Quick questions on obligations of CS payor

[DecentDad]

Hi Soc,

I'm employed full-time, earning the highest salary I've ever earned.  So, there's no current argument for imputing my income any higher.

From time to time, I earn extra income for consulting.  It's not a reliable income nor historically substantial (i.e., adds at most 5% to my annual income, but last year was zero percent).

If relevant, parties stipulated that I pay CS directly to my ex, not through the state.


1.  If I ramp up my consulting, in addition to keeping my full-time job, and if I have no predictor as to when I may get that extra income or with what frequency... would it be considered in any future CS modification?

2.  (separate scenario from question 1)  If I were to get a higher paying full-time job, what is my obligation to report the salary increase to my ex or to the court?  Is it legal to not report the increase until served with discovery or required to fill out an income/expense declaration on any future action?

Thanks,
DD

[socrateaser]

>1.  If I ramp up my consulting, in addition to keeping my
>full-time job, and if I have no predictor as to when I may get
>that extra income or with what frequency... would it be
>considered in any future CS modification?

The other party can demand a p&l from your bus and your accounting/tax records and then attempt to prove the reliability and amount of extra income, and if successful, then support would be awarded based upon your new earning capacity, even if your income weren't reliable, the court would average the support award, and then if it fell off for say 90 days, you could go back for a downward mod.

>2.  (separate scenario from question 1)  If I were to get a
>higher paying full-time job, what is my obligation to report
>the salary increase to my ex or to the court?  

None, which is why most people are forced to pay through a wage assignment, because it alerts the receiving parent, and the State, that you've changed jobs.


>Is it legal to not report the increase until served with discovery or
>required to fill out an income/expense declaration on any
>future action?

In CA, a party who doesn't file a motion/OSC to modify has a legal right to obtain a finanical declaration from you, and your tax return, once in any 12 month period, starting from the date of entry of the last support judgment/order (or maybe it's the date of filing the motion -- I don't remember, at the moment).

Otherwise, they must file the motion first before they can discover your financial info, which means that they must allege a change of circumstances, based on some other extrinsic evidence. So, if they don't have any or there hasn't been a change, then the allegation would be false and that would be contempt (or perjury, depending on who's the plaintiff).

You, on the other hand, can say nothing for 12 months and pay direct, and if the other parent doesn't catch wind of your job change, then he/she's SOL, because federal law prohibits retroactive mods.

However, the court might lean against you heavily, on equitable grounds, if it thought that you were gaming your ex and child, depending on how big the income change.

"Oh, yeah, your honor, I remember now. I won the Powerball jackpot for 100 MM. It just slipped my mind, otherwise I would have sent my kid an extra $50 for her b'day!"

So, there's a balance to be struck -- make sure you don't strike out.

[DecentDad]

Thanks.

Per court order, we're required to keep each other current on work contact information, so she'll know of my job change.  But it sounds like she's only entitled to once-per-year update on my financials?

1.  Regarding the court's wrath, what if a good chunk of the extra income went into something like a 529 for the child (i.e., whereas biomom has admitted that she has no savings for the child)?

2.  Biomom had ignored my prior requests for "tax return and I/E declaration once per 12 months per Code (I forget)".  What if a party ignores that particular request (i.e., it's not discovery, and it's not a court order)?

3.  Is job change (regardless of knowing if my salary has changed) sufficient for showing change of circumstance regarding CS?  Technically, probably not, but a judge may allow leeway because of what a job change typically means financially, I'm guessing?

[socrateaser]

>Thanks.
>
>Per court order, we're required to keep each other current on
>work contact information, so she'll know of my job change.
>But it sounds like she's only entitled to once-per-year update
>on my financials?

If she sees your job change, that would be sufficient allegation of a change of circumstances to start a modification action.

>
>1.  Regarding the court's wrath, what if a good chunk of the
>extra income went into something like a 529 for the child
>(i.e., whereas biomom has admitted that she has no savings for
>the child)?

That's a negotiable issue between the parents. The court has no authority to consider or order it.

>
>2.  Biomom had ignored my prior requests for "tax return and
>I/E declaration once per 12 months per Code (I forget)".  What
>if a party ignores that particular request (i.e., it's not
>discovery, and it's not a court order)?

motion to compel, and costs of suit, sanctions, etc., as part of the motion/OSC to modify.

>3.  Is job change (regardless of knowing if my salary has
>changed) sufficient for showing change of circumstance
>regarding CS?  Technically, probably not, but a judge may
>allow leeway because of what a job change typically means
>financially, I'm guessing?

I was about to knee jerk that it's an obvious material change, so it would be sufficient. But, on reflection, let's go through the analysis:

A support mod in CA requires a "material change in circumstances affecting the child's best interests," and, as CA is a fact pleading jurisdiction, the motion/OSC to modify must state the ultimate facts, which if proved would entitle the movant to the relief requested.

A job change, is not material/relevant change affecting the support obligation, unless you make more or less money, so merely alleging a job change is not an ultimate fact, which if proved, would entitle the other parent to relief. But, if she pleads that you have changed jobs and you earn more money, then she has alleged ultimate facts which if proved would entitle her to relief, i.e., more support.

And, she's entitled to discover your income at that point in order to make her case. If she failed to do so, then you should be able to successfully argue that your time and inconvenience is worth something, in view of your ex wasting everyone's time, and that you should be reimbursed for costs of suit/attorney fees, etc.

But, beyond that, I doubt if the court would give you anything, because in the words of the CA State Legislature, "A parent's topmost priority is to support his or her child(ren)."

So, if you change jobs, and the other parent files, you're gonna have to play along.

Forget about my prior post on this last issue. I should have thought it through better.

[DecentDad]

Okay, thanks for all that information.