No announcement yet.

Payee under-reporting income

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Payee under-reporting income


    Does anyone have any knowledge or experience with the payee (the one receiving child/spousal support) under reporting and/or intentionally unemployed for the purpose of skewing child/spousal support calculations?

    The payor goes by his line 150, but the payee is/was self-employed and stopped working during the divorce.

    Can income be imputed to the payee?
    Based on previous self-employed income?


  • #2
    I tried looking at it in Canlii, as I have a similar issue, however almost all of the cases I've seen the courts impute income to the paying spouse.

    With the spouse having stopped working during the divorce, you may be able to put forth an arguement that it was deliberate underemployment since it happened during the divorce. They're going to counter - they need more time for the kids, mental stress, soft economy

    I can see this being big for SS, for CS its going to impact s7 only, of which post-secondary will have a material impact.


    • #3
      s7 is special expenses?

      interesting points on how you think they might counter my argument that she's deliberately unemployed. The one I am hearing from the other side are two fold:

      1. its my fault (bogus!)
      2. since she is collecting welfare, if she worked, welfare would just claw it back (is that even a reasonable justification?)


      • #4
        Originally posted by bautista27 View Post
        2. since she is collecting welfare, if she worked, welfare would just claw it back (is that even a reasonable justification?)
        Does the recipient get the CS payments directly?

        If the party is on welfare my understanding is CS is most often assigned to the welfare agency. It may count as income for welfare purposes and trigger a claw back or adjustment.

        I have definitely seen a CS recipient imputed an income but only as a payor in a shared custody arrangement - where both parties are paying and net difference is exchanged. Best case for someone who's received welfare recently is to have a minimum wage salary imputed and that's unlikely but not unreasonable to ask for, if the party is physically and mentally capable of work.


        • #5
          I thought S7 was in proportion to income. Or, can the parties agree otherwise?


          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.