S.P.A.R.C.

Separated Parenting Access & Resource Center
crazy gamesriddles and jokesfunny picturesdeath psychic!mad triviafunny & odd!pregnancy testshape testwin custodyrecipes

Author Topic: Cathy, here it is to settle your curiousity! (Long) rated R for ADULT situations  (Read 4976 times)

4honor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 630
  • Karma: 56
  • Been hanging out since 1998... I think.
    • View Profile
I am in WA
« Reply #10 on: Apr 19, 2006, 09:47:04 AM »
BM's other son WAS considered in previous CS obligations... but no deviation for her is granted in WA, as she is the CP. She can deviate all she likes by adjusting what she spends on the kids.

We too have an income shares model, but there is no MORE support to be had when a deviation happens there is LESS support overall and only on the NCP side.

It goes like this:

Get BM & BF's incomes
withhold taxes and Soc Sec and stuff to get Net monthly income
(if BM gets the exemption it is added to her income and vice versa)
add both net incomes together
How many kids and what age for these two parents TOGETHER
look at table for guideline for each and **add together
divide by each parent's income to get their share
set each parent's percentage
Multiply percent by guideline amount to get baseline support amount.

calculate unreimbursed medical (include costs for premiums here too)
Note any credit for which parent pays premiums, copays etc.
split by each parents' percent

Calculate long distance visitation costs
Note any credit for which parent pays
split by each parents' percent

Calculate necessary child care expenses
Note any credit for which parent pays
split by each parents' percent

Add the baseline support, Medical, Transportation, and Childcare expenses together. That is the total support.

Now add all credits for the 3 areas
Take the sum from their respective sides (since it is already paid directly)
Now you have the NCP's ordered amount on his/her side
---- BUT WAIT!
then it must CHECK:
   Find the poverty level for one person  - Notate that
   Bring your Net income from page one - Notate that
   Subtract ordered amount - get the sum
   Divide net income by 45% (or if there is arears 55%) - Notate that
   Determine if taking the CS puts an NCP below poverty level for one person if so, deviation from guideline is nearly automatic.
   Determine if ordered amount is over the percent of income allowed.
  If it has not impoverished the NCP, then you move on.

Now you run the numbers again -- with the the NCP side accounting for all children to whom he owes a duty of support
(EXAMPLE: Look in the table for 3 children, with SS at an age above 12)
get that amount for SS
now run from ** above again.
Run the checks

take the second instance from the first instance.

That number is what the deviation amount is and is SUBTRACTED from the NCP obligation. BM's calculations remain static ON PAPER.

5% of unreimbursed medical is built into the guideline in WA
NCP owes when CP's proves that credited amounts have been exceeded.
(EXAMPLE: $31 for medical is both built in and includes BM's percentage of premiums paid by DH. -- she must use all of the already paid $372/yr on unreimbursed medical before she can come for ANY more from DH.)

In my state, there is simply LESS $$ in the CP home if a deviation from guideline is granted. Deviation is not a percentage, but a SET amount of money that the NCP is then not obligated to pay. Deviation from guideline for DH who has 2 other children is not even HALF of SS' CS total support amount... so EQUAL is not possible. FAIR is that DS1 and DS2 are considered and taken into account. Could we raise DS1 and DS2 on $156 a month? NO. It is RELIEF, not RESOLUTION.

It appears WA guidelines are slightly better than your state, but not by much. You've convinced me, I agree, your state is messed up.
A true soldier fights, not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves whats behind him...dear parents, please remember not to continue to fight because you hate your ex, but because you love your children.


cathy

  • Private Reserve
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1965
  • Karma: 204
    • View Profile
Whew - -
« Reply #11 on: Apr 19, 2006, 04:58:54 PM »
I'm tired just reading that - and I can't even claim that I read it all!!

The worksheet in NC is pretty simply, although not consistant.  The calculator on the CSE website gives one amount, our lawyer's calculator gives another amount, and one of the other lawyers in her firm has a calculator that gives yet a different amount!!

The worksheet (for primary custody, differs a bit for joint by factoring in the percentage of time spent with each parent):

Number of children
Monthly gross income of both parents
Subtract existing child support payments from individual parent's income
Subtract responsibility for other children from individual parent's income

Add the adjusted incomes to get a combine income

Use the adjusted combined income to look up basic child support amount

Make adjustments for childcare, health insurance, extraordinary expense

Take the percentage share of income for each parent and apply to the final child support amount.  

That gives the amount of child support each parent is responsible for - and in primary case, the NCP pays that amount.

------------

Now - there are some changes for low income - and that is what I'm hitting up against now.  None of the calculators seem to give the same answer - - and the one the court used absolutely did not follow the NC General Statute concerning low income parent.  Oh well - - - - - -

Bottom line is that each parent gets to adjust their income and support an amount for other children.  This in effect lowers their income, and their percentage of the overall income - - which in turn makes them responsible for less of the total child support obligation.  Of course, the overall combine income is less, so the basic child support amount is less - - but in theory (and I'm sure in practice) the amount one has to pay can and is affected by additional kids on either side.

Did that make sense?  I'm just so glad I'm not in the position that so many people are in where the amount received or the amount paid is almost necessary for survival.

msme

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 479
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
On a lighter note.....
« Reply #12 on: Apr 19, 2006, 10:02:37 PM »
Gr8Dad & gr8Mom were working very hard at blending their 8 kidlets. One thing that they did was forbid anyone to say that something was not fair. One Sunday, we were coming out of church & talking to neighbors when one of the little ones came running up yelling that another one had said the "F" word. They were both only about 4 & a half. You should have seen the looks of horror, until we explained that they were talking about "Fair". LOL

You never get a second chance to make a first impression!

 

Copyright © SPARC - A Parenting Advocacy Group
Use of this website does not constitute a client/attorney relationship and this site does not provide legal advice.
If you need legal assistance for divorce, child custody, or child support issues, seek advice from a divorce lawyer.