Completely befuddled

[thefunone]

Can anyone tell me the order of calculations for support:
Is it CS first..then SS.. then S7?
Or is it CS first..then S7 ...then SS ?
I have researched areas where I thought it may indicate but with no luck.
If you know...and have a link - I woud appreciate knowing.

Cheers

[momforever1956]

Try-http://www.mysupportcalculator.ca/

[thefunone]

Thanks - I have been there - and yes - you plug in some numbers and then it tells you the % you would owe.... but it doesnt indicate the order in which the values are calculated. Common sense says CS then SS then S7 when using MSC...
However - when using DivorceMate you are able to do OVERRIDES to put in a monthly amount...nothing seems to be set in stone that I can find anywhere.
And if you put in OVERRIDES it can sway the numbers.
It seems that whoever is presiding gets to make the choice.

I appreciate your response nonetheless

Cheers

[Berner_Faith]

Section 7 is based on income. So that means the one who gets SS, their income increases, but the payers income decreases. Section 7 amounts, like CS will fluctuate based on income.

[Rioe]

I've had it explained to me that the children's stuff is always figured out before the spousal stuff. The logic is that the children's needs are most important, and also CS and S7 need to start up right away, while SS often gets argued about at length. So my guess would be that it's your second order of calculations.

Variations and overrides probably exist to give judges some discretionary power for unusual circumstances.

Personally, I would prefer to see that a SS recipient have it included in their income for CS calculations, while the payor does not include that amount. Seems fairest to me, since SS is kind of like income splitting. All you would have to do is start up CS right away based on actual incomes, and then recalculate it if SS is determined, adjusting amounts until it all works out.

So ideally, SS then CS and S7. Sometimes it sucks being an idealist.

[SadAndTired]

I've had it explained to me that the children's stuff is always figured out before the spousal stuff. The logic is that the children's needs are most important, and also CS and S7 need to start up right away, while SS often gets argued about at length. So my guess would be that it's your second order of calculations.

Variations and overrides probably exist to give judges some discretionary power for unusual circumstances.

Personally, I would prefer to see that a SS recipient have it included in their income for CS calculations, while the payor does not include that amount. Seems fairest to me, since SS is kind of like income splitting. All you would have to do is start up CS right away based on actual incomes, and then recalculate it if SS is determined, adjusting amounts until it all works out.

So ideally, SS then CS and S7. Sometimes it sucks being an idealist.

That is how our situation is calculated.

Ex's line 150 is his income - ss.

My line 150 is my income + ss.

Child support is then calculated based on his line 150 (which has had ss removed).

Section 7 is proportionate to the two incomes as calculated above.

[OrleansLawyer]

Is it CS first..then SS.. then S7?

This is the common sense approach.

Child support (which includes s.7) always has precedence. However, unless your agreement dictates a set amount of s.7, you won't know s.7 until it happens (or later). As such, spousal support must be provided first, which impacts the division of s.7 expenses.

Try-http://www.mysupportcalculator.ca/

Tools are helpful, but not perfect. Do not be a slave to them.

Section 7 is based on income. So that means the one who gets SS, their income increases, but the payers income decreases. Section 7 amounts, like CS will fluctuate based on income.

Be careful ; child support is not impacted by spousal support. Some argue that means s.7 expenses (which are cs) should not be impacted. Practical order of operations, and procedural fairness, dictate that s.7 expenses are impacted.

That is how our situation is calculated.

Ex's line 150 is his income - ss.

My line 150 is my income + ss.

Child support is then calculated based on his line 150 (which has had ss removed).

Section 7 is proportionate to the two incomes as calculated above.

Some people speculate that CS is calculated before SS, since CS will reduce SS (assuming payor for CS is payor for SS) and therefore reducing the overall tax deductions shared by the parties. This is also why some families elect to file everything under SS (grossed appropriately) to allow for income splitting and overall reduction of tax burden.

[Rioe]

Some people speculate that CS is calculated before SS, since CS will reduce SS (assuming payor for CS is payor for SS) and therefore reducing the overall tax deductions shared by the parties. This is also why some families elect to file everything under SS (grossed appropriately) to allow for income splitting and overall reduction of tax burden.

So what about the case where a person receives SS from a first ex, and CS is done with a second ex? Would their SS be included in their income for their CS calculations?

And the reverse? A person is paying SS to a first ex, and now must calculate CS for a second ex. Is the SS removed from their income at all before the calculation?

There are all sorts of hybrid situations possible here and no hard and fast rule. No wonder people need lawyers even when they separate amicably!