Actually, no. Child support is not alimony, and alimony is not child support. There are various kinds of each type of support, but the two categories are different; and the most obvious reason the courts make a distinction is that they are taxed differently.
The percentage of income cited on standard child support schedules varies from one state to another, as previously noted “a patchwork of standards.” Here are some of the various rates in several states for a person with a net income of $3,000 per month ($36,000 annually) for one child:
Washington State 561
Louisiana 548
Colorado 720
Alabama 587
Ohio 514
Rhode Island 540
New Jersey 447
Arkansas 521
N. Carolina 571
New York 510
As you can see, the rates vary greatly and the way they are applied not only varies from state to state, but also may vary based on negotiations between the two parties to the divorce, with additions or subtractions based on items such as who pays for health care coverage, who provides babysitting (nursery school fees vs. grandma volunteering) and a host of other issues such as braces, summer camp, college education or many other variables.
I’ve been trying to get across to you that one divorce case or even the standards of the law in one state does not apply to the entire nation’s court cases. While you may have a point that some courts make an assumption that the woman will be the primary custodian, not all courts nor all judges do this. And no state can bar any father or mother from suing for custody or for an alteration in custody orders as long as the child is a minor. Even O J Simpson got custody after his imprisonment for a civil finding (sued by the Goldman famlly after the criminal case failed) of having murdered the mother of his children.
There are no winners in divorce when children are part of the marriage. Everyone — man, woman, child and extended family, even the neighbors, church, schoolmates and community tax base — loses something vital. Claiming that women have ruined the system is like anti-war protestors blaming the soldiers for a war. The legislatures and bar associations bear most of the blame. Virtually no individual goes into court with his or her personal divorce tragedy in order to run a test case to establish revolutionary precedents in American law. Lawyers might try to use cases for that reason; their motivation is also not likely to be “for the children” as much as it is for their own bottom line, lawyer lifestyles, summer homes at the beach and their own divorce battles.
Obviously you have an axe to grind, and while I have been posting in general terms about the overall trends and the exceptions thereof, you have been railing in absolute, black&white polemics, leveling personal insults and trying to make your posts believable because you firmly believe them. It’s not working.
You are confused.
Alimony is an obligation to financially support another person.
Alimony can be for:
- Spousal support
- Child support
- or even parental (or grandparental support)
For example:
“Art. 229. Reciprocal alimentary duties of ascendants and descendants.
Children are bound to maintain their father and mother and other ascendants, who are in need,
and the relatives in the direct ascending line are likewise bound to maintain their needy descendants,
this obligation being reciprocal.
This reciprocal obligation is limited to life’s basic necessities of food, clothing, shelter, and health care, and arises only upon proof of inability to obtain these necessities by other means or from other sources.
Amended by Acts 1970, No. 436, §2; Acts 1972, No. 668, §1; Acts 1979, No. 249, §1.”
Actually, no. Child support is not alimony, and alimony is not child support. There are various kinds of each type of support, but the two categories are different; and the most obvious reason the courts make a distinction is that they are taxed differently.
The percentage of income cited on standard child support schedules varies from one state to another, as previously noted “a patchwork of standards.” Here are some of the various rates in several states for a person with a net income of $3,000 per month ($36,000 annually) for one child:
Washington State 561
Louisiana 548
Colorado 720
Alabama 587
Ohio 514
Rhode Island 540
New Jersey 447
Arkansas 521
N. Carolina 571
New York 510
As you can see, the rates vary greatly and the way they are applied not only varies from state to state, but also may vary based on negotiations between the two parties to the divorce, with additions or subtractions based on items such as who pays for health care coverage, who provides babysitting (nursery school fees vs. grandma volunteering) and a host of other issues such as braces, summer camp, college education or many other variables.
I’ve been trying to get across to you that one divorce case or even the standards of the law in one state does not apply to the entire nation’s court cases. While you may have a point that some courts make an assumption that the woman will be the primary custodian, not all courts nor all judges do this. And no state can bar any father or mother from suing for custody or for an alteration in custody orders as long as the child is a minor. Even O J Simpson got custody after his imprisonment for a civil finding (sued by the Goldman famlly after the criminal case failed) of having murdered the mother of his children.
There are no winners in divorce when children are part of the marriage. Everyone — man, woman, child and extended family, even the neighbors, church, schoolmates and community tax base — loses something vital. Claiming that women have ruined the system is like anti-war protestors blaming the soldiers for a war. The legislatures and bar associations bear most of the blame. Virtually no individual goes into court with his or her personal divorce tragedy in order to run a test case to establish revolutionary precedents in American law. Lawyers might try to use cases for that reason; their motivation is also not likely to be “for the children” as much as it is for their own bottom line, lawyer lifestyles, summer homes at the beach and their own divorce battles.
Obviously you have an axe to grind, and while I have been posting in general terms about the overall trends and the exceptions thereof, you have been railing in absolute, black&white polemics, leveling personal insults and trying to make your posts believable because you firmly believe them. It’s not working.
Using the ‘claimed’ BASIC support amounts, and excluding the two outliers, the alleged low of New Jersey and the alleged high of Colorado.
The results show the that average BASIC child support amount is $544/mo.
The median is also the same as the average amount at $544/mo.
The standard deviation for the results is $27.99/mo.
So for the same income amount, the proposed BASIC child support award is essentially the same for most States. This is because the same firm was hired to develop the child support guidelines for most states.
Let us sort the ‘claimed’ amounts of BASIC support you cited.
New Jersey............ 447
New York............... 510
Ohio....................... 514
Arkansas................ 521
Rhode Island.......... 540
Louisiana............... 548
Washington State.. 561
N. Carolina............ 571
Alabama................ 587
Colorado............... 720
You are confused.
The purpose behind the table was to eliminate the ‘additions and subtractions based on who pays for health care coverage, babysitting, etc’.
To say these are based on ‘negotiations between the parties’ is ludicrous. These are often just mandated/dictated by the courts to the parties. The parties frequently have little to no say.
As fare as ‘subtractions’ go. The only subtraction allowed by Louisiana law is if the child has income.
Everything else is an ADDITION.
The typical largest addition is for daycare. That would add about $280 to $300/month to the award (for one child)
A person with a $3,000/month income has a tax liability of approximately $633.44/mo. The breakdown on that is $310.00/mo Federal tax; $93.94/mo Louisiana tax; and $229.50/mo FICA.
So their net income is approximately $2,366.56/mo.
Deducting the $548/mo basic child support obligation, that persons take home pay is now $1,818.56/mo (So the $17.30/hr income is a net $10.49/hr)
If we add on the $280/mo for day care, then take home income becomes $1,538.57/mo ($8.88/hr)
Health care is mandatory, so lets tack on another $100/mo for the health car.
Net income is now $1,438.56/mo. ($8.30/hr)
So what else would you like to tack on? Keep going. The courts are allowed to. They will be going for the cap of 50% of net income, so an order of $1,183.28/mo is probably likely.
P.S. Most states do not allow for Child Support for College Education. Only about 17 States do so.
We stopped that proposal in Louisiana back in, goodness, I think it was 2005.
It turned out that Rep. McVea’s sister’s child support of $5,000/month was set to expire. So he sought to change the law so that the support could continue PLUS COLLEGE EXPENSES.
Fortunately, he lost.
Since there is NO cap on the ‘extraordinary expenses’, these expenses can bring the order up to take all of the persons income as child support. Especially a low income person.
The Federal government says that a typical order on a low income person is typically 60% of net income.
The Feds also say that most of the arrears in child support orders are being accrued against people with income of less than $10,000/year.
Please do not post misinformation.
1) The majority of courts across this nation tend to make the women the primary custodial parent and have done so for the past thirty to forty years. The situation has improved slightly in recent years, but the rampant discrimination against men still exists.
2a) O.J. Simpson was declared not guilty in his criminal trial. Since the mother was dead, of course he was granted primary custody at that point.
2b) O.J. Simpson was not granted primary custody while the mother was alive. That was one of the issues between them. They used the fact that he was at her open door hollering for her to bring down his kids because it was his time with them against him in the criminal trial.
2c) O.J. Simpson was NOT jailed in the civil trial. He had very large financial award leveled against him. But he was not jailed as a result of that civil trial.
2d) O.J. Simpson was jailed as a result of a dispute between himself and a ‘fan’ who had property that O.J. considered belonging to him.
2e) Citing the O.J. Simpson case does not help your position.
3) Yes, States allow the parents to sue of child custody once. Once it is settled, changing the outcome of the case is difficult. So yes, a parent can be effectively barred from suing for custody.
4) The Federal government rarely intervenes in custody cases. They have a “Rooker-Feldman” doctrine. Divorce is a State court issue.
“I’ve been trying to get across to you that one divorce case or even the standards of the law in one state does not apply to the entire nation’s court cases.”
“While you may have a point that some courts make an assumption that the woman will be the primary custodian, not all courts nor all judges do this.”
“And no state can bar any father or mother from suing for custody or for an alteration in custody orders as long as the child is a minor.”
“Even O J Simpson got custody after his imprisonment for a civil finding (sued by the Goldman famlly after the criminal case failed) of having murdered the mother of his children.”
The legislatures and bar association dance to the tune of the women.
Sorry, but that is who is specifically responsible for the laws that are on the books.