Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CPP disability children's benefit

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • CPP disability children's benefit

    Situation is that parents are divorced. They have shared custody week on/off basis. Father receives CPP disability. He also receives the children benefit. This is not considered income as it is for the children and is paid to them through custodial parent until they are 18, which is when this benefit will be directly paid to the children.

    Question is, shared custody and CRA automatically gives both parents half for the children child tax benefit. It was adjusted directly by them once they were made aware of shared custody.

    Since children are shared equally, would the CPP disability, children benefit be also shared? It's payment for the kids but through custodial parent. Both parents share equally so both should get half, right?

    Can't find any info on that . However CPP did say on phone it should be shared. Mother applied but got refused as other parent is collecting it. They advised talk to father to pay u half, or one child cheque.

    Mother doesn't want to stir anything unless it's confirmed that she should receive half. Chances are father will refuse and a motion will be filed by mother.

    Please help and advise how to go about this. If there is caselaw that says it should be split in shared custody situation that would be great. Please help!

  • #2
    is the one getting the money on the behalf of the kids giving it all to the kids?

    Comment


    • #3
      Kids are very young under 10.

      Comment


      • #4
        Anyone who can help?

        Comment


        • #5
          Wow, no one here can help?????

          Comment


          • #6
            Search for "cpp disability "child benefit" support" on CanLII

            Comment


            • #7
              Children receive cpp disability... Why? If it's related to one parent's disability I can't see how that should be shared with the other parent. But I really have no idea or experience, just seems odd.

              Comment


              • #8
                There's a Child Disability Benefit which is available to families who care for a child under 18 with a disability (who would qualify for the disability amount if that child were over 18). Maybe that's what the OP is referring to. However I don't think it has anything to do with CPP.

                If child is the one with the disability and both parents are equally involved in caring for the child, then the benefit should be shared between them. But if the adult is the one with the disability and is receiving some sort of benefit through CPP, I don't see why it should be shared with the other parent.

                Comment


                • #9
                  "A disabled contributor's child benefit for the child of a person receiving a CPP disability benefit – a monthly payment for a natural or adopted child or a child who is in the care and custody of the person receiving a CPP disability benefit."

                  This is a payment to help a disabled parent care for their kids.

                  A quick read thru of the canlii cases seemed to show that if the benefit was $100/mo (paid to the child or CS recipient), then the disabled parent's CS obligations would be reduced $100/mo.

                  So no, it is not shared. It is solely to help the disabled parent.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I'm with DF, if one parent is disabled, why should the other non disabled parent be entitled to any of it?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      But I see the parents here have shared custody, so supposedly offset CS. That's where the problem starts.

                      With offset CS, each parent (supposedly) contributes according to tables, so higher earner pays the difference so that the 'kid spend' in each household can be equal.

                      The old problem is that really higher earner should be paying HALF the difference, but even though LOGICAL, apparently that is not accepted.

                      Now we have the similar situation ... one parent's obligations are reduced by x/month because of a disability (where logically, should be reduced by only HALF of x/month). I think that impacts where the child's benefit $ should go .. as (hopefully) explained below.

                      On the assumption that the disabled parent is the net CS payor, here's my reasoning for it all going to the net CS receiver:

                      1) because of net payor's disability, their income is 20K less, so their table amount is 3K less, so offset CS paid is 3K less (so the net recipient bears more of the weight of the disability than if using LOGICAL method).
                      2) because of disability, child gets 1k cpp benefit. This should go to the net recipient to compensate for #1.

                      If the disabled parent is the net CS recipient...
                      1) because of net recipient's disability, their income is 20K less, so their table amount is 3k less, so offset CS received is 3K more (so the net payor bears more of the weight of the disability than if using LOGICAL method).
                      2) because of disability, child gets 1k cpp benefit. This should go to the net payor, to compensate for #1.

                      So I think it all depends on who is net payor/recipient. But this is a result of the non-logical offset CS method.

                      No idea if my 'logic' is followable...
                      Last edited by dinkyface; 10-16-2015, 12:07 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Then again .... since the CS offset method is 'officially fair', and so, the benefit should be paid into both households equally, to preserve the ability to 'spend equally'.

                        In other words, my prior argument would require some official acknowledgement that the cs offset method is 'unfair to the net payor', and that's probably not going to happen in court.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I am thinking (and in now way is what I write based on law) that morally the money belongs to the kids or to help the person look after the kids. Based on the disability they may need help with the kids when they have them due to their limitations. If they don't need the money to help look after the kids then why not put that money into an education fund for the kids or even buy some Canada Savings bonds or something that become mature when the kids hit 18?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            SOTS - so you see it as assisting with increased costs relating to disability, not as compensating for the parent's lower earning power. I would agree with that if it was the child who was disabled, not the parent....
                            but one parent's lower earning power affects both households (because of CS paid), so if it is really for the child, then it should help out both households.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The child disability benefit is payable to a disabled parent, because they are disabled. A non-disabled parent isn't eligible for it and shouldn't receive it. After you're divorced, you can't profit off tax breaks that your ex is eligible for. Your finances are separated. Maybe you have to pay a bit more in CS than you would if your ex were not disabled, but that doesn't mean you get his/her disability benefits.

                              Comment

                              Our Divorce Forums
                              Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
                              Working...
                              X