Who will have to pay ? And who has Primary custady ?

[GrowUp!]

If there is a large enough disparity of income, then he could be primary custodian and still have to pay some child support. It hasn't been determined that either is primary custodian, they have shared custody. She can be imputed a higher income as you mentioned, if that is just minimum wage it would still be much less than his income.

You're really throwing anything you can against the wall to see what sticks. You have alot of "ifs" here.

Assuming her ex has an attorney or the knowledge to ask that a higher amount be imputed based on what her earning capacity is, then their incomes could be more equitable. I did say based on the incomes she provided he probably would have to pay. That part was not a given, but the medical and discount for overnights are spelled out directly in PA guidelines.

And "if" he is providing the primary insurance, that is considered "support" in many states, therefore lowering the amount of support owed, "if" any.

And childcare costs would be considered if she needs to get another job, they too are shared by both parents.

And he would have every right to protest that and ask for more time to decrease the need for daycare and inflicting additional expenses onto both parents, which would give him more time than Mom.

Or mom can simply agree to have a respectable income imputed onto her for being voluntarily being under-employerd by being a SAHM (since so many make the argument that it actually is a "full-time job"), so there is no support being exchanged. BTW...there is no discounting the responsibilities of being a SAHM, but if one's going to make the argument of what a full-time gig it is, then those who do should agree to have an income imputed to reflect that. And not minimum wage, either.

 

[wondreing]

In previous posts, it was stated that her ex would get a discount for providing insurance, assuming it is not provided free by his work. Only child care and medical insurance are specifically addressed in the PA guidelines (or education if the child was already attending a private school prior to the divorce, doesn't appear to be the case here). The amounts each would be required to contribute towards child care costs and insurance are based on their proportional share and not split 50/50. Those amounts are added to or subtracted from the child support order. And there are a lot of "ifs" in regards to some child support cases because of the deviations in place. In their case, that would include income (not sure what amount they will use to determine hers) and amount of overnights at each residence. To file though, it states in the PA handbook that the parent the child lives with can file for child support and she has the children more than 40% of the time. Doesn't mean she will get anything if she files, and I'm not trying to imply she will, but she could.

 

[CJane]

And that means no madder how long I have the children during the time he works as long as he has them overnight he has primary custody?

I know that's the way it would work in my state. BTDT.

Two week schedule of overnights for my house:

Week #1
Sun - Mom
Mon - Mom
Tues - Mom
Wed - Dad
Thurs - Dad
Fri - Dad
Sat - Dad

3 overnights for Mom
4 overnights for Dad

Week #2
Sun - Mom
Mon - Mom
Tues - Mom
Wed - Dad
Thurs - Dad
Fri - Mom
Sat - Mom

5 overnights for Mom
2 overnights for Dad

So, in a 2 week period I have them 8 nights, he has them 7. Just like you. He thought we had a 50/50 schedule until we went to court and it was explained to him by the judge that I have the kids nearly 60% of the time, making me primary... just like your ex.

 

[goldengirlblue]

In previous posts, it was stated that her ex would get a discount for providing insurance, assuming it is not provided free by his work. Only child care and medical insurance are specifically addressed in the PA guidelines (or education if the child was already attending a private school prior to the divorce, doesn't appear to be the case here). The amounts each would be required to contribute towards child care costs and insurance are based on their proportional share and not split 50/50. Those amounts are added to or subtracted from the child support order. And there are a lot of "ifs" in regards to some child support cases because of the deviations in place. In their case, that would include income (not sure what amount they will use to determine hers) and amount of overnights at each residence. To file though, it states in the PA handbook that the parent the child lives with can file for child support and she has the children more than 40% of the time. Doesn't mean she will get anything if she files, and I'm not trying to imply she will, but she could.

We already have a order in and I am going there today for it I will let you all know how it went.I am the childcare provider in this case because I do work form home I have the children when he works.
I have been writing down all the times that I have the children.
And I do have them more then 40% I don't know why they can say he h as them a couple nights more I believe you provide much more for children during the day then over night.
Including gas bill electric to keep the children warm.Anyways I think it is wrong the way they figure the overnights and stuff like that.
Thats just me.
Thank you all

 

[Silverplum]

In previous posts, it was stated that her ex would get a discount for providing insurance, assuming it is not provided free by his work. Only child care and medical insurance are specifically addressed in the PA guidelines (or education if the child was already attending a private school prior to the divorce, doesn't appear to be the case here). The amounts each would be required to contribute towards child care costs and insurance are based on their proportional share and not split 50/50. Those amounts are added to or subtracted from the child support order. And there are a lot of "ifs" in regards to some child support cases because of the deviations in place. In their case, that would include income (not sure what amount they will use to determine hers) and amount of overnights at each residence. To file though, it states in the PA handbook that the parent the child lives with can file for child support and she has the children more than 40% of the time. Doesn't mean she will get anything if she files, and I'm not trying to imply she will, but she could.

WHY would the parent who has the child less than half of the time receive CS??

 

[CJane]

We already have a order in and I am going there today for it I will let you all know how it went.I am the childcare provider in this case because I do work form home I have the children when he works.
I have been writing down all the times that I have the children.
And I do have them more then 40% I don't know why they can say he h as them a couple nights more I believe you provide much more for children during the day then over night.

And my ex's wife was our child care provider, which my ex thought would give HIM primary custodian status because the kids technically spent more time in his house. The judge explained to him (and by explained, I mean beat into his head) that this state counts OVERNIGHTS, not hours. He then asked if the ex would grant the kids' school custody using the same logic. After all, the school has them for around 7 hours per day, 5 days per week, 9 months per year. The school feeds them 2 meals/day, keeps them warm and dry, etc.

 

[wondreing]

They only refer to custodial parent as the parent the child lives with, which is both parents in a joint custody situation. My husband had his kids 183 overnights and his ex had them 182 overnights whenever she filed, and by so doing, became custodial parent.

 

[goldengirlblue]

They only refer to custodial parent as the parent the child lives with, which is both parents in a joint custody situation. My husband had his kids 183 overnights and his ex had them 182 overnights whenever she filed, and by so doing, became custodial parent.

Hey all
I did go to the custody meeting and I was suppose to pay 50 dollars a month for both children for health insurance but he did not want that he was asking us for 200 a month I have the children 48 % of the time and he has them 52% So we going in front of the judge because of 50 dollars thats just not right.He is a very controlling person and still is he wants to have the have he is asking for just to but that littel control on to me.Heck I was never alought to talk to anyone he used to check my emails and listen to my phone call in Germany that i had made with my family.
Also they are in process of changing the overnights to hours they were planing on it this year but never went threw so they still in process of doing that.

 

[CJane]

Hey all
I did go to the custody meeting and I was suppose to pay 50 dollars a month for both children for health insurance but he did not want that he was asking us for 200 a month I have the children 48 % of the time and he has them 52% So we going in front of the judge because of 50 dollars thats just not right.

So the answer to your original question is that he's primary and you're the payor.

And you're correct. It's NOT right that you're attempting to avoid paying your portion of the children's health insurance.

Also they are in process of changing the overnights to hours they were planing on it this year but never went threw so they still in process of doing that.

Who is 'they'?

 

[goldengirlblue]

So the answer to your original question is that he's primary and you're the payor.

And you're correct. It's NOT right that you're attempting to avoid paying your portion of the children's health insurance.



Who is 'they'?

I am not avoiding it I pay for it but he wants more then he is getting so he wants to but it in front of a judge.
I can pay for health insurance or simply but them on mine it don't madder to me with one child he has the access card from the wall fare department so I know there is not cost for one child. But the other witch like I said I can but on my insurance.With they I meant the domestic relation.

 

[Astrolink]

Just a couple things

I don't know about your state, but this is the way it is in mine (MN).

1) All hours a NCP has the children in lieu of daycare for the CP, count as hours for the CP.
2) Your income will be imputed to 40 hours/week at whatever wage you are earning in computing CS. If you don't work at all, it will be imputed to 40 hours/ week at your state's minimum wage. If you earn $500/month as you said, and your income is not paid hourly, then the court would take how many hours you worked to earn the $500, then calculate what you would make in 40/hours.


There is a case here where a NCP has the kids 66% of the time (27% of that time is credited to the CP via daycare replacement by the NCP, thus the court "changes" the figure to 39%) , and must pay CS, as in MN, CS is based only on the NCP's income.

 

[nextwife]

I don't know about your state, but this is the way it is in mine (MN).

1) All hours a NCP has the children in lieu of daycare for the CP, count as hours for the CP.
2) Your income will be imputed to 40 hours/week at whatever wage you are earning in computing CS. If you don't work at all, it will be imputed to 40 hours/ week at your state's minimum wage. If you earn $500/month as you said, and your income is not paid hourly, then the court would take how many hours you worked to earn the $500, then calculate what you would make in 40/hours.


There is a case here where a NCP has the kids 66% of the time (27% of that time is credited to the CP via daycare replacement by the NCP, thus the court "changes" the figure to 39%) , and must pay CS, as in MN, CS is based only on the NCP's income.

And how they do things in MN affects PA exactly HOW?

 

[stealth2]

They are in the same country. Care to debate that one?

Oh for Christ's sake. Do you not realize that state law governs these situations - and the laws in PA may be vastly different than those in MN? MN is moot to this conversation.

 

[Astrolink]

Of course they are different

All 50 states are different. Every county of each state follows the laws differently, and each judge interprets each differently. I read the differences in each, and I somewhat know PA's laws as well. I'm just giving an extreme example. The bottom line in this case is overnights, as others have stated, and the possibility of imputation of income.