Is child support always awarded to one parent or any parent?

[Stott]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Texas

cs may not always be awarded to one parent and if child support and custody are "seperate" issues why is it most always awarded?

If seperated parents are joint mangaing conservators and the custody arrangement has additional days than a standard SPO; does that mean the CP who designates primary residance shall get CS or a raise in it especially if they do not work, have no committed to working in the past and the children are in school and in no way handicapped or anything of the sort?
What circumstances is CS not awared or raised? as the website I notated states???


Anyone know anything about this stuff or have experince in this kind of technical question??

Thank you so much.

 

[goddessoflubboc]

CS and custody are separate issues in that regardless of NCP's payment status, the ordered visitation is still to be followed. The NCP is not paying for the right to see their child.

CS is not always ordered, some parents agree to no cs for various reasons.

I imagine this is the line that made for confusion: "Joint Managing Conservatorship does not mean that each party will have the children one-half of the time. It also does not mean that child support will not be awarded to one parent." emphasis added This sentence is poorly written with a double negative. What it means is that just because parents share custody doesn't prevent one parent from being ordered to pay cs to the other parent.

In the State of Texas, cs is based solely on NCP's income - CP could be unemployed or making 3x what NCP is, it makes no difference. It also does not depend on time spent with the child, as it does in many states. Just a flat percentage of NCP's income - although Texas does lower the percentage slightly if NCP has other legal children.

 

[TheGeekess]

From the website that you quoted:

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.

Net resources is defined very broadly, and income can also be imputed to a party.

 

[LdiJ]

If both parents made substantially the same amount of money, and they had a true 50/50 timeshare, then that is one instance where a judge might not order child support (even if the parents are not in agreement).

 

[Stott]

Ok I know most of this. I know the percentages and all that. Thank you. I guess what I need to ask is... Does a judge legally have to order child support?
Not because of time arrangement or anything just generally must they order child support according to the Texas Family Code?

 

[Stott]

If both parents made substantially the same amount of money, and they had a true 50/50 timeshare, then that is one instance where a judge might not order child support (even if the parents are not in agreement).

But I thought time arrangement didnt matter?

 

[garrula lingua]

There are 17 reasons, listed in the Texas Family Code, to deviate from guildeline support.
The FC also states that each parent has a duty to support the child.
Most Judges will find that it is in the best interests of the child, that the non-custodial parent pay child support.
As Ldij said, if there was a 50/50 sharing of the child, that is one of the reasons to deviate from guideline c/s - either by reducing or eliminating c/s.