Child Support

[dantek]

My ex-husband is claiming his group insurance plan from his employer as a special expense on the child support form to lower the monthly payment. I understand that this is justified although in this case the employer is paying for it fully (100%) therefore it is a benefit for him but not necessarily an expense. Is he entitled to claim and deduct this expense from child support payments?

[DowntroddenDad]

My ex-husband is claiming his group insurance plan from his employer as a special expense on the child support form to lower the monthly payment. I understand that this is justified although in this case the employer is paying for it fully (100%) therefore it is a benefit for him but not necessarily an expense. Is he entitled to claim and deduct this expense from child support payments?

Are you sure the employer is paying for it fully?

In most companies, the company pays part, and the employee pays part. The employees contribution is deducted at source, so you would see it on a pay stub.

And there are often co-pays and deductables involved.

Personally, I pay them and don't try to take the amounts off the child support.

Special expenses should ALWAYS require a receipt. Make him provide it. That would require him providing a paystubb.

[dantek]

Yes, sure it is fully being paid from paystub and from employer letter (no deduction at source).

I have the paystub and here's how it's listed with sample figures:

EARNINGS
Hours = $1000
Life Insurance = $20
Medical insurance = $80
Total earnings = $1100
Less Taxable Benefits = $100
Total Gross = $1000

[Straittohell]

Geez, I'm glad that they're only sample figures. I couldn't imagine making that kind of money, and then having to both live off of that and pay child support.

[dantek]

LOL

Question still remains, can he claim this as an expense and deduct from child support?

[Straittohell]

Tough to say. I don't think so, but sometimes it is not always black and white.

If those "taxable benefits" of $100 that you listed are indeed knocking his pay down, and if they are to pay for benefits for the kids, and if those benefits end up paying for things so that you don't have to do, I could see why he would want that counted toward his support.

I don't think that he technically can, but I can see why he wants to. If he is paying any kind of special cost to provide benefits that ultimately mean you don't have to pay for something, is he being unreasonable?

[MS Mom]

LOL

Question still remains, can he claim this as an expense and deduct from child support?

He can claim premiums paid for health insurance as a S7 expense. Meaning you repay him your proportionate share of the expense.

I don't think he can deduct it from his income, cs should be paid on the line 150 of the NOA.

Does your agreement have any wording on who would carry benefits for the children? My agreement states he will carry benefits for the child and at his expense.

[Berner_Faith]

Could this be one of those times you really need to look at the cost vs expense?

If you are looking at only a couple thousand difference is it really going to effect CS so much so that it is worth fighting over or paying a lawyer over? Run the numbers to see what CS without removing them and run them with removing them. See what the difference is. Unless its in the thousands, maybe it isn't worth it.

[Rioe]

Yes, sure it is fully being paid from paystub and from employer letter (no deduction at source).

I have the paystub and here's how it's listed with sample figures:

EARNINGS
Hours = $1000
Life Insurance = $20
Medical insurance = $80
Total earnings = $1100
Less Taxable Benefits = $100
Total Gross = $1000

Does he earn $1000 or $1100 towards his taxable income? Which does he report to CRA as his income, and which figure is he paying CS on? If it's the higher one, then yes, the expense is valid.

[Serene]

Actually, that taxable benefit might be the employers contribution towards his benefits. And then he (the employee) pays an additional 20+80?

In any event, not sure how you can say the employer is paying for it. They are deducting it at source but his net and gross pay are different because of the exact dollar amount of the cost of the benefits. So the employee is paying it. Not the employer.

All that to say, you still have the better deal if he deducts his S7 from hiss income for child support purposes... you get a few dollars less a month and he is paying $1200 a year. I'd be sucking it up!

[dantek]

Tough to say. I don't think so, but sometimes it is not always black and white.

If those "taxable benefits" of $100 that you listed are indeed knocking his pay down, and if they are to pay for benefits for the kids, and if those benefits end up paying for things so that you don't have to do, I could see why he would want that counted toward his support.

I don't think that he technically can, but I can see why he wants to. If he is paying any kind of special cost to provide benefits that ultimately mean you don't have to pay for something, is he being unreasonable?

They are not knocking his pay down, they are being added to his pay as a benefit. If he had the choice to not take the insurance offered his pay would be the same. The only difference is that this benefit is taxable.

Also keep in mind that I am dealing with a person that denies his children a field trip just to not have to pay the $20. And that the government needs to seize his salary because he never wants to pay the child support. And that he argues every little expense towards his children. So it's not about what's reasonable or not, it's about what's technically correct or not.

[dantek]

He can claim premiums paid for health insurance as a S7 expense. Meaning you repay him your proportionate share of the expense.

I don't think he can deduct it from his income, cs should be paid on the line 150 of the NOA.

Does your agreement have any wording on who would carry benefits for the children? My agreement states he will carry benefits for the child and at his expense.

Yes I know he can claim premiums paid although his employer is actually the one paying them. This is why I'm trying to figure out if he can. No agreement on who carry's the benefits.

[dantek]

Could this be one of those times you really need to look at the cost vs expense?

If you are looking at only a couple thousand difference is it really going to effect CS so much so that it is worth fighting over or paying a lawyer over? Run the numbers to see what CS without removing them and run them with removing them. See what the difference is. Unless its in the thousands, maybe it isn't worth it.

It's not about cost vs expense or the amount of money it represents or fighting over it with a lawyer. I'm trying to find out if it is allowed or not to be claimed for other reasons.

[dantek]

Does he earn $1000 or $1100 towards his taxable income? Which does he report to CRA as his income, and which figure is he paying CS on? If it's the higher one, then yes, the expense is valid.

He earns $1000 towards his taxable income for federal and $1100 for provincial. The figure being reported on the CS is unknown at this time due to his salary being a complete inconsistent mess (sick leave, changing hours, on call, working for cash, etc...)

Should the provincial income be reported or the federal?

[dantek]

Actually, that taxable benefit might be the employers contribution towards his benefits. And then he (the employee) pays an additional 20+80?

In any event, not sure how you can say the employer is paying for it. They are deducting it at source but his net and gross pay are different because of the exact dollar amount of the cost of the benefits. So the employee is paying it. Not the employer.

All that to say, you still have the better deal if he deducts his S7 from hiss income for child support purposes... you get a few dollars less a month and he is paying $1200 a year. I'd be sucking it up!

He doesn't pay a dime for the insurance. I'm sure that the employer is paying for it by looking at his pay stub, by having an accountant look at his pay stub and telling me the same, and by the letter written from his employer stating that it is fully paid for by the company. It is being added and deducted form his pay only because it is a taxable benefit (but for provincial only).

It's not about if I have the better deal or not or the dollars or sucking it up. I need to know for other reasons (it's complicated )