7,366
edits
Difference between revisions of "Child Support Guidelines"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Child Support Guidelines (view source)
Revision as of 20:24, 22 November 2022
, 20:24, 22 November 2022From staging Aug 2022
Nate Russell (talk | contribs) (From staging July 2022) |
Nate Russell (talk | contribs) (From staging Aug 2022) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| resourcetype = <br/>more resources on<br/> | | resourcetype = <br/>more resources on<br/> | ||
| link = [https://www.clicklaw.bc.ca/global/search?k=child%20support child support] | | link = [https://www.clicklaw.bc.ca/global/search?k=child%20support child support] | ||
}}Often referred to as just "the Guidelines," the | }}Often referred to as just "the Guidelines," the [http://canlii.ca/t/80mh Child Support Guidelines] is a federal regulation, adopted by all of the provinces except Quebec, that describes the rules that the courts must apply when making an order for child support. | ||
The most important feature of the Guidelines is the child support tables that fix the amount of support payments according to the annual income of the person paying support, the ''payor'', the province the payor lives in, and the number of children support is to be paid for. The Guidelines cover pretty much every issue involved in calculating the amount of child support, including determining income, paying for children's special expenses and extraordinary expenses, figuring out the amount of support payable when the parents have the children for an almost equal amount of time, and figuring out the amount payable when one or more of the children have their primary home with each parent. | The most important feature of the Guidelines is the child support tables that fix the amount of support payments according to the annual income of the person paying support, the ''payor'', the province the payor lives in, and the number of children support is to be paid for. The Guidelines cover pretty much every issue involved in calculating the amount of child support, including determining income, paying for children's special expenses and extraordinary expenses, figuring out the amount of support payable when the parents have the children for an almost equal amount of time, and figuring out the amount payable when one or more of the children have their primary home with each parent. | ||
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
==Special expenses and extraordinary expenses== | ==Special expenses and extraordinary expenses== | ||
The basic amount of child support a parent pays is presumed to cover a wide variety of common day-to-day expenses associated with raising children: the child's share of housing costs, utilities, clothes and shoes, groceries, diapers, toiletries, school field trip fees, entertainment, haircuts, and so forth. The basic amount of support is not always presumed to include certain other kinds of expenses that are infrequent but | The basic amount of child support a parent pays is presumed to cover a wide variety of common day-to-day expenses associated with raising children: the child's share of housing costs, utilities, clothes and shoes, groceries, diapers, toiletries, school field trip fees, entertainment, haircuts, and so forth. The basic amount of support is not always presumed to include certain other kinds of expenses that are infrequent but costly, such as the cost of daycare or orthodontic work. In addition to the basic amount of support payable, the parents may also be required to cover their respective portions of these other expenses, as long as they qualify as ''special expenses'' or ''extraordinary expenses'' under the Guidelines. | ||
Special expenses and extraordinary expenses are defined in section 7(1) of the Guidelines: | Special expenses and extraordinary expenses are defined in section 7(1) of the Guidelines: | ||
| Line 54: | Line 54: | ||
Special expenses are the expenses listed in section 7(1)(a), (b), (c), and (e). When the court is asked to decide whether it should make an order that an extra amount, beyond Guidelines child support, should be paid to contribute to the cost of these expenses, it must think about the test in section 7(1) and consider: | Special expenses are the expenses listed in section 7(1)(a), (b), (c), and (e). When the court is asked to decide whether it should make an order that an extra amount, beyond Guidelines child support, should be paid to contribute to the cost of these expenses, it must think about the test in section 7(1) and consider: | ||
<blockquote><tt>...the necessity of the expense in relation to the child’s best interests and the reasonableness of the expense in relation to the means of the spouses and those of the child and to the family’s spending pattern prior to the separation | <blockquote><tt>...the necessity of the expense in relation to the child’s best interests and the reasonableness of the expense in relation to the means of the spouses and those of the child and to the family’s spending pattern prior to the separation.</tt></blockquote> | ||
Extraordinary expenses are the expenses listed in section 7(d) and (f). When deciding whether the cost of primary- and secondary-school education expenses and extracurricular activities | Extraordinary expenses are the expenses listed in section 7(d) and (f). When deciding whether the cost of primary- and secondary-school education expenses and extracurricular activities qualify as "extraordinary expenses," the court will apply described in section 7(1.1): | ||
<blockquote><tt>(a) expenses that exceed those that the spouse requesting an amount for the extraordinary expenses can reasonably cover, taking into <span class="noglossary">account</span> that spouse’s income and the amount that the spouse would receive under the applicable table or, where the court has determined that the table amount is inappropriate, the amount that the court has otherwise determined is appropriate; or</tt></blockquote> | <blockquote><tt>(a) expenses that exceed those that the spouse requesting an amount for the extraordinary expenses can reasonably cover, taking into <span class="noglossary">account</span> that spouse’s income and the amount that the spouse would receive under the applicable table or, where the court has determined that the table amount is inappropriate, the amount that the court has otherwise determined is appropriate; or</tt></blockquote> | ||
| Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
<blockquote><blockquote><tt>(v) any other similar factor that the court considers relevant.</tt></blockquote></blockquote> | <blockquote><blockquote><tt>(v) any other similar factor that the court considers relevant.</tt></blockquote></blockquote> | ||
Here's a helpful summary of how section 7(1.) works from a 2010 case, [http://canlii.ca/t/2dpzr Piper v. Piper]: | Here's a helpful summary of how section 7(1.1) works from a 2010 case from the Supreme Court, [http://canlii.ca/t/2dpzr Piper v. Piper]: | ||
<blockquote>"Under section 7(1.1)(a) the court is first required to consider whether the income of the requesting spouse, including any child support received, can reasonably cover the expense claimed or whether the expense exceeds her ability to pay without any consideration of the factors enumerated in section 7(1.1)(b). If the income cannot cover the expense, the expense is deemed to be extraordinary and the court's next analysis turns to consideration of the factors enumerated in section 7(1) which, of course, brings into consideration the parties' means and pre-separation spending pattern."</blockquote> | <blockquote>"Under section 7(1.1)(a) the court is first required to consider whether the income of the requesting spouse, including any child support received, can reasonably cover the expense claimed or whether the expense exceeds her ability to pay without any consideration of the factors enumerated in section 7(1.1)(b). If the income cannot cover the expense, the expense is deemed to be extraordinary and the court's next analysis turns to consideration of the factors enumerated in section 7(1) which, of course, brings into consideration the parties' means and pre-separation spending pattern."</blockquote> | ||
| Line 91: | Line 91: | ||
====Necessity==== | ====Necessity==== | ||
Sometimes the needs of the child will | Sometimes the needs of the child will be more important than the burden of paying the cost of the expense borne by the parents, and an expense will qualify as a shareable special expense or extraordinary expense whether the cost is a hardship to the parents or not. These expenses usually include things like: | ||
*medical costs, including costs that aren't covered by MSP such as autism therapies, | *medical costs, including costs that aren't covered by MSP such as autism therapies, | ||
| Line 102: | Line 102: | ||
===Sharing qualifying expenses=== | ===Sharing qualifying expenses=== | ||
Under section 7(2) of the Guidelines, expenses that qualify as special | Under section 7(2) of the Guidelines, expenses that qualify as special expenses and extraordinary expenses are generally shared by the parties in proportion to their incomes, after deducting any contribution to those costs made by the child or by the government, through things like grants or tax deductions. The idea here is to look at the total pot of money available to the child — the income of the payor plus the income of the recipient — and to figure out how much each party's share of that pot is, and then pay the child's special expenses according to each parent's share. | ||
The easiest way to calculate a parent's ''proportionate share'' is to add the incomes of both parents together and then figure out what percentage each income is of the total. Here are two examples. | The easiest way to calculate a parent's ''proportionate share'' is to add the incomes of both parents together and then figure out what percentage each income is of the total. Here are two examples. | ||
| Line 115: | Line 115: | ||
<blockquote>If one parent earns $48,000 per year and the other $62,000, the total of their incomes is $110,000. The first parent's income is 43.6% of the total, and the other parent's income is 56.4% of the total. The first parent would have to pay 43.6% of the cost of all qualifying expenses, and the second would have to pay the remaining 54.6% of those expenses.</blockquote> | <blockquote>If one parent earns $48,000 per year and the other $62,000, the total of their incomes is $110,000. The first parent's income is 43.6% of the total, and the other parent's income is 56.4% of the total. The first parent would have to pay 43.6% of the cost of all qualifying expenses, and the second would have to pay the remaining 54.6% of those expenses.</blockquote> | ||
It's important to know that the cost that is being shared is the ''net cost'' of an expense, in other words, the amount that is actually being paid after any third-party contributions have been applied to reduce the expense. Daycare costs, for example, are sometimes subsidized for lower-income earners and the amount paid by a parent is deductible from their income. Post-secondary expenses might be reduced by bursaries and scholarships, or be partly paid by an RESP. The cost of prescriptions might be offset by contributions from a workplace health and dental insurance plan. It is the net cost of the expense, after deducting any contributions and other savings, that parents share. | It's important to know that the cost that is being shared is the ''net cost'' of an expense, in other words, the amount that is actually being paid after any third-party contributions have been applied to reduce the expense. Daycare costs, for example, are sometimes subsidized for lower-income earners, and the amount paid by a parent is deductible from their income. Post-secondary expenses might be reduced by bursaries and scholarships, or be partly paid by an RESP. The cost of prescriptions might be offset by contributions from a workplace health and dental insurance plan. It is the net cost of the expense, after deducting any contributions and other savings, that parents share. | ||
It's also important to know that sometimes the income of a parent's new partner may be taken into consideration in determining a parent's "means" in sharing a qualifying expense. In the 2000 case [https://canlii.ca/t/1fm6b Baum v. Baum], the court held that the section 7(1) consideration of the "means of the spouses" should be interpreted broadly as including all sources of income available to the paying parent, including the contribution of a parent's new partner. Also see the case of [https://canlii.ca/t/53kt Scott v. Scott], another decision from 2000. | It's also important to know that sometimes the income of a parent's new partner may be taken into consideration in determining a parent's "means" in sharing a qualifying expense. In the 2000 Supreme Court case [https://canlii.ca/t/1fm6b Baum v. Baum], the court held that the section 7(1) consideration of the "means of the spouses" should be interpreted broadly as including all sources of income available to the paying parent, including the contribution of a parent's new partner. Also see the case of [https://canlii.ca/t/53kt Scott v. Scott], another Supreme Court decision from 2000. | ||
==Calculating income== | ==Calculating income== | ||
| Line 134: | Line 134: | ||
The basic rule here is that a party's income for the purposes of the Guidelines is the amount stated at line 15000 of the payor's most recent tax return, although there are important exceptions that apply when a person's income is from self-employment. A party's income includes all of the party's income, not just income from a job. ''Income'' might include bonuses, overtime, rental income, profit from stock options, company dividends, Workers' Compensation payments, long- and short-term disability payments, personal injury awards that relate to loss of income, pension income, government benefits, interest from an investment, and so forth, as well as employment and self-employment income. | The basic rule here is that a party's income for the purposes of the Guidelines is the amount stated at line 15000 of the payor's most recent tax return, although there are important exceptions that apply when a person's income is from self-employment. A party's income includes all of the party's income, not just income from a job. ''Income'' might include bonuses, overtime, rental income, profit from stock options, company dividends, Workers' Compensation payments, long- and short-term disability payments, personal injury awards that relate to loss of income, pension income, government benefits, interest from an investment, and so forth, as well as employment and self-employment income. | ||
Section 2(3) of the Guidelines requires that the most current income information be used; this can include a calculation of income based on paystub evidence. Most of the time income is based on the most recent tax year, since the income information for that year is complete. This means that there is usually a one-year lag between the amount of support being paid and the payor's income. The amount of support paid in 2023 will be based on income earned and reported in 2022, and the amount paid in 2024 | Section 2(3) of the Guidelines requires that the most current income information be used; this can include a calculation of income based on paystub evidence. Most of the time income is based on the most recent tax year, since the income information for that year is complete. This means that there is usually a one-year lag between the amount of support being paid and the payor's income. The amount of support paid in 2023 will be based on income earned and reported in 2022, and the amount paid in 2024 will be based on income from 2023. However, if a payor's current income can be known with certainty, such as if the payor is an employee who doesn't get bonus or commission income, child support can be determined using the payor's current income. | ||
===Government benefits=== | ===Government benefits=== | ||
| Line 194: | Line 194: | ||
If you're going to make an argument that income should be imputed to someone, you will have to prove that one or more of the conditions described in section 19(1) exist. If someone's underemployment or unemployment is caused by childcare responsibilities, the court will not usually impute income. | If you're going to make an argument that income should be imputed to someone, you will have to prove that one or more of the conditions described in section 19(1) exist. If someone's underemployment or unemployment is caused by childcare responsibilities, the court will not usually impute income. | ||
It's not enough merely to ''argue'' that one of the circumstances listed in section 19(1) exist, you have to be able to ''prove'' that the circumstance exists. The following factors were discussed in a 2003 case, [http://canlii.ca/t/1pt18 Nahu v. Chertkow], in determining whether someone is intentionally underemployed or unemployed: | It's not enough merely to ''argue'' that one of the circumstances listed in section 19(1) exist, you have to be able to ''prove'' that the circumstance exists. The following factors were discussed in a 2003 Supreme Court case, [http://canlii.ca/t/1pt18 Nahu v. Chertkow], in determining whether someone is intentionally underemployed or unemployed: | ||
*the payor's education, training, and work experience, | *the payor's education, training, and work experience, | ||
| Line 204: | Line 204: | ||
*any evidence that the underemployment or unemployment is motivated by ill will towards the recipient. | *any evidence that the underemployment or unemployment is motivated by ill will towards the recipient. | ||
This last point, about the payor's ill-will, has to do with the idea that the payor is able to earn more but chooses not to. In a 1999 case called [http://canlii.ca/t/1d2x1 Hanson v. Hanson], the court had this to say on the subject: | This last point, about the payor's ill-will, has to do with the idea that the payor is able to earn more but chooses not to. In a 1999 Supreme Court case called [http://canlii.ca/t/1d2x1 Hanson v. Hanson], the court had this to say on the subject: | ||
<blockquote> | <blockquote>[14] The following principles apply when determining capacity to earn an income. </blockquote> | ||
<blockquote>< | <blockquote><blockquote>1. There is a duty to seek employment in a case where a parent is healthy and there is no reason why the parent cannot work. It is "no answer for a person liable to support a child to say that he is unemployed and does not intend to seek work or that his potential to earn income is an irrelevant factor" ...</blockquote></blockquote> | ||
<blockquote>< | <blockquote><blockquote>2. When imputing income on the basis of intentional underemployment, a court must consider what is reasonable under the circumstances. The age, education, experience, skills and health of the parent are factors to be considered in addition to such matters as the availability of work, freedom to relocate and other obligations.</blockquote></blockquote> | ||
<blockquote>< | <blockquote><blockquote>3. A parent's limited work experience and job skills do not justify a failure to pursue employment that does not require significant skills, or employment in which the necessary skills can be earned on the job. ... [C]ourts have never sanctioned the refusal of a parent to take reasonable steps to support his or her children simply because the parent cannot obtain interesting or highly paid employment.</blockquote></blockquote> | ||
<blockquote>< | <blockquote><blockquote>4. Persistence in [poorly paid] employment may entitle the court to impute income.</blockquote></blockquote> | ||
<blockquote>< | <blockquote><blockquote>5. A parent cannot be excused from his or her child support obligations [to pursue] unrealistic or unproductive career aspirations.</blockquote></blockquote> | ||
<blockquote><blockquote>6. As a general rule, a parent cannot avoid child support obligations by a self-induced reduction of income.</blockquote></blockquote> | |||
==="Grossing-up" income=== | ==="Grossing-up" income=== | ||
| Line 228: | Line 229: | ||
The math behind grossing up someone's income is a bit complex. Essentially, the idea is to figure out the amount of income the person would have to earn before taxes in British Columbia to receive the amount they earn after taxes. Think of it like this: | The math behind grossing up someone's income is a bit complex. Essentially, the idea is to figure out the amount of income the person would have to earn before taxes in British Columbia to receive the amount they earn after taxes. Think of it like this: | ||
<blockquote>Say Parent 1 earns $100,000 per year. As a resident of British Columbia, Parent 1 pays income tax at a rate of, for example, 40%. This means that Parent 1's income, net of taxes, is $60,000 per year.</blockquote> | <blockquote>'''Example'''</blockquote> | ||
<blockquote>Parent 2 also earns $100,000 per year. Parent 2, on the other hand, lives in Texas and has an income tax rate of, for example, 25%. This means that Parent 2's net income is $75,000 per year.</blockquote> | |||
<blockquote>Income for the purposes of the Guidelines would normally be calculated for both Parent 1 and Parent 2 at a gross income of $100,000. In reality, though, Parent 1 has a lot less money after income taxes are paid than Parent 2 does. Parent 2 actually has a lot more money than Parent 1, and ought to pay child support based on this additional money.</blockquote> | <blockquote><blockquote>Say Parent 1 earns $100,000 per year. As a resident of British Columbia, Parent 1 pays income tax at a rate of, for example, 40%. This means that Parent 1's income, net of taxes, is $60,000 per year.</blockquote></blockquote> | ||
<blockquote>Parent 2's income would be "grossed up" to figure out what income they would have to earn here to have an after-tax income of $75,000. Since Parent 2 would pay income tax at a rate of 40% here, the court would consider Parent 2 to have a gross income of $125,000 for the purposes of child support, since tax of 40% on a gross income of $125,000 leaves a net income of $75,000.</blockquote> | <blockquote><blockquote>Parent 2 also earns $100,000 per year. Parent 2, on the other hand, lives in Texas and has an income tax rate of, for example, 25%. This means that Parent 2's net income is $75,000 per year.</blockquote></blockquote> | ||
<blockquote>Parent 1 and Parent 2 both have incomes of $100,000 per year. Parent 1 will pay his base amount of support at that income, but Parent 2 will pay at a grossed-up income of $125,000 to reflect what they would have to earn in British Columbia to have the after-tax income of $75,000 they have living in Texas.</blockquote> | <blockquote><blockquote>Income for the purposes of the Guidelines would normally be calculated for both Parent 1 and Parent 2 at a gross income of $100,000. In reality, though, Parent 1 has a lot less money after income taxes are paid than Parent 2 does. Parent 2 actually has a lot more money than Parent 1, and ought to pay child support based on this additional money.</blockquote></blockquote> | ||
<blockquote><blockquote>Parent 2's income would be "grossed up" to figure out what income they would have to earn here to have an after-tax income of $75,000. Since Parent 2 would pay income tax at a rate of 40% here, the court would consider Parent 2 to have a gross income of $125,000 for the purposes of child support, since tax of 40% on a gross income of $125,000 leaves a net income of $75,000.</blockquote></blockquote> | |||
<blockquote><blockquote>Parent 1 and Parent 2 both have incomes of $100,000 per year. Parent 1 will pay his base amount of support at that income, but Parent 2 will pay at a grossed-up income of $125,000 to reflect what they would have to earn in British Columbia to have the after-tax income of $75,000 they have living in Texas.</blockquote></blockquote> | |||
Grossing-up a payor's income can be a bit tricky, and requires a knowledge of the income tax laws applicable to First Nations payors earning income on First Nations reserve lands and to payors earning income outside of Canada. If you have a problem in this area, you should consider hiring a lawyer to help you. | Grossing-up a payor's income can be a bit tricky, and requires a knowledge of the income tax laws applicable to First Nations payors earning income on First Nations reserve lands and to payors earning income outside of Canada. If you have a problem in this area, you should consider hiring a lawyer to help you. | ||
| Line 238: | Line 241: | ||
==="Grossing-down" income=== | ==="Grossing-down" income=== | ||
The same idea about grossing income up applies, in reverse, to people who live in places with higher tax rates. Someone who lives in a place where they pay higher income taxes than they would if they lived in British Columbia | The same idea about grossing income up applies, in reverse, to people who live in places with higher tax rates. Someone who lives in a place where they pay higher income taxes than they would if they lived in British Columbia can have their income grossed down to reflect the money they'd have to earn, living here, to have the same after-tax income as they do living there. | ||
Grossing-down a payor's income is also tricky. If you have a problem in this area, you should consider hiring a lawyer to help you. | Grossing-down a payor's income is also tricky. If you have a problem in this area, you should consider hiring a lawyer to help you. | ||
| Line 248: | Line 251: | ||
===Basic child support payments=== | ===Basic child support payments=== | ||
The income of a parent's new partner is not included in calculating the amount of child support, nor is a payor's new partner obliged to pay child support. The new partner will not inherit the child support obligation in the event the parent dies, and a recipient of support won't be able to pursue the new partner for continuing or supplemental payments. If the new partner and the parent separate, however, the new partner might become obligated to pay child support if they qualify as a "stepparent" to the children. See the | The income of a parent's new partner is not included in calculating the amount of child support, nor is a payor's new partner obliged to pay child support. The new partner will not inherit the child support obligation in the event the parent dies, and a recipient of support won't be able to pursue the new partner for continuing or supplemental payments. If the new partner and the parent separate, however, the new partner might become obligated to pay child support if they qualify as a "stepparent" to the children. See the discussion of stepparents’ obligations in the first section in this chapter, [[Child Support]]. | ||
When calculating the base amount of child support a parent must pay — that is, the parent's obligation under the Child Support Guidelines tables, before special expenses and extraordinary expenses — the court will only look at the parent's income. The income of the new partner is not taken into <span class="noglossary">account</span>. | When calculating the base amount of child support a parent must pay — that is, the parent's obligation under the Child Support Guidelines tables, before special expenses and extraordinary expenses — the court will only look at the parent's income. The income of the new partner is not taken into <span class="noglossary">account</span>. | ||
| Line 254: | Line 257: | ||
==="Undue hardship" claims=== | ==="Undue hardship" claims=== | ||
Section 10 of the Child Support Guidelines allows people to argue that the base amount of support set out in the Guidelines tables is too low or too high and would cause | Section 10 of the Child Support Guidelines allows people to argue that the base amount of support set out in the Guidelines tables is too low or too high and would cause them ''undue hardship'' if the table amount was paid. Payors will argue that the base amount is too high, while recipients will argue that it is too low. If the court agrees, the court can make a child support order that is lower or higher than the amount in the tables. This chapter discusses exceptions to the Guidelines more thoroughly in the section, [[Exceptions to the Child Support Guidelines]]. | ||
If undue hardship is claimed, the court must look at the standard of living in each parent's ''household'', rather than the standard of living of each parent alone. This means that the court, in deciding whether there is undue hardship, will look at the total expenses and total income of each parent's household, including the income of each parent's new partner. This will not cause the new partner to be liable to pay support. It just means that their income will be taken into consideration to see whether the usual table amount of support payable is too high or low. | If undue hardship is claimed, the court must look at the standard of living in each parent's ''household'', rather than the standard of living of each parent alone. This means that the court, in deciding whether there is undue hardship, will look at the total expenses and total income of each parent's household, including the income of each parent's new partner. This will not cause the new partner to be liable to pay support. It just means that their income will be taken into consideration to see whether the usual table amount of support payable is too high or low. | ||
| Line 264: | Line 267: | ||
Section 4 of the Guidelines deals with parents who earn more than $150,000 each year. Under this section, the income, or lack of income, of a parent's new partner may be taken into <span class="noglossary">account</span> in deciding whether the formula gives a fair result. The calculation of support owing by parents with incomes in excess of $150,000 is discussed in more detail in [[Exceptions to the Child Support Guidelines]]. | Section 4 of the Guidelines deals with parents who earn more than $150,000 each year. Under this section, the income, or lack of income, of a parent's new partner may be taken into <span class="noglossary">account</span> in deciding whether the formula gives a fair result. The calculation of support owing by parents with incomes in excess of $150,000 is discussed in more detail in [[Exceptions to the Child Support Guidelines]]. | ||
Section 4(b)(ii) of the Guidelines says that when considering the amount payable | Section 4(b)(ii) of the Guidelines says that when considering the amount payable on top of the basic amount for a person whose annual income is $150,000, the court should apply the formula but take into <span class="noglossary">account</span>: | ||
<blockquote><tt>... the condition, means, needs and other circumstances of the children who are entitled to support and the financial ability of each spouse to contribute to the support of the children ...</tt></blockquote> | <blockquote><tt>... the condition, means, needs and other circumstances of the children who are entitled to support and the financial ability of each spouse to contribute to the support of the children ...</tt></blockquote> | ||
| Line 274: | Line 277: | ||
Section 7 of the Guidelines allows for the sharing of the children's qualifying special expenses and extraordinary expenses between parents, as discussed above. In figuring out how much a parent should have to contribute to these expenses, the court is required to take into <span class="noglossary">account</span>, among other things, "the necessity and reasonableness of the expense in relation to the means of the spouses and those of the child." | Section 7 of the Guidelines allows for the sharing of the children's qualifying special expenses and extraordinary expenses between parents, as discussed above. In figuring out how much a parent should have to contribute to these expenses, the court is required to take into <span class="noglossary">account</span>, among other things, "the necessity and reasonableness of the expense in relation to the means of the spouses and those of the child." | ||
A parent's new partner's income can be taken into consideration in assessing the "means of the spouses," which is exactly what the court did in the 2000 case of [http://canlii.ca/t/1fm6b Baum v. Baum]. In that decision, the court held that ''means of the spouses'' should be interpreted broadly as including ''all'' of the "means" available to the paying parent, including the financial contribution of their new partner. | A parent's new partner's income can be taken into consideration in assessing the "means of the spouses," which is exactly what the court did in the 2000 Supreme Court case of [http://canlii.ca/t/1fm6b Baum v. Baum]. In that decision, the court held that ''means of the spouses'' should be interpreted broadly as including ''all'' of the "means" available to the paying parent, including the financial contribution of their new partner. | ||
Again, the new partner will not be responsible to pay child support or a share of the children's special expenses or extraordinary expenses as a result; only the parent's obligations will be affected by their new partner's income. | Again, the new partner will not be responsible to pay child support or a share of the children's special expenses or extraordinary expenses as a result; only the parent's obligations will be affected by their new partner's income. | ||
| Line 280: | Line 283: | ||
===Death of the payor=== | ===Death of the payor=== | ||
A number of readers have asked whether they will have any responsibility to make child support payments if their partner, who is a parent or guardian with an obligation to pay child support, dies. The simple answer to that question is no, they | A number of readers have asked whether they will have any responsibility to make child support payments if their partner, who is a parent or guardian with an obligation to pay child support, dies. The simple answer to that question is no, they won't be responsible. The fact that they are in a relationship with a paying parent doesn't necessarily mean that they will have a duty to keep paying support if that parent dies. | ||
While that is a good general rule, and one you can probably rely on, it is possible that a claim could be made against the new partner as a "stepparent" of the child under the ''[[Family Law Act]]''. The act says that all parents, guardians, and stepparents are required to support their children, but section 147 says that stepparents who are obliged to pay child support must have contributed to the support of the child for at least one year. In other words, | While that is a good general rule, and one you can probably rely on, it is possible that a claim could be made against the new partner as a "stepparent" of the child under the ''[[Family Law Act]]''. The act says that all parents, guardians, and stepparents are required to support their children, but section 147 says that stepparents who are obliged to pay child support must have contributed to the support of the child for at least one year. In other words, someone who marries or begins to live with a paying parent may have an obligation if they have contributed to the support of the child. Again, while this is technically possible, orders against new partners following the death of the paying parent are extremely rare. | ||
==Agreements and orders for child support== | ==Agreements and orders for child support== | ||
| Line 303: | Line 306: | ||
<blockquote><tt>AND UPON the Court finding that the Claimant's income for the purposes of the Child Support Guidelines is $72,000.00 per year;</tt></blockquote> | <blockquote><tt>AND UPON the Court finding that the Claimant's income for the purposes of the Child Support Guidelines is $72,000.00 per year;</tt></blockquote> | ||
<blockquote><tt>THIS COURT ORDERS that:</tt></blockquote> | <blockquote><tt>THIS COURT ORDERS that:</tt></blockquote> | ||
<blockquote><tt>1. The Claimant, Jane Doe, payor, | <blockquote><tt>1. The Claimant, Jane Doe, payor, will pay to the Respondent, John Doe, recipient, the sum of $1,092 per month, commencing on the first day of April 2022 and continuing on the first day of each and every month thereafter until such time as the children are no longer "children of the marriage" as defined by the ''Divorce Act''; and, </tt></blockquote> | ||
<blockquote><tt>2. The Claimant | <blockquote><tt>2. The Claimant will provide to the Respondent a copy of her income tax return on the first day of May 2023 and continuing on the first day of May for each and every year thereafter, and copies of each Canada Revenue Agency Notice of Assessment or Notice of Reassessment she receives in respect of those income tax returns within two weeks of her receipt of the same, and the parties will adjust the amount of child support payable by the Claimant to the Respondent as of the first day of June 2023, and continuing on the first day of June for each and every year thereafter for so long as the Claimant is obliged to pay child support to the Respondent.</tt></blockquote> | ||
Under the ''[[Family Law Act]]'', the order would look like this: | Under the ''[[Family Law Act]]'', the order would look like this: | ||
| Line 313: | Line 316: | ||
<blockquote><tt>AND UPON the Court finding that the Claimant's income for the purposes of the Child Support Guidelines is $72,000.00 per year;</tt></blockquote> | <blockquote><tt>AND UPON the Court finding that the Claimant's income for the purposes of the Child Support Guidelines is $72,000.00 per year;</tt></blockquote> | ||
<blockquote><tt>THIS COURT ORDERS that:</tt></blockquote> | <blockquote><tt>THIS COURT ORDERS that:</tt></blockquote> | ||
<blockquote><tt>1. The Claimant, Jane Doe, payor, | <blockquote><tt>1. The Claimant, Jane Doe, payor, will pay to the Respondent, John Doe, recipient, the sum of $1,092 per month, commencing on the first day of April 2022 and continuing on the first day of each and every month thereafter until such time as the children are no longer "children" as defined by the ''Family Law Act''; and,</tt></blockquote> | ||
<blockquote><tt>2. The Claimant | <blockquote><tt>2. The Claimant will provide to the Respondent a copy of her income tax return on the first day of May 2023 and continuing on the first day of May for each and every year thereafter, and copies of each Canada Revenue Agency Notice of Assessment or Notice of Reassessment she receives in respect of those income tax returns within two weeks of her receipt of the same, and the parties will adjust the amount of child support payable by the Claimant to the Respondent as of the first day of June 2023, and continuing on the first day of June for each and every year thereafter for so long as the Claimant is obliged to pay child support to the Respondent.</tt></blockquote> | ||
The point of the last paragraph of each of these sample orders is to require the payor to annually provide evidence of their income to the recipient so that both parties can decide whether an increase or a decrease in the amount payable is appropriate. | The point of the last paragraph of each of these sample orders is to require the payor to annually provide evidence of their income to the recipient so that both parties can decide whether an increase or a decrease in the amount payable is appropriate. | ||
| Line 325: | Line 328: | ||
*an order that both parents exchange income information each year. | *an order that both parents exchange income information each year. | ||
Disclosure of income by both parents is also required in cases where one or more children live primarily with each parent | Disclosure of income by both parents is also required in cases where one or more children live primarily with each parent and in cases where the parents share the children's time more or less equally. | ||
It's a good idea to specify in a child support order whether the order is made under the ''Divorce Act'' or the ''Family Law Act'' as it could have an effect on a future application to change the original order. This was very important in the 2012 case of [http://canlii.ca/t/fspd1 Yu v. Jordan]. | It's a good idea to specify in a child support order whether the order is made under the ''Divorce Act'' or the ''Family Law Act'' as it could have an effect on a future application to change the original order. This was very important in the 2012 Court of Appeal case of [http://canlii.ca/t/fspd1 Yu v. Jordan]. | ||
===Agreements for child support=== | ===Agreements for child support=== | ||
| Line 342: | Line 345: | ||
<blockquote><tt>15. Jane will pay child support to John in the amount of $1,092 per month, beginning on 1 April 2022 and continuing on the first day of each month thereafter for so long as Jesse and Sandra remain "children" as defined by the ''Family Law Act''.</tt></blockquote> | <blockquote><tt>15. Jane will pay child support to John in the amount of $1,092 per month, beginning on 1 April 2022 and continuing on the first day of each month thereafter for so long as Jesse and Sandra remain "children" as defined by the ''Family Law Act''.</tt></blockquote> | ||
<blockquote><tt>16. Jane will give John a copy of her tax return by no later than May | <blockquote><tt>16. Jane will give John a copy of her income tax return by no later than May 1st each year, as well as copies of each Canada Revenue Agency Notice | ||
of Assessment or Notice of Reassessment within two weeks of her receipt of the same, for so long as Jane is required to pay child support to John.</tt></blockquote> | |||
<blockquote><tt>17. Jane and John will adjust the amount of child support payable by Jane to John after reviewing Jane's income tax return, and the adjusted amount will be effective as of June 1st each year.</tt></blockquote> | |||
Both court orders and separation agreements should include the children’s full names, birth dates, the amounts of child support | Both court orders and separation agreements should include the children’s full names, birth dates, the amounts of child support, the amounts of the children's special expenses and extraordinary expenses, and the date when payments will start. These details are important so that the orders and agreements about child support can be enforced. | ||
==Child support tables and calculators== | ==Child support tables and calculators== | ||
| Line 350: | Line 355: | ||
The [http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-97-175/page-11.html#h-15 simplified Child Support Guidelines Tables for British Columbia] are available from the website of the federal Department of Justice. The federal government has published an [http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/fl-df/child-enfant/look-rech.asp online child support calculator]. | The [http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-97-175/page-11.html#h-15 simplified Child Support Guidelines Tables for British Columbia] are available from the website of the federal Department of Justice. The federal government has published an [http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/fl-df/child-enfant/look-rech.asp online child support calculator]. | ||
The provincial government also operates the BC Child Support Info Line | The provincial government also operates the BC Child Support Info Line that offers free information about child support and the child support tables. Contact the Info Line at: | ||
*Lower Mainland: 604-660-2192<br> | *Lower Mainland: 604-660-2192<br> | ||
| Line 378: | Line 383: | ||
{{REVIEWED | reviewer = [[JP Boyd]], | {{REVIEWED | reviewer = [[JP Boyd]], 24 August 2022}} | ||
{{JP Boyd on Family Law Navbox|type=chapters}} | {{JP Boyd on Family Law Navbox|type=chapters}} | ||