Child support; income over $150K

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

shellshocked22

New member
Some of the material I've been reading suggests that if the payor's income is over $150K then there may be some flexibility to pay less given that the "tables" provide dollar amounts of support well in excess of that required for "child" support at that level. Other sources say the tables continue to apply.

The "blog" on this website has an article noting that for income over $150K tables may not apply given that the amount is excessively large given its supposed purpose is to raise the child as opposed to another form of spousal support.

Any comments on this issue ?
 
If you make over 150K then you pay what is at the table for 150K plus more. The difference is that I do not believe you can mathematically extrapolate what you will pay if you make say 190K by looking at lower table amounts.

But rest assured you will pay at least what it says at the 150K level.

Of course this is all just my opinion and should not be construed as legal advice.
 
This is what I put in my SA (made it up myself - no input from lawyers...)

If an income used for the purpose of Child Support calculation is above 150K, then the Child Support amount shall be the extrapolated value from the table for that income. This shall be a best fit linear extrapolation of the table across the entire income range up to 150K, extrapolated to the income amount.

Note that the CS tables are pretty much a straight line slope.
 
I think if you extrapolate in my opinion you will be greatly overpaying. It is less than a straight extrapolation.

One thing you might want to do is go to www.canlii.org. Find about 6 cases where a person earns over 150K and pays CS. Plot these mathematically and then use this to set the amount you would pay over 150K. Also cite these cases. If one could extrapolate over 150K then the tables would have had these amounts or provided an exact formula so extrapolation could be done. I think if you earn say 250K, 190K etc. then if you extrapolate the amount of CS will be greatly exaggerted. I'd look at existing cases to determine the amount.

Of course you could read the cases, make an assessment of what you beleive to be the common line of reasoning used in these cases to set child support levels and attempt to apply the same line of reasoning however I think I would just start with picking 6 cases and use these to make some type of estimate as to a fair amount. Hard numbers are easier to work with.


Of course this is all just my opinion and should not be construed as legal advice.
 
Why is everyone talking about extrapolation? The guidelines give a very clear formula: $1254 plus 0.74% of income over $150000 (Ontario, 1 child).

To add a question to the original question - I've also read that when over $150,000, the RECIPIENT's income may be relevant, but could not find any information to say exactly why or how.
 
billm said:
This is what I put in my SA (made it up myself - no input from lawyers...)

If an income used for the purpose of Child Support calculation is above 150K, then the Child Support amount shall be the extrapolated value from the table for that income. This shall be a best fit linear extrapolation of the table across the entire income range up to 150K, extrapolated to the income amount.

Note that the CS tables are pretty much a straight line slope.
Click to expand...

billm said:
A formula for over 150K is posted here:

Federal Child Support Amounts: Simplified Tables
Click to expand...

I will be removing my own formula from my SA (not signed yet!) as it is specified in the tables already for income over $150K (and my formula made CS more for over $150).
 
I don't get this whole 'hate for the ex to benefit in any way from the child's CS' thing, especially at incomes I consider unrealistically large. If you could afford it, why shouldn't your children live in a mansion when they are with the ex, even if the ex gets to live there too?

It's only at lower incomes that paying CS can be a hardship, in my opinion.
 
My comment, which would be that of the layman - make no mistake!

Is that you only need so much money to raise a kid.
Personally, in my completely subjective assesment - I would say around 300 bucks a month is reasonable for a child. And a similar amount, with consideration of the law of diminishing returns, for each succesive child.

Mind you I'm nobody from nowhere - and my opinion doesn't count.
 
wretchedotis said:
My comment, which would be that of the layman - make no mistake!

Is that you only need so much money to raise a kid.
Personally, in my completely subjective assesment - I would say around 300 bucks a month is reasonable for a child. And a similar amount, with consideration of the law of diminishing returns, for each succesive child.

Mind you I'm nobody from nowhere - and my opinion doesn't count.
Click to expand...


You know what?!?
If I'm the asshole DAD that walks away from KID(S)...!
Then make it 500 a month!!

But if I'm the guy that would take his KID(S) full-time and never ask a cent from the ex....
as it's what I want and I am therefore I shouldn't be PAID to do it.....!!!!

Yes. I guess I'm conflicted about CS.
 
wretchedotis said:
You know what?!?
If I'm the asshole DAD that walks away from KID(S)...!
Then make it 500 a month!!

But if I'm the guy that would take his KID(S) full-time and never ask a cent from the ex....
as it's what I want and I am therefore I shouldn't be PAID to do it.....!!!!

Yes. I guess I'm conflicted about CS.
Click to expand...

Does that even make sense?
I think faster then I type.
Sorry.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top