Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

About to lie regarding income

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

  • About to lie regarding income

    My ex informed that he is about to file a motion to change stating his "taxable" income is 15000.00 (less than minimum wage). He owns his own construction business and has for over 20 years. Will a judge buy this?

  • #2
    There not enough information in your post to give you an informed "opinion." Who knows what a judge will buy? Are you interested in CS or SS? They're not based on "taxable income." More info please.

    Comment


    • #3
      This is just for child support. FRO has been after him for over a year. He is 19 months behind in his payments. Had a default hearing last month. The judge imputed his income almost a year ago at much more than 15000.00 due to the fact that he would not show up to hearings or file paper work. He owns a company with his brother and have for over 20 years.

      He sent me an email saying he is going to file a motion to change based on 15,000.00 taxable income. Said he just got his paperwork back from his accountant and thats all he made in 2009. He wanted to offer me a "deal" as he said my support would drop from 800.00/month to 200.00/month, he was offering me 400.00/month.

      I was told once by a lawyer that judges usually add 10,000 onto taxable income since that is not what CS is based on. However, I did not think he would be stupid enough to file papers stating 15,000. That is less than minimum wage.

      He owns a home, SUV and 2 pickup trucks.

      I guess I know he is lying and I am wondering what a judge will think. Should I get a lawyer? Or will the courts see through his lies and call him on it?

      I got a kid hoping to go to university in the fall and I need to make sure he is paying what is fair. This amount is not fair.

      Comment


      • #4
        Anything is possible. My ex has his own business and his taxable income for 2009 was over $100,000.00. However, once he laid his company's financial statement's on the table, the judge inputed ex's income to $35,000.00. He scolded my ex for over-paying himself. I have never heard of a judge doing such a thing but now not only is ex getting a reduction in CS, he is stating overpayment for 2008 and 2009. After 20 years of marriage where I stayed home with the kids Ex will not be paying me CS or SS. Furthermore now he claims I may have to pay him SS. (I returned to the workforce just before we were seperated.) Will a judge buy your ex's story? If your ex has the paper trail to prove his losses, the judge may well buy it. It can go either way. In my case, the judge really sided with my ex husband.

        Comment


        • #5
          @supar3 and @Holly,

          I'm a bit disturbed by your stay-at-home moms (probably) judgment. Businesses have lots of expenses and taxable income may be different from gross income determined for child support.

          Owning a company for 20 years doesn't mean you necessarily make a tone of money, when lots of businesses go bankrupt. And "lying" means frequently only that the other side sees things in a different manner. Sorry, I did not want to take sides (because I don't know your full stories), but your ways of saying things is simply mean and superficial.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by florio View Post
            @supar3 and @Holly,

            I'm a bit disturbed by your stay-at-home moms (probably) judgment. Businesses have lots of expenses and taxable income may be different from gross income determined for child support.

            Owning a company for 20 years doesn't mean you necessarily make a tone of money, when lots of businesses go bankrupt. And "lying" means frequently only that the other side sees things in a different manner. Sorry, I did not want to take sides (because I don't know your full stories), but your ways of saying things is simply mean and superficial.
            What's superficial is your take.

            Yes, the OP's may have misinterpreted the situation - they may even have a misguided sense of entitlement.

            But there is not nearly enough here for you to draw the "mean and superficial" conclusion you did.

            What's astonishing is that you acknowledged that and then went right ahead and judged them anyway.

            Comment


            • #7
              @dadtotheend,

              It's mean when you accuse someone of LYING and superficial when the only "proof" I've seen so far is if you own a business you cannot have income of less than 15,000. I worked for enough businesses in my life with LOSSES of more than 100K a month, so what's your problem, man? (or should I say Lady, judging by the way you reply)

              PS: I've seen that you considered "smelly" my 7 comments. From your 3,000 comments I "smell" you may be the owner or admin of this forum. What's "smelly" when I posted a topic first (you gave me initially a really dumb answer), and then I browsed this forum looking for other cases similar to my CS and separation problems, with feedback at some of them? Is this forum for interaction or not? Are we required to a maximal number of comments per day, or only "Dads To The End" can post thousands?

              Anyway, I've seen so far only me and you online here in last couple of hours, so you should rather be grateful someone brought additional feedback.

              Comment


              • #8
                I guess that may be some sort of rationalization.

                A business that has been operating for about 20 years is somewhat suggestive that it is established.

                True, a business or individual may go bankrupt, after 20 years, but that isn't the situation here.

                True, many business people self elect a reduced salary only to reduce the personal income tax they pay on such, along with tax rebates they might be eligible for. In essence, that is not a true reflection of the business income or assets in itself.

                Who works for 15K per year in a business when they could earn more at a minimum wage position full time as the originating poster stated?

                Someone looking to bail on their financial obligations to their children comes to my mind.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Well, he finally served me with actual paper work. His business income was 70,000 and taxable was 15,000. He wants to pay on 15,000. Of course, cash jobs are not in either amount. I have been told that CS is not based on taxable income and thats simply a number for revenue Canada.

                  I just don't see how it is possible to pay on on 15,000 of 70,000. It costs him more to work than he makes? Obviously, he lives off of more than that as he has a mortgage, car payments, etc. I believe a pack a day smoking habits runs around 4000.00/year. Its simply not reasonable that he lives off that little amount.

                  I only want what is fair. He wants to pay as little as he can get away with. This I do not understand. These are his children and I thought parents want whats best for their children. They do not nickle and dime them on CS. I am not asking for a crazy amount of money and I am willing to negotiate, but I am not willing to accept 215.00/month for 2 kids. Thats just silly.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    BTW~ I am not a stay at home mom. I work full time and have been putting in 10 hours weekly of overtime for almost 2 years now to help make up for the lack of CS. I have kids to support.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      How on earth did they qualify for that mortgage considering their personal income is about 15K per year. The mortgage documents will reveal a closer estimation of their true income. Request true copy of their mortgage documents.

                      Their numbers don't make sense and sadly, what they are proposing for support of their children, is far less than what they spend on their smoking habit. I suspect, income will be imputed to them as their own paperwork discrepancies will come back to haunt.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        The mortgage is 14 years old. He lives in the home we bought together after the wedding. The down payment was supplied by my now deceased grandmother. I believe there is 5 years left on the mortgage and the house is paid off.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by logicalvelocity View Post

                          Who works for 15K per year in a business when they could earn more at a minimum wage position full time as the originating poster stated?
                          Many people, who believes in the future or people who rather feed others than making more money for themselves, or people who value the relative freedom more than money, or people who are smart but can't get along well with others in a workplace.
                          One can decide to work for somebody else for 100.000, or work for himself for 15.000 per year now, and realistically hoping that the business they build will worth millions in a few years. There are business owners who has less money to spend than what they pay for their employees. There are people who are unable to work in a workplace setting because of personality issues. They have the choice to go on long term disability or have their own business, set their own goals, choose their own colleagues. So there can be many, many reasons why someone makes less as a business owner than could make as an employee.

                          From the original post it seems the guy paid cs for years based on the business income, which is vastly different from the income he could have spent privately and now the judge realized this. How many times we have seen the opposite here, when the judge imputed the earning of the payer dumbly using the companies retained earning?

                          Anyways, I don't think that the original question can be answered without seeing the books (and maybe the off-the-books financials) of that company, and we can't even assume that the judge is not a complete idiot.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            He has been in business for himself for over 20 years. There is really no overhead as he is a service provider. He has no employees with the exception of the business partner (his brother) and he has worked in the past for celebrities and has had some of his work published in magazines. There is no store or warehouse. He works out deals from his home or in his truck on the phone. Customers call and he goes to them. When we were together about 80% of his business was cash. I doubt it is that high now but not gone completely.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              It's also unfortunate that many individuals choose to believe in the future and feed others at the expense of their children and their CS obligation by some sort of less than honest hardship claim only as a means to delay or attempt to get out of their responsibilities.

                              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