# New C$A formula and shared care?

Member

### How is shared care treated under the NEW CSA legislation when parents have shared care 50/50?

Anyone have any idea what is happening with C$A when parents have shared care 50/50?

Some sites say the rate is the same as the old system and others say that there is no child support when over 176 nights.

bluey70

Some sites say the rate is the same as the old system and others say that there is no child support when over 176 nights.

bluey70

As I understand it, the calculation is done for each parent as if they were paying the other (i.e. the normal calculation and then the one paying the most CS pays the difference to the other parent). I think you can use the calculators that exist and do 2 simple calculations.## Every Picture tells a story said

9.10.2 Split care

Another possible family arrangement in families with several children is where one parent takes responsibility for some of the children, and the other parent takes responsibility for the others. In these cases, it is not clear which parent will have the overall child support liability, as each is both a resident and non-resident parent (although to different children). Each may be assessed separately as liable for children in the care of the other parent. The liabilities of each parent may then be offset in order to find the overall payer parent. This is precisely what happens under the current formula.Recommendation 1.20

Where parents each care for one or more of their children, each parent is assessed separately as liable to the other, and the liabilities offset.

e.g. Tom and Mary have 3 children Alan, Sally and Chris. Alan and Sally have Tom as their primary carer Chris has Mary as his Primary carer. Tom has an adjusted taxable income of 60000 Mary 50000. Tom has Chris for 50 nights, likewise Mary has Alan and Sally for 50 nights. All children are under 13.

Calculation 1. Tom's CS for Chris equates to

**6253**(Alan and Sally are disregarded from the calculation I think).

Calculation 2. Mary's CS for Alan and Sally equates to

**7178**.

Calculation 3. As Mary's CS is the higher amount you subtract Tom's CS i.e. 7178 - 6253 =

**925**.

Calculations are based upon the latest MTAWE.

So I think you can use the calculators available from this site to work this scenario out, just use them twice.

e.g.

First I input Tom has 1 under 13, 0 teens, 0, other children under 13, 0 other teens, 50 nights, payees ati 50000 and payers ati 60000 and noted the annual CS.

Second I input Mary has 2 under 13's, 0 teens. 0 other child under 13, 0 other teens, 50 nights, payees ati 60000 and payers ati 50000, again noting the annual CS.

This was using the calculator at Calculator for July 2008 Legislation

I'm not 100% sure that this is how works, rather it is my interpretation. I'm trying to get hold of the stuff that the CSA use for training as I find these relatively easy to go through. I have two one for the basic formula and 1 for multi-case formulas. I'd welcome other people's input.

Guest user

### Calculating care amount

Could anyone please tell me how to calculate care arrangements correctly.

We have the children every second weekend from Friday afternoon through to Tuesday mornings (4 nights). Then half of school holidays except Christmas break, when we have them 2 weeks (14 nights).

During the holidays it is still every second weekend as well as the period of half holidays regardless of which days it falls on.

I have calculated 4 nights at 26 fortnights per year = 104 nights

There is 5 days as half of Easter.

7 days for June break.

7 days for September break and 14 nights over December break.

That comes to a total of 137 nights per year.

However do I disregard the weekends included over the holiday dates when they are with us? which may only be the one weekend over the 2 week December break.

I would appreciate your help.

We have the children every second weekend from Friday afternoon through to Tuesday mornings (4 nights). Then half of school holidays except Christmas break, when we have them 2 weeks (14 nights).

During the holidays it is still every second weekend as well as the period of half holidays regardless of which days it falls on.

I have calculated 4 nights at 26 fortnights per year = 104 nights

There is 5 days as half of Easter.

7 days for June break.

7 days for September break and 14 nights over December break.

That comes to a total of 137 nights per year.

However do I disregard the weekends included over the holiday dates when they are with us? which may only be the one weekend over the 2 week December break.

I would appreciate your help.

If one were to assume 10 extra nights i.e. the average, then that takes you to 127 nights, you get 25% care reduction, but not be able to claim FTB.

I really wonder if these are financially purposefully contrived arrangements. In this position I would look to keeping a record of all care and perhaps claim each year as it is.

Some examples of CS only (my knowledge of FTB, well sheesh I don't even understand A & B). For payer on $50000 ATI and Payee on $25000 ATI, with 1 child under 13, no other children:

@ 117 nights Annual CS is $3696

@ 127 nights Annual CS is $3633

@ 137 nights Annual CS is $3317

Make that 3 teens instead of 1 child

@ 117 nights Annual CS is $7137

@ 127 nights Annual CS is $7015

@ 137 nights Annual CS is $6405

Guest user

### Care arrangements

Thank you, and yes I did mean nights. My apologies.

I do think that she discussed these care arrangements with her solicitor in order to benefit financially. But if these were not agreed upon then it would have cost thousands (more) in court fees/solicitor fees. Funny that. Despite having shared care arrangements and not paying support due to shared care prior to getting a new partner. Oh well it appears that's what seems to happen to most.

With the way the system is now it is costing me quite a substantial amount of money. I was looking at your calculator for a bit of relief and it is very helpful. Let's hope that it does come it at 137 nights.

Thank you kindly for your help.

I do think that she discussed these care arrangements with her solicitor in order to benefit financially. But if these were not agreed upon then it would have cost thousands (more) in court fees/solicitor fees. Funny that. Despite having shared care arrangements and not paying support due to shared care prior to getting a new partner. Oh well it appears that's what seems to happen to most.

With the way the system is now it is costing me quite a substantial amount of money. I was looking at your calculator for a bit of relief and it is very helpful. Let's hope that it does come it at 137 nights.

Thank you kindly for your help.

Member

### Child support calculators

Thanks MikeT.

Yet another calculator with another different amount.

I still like the one on Family Law Web Guide, as this one states zero if care is over 176 nights.

http://flwg.com.au/cs/index.php?page=calculator

I guess we will just have to wait until someone tells us for real, if they ever can get it right.

Here's hoping.

bluey70

Yet another calculator with another different amount.

I still like the one on Family Law Web Guide, as this one states zero if care is over 176 nights.

http://flwg.com.au/cs/index.php?page=calculator

I guess we will just have to wait until someone tells us for real, if they ever can get it right.

Here's hoping.

bluey70

Member

Shared care where one parent earns less than the other parent always results in some complex calculation and money changing hands. This is based on the absurd notion that , it being all about the children, all parents income can be divided between households - for the benefit of the children - for the next 18 years of their lives.

Its absurd, complex, expensive to run, nonsensical, invasive and discriminatory. As soon as the government wakes up to itself and realises that shared care should not result in ANY MONEY changing hands - the better for all. Women can work, men can work ,children can experience different standards of living (does it really matter?)

People get fined less and spend less time being monitored and interfered with by government for far worse crimes than having children and divorcing.

Its absurd, complex, expensive to run, nonsensical, invasive and discriminatory. As soon as the government wakes up to itself and realises that shared care should not result in ANY MONEY changing hands - the better for all. Women can work, men can work ,children can experience different standards of living (does it really matter?)

People get fined less and spend less time being monitored and interfered with by government for far worse crimes than having children and divorcing.

Maybe I am not explaining myself well enough

### CSA What do they really do?

You raise an interesting point about shared care and costs. I suspect that the real reason there is opposition to shared care from some quarters, is for the very reason you bring up. Why does money change hands with shared care?

The CSA's real function is to cut the cost of welfare payments by the government. It does this by getting one of the parents to pay. In other words the CSA is a revenue raising department for the government. No problems there, children are expensive!

What if there was shared care and one parent earned double or even triple the other parent. Should money change hands? What happens in a married household, where one parent earns more than the other? Don't they pool their money for the children's cost? Naturally the higher income earner pays more of the cost.

What about s.79 matters? Normal financial splits range from 50/50 to 80/20. One of the main reasons for this is the cost of children.

Another reason for the opposition to shared care?

The CSA's real function is to cut the cost of welfare payments by the government. It does this by getting one of the parents to pay. In other words the CSA is a revenue raising department for the government. No problems there, children are expensive!

What if there was shared care and one parent earned double or even triple the other parent. Should money change hands? What happens in a married household, where one parent earns more than the other? Don't they pool their money for the children's cost? Naturally the higher income earner pays more of the cost.

What about s.79 matters? Normal financial splits range from 50/50 to 80/20. One of the main reasons for this is the cost of children.

Another reason for the opposition to shared care?

**Executive Member of SRL-Resources**, the Family Law People on the site (Look for the Avatars). Be mindful what you post in the public areas.

I'd like to thank NM for providing me with a pretty complex scenario, which didn't initially work. However by using that scenario I've managed to highlight a few bugs (like it wasn't actually subtracting the multi-case allowance). The latest version is relatively good but I still have an issue with what I'll term Split Primary Care (hey when I read the stuff below I might start using whatever term they give it). It cam also cater for a carer (but you MUST give that carer an ATI of 0 as there income is not taken into consideration). It doesn't handle multiple carers. That comes after I've implemented stuff to do Split Primary Care properly. It's a bit of a story, that I'm not going to tell but by accident, you know a bit like Pythagoras in the bath, that I realised that the calculator has the potential to do far more than I anticipated, in that it can even handle multiple cases in one go (simply by inputting the scenarios ensuring that all names are unique.

I've been told that the CSA's online estimator only handles simple scenarios, definitely not multi-case.

Any the good news I've been notified of a link to the new legislation with regard to the formula, it can be found here

Mods perhaps you like to get this doco put into the library. I'd try but no too sure whether I should or should not or even if it is in the library. I have no problem doing if it you like, just let me know if it's OK.

## Child Support Legislation Amendment (Reform of the Child Support Scheme - New Formula and Other Measures) Act 2006 said

48 Working out percentage of care

(1) A person's percentage of care for a child for a day in a child support periodis the percentage of care of the child that the person is likely to have during the period(the care period) of 12 months from:

(a) the day on which an application is made under section 25 or 25A for a parent to be assessed in respect of the costs of the child; or

(b) the day on which the Registrar becomes aware of the following:(i) a change of at least 7.1% in the percentage of care of the child that the person has;

(ii) that the person's percentage of care for the child has fallen below 14%;

(iii) that the person's percentage of care for the child has increased to 14%, or above 14%.

Note: The Registrar is not entitled to amend an administrative assessment in respect of a person's percentage of care unless the Registrar becomes aware of an event mentioned in paragraph (1)(b) (see subsection 75(2)).

(2) The percentage of care is to be worked out in accordance with this Subdivision.

Note: Generally, a person's percentage of care for a child is worked out based on the number of nights that the child is likely to be in the care of the person during the care period.

(3) If a person's percentage of care worked out in accordance with this Subdivision is not a whole percentage:

(a) if the percentage is greater than 50%–the percentage is rounded up to the nearest whole percentage; and

(b) if the percentage is less than 50%–the percentage is rounded down to the nearest whole percentage.

here's two examples from the calculator for parents with a single child under 13, the payer earning $60,000, the payee effectively not earning in the first and then earning $25000, it makes less than $30 per month difference. There again that could be a lot to many.

## Calculator for income up to minimum SSI said

Payer's ………………….ati=$60000Other Teens=0 Other Children=0 Teens=0 Children=1 Multicase Teens=0 Multicase Children=0

Payee's ………………….ati=$18252Other Teens=0 Other Children=0 teens=0 children=1 Multicase Teens=0 Multicase Children=0

Payer's ………………….Cost of other children=$0

Payee's ………………….Cost of other children=$0

Payer's ………………….MultiCase Alowance=$0Adjusted Income=$41748Calc=(ATI-SSI-COOC-MCA) i.e. [60000 - 18252 - 0 - 0]

Payee's ………………….MultiCase Alowance=$0Adjusted Income=$0Calc=(ATI-SSI-COOC-MCA) i.e. [18252 - 18252 - 0 - 0]

Combined Child Support Income (CCSI)=$41748Calc=(Payer Adjusted Income + Payee Adjusted Income) i.e. [41748 + 0]

Cost of Children=$6810Payer % of CCSI=100%Payee % of CCSI=0%

Care reductions steps (1 per child)=1 cost per individual child=$6810

Reduction=%24 Cost before=6810 Cost after=$5176 Acumulated Annual CS=$5176## Annual CS to be paid by

PayertoPayeeis $5,176Monthly=$432.22Weekly=$99.20Daily Rate=$14.17112

Acronym's explained:## Calculator for increased payee income ($25000) said

Payer's ………………….ati=$60000Other Teens=0 Other Children=0 Teens=0 Children=1 Multicase Teens=0 Multicase Children=0

Payee's ………………….ati=$25000Other Teens=0 Other Children=0 teens=0 children=1 Multicase Teens=0 Multicase Children=0

Payer's ………………….Cost of other children=$0

Payee's ………………….Cost of other children=$0

Payer's ………………….MultiCase Alowance=$0Adjusted Income=$41748Calc=(ATI-SSI-COOC-MCA) i.e. [60000 - 18252 - 0 - 0]

Payee's ………………….MultiCase Alowance=$0Adjusted Income=$6748Calc=(ATI-SSI-COOC-MCA) i.e. [25000 - 18252 - 0 - 0]

Combined Child Support Income (CCSI)=$48496Calc=(Payer Adjusted Income + Payee Adjusted Income) i.e. [41748 + 6748]

Cost of Children=$7822Payer % of CCSI=86.09%Payee % of CCSI=13.91%

Care reductions steps (1 per child)=1 cost per individual child=$7822

Reduction=%24 Cost before=7822 Cost after=$4857 Acumulated Annual CS=$4857## Annual CS to be paid by

PayertoPayeeis $4,857Monthly=$405.58Weekly=$93.08Daily Rate=$13.29774

ATI = Adjusted Taxable Income (basically the amount on your tax return)

SSI = Self Support Income (i.e. what the payer and payee should have, before Child support is taken, to support themselves)

COOC = Cost of other children (other children being biological or adopted)

MCA = Multi Case Allowance (basically the cost of children for another case the payee/payer may have to contribute toward)

LifeInsight if I remember I'll put up a few extra scenarios with the payee's income rising. Perhaps email me to remind me.

### FTB (Family Tax Benifit) explained

FTB in a quick summary for you MikeT… enjoy## MikeT said

….(my knowledge of FTB, well sheesh I don't even understand A & B).

Family Tax Benefit Part A is an annual tax benefit to help families with the cost of raising children.

Guardians, including foster parents and grandparents, responsible for the day-to-day care of children/grandchildren may be eligible for Family Assistance and should contact the Family Assistance Office at Centrelink for more information.

You may get Family Tax Benefit Part A if you:

- have a dependent child under 21 (including a foster child), or

- have a dependent full time student aged 21 to 24, and

- have income under a certain amount, and are living in Australia (that is, Australia is your permanent home), and

- you are either an Australian citizen, a New Zealand citizen, the holder of a permanent visa or the holder of certain temporary visas.

Family Tax Benefit Part B gives extra assistance to families with one main income, including sole parents, where the youngest dependent child is under 16 (or up to 18 if they are a full time student and do not receive Youth Allowance or a similar payment).

It also gives extra assistance to families who have a child under the age of five.

You cannot receive Family Tax Benefit for a dependent who is:

- your partner

- aged between 5 and 15 years, not undertaking full-time study and has a taxable income of $11 929 or more

- aged 16 or over and has a taxable income of $11 929 or more

- any age and receiving a social security pension or benefit or a payment under a labour market program.

If you are a single income family or a sole parent, Family Tax Benefit Part B gives you an extra payment to help with the cost of raising children. It also gives extra help if your family has a child under the age of five years.

Family Tax Benefit Part B gives extra assistance to families with one main income, including sole parents, where the youngest dependent child is under 16 (or up to 18 if they are a full time student and do not receive Youth Allowance or a similar payment). It also gives extra assistance to families who have a child under the age of five.

Was my post helpful? If so, please let others know about the FamilyLawWebGuide whenever you see the opportunityExecutive Secretary - Shared Parenting Council of Australia

Have you any reference for these figures such as a web link or a report you can upload with your post? The thing to remember is it does not actually cost anything in real terms to pay one dollar of child support because it is taken from the general departmental operating costs which are mostly recurrent costs and we all pay for that out of a thing called tax. (Some of us do I should say). I seem to recall a report a few years ago that did provide some very detailed figures of what it cost in maintaining the Agency. John Flannagan would have some interesting figures for sure.## LifeInsight said

…The costs of C$A case management increase five fold when the collection of child support goes from voluntary payments by the payer directly to the payee, to C$A collection.

That is from 11 cents for every dollar of child support transferred to 55 cents.

I have no idea of the increase to their costs when all correspondence is done in writing, every decision is objected to and always taken to the SSAT.

Was my post helpful? If so, please let others know about the FamilyLawWebGuide whenever you see the opportunityExecutive Secretary - Shared Parenting Council of Australia

### Definitions of regular care and shared care

Secretary_SPCA, many thanks for explaining parts A and B, I wonder if the old grey matter will recall that in the future.

The new legislation has the following definitions with regard to care levels (not sure if they're keeping the sole care to mean 0-14%):

Here's the examples initially going up in $10,000 increments from $40,000 :-

The new legislation has the following definitions with regard to care levels (not sure if they're keeping the sole care to mean 0-14%):

LifeInSight OK, I've made a bit of an assumption here, and that is your question would lead to how much would she have to earn before I had to pay nothing. The answer using the scenario above (60000 for the payer, varying amounts for the payee (primary carer), single child regular care then when she gets an ATI of $150418 the there would be no liability.## The New Legislation said

59 At the end of section 5

Add:

Definitions of regular care and shared care

(2) A person has regular care of a child if the person has:

(a) at least 14%; but

(b) less than 35%;

of the care of the child during a care period.

(3) A person has shared care of a child if the person has:

(a) at least 35%; but

(b) no more than 65%;

of the care of the child during a care period.

Here's the examples initially going up in $10,000 increments from $40,000 :-

## The New Calculator said

Mike's …………………..ati=$60000 Other Teens=0 Other Children=0 Teens=0 Children=1 Multicase Teens=0 Multicase Children=0

Rebecca's ………………..ati=$40000 Other Teens=0 Other Children=0 teens=0 children=1 Multicase Teens=0 Multicase Children=0

Mike's …………………..Cost of other children=$0

Rebecca's ………………..Cost of other children=$0

Mike's …………………..MultiCase Alowance=$0 Adjusted Income=$41748 Calc=(ATI-SSI-COOC-MCA) i.e. [60000 - 18252 - 0 - 0]

Rebecca's ………………..MultiCase Alowance=$0 Adjusted Income=$21748 Calc=(ATI-SSI-COOC-MCA) i.e. [40000 - 18252 - 0 - 0]

Combined Child Support Income (CCSI)=$63496 Calc=(Payer Adjusted Income + Payee Adjusted Income) i.e. [41748 + 21748]

Cost of Children=$9809 Payer % of CCSI=65.75% Payee % of CCSI=34.25%

Care reductions steps (1 per child)=1 cost per individual child=$9809

Reduction=%24 Cost before=9809 Cost after=$4095 Acumulated Annual CS=$4095

Annual CS to be paid by Mike to Rebecca is $4,095 Monthly=$341.95 Weekly=$78.48 Daily Rate=$11.21150

Mike's …………………..ati=$60000 Other Teens=0 Other Children=0 Teens=0 Children=1 Multicase Teens=0 Multicase Children=0

Rebecca's ………………..ati=$50000 Other Teens=0 Other Children=0 teens=0 children=1 Multicase Teens=0 Multicase Children=0

Mike's …………………..Cost of other children=$0

Rebecca's ………………..Cost of other children=$0

Mike's …………………..MultiCase Alowance=$0 Adjusted Income=$41748 Calc=(ATI-SSI-COOC-MCA) i.e. [60000 - 18252 - 0 - 0]

Rebecca's ………………..MultiCase Alowance=$0 Adjusted Income=$31748 Calc=(ATI-SSI-COOC-MCA) i.e. [50000 - 18252 - 0 - 0]

Combined Child Support Income (CCSI)=$73496 Calc=(Payer Adjusted Income + Payee Adjusted Income) i.e. [41748 + 31748]

Cost of Children=$11009 Payer % of CCSI=56.8% Payee % of CCSI=43.2%

Care reductions steps (1 per child)=1 cost per individual child=$11009

Reduction=%24 Cost before=11009 Cost after=$3611 Acumulated Annual CS=$3611

Annual CS to be paid by Mike to Rebecca is $3,611 Monthly=$301.53 Weekly=$69.20 Daily Rate=$9.88638

Mike's …………………..ati=$60000 Other Teens=0 Other Children=0 Teens=0 Children=1 Multicase Teens=0 Multicase Children=0

Rebecca's ………………..ati=$50000 Other Teens=0 Other Children=0 teens=0 children=1 Multicase Teens=0 Multicase Children=0

Mike's …………………..Cost of other children=$0

Rebecca's ………………..Cost of other children=$0

Mike's …………………..MultiCase Alowance=$0 Adjusted Income=$41748 Calc=(ATI-SSI-COOC-MCA) i.e. [60000 - 18252 - 0 - 0]

Rebecca's ………………..MultiCase Alowance=$0 Adjusted Income=$31748 Calc=(ATI-SSI-COOC-MCA) i.e. [50000 - 18252 - 0 - 0]

Combined Child Support Income (CCSI)=$73496 Calc=(Payer Adjusted Income + Payee Adjusted Income) i.e. [41748 + 31748]

Cost of Children=$11009 Payer % of CCSI=56.8% Payee % of CCSI=43.2%

Care reductions steps (1 per child)=1 cost per individual child=$11009

Reduction=%24 Cost before=11009 Cost after=$3611 Acumulated Annual CS=$3611

Annual CS to be paid by Mike to Rebecca is $3,611 Monthly=$301.53 Weekly=$69.20 Daily Rate=$9.88638

Mike's …………………..ati=$60000 Other Teens=0 Other Children=0 Teens=0 Children=1 Multicase Teens=0 Multicase Children=0

Rebecca's ………………..ati=$70000 Other Teens=0 Other Children=0 teens=0 children=1 Multicase Teens=0 Multicase Children=0

Mike's …………………..Cost of other children=$0

Rebecca's ………………..Cost of other children=$0

Mike's …………………..MultiCase Alowance=$0 Adjusted Income=$41748 Calc=(ATI-SSI-COOC-MCA) i.e. [60000 - 18252 - 0 - 0]

Rebecca's ………………..MultiCase Alowance=$0 Adjusted Income=$51748 Calc=(ATI-SSI-COOC-MCA) i.e. [70000 - 18252 - 0 - 0]

Combined Child Support Income (CCSI)=$93496 Calc=(Payer Adjusted Income + Payee Adjusted Income) i.e. [41748 + 51748]

Cost of Children=$13182 Payer % of CCSI=44.65% Payee % of CCSI=55.35%

Care reductions steps (1 per child)=1 cost per individual child=$13182

Reduction=%24 Cost before=13182 Cost after=$2722 Acumulated Annual CS=$2722

Annual CS to be paid by Mike to Rebecca is $2,722 Monthly=$227.30 Weekly=$52.17 Daily Rate=$7.45243

Mike's …………………..ati=$60000 Other Teens=0 Other Children=0 Teens=0 Children=1 Multicase Teens=0 Multicase Children=0

Rebecca's ………………..ati=$80000 Other Teens=0 Other Children=0 teens=0 children=1 Multicase Teens=0 Multicase Children=0

Mike's …………………..Cost of other children=$0

Rebecca's ………………..Cost of other children=$0

Mike's …………………..MultiCase Alowance=$0 Adjusted Income=$41748 Calc=(ATI-SSI-COOC-MCA) i.e. [60000 - 18252 - 0 - 0]

Rebecca's ………………..MultiCase Alowance=$0 Adjusted Income=$61748 Calc=(ATI-SSI-COOC-MCA) i.e. [80000 - 18252 - 0 - 0]

Combined Child Support Income (CCSI)=$103496 Calc=(Payer Adjusted Income + Payee Adjusted Income) i.e. [41748 + 61748]

Cost of Children=$14182 Payer % of CCSI=40.34% Payee % of CCSI=59.66%

Care reductions steps (1 per child)=1 cost per individual child=$14182

Reduction=%24 Cost before=14182 Cost after=$2317 Acumulated Annual CS=$2317

Annual CS to be paid by Mike to Rebecca is $2,317 Monthly=$193.48 Weekly=$44.41 Daily Rate=$6.34360

Mike's …………………..ati=$60000 Other Teens=0 Other Children=0 Teens=0 Children=1 Multicase Teens=0 Multicase Children=0

Rebecca's ………………..ati=$90000 Other Teens=0 Other Children=0 teens=0 children=1 Multicase Teens=0 Multicase Children=0

Mike's …………………..Cost of other children=$0

Rebecca's ………………..Cost of other children=$0

Mike's …………………..MultiCase Alowance=$0 Adjusted Income=$41748 Calc=(ATI-SSI-COOC-MCA) i.e. [60000 - 18252 - 0 - 0]

Rebecca's ………………..MultiCase Alowance=$0 Adjusted Income=$71748 Calc=(ATI-SSI-COOC-MCA) i.e. [90000 - 18252 - 0 - 0]

Combined Child Support Income (CCSI)=$113496 Calc=(Payer Adjusted Income + Payee Adjusted Income) i.e. [41748 + 71748]

Cost of Children=$15063 Payer % of CCSI=36.78% Payee % of CCSI=63.22%

Care reductions steps (1 per child)=1 cost per individual child=$15063

Reduction=%24 Cost before=15063 Cost after=$1925 Acumulated Annual CS=$1925

Annual CS to be paid by Mike to Rebecca is $1,925 Monthly=$160.75 Weekly=$36.89 Daily Rate=$5.27036

Mike's …………………..ati=$60000 Other Teens=0 Other Children=0 Teens=0 Children=1 Multicase Teens=0 Multicase Children=0

Rebecca's ………………..ati=$100000 Other Teens=0 Other Children=0 teens=0 children=1 Multicase Teens=0 Multicase Children=0

Mike's …………………..Cost of other children=$0

Rebecca's ………………..Cost of other children=$0

Mike's …………………..MultiCase Alowance=$0 Adjusted Income=$41748 Calc=(ATI-SSI-COOC-MCA) i.e. [60000 - 18252 - 0 - 0]

Rebecca's ………………..MultiCase Alowance=$0 Adjusted Income=$81748 Calc=(ATI-SSI-COOC-MCA) i.e. [100000 - 18252 - 0 - 0]

Combined Child Support Income (CCSI)=$123496 Calc=(Payer Adjusted Income + Payee Adjusted Income) i.e. [41748 + 81748]

Cost of Children=$15763 Payer % of CCSI=33.81% Payee % of CCSI=66.19%

Care reductions steps (1 per child)=1 cost per individual child=$15763

Reduction=%24 Cost before=15763 Cost after=$1546 Acumulated Annual CS=$1546

Annual CS to be paid by Mike to Rebecca is $1,546 Monthly=$129.10 Weekly=$29.63 Daily Rate=$4.23272

Mike's …………………..ati=$60000 Other Teens=0 Other Children=0 Teens=0 Children=1 Multicase Teens=0 Multicase Children=0

Rebecca's ………………..ati=$110000 Other Teens=0 Other Children=0 teens=0 children=1 Multicase Teens=0 Multicase Children=0

Mike's …………………..Cost of other children=$0

Rebecca's ………………..Cost of other children=$0

Mike's …………………..MultiCase Alowance=$0 Adjusted Income=$41748 Calc=(ATI-SSI-COOC-MCA) i.e. [60000 - 18252 - 0 - 0]

Rebecca's ………………..MultiCase Alowance=$0 Adjusted Income=$91748 Calc=(ATI-SSI-COOC-MCA) i.e. [110000 - 18252 - 0 - 0]

Combined Child Support Income (CCSI)=$133496 Calc=(Payer Adjusted Income + Payee Adjusted Income) i.e. [41748 + 91748]

Cost of Children=$16463 Payer % of CCSI=31.27% Payee % of CCSI=68.73%

Care reductions steps (1 per child)=1 cost per individual child=$16463

Reduction=%24 Cost before=16463 Cost after=$1197 Acumulated Annual CS=$1197

Annual CS to be paid by Mike to Rebecca is $1,197 Monthly=$99.95 Weekly=$22.94 Daily Rate=$3.27721

Mike's …………………..ati=$60000 Other Teens=0 Other Children=0 Teens=0 Children=1 Multicase Teens=0 Multicase Children=0

Rebecca's ………………..ati=$120000 Other Teens=0 Other Children=0 teens=0 children=1 Multicase Teens=0 Multicase Children=0

Mike's …………………..Cost of other children=$0

Rebecca's ………………..Cost of other children=$0

Mike's …………………..MultiCase Alowance=$0 Adjusted Income=$41748 Calc=(ATI-SSI-COOC-MCA) i.e. [60000 - 18252 - 0 - 0]

Rebecca's ………………..MultiCase Alowance=$0 Adjusted Income=$101748 Calc=(ATI-SSI-COOC-MCA) i.e. [120000 - 18252 - 0 - 0]

Combined Child Support Income (CCSI)=$143496 Calc=(Payer Adjusted Income + Payee Adjusted Income) i.e. [41748 + 101748]

Cost of Children=$16700 Payer % of CCSI=29.09% Payee % of CCSI=70.91%

Care reductions steps (1 per child)=1 cost per individual child=$16700

Reduction=%24 Cost before=16700 Cost after=$850 Acumulated Annual CS=$850

Annual CS to be paid by Mike to Rebecca is $850 Monthly=$70.98 Weekly=$16.29 Daily Rate=$2.32717

(until when she earns 150418 or above when the payer gets to pay zilch.

Mike's …………………..ati=$60000 Other Teens=0 Other Children=0 Teens=0 Children=1 Multicase Teens=0 Multicase Children=0

Rebecca's ………………..ati=$150418 Other Teens=0 Other Children=0 teens=0 children=1 Multicase Teens=0 Multicase Children=0

Mike's …………………..Cost of other children=$0

Rebecca's ………………..Cost of other children=$0

Mike's …………………..MultiCase Alowance=$0 Adjusted Income=$41748 Calc=(ATI-SSI-COOC-MCA) i.e. [60000 - 18252 - 0 - 0]

Rebecca's ………………..MultiCase Alowance=$0 Adjusted Income=$132166 Calc=(ATI-SSI-COOC-MCA) i.e. [150418 - 18252 - 0 - 0]

Combined Child Support Income (CCSI)=$173914 Calc=(Payer Adjusted Income + Payee Adjusted Income) i.e. [41748 + 132166]

Cost of Children=$16700 Payer % of CCSI=24% Payee % of CCSI=76%

Care reductions steps (1 per child)=1 cost per individual child=$16700

Reduction=%24 Cost before=16700 Cost after=$0 Acumulated Annual CS=$0

Annual CS to be paid by Mike to Rebecca is $0 Monthly=$0.00 Weekly=$0.00 Daily Rate=$0.00000

For 1 child 52-126 nights care

1

^{st}line=Payer/Payee ATI

2

^{nd}line=New

3

^{rd}line=Old

$60000/$40000

Annual CS to be paid by

**Mike**to

**Rebecca**is $

**4,095**

Estimate = $8,032 Per Year

$60000/$50000

Annual CS to be paid by

**Mike**to

**Rebecca**is $

**3,611**

Estimate = $7,627 Per Year

$60000/$60000

Annual CS to be paid by

**Mike**to

**Rebecca**is $

**3,611**

Estimate = $6,727 Per Year

$60000/$70000

Annual CS to be paid by

**Mike**to

**Rebecca**is $

**2,722**

Estimate = $5,827 Per Year

$60000/$80000

Annual CS to be paid by

**Mike**to

**Rebecca**is $

**2,317**

Estimate = $4,927 Per Year

**$60000/$90000**

Annual CS to be paid by

**Mike**to

**Rebecca**is $

**1,925**

Estimate = $4,027 Per Year

$60000/$100000

Annual CS to be paid by

**Mike**to

**Rebecca**is $

**1,546**

Estimate = $3,127 Per Year

$60000/$110000

Annual CS to be paid by

**Mike**to

**Rebecca**is $

**1,197**

Estimate = $2,227 Per Year

$60000/$120000

Annual CS to be paid by

**Mike**to

**Rebecca**is $

**850**

Estimate = $2,008 Per Year

$60000/$150418

Annual CS to be paid by

**Mike**to

**Rebecca**is $

**0**

Estimate = $2,008 Per Year

$60000/$200000

Annual CS to be paid by

**Mike**to

**Rebecca**is $

**0**

Estimate = $2,008 Per Year

I read some of the report and saw the bit about costing more for CSA collect than private collect.

Member

Lifeinsight - I read some of the link stuff and found it very interesting. I was underestimating out social security payments - I had them at 1/3 of budget - they had them at 45% of total outlays.

Also interesting was the repeating theme of "no child shall live in poverty". The model for this was - give more money through TAX and CSA to whoever had the children.

This of course is the FUNDAMENTALLY WRONG idea.

The idea should be - ENCOURAGE HEALTHY FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS - where people work and support themselves. This would mean STOP ENCOURAGING breakups by providing HUGE FINANCIAL windfalls in marriage breakups to people if they can:

1) show they have not worked or can work at all

2) get more money of the can claim the children or prove the other parent hopeless

It also showed me how much society supports women - (with money and support for their choices) and highlighted how men are treated.

Also interesting was the repeating theme of "no child shall live in poverty". The model for this was - give more money through TAX and CSA to whoever had the children.

This of course is the FUNDAMENTALLY WRONG idea.

The idea should be - ENCOURAGE HEALTHY FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS - where people work and support themselves. This would mean STOP ENCOURAGING breakups by providing HUGE FINANCIAL windfalls in marriage breakups to people if they can:

1) show they have not worked or can work at all

2) get more money of the can claim the children or prove the other parent hopeless

It also showed me how much society supports women - (with money and support for their choices) and highlighted how men are treated.

Maybe I am not explaining myself well enough

Member

The idea was good but the logic was to give more money to women and single mothers by taking more moeny from 'deadbeat dads' would reduce the issue. Fundamentallyu women still 'own their body" 'its my womb' - so women can have sex produced babies - regardless of their marital status or ability to earn an income - and expect to be supported one way or the other - because of the children.

This is a prevalent model fo young women (lately in the NT) but also because of the baby bonus. None of this helps families , relationships or children. Children learn to "be supported" constantly - no good for the future.

The report was interesting but sill showed a lack of positive planning for a healthy future Australia - it was shallow - very money, payments and victims.

Its shows the lack of vision, depth and intelligence by some people who 'represent' us to foreign delegations.

This is a prevalent model fo young women (lately in the NT) but also because of the baby bonus. None of this helps families , relationships or children. Children learn to "be supported" constantly - no good for the future.

The report was interesting but sill showed a lack of positive planning for a healthy future Australia - it was shallow - very money, payments and victims.

Its shows the lack of vision, depth and intelligence by some people who 'represent' us to foreign delegations.

Maybe I am not explaining myself well enough

**1**guest and

**0**members have just viewed this.