by her, in her 4 day a week job. Always take you arguments and see how they can be used against you.

Last edited by dinkyface; 11-08-2012 at 05:00 PM.
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 11-08-2012, 04:55 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 28
stressfultimes is on a distinguished road
Default

Good point!
Closed Thread


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
Imputing Personal Corporate Income SomeGuy Financial Issues 13 10-03-2012 05:44 PM
Bad Faith & Imputing Income & Access Teenwolf Divorce & Family Law 17 12-20-2011 08:49 PM
Imputing Income - Does this sound appropriate? Linear Financial Issues 1 02-01-2011 12:55 AM
Imputing Income Advice Rioe Financial Issues 14 12-20-2010 11:30 PM
child support and EI beltane Financial Issues 3 06-07-2006 10:28 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:43 PM.