Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Child Support and partners income

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Child Support and partners income

    i have custody of the children 76% of the time. is my partner's income relevant when calcuating child support that my ex has to pay me? Is my partner's income ever relevant if my ex requests and gets 40% or more access? What are the laws in regards to partner's incomes when calculating child support? we are common law not legally married.

  • #2
    Child support is based on HIS income only in your custody situation. Yours doesn't come into play until you're on a 50-50 arrangement and your partner's income doesn't come into play ever.

    Google the child support guidelines and you can find tonnes of info on how it works and how much you/he can expect to recieve/pay.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by blinkandimgone View Post
      partner's income doesn't come into play ever..
      ... unless one of you claims 'Undue Hardship'. Google it, search on this forum, search in Canlii - you will find that this claim can only be used in certain unusual situations, and is rarely applicable.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by babygirl View Post
        i have custody of the children 76% of the time. is my partner's income relevant when calcuating child support that my ex has to pay me? Is my partner's income ever relevant if my ex requests and gets 40% or more access? What are the laws in regards to partner's incomes when calculating child support? we are common law not legally married.
        Hi,

        On a 60-40 split there will be an adjustment now just like 50-50. So, to fight for 60-40 to get full child support isn't how it goes these days from my understanding. So the same rules apply. Take the higher paying income's child support and subtract the lower paying child support and the difference goes to the lower income earner.

        Don't bother trying to go for a 60-40 just to keep child support. Judges are wise to the whole game. They will order 50-50. The 10% really isn't worth fighting over anymore. You might as well go 50-50 and deal with the real issues. Raising your children versus the money you get from the other parent for child support.

        Good Luck!
        Tayken

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by blinkandimgone View Post
          Child support is based on HIS income only in your custody situation. Yours doesn't come into play until you're on a 50-50 arrangement and your partner's income doesn't come into play ever.
          In your current custody arrangement, your partners income does not matter.

          However in the case of 50/50 access, when your income comes into play, your partners income SHOULD come into play IF your partner is supporting you in a way such that you don't make as much money as you would if you didnt have that partner. Meaning you don't work, or you work part time, or you work below you abilities, because your partner is helping to support you.

          In this case, to be fair, your partner can't support only you, you are a package deal and they are supporting your kids too. In this case, an greater income imputed to you for the purpose of CS calculation would be the fair thing to do.

          Also, even if you are working normally, but your partner is providing you with a standard of living that is significantly greater than what you could afford, it would also be fair to say that that partner is financially supporting you and then also in that case, you are a package deal, and that support is extended to your kids, and subsequently it SHOULD effect the CS calculation (ie more to your ex), if you want to be fair.

          What the courts do, I am not sure, I am stating my opinion on what would be fair.

          and it SHOULD go without saying that mixing support and access in the same thought process (ie thinking "mmm should I allow more access if it will effect my CS?"), is NOT in the best interest of the kids!!!!
          Last edited by billm; 08-19-2011, 12:24 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Thanks for the responses. Tayken and billm....i appreciate your input and truly agree that it is about the kids not the money. i have offered him 50/50 and he has refused. I always put the kids first. i was simply asking about about number/money this time but by no means is that what the entire situation is about.

            Comment


            • #7
              I was going to say what Billm did Your partner's income is only relevant if they are supporting you OR one of you claims undue hardship.

              As long as you are making at least full time hours @ min wage equivalent, it's a tough sell to impute you more based on your partner making more money.

              If you are making LESS that that, it's easier to just impute you full times hours/min wage than it is trying to use your partner's income

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by billm View Post
                In your current custody arrangement, your partners income does not matter.

                However in the case of 50/50 access, when your income comes into play, your partners income SHOULD come into play IF your partner is supporting you in a way such that you don't make as much money as you would if you didnt have that partner. Meaning you don't work, or you work part time, or you work below you abilities, because your partner is helping to support you.

                In this case, to be fair, your partner can't support only you, you are a package deal and they are supporting your kids too. In this case, an greater income imputed to you for the purpose of CS calculation would be the fair thing to do.

                Also, even if you are working normally, but your partner is providing you with a standard of living that is significantly greater than what you could afford, it would also be fair to say that that partner is financially supporting you and then also in that case, you are a package deal, and that support is extended to your kids, and subsequently it SHOULD effect the CS calculation (ie more to your ex), if you want to be fair.

                What the courts do, I am not sure, I am stating my opinion on what would be fair.

                and it SHOULD go without saying that mixing support and access in the same thought process (ie thinking "mmm should I allow more access if it will effect my CS?"), is NOT in the best interest of the kids!!!!
                I am in a 50/50 situation and my lawyer has advised me that the laws around CS for shared arrangements are not as clear cut as sole custody arrangements. While my partner's income would NOT be taken into consideration, my standard of living CAN BE. Which means, if my partner and I live in a nice house and my ex is in a 1 bedroom apartment, my CS can be increased so that he can maintain a similar standard of living. The thought being that the children should not suffer while at one parent's home. However, while this could come into play, she said most lawyers will recommend just using the offset method for simplicity.

                Comment


                • #9
                  CSAngel, you need a different lawyer. The law is perfectly clear cut, the child support guidelines are mandatory and the formula is spelled out clearly.

                  Any possible deviation from the guidelines is only for specific reasons and those reasons have to be clearly shown.

                  Standard of living only comes into play if one party is claiming undue hardship. There is some discretion on the part of judge's here, but there is plenty of case law precedent to know what is reasonable and what is bullshit.

                  If your ex wants a deviation from the guidelines they have to prove why, not just whine.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Mess View Post
                    CSAngel, you need a different lawyer. The law is perfectly clear cut, the child support guidelines are mandatory and the formula is spelled out clearly.

                    Any possible deviation from the guidelines is only for specific reasons and those reasons have to be clearly shown.

                    Standard of living only comes into play if one party is claiming undue hardship. There is some discretion on the part of judge's here, but there is plenty of case law precedent to know what is reasonable and what is bullshit.

                    If your ex wants a deviation from the guidelines they have to prove why, not just whine.
                    Wrong. Child support guideline states:

                    Shared custody

                    9. Where a spouse exercises a right of access to, or has physical custody of, a child for not less than 40 per cent of the time over the course of a year, the amount of the child support order must be determined by taking into account
                    (a) the amounts set out in the applicable tables for each of the spouses;
                    (b) the increased costs of shared custody arrangements; and
                    (c) the conditions, means, needs and other circumstances of each spouse and of any child for whom support is sought.


                    It's C. she's referring too. Unlike in a less that 60/40 split where the guidelines are VERY clear, shared is open to adjustment. Undue hardship or not. It doesn't explicitly say how to calculate an amount - only what to 'consider'.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      And read what I wrote. There is plenty of case law. Exceptions under that section are by far the minority of instances and you have show factual reasons, not just vague claims, to get exceptions.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Child support cannot be increased to help your ex live a more lavish or equal lifestyle.

                        There is only one calculation for child support and it is decided on your income solely.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Thank you for the discussion back and forth. There is alot to be considered. CS Angel - what you pointed out in Section 9 C is exactly what my lawyer read to me. Apparently my ex will be claiming undue hardship.

                          So here is my next question how do you meet or qualify as undue hardship? He made $102 last year, will make $90 this year, owns a house, just bought a brand new 2011 car, has been on 5 vacations in the last 1.5 and lives well beyond his means....charge charge charge. He has alot of bad debt and lawyers fees for family law related issues and his own criminal matter unrelated to me.

                          Thanks again

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            He doesn't stand a chance at an undue hardship claim, unless maybe you and your partner are millionaires.

                            Undue hardship is for people who aren't living beyond their means and are still struggling to get by.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              So true Rioe, my ex continually tried claimed bankruptcy and undue financial hardship, meanwhile he buys a new boat, motor and trailer and a new truck to haul it.

                              Good luck with claiming financial hardship moron.

                              Some people really should be assessed by a psychologist!!

                              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