Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Political Issues

Political Issues This forum is for discussing the political aspects of divorce: reform to divorce laws, men's rights, women's rights, injustices in the divorce system, etc.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #71 (permalink)  
Old 02-21-2014, 04:19 PM
arabian's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 9,965
arabian will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toutou View Post
The same goes for spousal support, while the starting point is gross income, income tax and CS amount are taken out to bring it down to net disposable income.
This is certainly not true - certainly not in my case.
Reply With Quote
  #72 (permalink)  
Old 02-21-2014, 04:20 PM
Hand of Justice
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: In the Shadows
Posts: 3,146
Links17 is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
This is certainly not true - certainly not in my case.
Its more like that in Quebec, they take a more holistic view of how much money each house has.
Reply With Quote
  #73 (permalink)  
Old 02-21-2014, 04:22 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,702
DowntroddenDad will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by arabian View Post
This is certainly not true - certainly not in my case.
Not in my case either. For me, it is simply table based, and they use my gross income. My SS did not go up when my CS went down, for example (child became an adult).
Reply With Quote
  #74 (permalink)  
Old 02-21-2014, 04:23 PM
arabian's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 9,965
arabian will become famous soon enough
Default

How or if my ex paid income tax was of no relevance.

You have to remember that many people are self employed.

SS is unlike CS. There are guideline ranges, however, SS is decided on a case-by-case basis.

Wouldn't my ex just love to pay SS based on his line 150 !!!! Dream on!
Reply With Quote
  #75 (permalink)  
Old 02-21-2014, 04:26 PM
FB_ FB_ is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,407
FB_ will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MS Mom View Post
I stopped reading when I got to "payroll deductions don't affect your net income".

The difference between Gross and Net is Payroll Deductions.
Actually it has nothing to do with payroll deductions.

Your NET income on your notice of assessment is completely different than you NET on your pay stub. It's your NOA that counts not the bottom line of your pay stub.

I have a ton of "OTHER" deductions coming off my pay. Almost $400 per pay for car insurance, investments, rrsps, benefits, LTD...

However my tax return shows none of these it only shows net of taxes not other deductions.

As mentioned by Links the additional cost of having more kids is not in line with the amount more you have to pay.

The other problem is that if a parent has 39% access they still need to have accommodations suitable to have the child at their house 39% of the time. These are all FIXED costs... Groceries and other variable expenses are minimal IMO. The CS guidelines don't take any of this into account.
Reply With Quote
  #76 (permalink)  
Old 02-21-2014, 04:26 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,151
MS Mom is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DowntroddenDad View Post
Not in my case either. For me, it is simply table based, and they use my gross income. My SS did not go up when my CS went down, for example (child became an adult).

Good point. If one affects the other, then it will change as kids age out of CS. SS shouldn't be going up because there is no longer a need to support kids. That would be truly unfair.
Reply With Quote
  #77 (permalink)  
Old 02-21-2014, 04:27 PM
FB_ FB_ is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,407
FB_ will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by arabian View Post
How or if my ex paid income tax was of no relevance.

You have to remember that many people are self employed.

SS is unlike CS. There are guideline ranges, however, SS is decided on a case-by-case basis.

Wouldn't my ex just love to pay SS based on his line 150 !!!! Dream on!
As it should.
Reply With Quote
  #78 (permalink)  
Old 02-21-2014, 04:28 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,151
MS Mom is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FB_ View Post
Actually it has nothing to do with payroll deductions.

Your NET income on your notice of assessment is completely different than you NET on your pay stub. It's your NOA that counts not the bottom line of your pay stub.

I have a ton of "OTHER" deductions coming off my pay. Almost $400 per pay for car insurance, investments, rrsps, benefits, LTD...

However my tax return shows none of these it only shows net of taxes not other deductions.

As mentioned by Links the additional cost of having more kids is not in line with the amount more you have to pay.

The other problem is that if a parent has 39% access they still need to have accommodations suitable to have the child at their house 39% of the time. These are all FIXED costs... Groceries and other variable expenses are minimal IMO. The CS guidelines don't take any of this into account.
Tax returns, sure - when it's all said and done and calculated. Absolutely. But, paystubs have been sufficient enough to make CS orders. Mine current CS is based on a paystub, not his NOA.

But, what about the 50% garnishment of NET in place?
Reply With Quote
  #79 (permalink)  
Old 02-21-2014, 04:40 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,350
Beachnana is on a distinguished road
Default

It will not matter what laws are passed, what default custody is put in place because its all up for interpretation by lawyers and judges. And once they have done spending all your money and you have an agreement our current support systems within Provincial and Federal Public Service will never be able to support or enforced that agreement.

For example
In Ontario FRO is ineffective and inconsistent in administration of what should be a simple process. Collecting payments from the payee and depositing into the receivers account. A court clerk should be feeding the agreement information into a computer system, within 24 hours of it being signed. On the agreed upon day for payment the system waits for the payment. If none comes it will now wait 24 hours to allow for emergencies and for the payment to be deposited and if it is not then the system garnish wages at source automatically. This information would be mandatory given at the signing of the agreement. If there is no income source or that parent has absconded then a warrant for their arrest is now generated.

But no Ontario sets up a clumsey, inefficient paper driven ( who uses a fax nowadays?) grinding machine that takes months to set up your accounts, assigns you some government worker who if you are lucky actually gives a sh@@ about their job and is capable to do it correctly. Then they allow it to be driven by the "clients" - the receiver has to register, the payee is sent information so they can register and if they choose ignore the letter, they are sent another polite reminder and so on. The payee can set up their own payment schedule - the receiver can push for enforcement actions to be processed. Too many breakdowns in the system allowed; too much choice allowed; too many people involved in the management of the file.

So my point is and I do have a point! Laws are only as good as the people who manage the day to day operation of those laws and our government has and always will do a crappy job in Family Law. It is not revenue generating so its not important to support.

Just take a look at Revenue Cananda and see how an organisation which is motivated to collect money for the government is set up with the best computerized system, the best staff and a system which cross references your input with everyone elses. You cannot collect rent and not declare it, because someone is claiming they paid that rent and the system will catch you. But when it comes to administering money for our children the government choses an ineffiencent clumsey system out of the arc. Why? because this is not a revenue stream for the government and so they do not care.
Reply With Quote
  #80 (permalink)  
Old 02-21-2014, 04:44 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,151
MS Mom is on a distinguished road
Default

Well said on FRO. They're a lovely bunch of coconuts aren't they?
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
Order wording concerning travel letter. HappyMomma Divorce & Family Law 4 06-18-2013 09:27 PM
Letter from CRA FB_ Financial Issues 5 05-03-2013 12:04 PM
Can I have help to Vet this letter to Other Side's laywer please E-Gal Financial Issues 2 10-23-2012 05:14 PM
Canada Child tax benefit CCTB letter and female presumption agreatdad Financial Issues 13 07-23-2012 01:56 PM
Asking for comments on my draft response letter Margaret-Krupa Divorce & Family Law 14 04-24-2012 03:48 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:09 AM.