Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

CSA have calculated payments from 07/08 FY with no tax return yet submitted

Add Topic
Hi

My husband pays Child Support and has not yet lodged his 07/08 tax return, yet today we received a letter from CSA stating the exact amount of taxable income he earned and what his new payments are to be.

I don't understand this, as isn't it normally calculated once the tax returned is lodged (and don't we have until October to do so?!) and also are the figures CSA come up with before all of the tax reductions or just off what you earned?

Also!… My husband earned quite a lot of money last year due to receiving one off bonuses for his particular job; however, it is not what he is earning now and was not a true reflection of his actual income. Because of this we have lodged an estimate and have been told that his ex can appeal if she wishes. We are expecting this person to do so as she is rather money hungry (although aren't we all?!) as the payments have increased form $150 to $311 p/f. We honestly cannot afford this, so I was wondering has anyone ever been through an appeal and do we have any chance of it remaining on the lesser or will CSA see it as we should give them their share?

One more thing!!! Could someone please shed some light for me. My husband and I have 2 children and he pays his ex for 1. The letter we received from CSA states  that we are required to pay his ex $8,124 p/y however $15,866 is his less other dependant allowance (for our 2 children). All children are under 13 - so why do my children only cost $7933 p/y and his ex $281 more?!

She received CS for 2 children (one to another sucker), works full-time and receives whatever other pensions and benefits that are out there and we maybe required to come up with $311.39 p/f on a single income?!

Oh well, I have to keep reminding myself that it's all about the children and the more my husband earns the more he has to fork out, so we have decided that we will never receive another bonus, and I see this as a real shame for our family becasue we can not make a better life for ourselves. Of course he is responsible for contributing some money to his ex, but come on this sort of thing gets the claws out and I'm sure in most cases where you have little to no contact with the child it makes you really regret your error of judgement for that one night!

Sorry for rambling on in the end, but any help would be appreciated!
Hi Question,

I,m new to this forum but I am interested in your situation.

I,m one of those dodgy dads that doesn't pay my ex one cent and never will again.(long story)

However this has been to the detriment of my two children from this marriage.Only just ,as the demands of CS were too great and unreasonable and we are better off if I work as the homemaker. I,m not too bad a cook it,s just my cleaning skills could use some work.

The point being it is worth doing the sums and decide what really is in the best interests of the child/children.

Working 50+ hrs/wk for bugger all and having latch key kids didn,t do it for me.

I refuse to be pushed around by petty bureaucrats and am fortunate that as a tradesman I can improve our situation without needing full on paid employment.I make no apology for this, it,s the nature of the system.

I suppose the only thing I can suggest is if they want to play the game you make them as accountable as you are expected to be.

Cheers
I would caution the approach mentioned by styx. There is still a capacity to earn that may be applied to this argument.

Also, for some people, leaving the workforce will make it excruciating to re-enter the workforce at a later date.

I am not the child support expert on this forum Question, but I do know that 2nd children are considered 'cheaper' in the formula that CSA apply. I also believe this formula takes into account that you, as mother of the second family, contribute some nominal amount to their upkeep - whether you work or not.

I would suggest you read the change of assessment rules on the CSA site and see if any apply to you. This may get you a reduction.

Junior Executive of SRL-Resources

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on this site (Look for the Avatars). Be mindful what you post in public areas. 
I know it does make it hard, but what Styx has mentioned does sound very desireable as we both have military backgrounds so it is very easy for us to re-enter the workforce; however, I have just stopped working as I was sick of always being away from home and missing out on my kids lives (and just quietly I'm stick of rolling around in the dirt!).

We have just lodged a change of assessment and are waiting for her to to appeal.

Thanks for your help!
Artemis said
I am not the child support expert on this forum Question, but I do know that 2nd children are considered 'cheaper' in the formula that CSA apply. I also believe this formula takes into account that you, as mother of the second family, contribute some nominal amount to their upkeep - whether you work or not.

Sorry Artemis I've got to sort of disagree/clarify 2nd children (I assume this is biological/adopted children that are termed as Relevant Dependant Children (RDC)) are not really considered cheaper as such, in fact depending on the incomes they can be more expensive. Their cost is worked out and then taken away from that parents income before the cost of the actual child support child or children is calculated. However in another way they could be considered cheaper as they only have the one parent's income fed into the cost of children determination, which is exactly the same for any class of children (by class I mean multi-case/child support case/relevant dependant, as opposed to by age and number of children).

Here's an overview (not necessarily that accurate) of what happens within the formula :-

1) Take parent A's taxable income and deduct the self support amount.

2) If there are relevant dependant for this parent then apply that parent's income to the cost of children table/calculation and then subtract that amount from the parent's remaining taxable income.

3) If there are multi-case children then apply the result from 2 to the cost of children table/calculation (this one's a little weird in that at some stage it considers all children ) and then subtract this from 2) the result being that parent's child support income.

4) Repeat 1-3 for parent B to ascertain parent B's child support income.

5) add the 2 parent's child support income to ascertain the combined child support income.

6) Apply the combined child support income to the cost of children table to determine the cost of the Child Support Children.

The formula then continues basing the result on the income split and level of care on a per child basis.

Now let's say Parent A earns $50,000 and has 1 RDC and 1 CS child and parent B (who's child is the CS child) is on low income (i.e. effecitvely $0 after the Self Support Amount reduction) and parent A has no care of the CS child and both children are under 13, then :-

The Cost of the 2nd Child is $5309, whilst the cost of the actual CS child comes in at $4495.

This is because $31748 ($50,000-$18252 or ATI-SSA) is applied to the cost of children table for the first child, the amount is then reduced to $26439, because the cost of the RDC is taken away (i.e. $31748-$5309) before being applied to the same cost of children table thus resulting in the lower cost of the Child Support child.

If the second parent has an income after the self support amount reduction, then it may be that the cost of the 2nd child/children is less.



Last edit: by MikeT

Ok styxz (whatever the spelling was).

You have got my attention? Why is it that you dont pay a cent?  And how is it you get away with that?

How have ALL your kids benefitted from this?

Paddy … Curious cause know matter I hav been through I no that I hav always given.
Hi again all

I apologise for the slow response it has been a busy weekend (family responsibilities).

Firstly I would like to say that at no time was I advocating breaking the law.I was,in my clumsy way pointing out the inequities of how the system is unfairly applied to second families.

Secondly the fact that I stay home and manage the household allows me to be fully involved with my children's life.

Artemis you are correct that things ,such as gst, can be applied to work where no money changes hands, that is a possibility,however that has not stopped me doing volunteer work for the local kindergarten,school or football club.

Upon reflection I realise my reply/post is provocative.It was not intended that way.

I was merely trying to point out that money was not the main issue here.

Being forced into financial penury and then further slandered as a low income earner and dodgy dad has caused me to make some blunt and perhaps inappropriate comments.

I do respect the forum and would like to think I have something to offer.

Finally I would like to say to paddy that I don't pay a cent because I choose not too.

Accountability works both ways.

Last edit: by styx

Ok, to get back on track….! I have spoken with CSA and your taxable income is based on what you earned, so all tax deductions are all put back on :(

Also, with my question re: the appeals process, as long as you can prove that you are no longer earning the wage of the last financial year amount you should be right.

Thanks everyone for your help!
styx said
Finally I would like to say to paddy that I don't pay a cent because I choose not too.

Accountability works both ways.
 

OK Now I am curious, how is the standard of living for the children of your first marriage/relationship?
I could be blunt here and say "who cares" but the true answer is ,I have no input, so good question.

Ask the government.

This is a long and complicated situation,if FC access agreements were enforced maybe I could give you a more definitive answer.

The standard of living for my children improved when I stopped allowing their mother to abuse them by the way she treated me.

The system was no help.

I do keep a distant eye on their situation (she,s on divorce 3)last one a multi millionaire.

I  do not begrudge her achievements just being shafted by bureaucracy.

T12 I love my kids and always will,I don't need anyone telling me its about some formula I can,t afford.

So because of this situation my kids here suffer.Great system.

I do not pay because I cannot afford it ,it,s called capacity to pay.No law breaking,just a reflection of the inequities.

I offer parenthood without the $ sign,s.

Post Script,

I am aware that this stance can upset some peoples view of how these issues should be dealt with,however I can assure you that all care was taken to ensure a more equitable outcome.
Along the lines of parents not paying CS, I must say I can understand why some people don't and I agree with Styx that you can offer parenthood without the big $$$$$.

Especially in my husbands situation where by we have basically nothing to do with his ex or child (they were never in a relationship, its just easier to call her that!). So paying CS to us is like paying off a car loan that you smashed up with no insurance.

Why should you have to pay for something that you didn't want? There are other options for a mother in this situation; however, she decided to keep the baby without my husband agreeing, so I believe she should fit the bill.

I know this sound rash, but its how I and I am sure thousands of others feel. By the way before everyone gets upset we are law abiding citizens and pay, eventhough I think it is WAY too much for something we get no use out of.

I have plenty of other negative views about the amount of CS we have to pay, but my complaining gets us no where!
Question! said
Along the lines of parents not paying CS, I must say I can understand why some people don't and I agree with Styx that you can offer parenthood without the big $$$$$.

Especially in my husbands situation where by we have basically nothing to do with his ex or child (they were never in a relationship, its just easier to call her that!). So paying CS to us is like paying off a car loan that you smashed up with no insurance.

Why should you have to pay for something that you didn't want? There are other options for a mother in this situation; however, she decided to keep the baby without my husband agreeing, so I believe she should fit the bill.

I know this sound rash, but its how I and I am sure thousands of others feel. By the way before everyone gets upset we are law abiding citizens and pay, eventhough I think it is WAY too much for something we get no use out of.

I have plenty of other negative views about the amount of CS we have to pay, but my complaining gets us no where!
 

Sorry, Question - it is all about the child, not what your husband agrees to, or for something that you get no  use out of.

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 have to disagree it is not always about the child. It is an income for the mother (of course you would hope some of the money is spent on the child).

Of course he has to pay some kind of allowance, but not when the cost of the childs living is $10,000 and we have to pay $8000 of it.

Question! said
I have to disagree it is not always about the child. It is an income for the mother (of course you would hope some of the money is spent on the child).

Of course he has to pay some kind of allowance, but not when the cost of the childs living is $10,000 and we have to pay $8000 of it.
Disagree - it is ALWAYS about the child, as seen through the eyes of law makers and government. This does not mean that every single parent does the right thing and spend the money on the children. What it means is the vast majority of single parents not only do the right thing, but put their own needs a clear second to the child.

I know it get very frustrating and makes you really angry when you see your hard earned income being wasted by an irresponsible parent, but no system is perfect. There are areas of CSA legislation that are still a mess - but the system is trying to improve!

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 would be a little more inclined to believe that rhetoric if the same amount of zealous energy was applied to the enforcement of court ordered access as is applied to CS payments.
1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets