My Take on the joke that is our Family Law

[Mess]

Parent A has sole custody and earns $100k. Parent B has EOW access and earns $100k.

Parent A would be just fine supporting the child on their own and wouldn't "need" the CS that Parent B pays. It doesn't change the fact that Parent B should be paying to support their child according to their income level.

So change it so that Parent A is earning $10k instead of $100k. Of course some of the CS is going to pay for housing and furnishings and clothes and transportation for Parent A. Duh. Effectively this is a salary for day to day childcare. I don't see anything unfair about it.

The CS guidelines are written in a generic fashion without explanations and exceptions for the 10,000 possible circumstances so that it can minimize the arguing in court. You don't (or shouldn't) have to argue CS in court. This keeps a lot of people out of court. That's the intent. It's supposed to be generic, it's not supposed to be modified for every possible circumstance, it's a compromise to minimize legal costs. Now that doesn't stop people hiring lawyers and fighting, but it does cut it down.

[cashcow4ex]

Household income of $180k, and you think $24K of costs associated with raising three kids (housing, clothing, food, sports, saving for education, school costs, vacations, camps, ...) is too much?? I just don't agree - are you thinking about pets, or actual humans?


This is seriously flawed logic and what 'tax breaks' are you referring to?


Nope, we share them equally, and we each claim a dependent.


Living the dream



Nice assumption but totally wrong, my SS payments are based on her estimated career damage, of which I pay 2/3, and I am almost done with it, it is currently about $200 (it declines every year for 6 years - I used to (gladly) pay over $1000 - AND the amount or time table does not change regardless of what happens now).


What colour are your glasses then? You should try mine - makes all the difference.


Again I ask, what are YOUR numbers - I'm fine with mine, if you want to complain, why don't you state your situation instead of incorrectly analyzing mine.

Look I enjoy a good argument, but I think the tables are reasonable and reflect the true cost of raising kids - I think some people want to ignore the cost for a bigger house and all the other things that that add up, including utilities, vacations, and many other things.

.

As I said before if you have your kids 38% of overnights (for example) it is crazy that your CS is not reduced relative to someone that never sees their kids. But for full time with CP, or as in my case 50/50 the tables seem reasonable.

As for SS - I hate SSAG (though they work for some extreme cases), and I managed to avoid them, but it seems they are being used more and more - but as for CS, the tables seem fine to me.

Hey, when you split, your standard living goes down - a tough pill to swallow when in general people's standard of living usually goes up during their working life. For me, I didn't feel it as much because generally my ex did not work once we started having kids. After the split she retrained and went back to being an RN and making 60K or so, and her pay is increasing - I realize this makes all the difference in that that 'new' money coming in makes it all work so that it was not as much of a hit as others who have to make do with what was coming in before.

I am glad your living the dream life. However I on the other hand am not looking for the "Ex Husband of the Year Award".

Her salary 34,000 (net/ self employyed) + 10,464 (CS) + 3600 (SS) + 5292 (gov’t credits/breaks/claiming them as dependants) = $53,356.00 (net give or take 2k)

My Salary 58,000- 18,000 (taxes) – 14,064 (CS & SS) – 792.00 (college fund) – 828.00 (mandated life insurance) = $24,316.00 (net give or take 1k)

Keep in mind that I pay all the fuel costs associated with driving the 50km's to pick the up every Wednesday, drop them back off on Wednesday as well as picking them up every other Friday and Dropping them of On Sunday nights. Thats 800km a month without driving 1 inch for activities with them. 800km's at $1.30 a litre with the vehicle I drive is about an additional $95.00 a month. This also doesnt factor in all the S7 expenses.

I too have to maintain a residence with 3 bedrooms, a reliable vehicle, food, clothing, toys, and such. Also missing in the above totals is the cost to maintain the childrens health policies through my work at $63.00 a month.

Its not like I can move into a bachelor pad and worry just about myself.

My thought process isnt flawed at all. If she had sole custody and I never saw them I could understand. But the Gov't has it so I pay for the childrens quality of life at her house and mine. Thats 2 households that basically I am on the bill for.

So if you can honestly look at the totals above and tell me that the tables arent flawed and tilted completely to one side than your a better man than I am.

[billm]

...

Her salary 34,000 (net/ self employyed) + 10,464 (CS) + 3600 (SS) + 5292 (gov’t credits/breaks/claiming them as dependants) = $53,356.00 (net give or take 2k)

My Salary 58,000- 18,000 (taxes) – 14,064 (CS & SS) – 792.00 (college fund) – 828.00 (mandated life insurance) = $24,316.00 (net give or take 1k)

I wonder about those numbers...

Claiming a dependent reduces your tax, it is not income. What is the break down for the $5292 you added to her income? Do you pay tax on the SS or her?

You make 58K and pay 18K in taxes?

She is also required to maintain life insurance and college fund.

Also, you agreed to the $300/month (taxable to her) SS - you were not forced by the courts to accept this. And it was based on a net income of less than half what you state - you made that bed.

As for CS - you make 58K, and have 2? kids and pay $14/day/child. Does not seem unreasonable to me.

My thought process isnt flawed at all. If she had sole custody and I never saw them I could understand. But the Gov't has it so I pay for the childrens quality of life at her house and mine. Thats 2 households that basically I am on the bill for.

So if you can honestly look at the totals above and tell me that the tables arent flawed and tilted completely to one side than your a better man than I am.

umm, I already agreed with this point multiple times - that your CS should be effected by your parenting costs.

[cashcow4ex]

I wonder about those numbers...

Claiming a dependent reduces your tax, it is not income. What is the break down for the $5292 you added to her income? Do you pay tax on the SS or her?
She gets the child tax credits for both kids. I cant tell you what it is all for but she gets a cheque for $440 a month from the Gov't. On top of it she gets to declare them as dependants and further reduce her tax owing at the end of the year by well over $2000 for the 2 children.

You make 58K and pay 18K in taxes?
After union dues and work related expenses such as uniforms, yes that is what I lose.

She is also required to maintain life insurance and college fund.
I maintain the kids RESP's cause she wouldn't. As for life insurance, she maintains a $100k policy that she has had since she was 18. I had to go get more coverage which at my age cost me a great deal more.

Also, you agreed to the $300/month (taxable to her) SS - you were not forced by the courts to accept this. And it was based on a net income of less than half what you state - you made that bed.
I agree that I did agree to this. However We were already $6000 into mediation costs and I wasnt about to maintain the family home, my new home, as well as court costs over it while we hammered out all the details. At some point someone on my salary has to make a choice whether to bankrupt myself or not. I was fast approaching that point because I was paying the mortgage and bills on the family home, the family car, and my new apartment during mediation.

As for CS - you make 58K, and have 2? kids and pay $14/day/child. Does not seem unreasonable to me.
Wrong I make $58,000 a year before the Gov't and greedy Ex gets their hands on it. You say $14.00 a day for CS. Well once I am done paying the Gov't and Ex I have about $50.00 a day. Out of that we deduct, food, utilities, gas, S7 expenses, rent, insurance and car payment for the vehicle and all other expenses I am left with under $9.00 a day to live. So my $9.00 a day, hmmm well I guess I should start saving that for b-day gifts and x-mas gifts cause thats not in the budget, shit I hope neither of them ever need braces cause I guess I will need to take out a loan for that one.

My payments to my Ex pays her mortgage and car payment.....so her salary of approx $41,000 after monies from Gov't is what I have about $21,000 to pay with after I of course pay my S7 crap,fuel just to go see kids and health coverage.

Dont give me the crap that she needs it cause of the kids living with her. I have to keep a 3 bedroom home, I have to buy the kids their toys and cloths like her and pay utilities. The only damn thing she pays additional is the food for the time she has them. They are small and dont eat like a 400 pound trucker. I pay most of the S7 expenses 88% as well as the extraordinary expenses such as sports.

I dont give a rats a$$ what the CS table says. Its BULLSHIT!



umm, I already agreed with this point multiple times - that your CS should be effected by your parenting costs.

See above in red for my responses.

[HammerDad]

$6k in mediation costs? Were you there every day or something? My ex and I paid like $450 total for 3 one hour sessions. So about $150 a hour. The FLIC office also has subsidized mediation where I'd be paying $60-70 an hour. $6k seem absolutely rediculous.

[cashcow4ex]

I wish I was kidding. We ended up paying $7200 for mediation. It was $250.00 an hour. Keep in mind that we discussed stuff like dog support and what not. It went on for ever.

We did not qualify for subsidized mediation.

[karmaseeker]

Billm has agreed that those that are paying full amount and not being consideration of access time with the kids under 40% are NOT FAIR

Therefore the tables are NOT fair.

Should they be fair they could deduct 10% each 10% of access time.

Deadbeat see's kids nil - Full Table
Visiting Dad see's kids 10% - Full table deduct 10% to be used towards expenses while the kids are in his care.
Part time dad 20% - full table deduct 20%
30% - full deduct 30%

Then we wouldn't be paying twice. This would be fair.

[karmaseeker]

I wish I was kidding. We ended up paying $7200 for mediation. It was $250.00 an hour. Keep in mind that we discussed stuff like dog support and what not. It went on for ever.

We did not qualify for subsidized mediation.

Your ex sounds like a nutbar like my partners ex.

It was almost humourous to me when this weekend (little ones communion- None of the dad's side was invited to the party but we all went to the church to support bearing gifts and well wishes)- and she had the stupidity to ask me for copies of the pictures as she forgot her camera for her own kids big day - yeah, I'll get right on that.

[cashcow4ex]

Billm has agreed that those that are paying full amount and not being consideration of access time with the kids under 40% are NOT FAIR

Therefore the tables are NOT fair.

Should they be fair they could deduct 10% each 10% of access time.

Deadbeat see's kids nil - Full Table
Visiting Dad see's kids 10% - Full table deduct 10% to be used towards expenses while the kids are in his care.
Part time dad 20% - full table deduct 20%
30% - full deduct 30%

Then we wouldn't be paying twice. This would be fair.

That doesnt make sense to me. I see my kids about 25% of the time. I cant buy them 25% of a bike, or 25% of cloths. I still have to maintain a home for those children. So I am still buying everything she has to buy excpet for less food.

[WorkingDAD]

That doesnt make sense to me. I see my kids about 25% of the time. I cant buy them 25% of a bike, or 25% of cloths. I still have to maintain a home for those children. So I am still buying everything she has to buy excpet for less food.

at least that would be better than we have now )
I would repeat one more time. The idea when one parent with sole custody take full financials responsibility would change whole game. I am talking about thous who fight against dad wishes to have 50/50 with kids...

[karmaseeker]

That doesnt make sense to me. I see my kids about 25% of the time. I cant buy them 25% of a bike, or 25% of cloths. I still have to maintain a home for those children. So I am still buying everything she has to buy excpet for less food.

25% Back to you to use towards your kids while they are in your care is 25% better than nothing.

If you are paying 1000 table then you get 250 to buy a bike or put towards food and she gets 750 to help support the children.

Kids need child support. The how much is up for debate. And time spent at both houses needs to be addressed a lot more specifically than 1 cut off point.

Seems more fair to me - but then I am not ruler of the world and really can't change a darn thing so it is still just a fantasy of what fair COULD look like.

What would fair look like to you?

[HammerDad]

We did not qualify for subsidized mediation.

I make nearly the same as you ($56k'ish). And my ex makes more then me ($68k give or take a bit depending on OT). The Family Law Information Centre (FLIC, found at various family court houses in Ontario) offers mediation based off of income. Based off of my income (being the lower of the two) we were quoted I think $60/hour.....(could've been $70, but still way cheaper).

[HammerDad]

Personally, I believe when it comes to deducting the child, each parent should be able to deduct the child based on their proportionate amount of their income.

The reasoning for my theory is, the guidelines were established to provide that the child(ren) had an equal standard of living as their parents never broke up. Therefore, my c/s amount is (what has been determined by the guidelines) proportionate to what I would have contributed should my ex and I still be together.

Taking my situation into consideration, my income of $56k and my ex's of $68k. My proportionate amount for my daughters up-bringing is 43%. My ex claiming 100% of the child deductions is unfair to me, as she is only paying 57% of the actual cost of upbringing, and does not give me any credit for the amounts I contribute on my daughters behalf. I feel it is a form of unjust enrichmrent for my ex at best, or at worst a violation of my charter rights as my contribution to my child's upbring is not being treated equal under the Income Tax Act.

I don't think we should base deductions off of time with the child, but as to proportion of contribution to the child's upbringing. I also feel it is unfair to me (and those like me) as we have law that openly provides that each parent is not considered equal.

If each parent were able to claim their proportionate amount of child deduction based off of their incomes, that would be more representative of what is actually happening.

Side Note - that is only for those that can verify paying c/s. Deadbeats need not apply.

[cashcow4ex]

I make nearly the same as you ($56k'ish). And my ex makes more then me ($68k give or take a bit depending on OT). The Family Law Information Centre (FLIC, found at various family court houses in Ontario) offers mediation based off of income. Based off of my income (being the lower of the two) we were quoted I think $60/hour.....(could've been $70, but still way cheaper).

Well crap, where were you 2 years ago?

[WorkingDAD]

Well crap, where were you 2 years ago?

when I come to court house I do not even qualify for duty counsel (~$60k/ex 0). I do not know how get thous number HammerDad