Tweet
Hello. I am new to posting here, but have been reading this forum for about 6 months. Any advice you could pass on would be appreciated. I am the NCP with over 40% custody of our children. The court order is dated in the year 2000 with minor changes along the way. Child support was designated at a little less than the table amount plus daycare expenses. This amount has not changed. The children no longer need daycare, and haven’t had this expense for 2 years. In 2004 I claimed one child as a dependant on my income tax form, ( I called Revenue Canada on this issue twice and they Oked this). Revenue Canada later decided that I could not claim a child as a dependant as I pay child support. I was not aware of this stipulation at the time, nor was anyone that I talked to at Revenue Canada at the time. So, I owe them a whack of money. Paying them back is drowning me financially. Here are my questions. Can I get a credit for child care that I am still paying? Can I go to court on an undue hardship clause, or strive for 50/50 time, as I absolutely can not provide any quality of life, even before having to pay Revenue Canada back? The difference in household incomes is about 3 to 1 as I work part time, receive no government assistance for the children and pay child support, where as my former spouse receives child tax benefit, can claim one child as a dependant, works full time and receives child support. What can I do? I am at my wits end. The financial situation for me is getting worse every month. I can barely feed the children, never mind offer any extras. Thanks for your time.
-
-
Your post definitely highlights how the balance is too far one way. As an involved parent, you are getting hit twice... you pay for everything, then pay again. And as a paying parent (e.g. CS and/or SS) you do not get a break anywhere. The double standards and complete lack of common sense in the "system" is staggering.
Lets just look at the ones that hit you:
- you cannot share the CTB because you are not 50-50... even if you were, you have to prove your case to CRA... so you still might not get it... I know, I just spent 6 months working with them on why their policies are wrong... I still haven't seen a cheque
- same with the UDC benefit... still fighting over that one
- your ex though, just fills in the form and the cheques are in the mail
- CRA disqualifies you from claiming a dependent since you pay child support - I find that one completely wacko... since a court may order support... or not... it is such a nebulous factor for deteriming dependancies... so basically a judge may take away your right for a tax break...
- your ex though can claim the dependant... so that is a nice little 1.5K to 3K refund... that is not tracked or factored into anything
- if anything, you should be able claim your ex as a dependent to you... right!
- your ex can deduct legal fees for support and more support, you cannot deduct for lowering support or for custody or access costs... interesting
- your ex's income is not a factor... so with tax benefits, tax dedeuctions, and your ex's own income, their SOL could be much higher than yours... so who is making sure your SOL is acceptable for the children... no one
- section 7 expenses are based on gross income... yet after you pay taxed child support, and your ex receiving tax-free support... the person with the higher gross (usually the paying parent) actually may have less disposable income after paying section 7 (especially daycare!) than the receiving parent
- as the paying parent, working PT is a no-no... any judge will most likely impute your income to a FT position... the receiving parent can not work, or work PT or do whatever... without imputed income (it does happen... but usually not)
Sorry, I could go on and on... but the "system" is so unbalanced it just boggles the mind. There are clearly two sets of rules 90% of the time. The trick to the "system" is figuring out that 10%.
I have two questions: what do you think will happen with 50-50? And, what child care deductions are you talking about since your children are out of daycare?
Undue hardship is really hard to make work. If you really, really want to go that route, we can show you how the formula works.
Finally, you can talk to a CRA agent about making a payment plan. They really don't care how long you take to pay them back, as long as they are getting money. -
Hi Decent dad.Thanks for the reply. I was hoping that I could acheive a 50/50 split of time with the children so that we can have a full weekend together, and so that CS could be figured out on an offset basis. I am not sure if that is the correct name, but what I mean is when both parents' income is taken into account and CS for both parents is figured out, and payment is the difference. That would give me a chance to maybe make ends meet every month. Is the offset method THE usual method when there is a 50/50 split?
The child care is not very much. Before and After school care, which has not been needed, like I mentioned for over 2 years. I am still paying it!
What is a UDC benefit?
I am interested in what it takes to prove undue hardship.
I have made a plan with CRA to pay back the debt, I just want that monkey off my back.
You are right on every point that you have made on here. Any other information that you can provide for me would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you.Comment
-
I am still a little confused about the child care. Is the child care ordered into the CS amount? Why are you paying it, yet the children are not needing/using it? If it is part of a court order, you have to get that changed. I would also ask for a retroactive refund. BTW, court ordered section 7 expenses included in the CS amount are brutal... especially things like daycare which provide a tax deduction.
UDC - Universal Daycare Benefit - $100 per month per child under 6
As you stated you are over 40% already and paying less than the table amount (via a court order). Was the less than table amount for the 40% rule? Because if you go back now for reduction due to 50%, it might not work. Anyway, here is my take on any aspect of Family Law:
1) What does the law say
2) What would you expect (i.e. common sense)
3) What most likely will happen
So regarding going to offseting CS payments when 50-50:
1) The law 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.
2) What would you expect (i.e. common sense)
Offsetting CS amounts.
3) What most likely will happen
Well, much has been said about this. Offsetting is common sense. In mediated agreements, in self-made agreements, even judges, would simply go offset. But the trend is not so. And with the Contino SCC decision providing zero direction in formalizing the offset approach, you and everyone else are back to square one. But now with the full weight of the SCC's heavily biased against-the-payor decision landing on you. So it is up to how well you present your case and the judge-du-jour. But, you already got a reduction for being over 40%, so I am not sure they will reduce it again. BTW, this again is another (of 100's) of double standards. Have the child for more than 60% and you get the table amount - no questions asked. But, if you have 50-50, the payor must spend 5K-10K, prove that they deserve an adjustment, etc., etc. Even split custody folks have a set formula!
That SCC decision IMO just added more fuel to the sole-custody winner-take-all battles.
Undue hardship is fairly simple. Take your income, subtract your CS (and a few other things). Take your ex's income, add CS (and a few other things). Divide the final number by a set value. The person with the higher result has the higher SOL. But, a judge only uses that as a reference for reducnig support. The key wording is *may* in the CSG is... "Undue hardship 10. (1) On either spouse’s application, a court may award an amount of child support that is different from the amount determined under any of sections 3 to 5, 8 or 9 if the court finds that the spouse making the request, or a child in respect of whom the request is made, would otherwise suffer undue hardship.
BTW, here is a really handy guide for calculating shared parenting and undue hardship. The stuff on shared parenting in the guide is enough to make your blood boil.
http://justice.gc.ca/en/ps/sup/pub/guide/guide.pdfComment
-
Thanks again Decent Dad. You certainly are committed to helping people and it is very much appreciated. Is there any way that I could send an e-mail message to you, or could you e-mail me, as I think that I allow others to e-mail me? I know you are very busy with your own legal stuff and constantly help others on here.
Thanks for your time.Comment
-
Unfortunatey Private Messages (PM) was disabled on this site.
You can e-mail me at:
reformtheact@gmail.comComment
-
Comment
Comment