![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I recently posted that oregun's new guidelines had upped the tables so
that, even with the new "parenting time credit", dads with standard access would see no decrease in their support...I was wrong. I finally got a chance to play with a few numbers and found that under the new guidelines, and in a situation looking only at support (no childcare or insurance) and with 1 joint child and the mother having 4 non-joint children, with both parents making $3K/month and dad having 20% of the yearly overnights, the father's support obligation will actually be $20 LESS using the new calculator than under the old guidelines/calculator and $80 less than with no parenting credit using the new calculator. Caveats: Every other weekend, plus 2 weeks in the summer and half a dozen holidays is LESS than 20% - 4 full weeks in the summer will put you over 20%. At ANYTHING LESS than 20%....the new guideline amount is $60 more than the old ($455 vs. $395). Guess I was maybe HALF wrong......but why is that last day that puts it over 20% worth $720 ($80 x 12 months)? Maybe because over the next 10 years you'll almost be able to recover the cost of the attorney that GOT you that last day.... As for the part I wrote about screwing those of us who have no *RECOGNIZED* parenting time... I finally got my modification results today. From $341/month at about $17/hr income, my support is going to drop to $218/month at minimum wage....whoopee****. Under the old guidelines, that same drop would have resulted in an obligation of $152 - the new amount is an increase of 43%....*F*O*R*T*Y*-*T*H*R*E*E* *F*'*I*N*G* PERCENT!!!!!! OUCH!!!!!! Always finding new ways to screw us - the governmental Kama Sutra.... It DOES appear they've done away with the old "her income went up so my CS went UP" problem. Using the old calculator, running her income from the ASSumed $1221 minimum wage to $7K in roughly $1K increments, my obligation would have gone UP from $152 to a peak of $168 at her income equal to $4K, before it finally dropped - at her income equal to $7k and mine at $1221 - to $146. Using the same numbers in the new calculator takes my support steadily-but-slowly down to $156...now if I could just get her that $7K/month job.... All-in-all, from my point of view they took a LOT away from us and gave back a little bit....a VERY little bit. Like I said - governmental Kama Sutra.... Mel Gamble |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
learning to talk wrong | Marie | Twins & Triplets | 6 | July 19th 04 08:57 PM |
ICAN and The Pink Kit: a dark side (Wintergreen is wrong) | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 0 | January 30th 04 09:45 PM |
Judge wrong to split teen & family teen wanted out FW: | Fern5827 | Spanking | 0 | January 18th 04 04:07 PM |