Child Support and wealth

[Jackston]

TX

Specifically in TX but feedback from other states welcome. The father is wealthy the mother is of average means. Does the presumptive amount apply in calculations of child support or is it the case that support may be calculated based more on the fathers lifestyle.

 

[nextwife]

TX

Specifically in TX but feedback from other states welcome. The father is wealthy the mother is of average means. Does the presumptive amount apply in calculations of child support or is it the case that support may be calculated based more on the fathers lifestyle.

It is based on the father's INCOME, and, in most states, also the mothers. "Lifestyle" can a be a combo of clever buying/and or selling, previous earnings, spousal/significant other contributions, inheritance etc. Alternatively, it can also be based on OVERSPENDING and dependence on credit, which is NOT sustainable. One cannot base child support, for example, on the fact that one parent may live in a neighborhood with million dollar homes because that parent built up equity over many years by paying extra on their mortgage and made other lifestyle choices that allowed them to accumulate wealth. Or on the fact that one parent appeared to live a nice lifestyle by maxing out their credit cards and sucking out their home equity.

 

[Jackston]

Thanks for your reply....So in a situation such as this would you consider the underlined info BS and manipulative or perhaps true. I'm trying to figure out all the lies**************.

I became pregnant , ex said he was happy and all in, told me to get a lawyer, then brought his CEO daddy to court and they lied and said ex had no money. Someone told me they overheard "the guys" (her boyfriend and my ex) talking and asked if I was aware that ex had removed his assets from his name to keep from paying support. At that time my income was appx 30K.

When asked in court how he lived they said he was living off a loan of 35K from daddy to cover expenses. So rich trust fund ex only HAS to pay 500 a month and he doesn't pay it. When I complained to bil about how child and I were treated, because he suggested I did not do enough for the family, he suggested I go back to court, "Surely in court he wouldn't lie." OMG... What different outcome could I expect from people with no compunction to lie under oath?
Then bil said ....

Just hung-up with my "partner's" wife that is a family lawyer and she mentioned a few things that are interesting. She is going to call some other lawyers to get more information.

She said there is a cap on child support of $1,200 per month. IF you can prove special needs you can sometimes get more. I explained he has $4 million cash and spends $20,000 per month and she said she will get more opinions but thinks $3,000 per month "may" be reasonable.

As far as income the only taxes I've seen were from 2001 where he made 658,720. AFTER taxes wholly generated from his trust fund. I can only assume that based on the same people handling his money his yearly income is at least in the same ballpark.

Please don't slam me like I'm some golddigger, herd it all before and it's not true. I'm just trying to figure out the depth of bil's lies....Thanks for any input.

 

[Astrolink]

Hmm

You aren't gold digging? That, I don't think you could convince your mother of, let alone anyone here.

 

[LdiJ]

Thanks for your reply....So in a situation such as this would you consider the underlined info BS and manipulative or perhaps true. I'm trying to figure out all the lies**************.

I became pregnant , ex said he was happy and all in, told me to get a lawyer, then brought his CEO daddy to court and they lied and said ex had no money. Someone told me they overheard "the guys" (her boyfriend and my ex) talking and asked if I was aware that ex had removed his assets from his name to keep from paying support. At that time my income was appx 30K.

When asked in court how he lived they said he was living off a loan of 35K from daddy to cover expenses. So rich trust fund ex only HAS to pay 500 a month and he doesn't pay it. When I complained to bil about how child and I were treated, because he suggested I did not do enough for the family, he suggested I go back to court, "Surely in court he wouldn't lie." OMG... What different outcome could I expect from people with no compunction to lie under oath?
Then bil said ....

Just hung-up with my "partner's" wife that is a family lawyer and she mentioned a few things that are interesting. She is going to call some other lawyers to get more information.

She said there is a cap on child support of $1,200 per month. IF you can prove special needs you can sometimes get more. I explained he has $4 million cash and spends $20,000 per month and she said she will get more opinions but thinks $3,000 per month "may" be reasonable.

As far as income the only taxes I've seen were from 2001 where he made 658,720. AFTER taxes wholly generated from his trust fund. I can only assume that based on the same people handling his money his yearly income is at least in the same ballpark.

Please don't slam me like I'm some golddigger, herd it all before and it's not true. I'm just trying to figure out the depth of bil's lies....Thanks for any input.

Obviously you need an attorney. Obviously 500.00 a month is unreasonable in this case.

However, you also need to realize that child support doesn't last forever. Even if you get an award of 3000.00 a month you are going to need to budget based on your own earnings, so that once child support stops, you won't be in a huge financial bind.

 

[CJane]

Obviously you need an attorney. Obviously 500.00 a month is unreasonable in this case.

However, you also need to realize that child support doesn't last forever. Even if you get an award of 3000.00 a month you are going to need to budget based on your own earnings, so that once child support stops, you won't be in a huge financial bind.

Also, MANY states have a "cap" on an amount of earnings considered for child support purposes. If the income amount is over that cap (in some states, that's like $120K, so it's not like it's a LOT), then different rules apply to CS.

TX uses a flat percentage of the NCP's income for child support calculations. I think it's 20%. Because Dad's entire income appears to be generated by investments, it may be handled differently. An attorney is a must in this case.

 

[nextwife]

Also, MANY states have a "cap" on an amount of earnings considered for child support purposes. If the income amount is over that cap (in some states, that's like $120K, so it's not like it's a LOT), then different rules apply to CS.

TX uses a flat percentage of the NCP's income for child support calculations. I think it's 20%. Because Dad's entire income appears to be generated by investments, it may be handled differently. An attorney is a must in this case.

Also, if dad's income is mostly generated off of investments, dad's income NOW may very well be quite different than in the well-performing stock market days of 2001. Some companies are now bankrupt, reporting negative earnings numbers, or simply not generating dividends or earnings. I'm just a little investor, and I lost $22,000 this year when a company that I used to work for went BK, with me still holding shares of company stock. Multiply such a scenario across a large investment portfolio, and many investors are seeing very little income right now from their portfolios. Which is why so many retirees are in financial trouble.

 

[LdiJ]

Also, MANY states have a "cap" on an amount of earnings considered for child support purposes. If the income amount is over that cap (in some states, that's like $120K, so it's not like it's a LOT), then different rules apply to CS.

TX uses a flat percentage of the NCP's income for child support calculations. I think it's 20%. Because Dad's entire income appears to be generated by investments, it may be handled differently. An attorney is a must in this case.

TX has a "cap". Beyond the cap its up to the judge's discretion to determine how much child support should be awarded. That's pretty normal for most states.

My comment on 500.00 obviously being inappropriate is due to the fact that many parents with dramatically lower income than this ncp are required to pay significantly more.

 

[Jackston]

Thanks to all but one for your effort in reply.

What I'm looking for is examples of others in similar situations. IE my wealthy ex pays X amount in support.

Point of post being bil's remark about what his "friend" said would be the best possible case. He said he told her what ex has and spends but I have no way of knowing if he really said that. Was he just jerking my chain or what? At one point bil told me ex was "almost out of money". Then he said, he has a little to keep him afloat for a while, 4M. Wow, he considers that almost out of money???!!!! I could float for a LONG time on that. I could float my kid some lessons, some braces, some vacations, all things I cannot do, having a hard time keeping the roof over our heads.

Bil had said to me several times that fil told him to "make sure (child) and I were totally taken care of" yet when I told bil I needed help he then said, "I discussed it with my father and we feel you need to get your help from ex since it's his kid and his responsibility." OMG. I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT ALL THE LIES. WHO LIED ABOUT WHAT AND WHEN. (which apparently is pretty much every time one of them opens their mouth)

*****CHILD SUPPORT

* The Texas Family Code contains guidelines for the computation of child support. The guidelines are specifically designed to apply to situations in which the obligor's monthly net resources are $7,500.00 or less. In such cases, the court presumptively applies the following schedule:
1 child
2 children
3 children
4 children
5 children
6 or more children

20% of Obligor's Net Resources
25% of Obligor's Net Resources
30% of Obligor's Net Resources
35% of Obligor's Net Resources
40% of Obligor's Net Resources
Not less than 40%

If the Obligor has children from another relationship(s), the percentages listed above may be reduced.

If the obligor's net resources exceed $7,500.00 per month, the Court shall presumptively apply the above percentages to the first $7,500.00 of net resources. Without further reference to the percentage, the court may order additional amounts of child support. The court may not order the obligor to pay more child support than the presumptive amount (as calculated by multiplying the above applicable percentage times $7,500.00) or an amount equal to 100% of the proven needs of the child, whichever is greater. *****

I do know and don't care how much the market fluctuates. He has gone from 3M then to 4M+ spending a quarter M a year on fun and games. He has no mortgage, paid, no car payments, paid, but lots of high dollar cars and last year bought a million dollar garage to "play cars" in. Yeah, I think 500. is totally inappropriate.

 

[rppearso]

I think it is sometimes refered to as the 3 pony rules, no child is entitled to more than "3 ponys" just because the ncp is loaded. I personally thing the courts set the bar WAY to high and if more people would claim refugee status when they went broke from support you might see things change.

 

[Jackston]

I think it is sometimes refered to as the 3 pony rules, no child is entitled to more than "3 ponys" just because the ncp is loaded. I personally thing the courts set the bar WAY to high and if more people would claim refugee status when they went broke from support you might see things change.

Not sure I can determine what your point is. We don't have any ponies, we do have a leaky roof. Does that count?

 

[Zigner]

Not sure I can determine what your point is. We don't have any ponies, we do have a leaky roof. Does that count?

Don't worry - rppearso makes things up as he goes and has a political agenda in his posts. Feel free to ignore him.

 

[CJane]

If he's clever, it's likely you can't determine his actual income without hiring a forensic accountant which is VERY expensive.

Yes, $500 is wholly inappropriate. Yes, he should likely be paying more (LOTS MORE) based on what his brother says his income is. HOWEVER, child support is based on INCOME and it sounds like Ex has lots of ASSETS which is not the same thing at all.

 

[nextwife]

If he's clever, it's likely you can't determine his actual income without hiring a forensic accountant which is VERY expensive.

Yes, $500 is wholly inappropriate. Yes, he should likely be paying more (LOTS MORE) based on what his brother says his income is. HOWEVER, child support is based on INCOME and it sounds like Ex has lots of ASSETS which is not the same thing at all.

And, brother may or may not be giving you a line of BS. CS is based on what one actually has as income, not what someone else, who may or may not REALLY know SAYS they earn. I know for SURE than NONE of my siblings has any clue what I earn or have saved, or OWE, other than knowing my where house is.

 

[rppearso]

Whats up with all this entitelment mentality, thats his money and his stuff. Why is 500$ inappropriate just because he has money, I would love to have that kind of money and buy myself an air race plane, it seems as soon as you have money everyone is trying to rip you off you almost have to live a very paranoid life and have your balls chopped off.