Is Auto Allowance taken into consideration?

[momofrose]

So you were looking for the answer you WANTED to hear, not necessarily the correct, LEGAL answer, huh? Especially since only one person responded in this thread who has experience with gas allowance. Make that 2.

No - that is not the case at all - I had thought that a taxed auto bi-weekly auto allowance that is included in the paycheck and taxed accordingly would be considered income, otherwise this would be a great way to "hide" income.

It is part of his compensation and this "allowance" is not that is used as Sales Reps or others that use their car on a daily basis to perform job functions - this is stricktly a perk.

Thanks

 

[fairisfair]

So you were looking for the answer you WANTED to hear, not necessarily the correct, LEGAL answer, huh? Especially since only one person responded in this thread who has experience with gas allowance. Make that 2.

the answer that I gave was legally correct. And by the way, because you seem so interested, I do receive a car allowance, and and mileage reimbursement, in fact, I even get the option to chose my own private health care and life insurance plan and am reimbursed for it by my employer. Not all of those things are calculated in my net income however, although some are.

You know timeout apparently only works for children.

 

[CJane]

Not all of those things are calculated in my net income however, although some are.

It sounds to me, because of the way this is paid to OP's ex, that it would count as income. It doesn't sound like an offset (as nextwife's allowance does) but as a ... bonus ... for lack of a better word.

During my custody trial, when we got around to CS, they included my ex's per diem while travelling, but not his rental car allowance. The reasoning was that one (the rental) was required in order to perform his duties and the other (per diem) was not.

OP's ex might have to prove that his vehicle allowance is required in order for him to maintain present employment. And I'm betting that's a tough row to hoe.

 

[Inquiry123]

It sounds to me, because of the way this is paid to OP's ex, that it would count as income. It doesn't sound like an offset (as nextwife's allowance does) but as a ... bonus ... for lack of a better word.

OP's ex might have to prove that his vehicle allowance is required in order for him to maintain present employment. And I'm betting that's a tough row to hoe.

I'm understanding OP's situation differently, somehow. It sounded to me as if his employer was giving a set reimbursement for use of his own vehicle to fulfill the job requirements. Depreciation, maintenance, fuel, ins., etc.

He has to travel from work to the job site. Does the job EVER require him to transport people, supplies, run errands, visit vendors, etc? As nextwife suggested, actual costs can vary and may actually exceed such a set reimbursement.

Although you could argue that the depreciation schedule for an early model Ford has been exhausted, that's not your call to make -- the "fair" amount (within reason) has been determined by the employer. IMO, they're simply trying to compensate him for using his own vehicle instead of having to provide a company vehicle to get the job done.

Devil's Advocate: Why not ask that it be included in the calculation, it couldn't hurt!

 

[momofrose]

I'm understanding OP's situation differently, somehow. It sounded to me as if his employer was giving a set reimbursement for use of his own vehicle to fulfill the job requirements. Depreciation, maintenance, fuel, ins., etc.

He has to travel from work to the job site. Does the job EVER require him to transport people, supplies, run errands, visit vendors, etc? As nextwife suggested, actual costs can vary and may actually exceed such a set reimbursement.

Although you could argue that the depreciation schedule for an early model Ford has been exhausted, that's not your call to make -- the "fair" amount (within reason) has been determined by the employer. IMO, they're simply trying to compensate him for using his own vehicle instead of having to provide a company vehicle to get the job done.

Devil's Advocate: Why not ask that it be included in the calculation, it couldn't hurt!

Thank for all replies - because the "auto allowance" is a perk (not something that is needed to offset transportation needed for the job) I am going to ask that it be included. He does not have to transport anyone or run to get supplies or visit vendors or any if the examples given. He is project manager for a large builder and needs to make certian the buiilding (in his development) is being done within the time framce and to code and things of that nature..none of which have to do with an auto allowance.

I agree that he may fight it, but I would ask the court then to ask the employer to submit in writing the reason for the auto allowance (for the record)...it's not a TON of money, but if it is (as I suspect) simply a perk...it should be counted.

Thanks

 

[nextwife]

If he bicycled to work, took a bus, carpooled, got dropped off: could he accomplish what his emplyers requires of him off site? If not, then he could make the argument that the car is necessary to his work. In opther words, the car is NOT just an extra, but having a car to access during the day and use, IS a requirement of his job. Because he must drive offsite of his employer to do the job.

If he inspects job sites, this project may only be here, but the next project could be way over there, and so on.