Please help us understand- UCCB, CTB & Section 7

[Berner_Faith]

I have looked through the site and found many different threads on this topic, but for some reason we just cannot wrap our heads around it.

How are section 7 expenses divided in the following situation?

Mom:

Line 150- $36,550
UCCB- $1200
CTB- $450 per month or $5400 annually
CS- $428 per month or $5136

Dad:

Line 150- $29,300

For Section 7 purposes, is Mom's income $48,286 and Dad's income $29,300?

Making to total income $77,586, meaning Parent A pays 62% and Parent B pays 38%?

With a combined total income of $77,586, would things like baseball ($100 per child once a year), swimming ($65 per child once per year) be Section 7?

For babysitting... Mom didn't claim any babysitting fees, even though the children were at a babysitter (Mom's friend). We assume this is because the babysitter does not claim it as income. Dad has not paid babysitting since separation in 2009 because Mom will no provide a proper receipt. The only receipt he ever received was typed with the sitters name and amount, but did not include SIN # or any other information for the sitter. The total cost was just over $700 for 7 months, so approximately $100 a month.

If Mom is not providing receipts, despite Dad asking, can Mom come back and ask for past babysitting fees? Dad is not opposed to paying, but would like a proper receipt and seeing as Mom is not claiming any babysitting costs, it is safe to assume everything is under the table.

We really are confused on how this works... please help!

[SadAndTired]

I have looked through the site and found many different threads on this topic, but for some reason we just cannot wrap our heads around it.

We really are confused on how this works... please help!

It is hard to understand, isn't it? I just emailed my lawyer about this yesterday and this was his reply.

The way this works is that you deduct the spousal support from (Ex)'s income and add it to yours and then do the percentage calculation, at $(amt removed) per month spousal, and those incomes, it is approximately 80 to 20%

So, in my lawyer's opinion, UCCB, CS and CTB simply don't factor into the equation.

BUT, the actual formula goes like this....

Available income = $36,550 Mom's Income + $29,300 Dad's Income
Available income = $65800

Dad $29,300/$65800 =45%

Mom $36,550/$65800 = 55%

(I used to think you just divided Dad by Mom but that isn't right.)

As far as I am aware, no receipt = no payment. I certainly wouldn't pay if I couldn't have a valid receipt.

[EDITED to add: I specifically asked about CS and UCCB and whether those were included in the calculation. He said no.]

[knackered]

Berner_Faith you were usually the one giving me advice on my messed up babysitting situation!!!

We had lawyers do our amendment for babysitting in 2011. Ex's CCTB got added to her line 150 for her yearly income to calculate our section 7 proportionate share.
There is no spousal support in our situation--so I don't know if that makes a difference or not?
After that I don't know how they came up with the formula.
They also have in the agreement that her $100 UCCB gets taken directly off the monthly amount.

Ex was supposed to provide me with a receipt on a monthly basis stating the total amount she paid the babysitter, upon receiving the receipt, I was to calculate my share and pay ex within 20 days.

Ex never gave me any receipts. Instead she was sending me e-mails where she would just type up the weeks and amounts beside it for each month.

(ex claimed that she paid $580 a month in child care fees on her financial statement, but not once did she send me an e-mail saying she paid $580...she works a Mon-Fri 8 hour shift...but her babysitting bill is never consistent...every week was a different amount, one month she could haves said $430 and the next month she could have said $950)

I told my lawyer what was going on/her not giving any receipts/sending those e-mails instead. Lawyer advised me to pay based on the e-mails, in case ex came up with receipts at end of year/didn't want me to owe large sum. So I followed lawyers advice/paid ex monthly based on these e-mails in good faith that she'd have receipts at the end of the year/they'd match

End of year came...ex hadn't gave any receipts.
January 2013 ex sends another e-mail with weekly amounts for the month, expecting me to pay.

I told her I wasn't paying until she provided me with the 12 receipts for 2012 year and continued to give ongoing receipts for 2013.

She magically was able to come up with 12 receipts--Problem--11 out of the 12 receipts did not match the e-mailed amounts she sent/ amount I paid her based on.

She also has refused to disclose her CCTB this year.
So I currently am not paying her...she keeps threatening to take legal action at MY cost.
I just keep telling her to communicate to my lawyer to settle the matters legally.
January 2013, ex sends me an e-mail

[Berner_Faith]

I thought we had it all figured out and we always thought that benefits were added to her income for this purpose. Like I mentioned, she has yet to provide receipts, but she made mention to him the other day about not receiving any section 7 expenses and when he asked about receipts she said she would make them up.

We don;t pay without receipts (and have never received one). The only reason we know her CTB is because of her income tax return where it gives the estimate. She doesn't think that her benefits should factor into any calculations, but I always thought they did. So now we are all confused.

He told her she is welcome to get clarification from a lawyer if she wishes (at which time we will then find a lawyer as we no longer live in the area his old lawyer was). But she doesn't want to spend the money. I don't understand why things have to be so difficult. He has no issue paying, but he isn't just handing over money anymore.

[dinkyface]

From: CanLII - 2006 BCSC 443 (CanLII)

"[19] The plaintiff also receives $7,725.84 in federal Child Tax Benefit and B.C. Family Bonus payments. This amount is not calculated as part of the plaintiff’s income for the purposes of determining the proportion of extraordinary expenses to be paid by each party. Income is a defined term under the Guidelines; in this case, the plaintiff’s income is calculated pursuant to s. 16 of the Guidelines, which provides:

Subject to sections 17 to 20, a spouse's annual income is determined using the sources of income set out under the heading "Total income" in the T1 General form issued by the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency and is adjusted in accordance with Schedule III.

Amounts received under Child Tax Benefit and the B.C. Family Bonus are not included under the heading “Total Income” on the T1 General form; therefore, it is not appropriate to include these amounts in the plaintiff’s income when determining the parties’ proportionate share of extraordinary expenses under s. 7(2) of the Guidelines."

From the same case, the judge ruled that yearly expenses of $500 (sports) + $250 (school activities/trips) per child to be covered by CS.

"[24] The plaintiff claimed, as an extraordinary expense, approximately $2,000 per year for sports and other extra-curricular activities for the four children and approximately $1,000 per year for school costs such as field trips and other school activities. These are normal expenses that are covered by the payment of child support. They are not extraordinary as contemplated by the statute and therefore are not shared under s. 7."

[HappyMomma]

From the Family Law Act:

Subsidies, tax deductions, etc.
(3) Subject to subsection (4), in determining the amount of an expense referred to in subsection (1), the court must take into account any subsidies, benefits or income tax deductions or credits relating to the expense, and any eligibility to claim a subsidy, benefit or income tax deduction or credit relating to the expense. O. Reg. 159/07, s. 2.
Universal child care benefit
(4) In determining the amount of an expense referred to in subsection (1), the court shall not take into account any universal child care benefit or any eligibility to claim that benefit. O. Reg. 159/07, s. 2.


So for childcare UCCB does not get counted. CCTB DOES. And childcare expense splitting must be include any tax deductions either parent receives.


Hope that helps.

[SadAndTired]

CSAngel, your posted info seems to contradict dinkyface's? No wonder this is so confusing......

[OntarioMomma]

I'm looking forward to these responses too. My ex hasn't ever paid any childcare expenses, and I do provide him receipts.

I think your ex is doing the right thing in not paying without them. I believe she could only obtain retro payments if she could prove she was requesting payment with the proper documentation.
If she didn't bother asking or providing receipts, I doubt she would see a penny in retro childcare payments.

[NBDad]

UCCB is taxable income. It gets factored into the income tax return already.

CCTB does NOT typically get counted, as it's "for the children" and is governed solely by the Income Tax Act.

If you want to see what she is claiming for childcare, ask for the full return. That's technically what is supposed to be exchanged anyway, so you can see all the various deductions.

[Mess]

A comment about the case Dinkyface cited.

This goes against what my lawyer explained to me, and there seems to be no question among the several lawyers that my ex and I have used that CCTB is used to calculate section 7 expenses.

My amateur interpretation: The judge in Gold v. Romhanyi made an error.

The section 16 that the judge refers to is supposed to be taken as ruling the calculation of income for the purpose of child support payments, not section 7.

This would be because section 7 has it's own rules for calculation of income. Section 7 specificly states that various tax credits, subsidies, etc. ARE to be taken into account. This is in contradiction to section 16. Section 16 cannot override the description given in section 7 for the calculation of of section 7. That section 7 goes further and excludes the UCCB from the calculation further indicates that section 16 is not being applied.

In short, section 7 has it's own method which is described in section 7 for section 7. This is the interpretation used by the judges, lawyers, and law clerks in Toronto that dealt with our case.

That being said, of course this B.C. judge is a judge and I am not. So who am I to say they are wrong. But that reasoning has not been applied in my court case.

[FightingForFamily]

My situation follows Mess' and other's explanation of using a "net income" for S7 splitting.

Income for S7 includes all amounts that are available to be spent on the child. Child support, CCTB, UCB, CDB, etc is all money literally earmarked for child related expenses and so it is counted on her side.

Not included in my income is the spousal support since it has already been paid to my ex and is NOT available for child related expenses on my side. I also exclude a few other expenses I cover for the child such as health insurance premiums. Again, this money is already spent for the child and shouldn't be counted as still available for other S7 expenses.