Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

Tie up the CSA with paperwork

What if we started and investment company for payers where they paid their child support into a month early and then the company paid it to the ex when due. Whilst the funds are held for a month they could generate more funds that could be used to help pa

Yes but you are missing the point… As an investment or as directors CSA would be able to see it all and I guess sometime shortly grab handfuls from it… I am talking about a network that ties CSA up in so much paperwork and trail finding that they just say "stuff it" the guys paying fair CS, leave him alone… If it were advertised (hint Hint flwg) I am guessing lawyers, accountants, business owners, company directors, real estate agents who are all CSA payers might come out of the woodwork and start banding together like we did for the reforms.

"A whisper is lost in the wind unless it comes from a million voices"
nxus said
No…. I am talking about a series of companies that encompass activities such as recruitment agencies, construction, lawyers, accountants, finance, property maintenance etc that employ payers and use part of profits, company property etc to assist payers during hard times. Payers must pay "fair" CS in order to get a job, but in essence the one company contracts services from another then contracts it out to another then out to another….etc etc etc… so the car a payer might drive might be a car provided by a company 7 times removed….

Did you get that CSA ??… Cut and Paste works best if you want to present this at the next compliance meeting.

Such a silly suggestion. Nxus you don't say your ex wastes the money - it seems its the only control you have and damn the kids. A real control situation. Did she boot you out for someone that wears size 14 shoes and you get back at her via the kids??
Did not mention my ex Conan.. and did not mention my kids either… but if you want to make it personal and start attacking me with biased views based on your beliefs then BRING IT ON…. Will see how gets booted off first.

My gripe here is with CSA and how they can just move through 1 section of Australian society and do whatever they like..

U may note that I was referring to where a payer would have to pay a fair amount of CS…

this is not about NOT paying this is about telling CSA to get lost when they come looking for MORE and MORE and MORE…. not all COA are instigated by a persons ex… a large proportion are started by CSA themseleves - just because they CAN - just to make you tow the line.

Size 12 myself Conan…so doing quite nicely in that department myself… But if you prefer 14's then obviously its all about size for you the bigger the better, the more money the better - so really who is "controlling"

Oh she wastes the money Conan….. and my situation is definitely - about money only…. how much i earn and how much she can get her hands on and the kids well if you know so much about my situation Conan.. maybe you could ring her and see how the kids are doing and this year will make it 9 years i haven tseen them.

How about moving on

I have been reading with alarm the posts by nxus and LifeInsight. You guys do not seemed to have moved on. Your posts seem to be more about dreaming up wild west ways of avoiding CSA payments. Do you wear white shoes by any chance? You seem to be selling ideas that even a Gold Coast estate agent, would find on the nose.

As to the CSA - it has moved on, things have and are changing for the better, I know it is not perfect, but it is slowly getting there. For your interest, those nefarious, devious and draconian punishment wielding ladies of the CSA, are not all bad. I have had 4 clients put my way by the CSA ladies, due to their concern about the clients lack of legal representation in the Family Court - yes, that is correct! I know Mr Agog has had calls as well, and not just from the CSA, but another evil government agency. Oh yes, forget to say - the clients were all men!

Forget past battles -they lead to retreat; future battles are what count - they lead to advancement.

Monti

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. 
Monti

Agree and disagree.  The CSA staff are by and large not too bad.  Trouble is they are constrained by process that is inflexible, flawed and well beyond its use by date.  

They still lose around 20% of correspondence (in my experience), give flawed advice (just this week saved myself $3k by telling them how to administer their law) and rely on systems set up to induce "appeal fatigue".  

The schemes (scams) discussed here are humourous but either immoral or illegal and should not be supported.  If the proponents are discussing them for therapy purposes, however, I encourage it.
Monti… Its not about the fact of what has moved forward and what hasn't.

Theoretical ideas about how things are set and we are by no means talking about how to AVOID CSA PAYMENTS…. I am all for paying CS for my child and I do pay every month, what I am against here is those payers that are placed in a category and sent to the wall…

I have always stated that people should pay "fair" CS… and I always will state that fact. But the key statement here is "FAIR".

Instead of CSA stating you operate a COMPANY AND THEREFORE HIDING YOU INCOME and we have evidence and we will now chase you for it…. they are simply saying YOU OPERATE A COMPANY and we are going to chase you… It is a case of you are guilty until proven innocent.

Look at the fact that for all the improvement (and i applaud those who fought for them - and i was one of them) how many more "compliance" and adherence resources have CSA applied to

To give you an example - I know of a case where a guy (without proof of use) had $360.00 applied to his CS income after passing over 100's of pages of details to CSA because he had an internet bill of $60 a month - he could not prove it was all business oriented so it was claimed that $30 of it was personal and therefore a benefit to him… How petty… 60 days process, CSA pouring through his affairs, srutinising every transaction on his bank account, he had to PROVE everything - he was mentally drained and distressed at the point of collapse before his interview and all this for a grand total of ($30 x 12) = $360

U know full well that most of the angst against CSA is not about the amount of CS but the amount of CS paid above what is fair… Yes we got some improvements, but you know that CSA has put in place more powers and being given more reach so how long will the fairness last.

All I am stating is that if you live the life that CSA want you to, have the job CSA say you should (full time with a company you arent associated with) do exactly what they want you too and pay when, where and how much the want you too - then you might make it out of the mudpit.

For others whose skills and dreams (and i ran my business before my break up) can let all that go and go back to a "normal job". I dont run a multiplatform company structure, just a single entity, full reporting to the tax office etc.. no inpropriety nothing outside normal, pay myself a salary, pay my taxes - so why is it that despite doing this for 8 years…. I am still treated as though I am ripping off the system…. Why? because others do so there for I must be as well. This is no justification for a "fair" system…. Everyone else in business can operate like I do with minimal interference, so why can't I.. because I pay CS.

So should I be looking at a more complex structure?

Well i am not, LifeInsight and were merely hypothesising and as BigRed states theraputically dumping ideologies…and I dont remeber anyone stating that the ladies of the CSA were bad.

Like BigRed - I too have had some very helpful and nice ones.  I certainly do not blame the coalface worker at CSA, its higher up the chain at the policy section that scare me.

Hope everyone understands…
Lifeinsight said
Well I think that you and I can start that company after we both finish paying CSA at our kids 18th…

I once considered a grander plan, well in my opinion anyway. A not for profit that would rely upon volunteers, and provide services, whatever services they could, the other part of the organisation would give to the needy, specifically, those in need because of financial hardship, just that it would happen to be that those would be the people to volunteer.  I assume you get the drift. That was back in the days when I dared to be a little more of a rebel, protesting outside the Family Law Court, doing the March, even having some round for a barbie, accidentally saying Joesph Stalin instead of Joe Hockey. However with time and looking at the bigger picture my thoughts are that without convincing the majority and thus threatening the power of the powerful, the most likely result would just be to be remembered as the rebel put down, the modern day Ned Kelly or Southern Cross Rebellion or more locally the Rum Rebellion. Heroes but losers in the actual battle. I see the real battle is to make changes for all, for my son, your children and hopefully for us.

Attacking the Dragon, in it's well defended lair, well that's not much different to picking off the odd foot soldier here and there. That will simply result in those lost simply being replaced and at a disadvantage as they have a defence of lack of knowledge. Anyone with any knowledge of the CSA knows that the Government, whichever party, in it's endless pursuance of control, will throw what ever it needs to at the CSA. Sheesh there exists a costing that a number of years ago estimated that it cost well over $5 to collect a $ and that wasn't including the millions recently put toward recouping some of the purported billion.

Does it really benefit any of us to increase the tax payers burden of the CSA? Aren't most of us those very tax payers? Are we just robbing Peter to take more from Peter? Perhaps a few will benefit short time, but yep the loopholes will be closed and likely they will be closed with a vengeance, we can see that as recently happening. Perhaps all paying parents will be subjected to mandatory surveillance or something. Is that the sort of reaction that we really want? I don't think so.

We need to fight intelligently I believe. Take the fight to where it should be fought, threaten the power not the powered. We all likely know how to change the lightbulb but not reconnect the electricity supply. How would smashing the light bulbs help in such a struggle?

So perhaps let's get this moving onto ways forward to benefit all?
yes well…. the Kamakaze pilot scared the heck out of the US navy… often 1 man 1 plane. Yes it bought out "all guns blazing" but they still had an impact and often hit the target. We can wax lyrical about this all night.

I have been through 6 COA in 9 years and the result being the same.. no inpropriety but we will make a decision anyway - never in my favour… so how am i to expect the outcome for this one? and I am sorry to say that most of the payers that i read on forums such as this are basically treated the same… all because they dont "go back to a normal job" and the new web site states mostly the same - look up the premise of Capacity to Pay. So the COA legislation is no longer the premise of a assessment change, they now have new powers to dig first, accuse later and ask all the questions they want.

I agree with  and applaud the centralised fight and it is sites like this that provide the details of what we should be fighting for. I too have stood in parliament house with with the AG and Matt Miller and attended the ministerial raodtrip at the start of the reform process.. But i still see that CSA underhanded tatics, not due process as the driving force of how they "catch all these dodgers".

Well i dont think the dodgers are sitting on this site - they are sitting elsewhere. Sitting here are those who still feel the sting of CSA injustice.

Here is a query - CSA got $162 million to bolster compliance resources and so far (including the cheats) they have netted $19 million back in unpaid debts.

So why not find those that are doing it tough and wipe their debts.. Clean slate, instead of delving deeper into personal affairs of people doing their best?

Because there are not enough barrels to place different groups in, so we all get placed in the closest barrel that matches what we are doing.

Oh well… as some of you are aware. I support both sides of the CSA wall, those payer's struggling to pay and those payee's not getting paid at all…..

My time here is at the mercy of my peers - sometimes I rant, sometimes I assist…..


LifeInsight said
….My idea of setting up a support fund was not about helping payers avoid child support, but to provide financial assistance to payers who found themselves in financial strife due to losing shared care of their children which might not happen for a number of years afterwards.

Perhaps FLWG could set up such a scheme to raise funds for their work as well as supporting payers or payees in dire need due to the inequities of the Family Court.

Paying child support three months in advance would raise  a lot of money a lot quicker that 1 month.

I'll put my money where my mouth is - I will give FLWG my child support payments three months in advance if they agree to make the payments on time. In return FLWG can keep the interest which would be about $12 or $48 for the year. Now that is based on $200 a month child support.

Are you Gods opps Mods taking this idea on - a no cost way to raise funds???
I have been reading with interest this topic. LifeInsight says he/she has three shelf companies. There is a real impost in admin overhead with these companies. There is an ATO that requires yearly returns, GST (BAS) returns as well, fees to maintain the company registrations and a myriad of accounting functions.

However that said my understanding of this idea is that payers would pay forward their child support for three months this giving the "company" a working capital to invest in obviously only secured funds streams. The funds advances would need to be secured. How do you propose that such security would be made? I wonder what the cost of admin would be for such a venture? How would the company entity guarantee the payments are made? Thinking about this what does CSA do with the interest they earn between the time funds are paid in and the time they are expended? (Paid out)?. Your idea is innovative but I suspect that securities,administration and accounting returns would erode that interest credit in no time. Thanks also for thinking about FLWG in the process as building something like this is not an inexpensive exercise.

Site Director
I agree with LifeInsight… there needs to be a way that give payers a "chance", a little self support.. anything that give those battling a break from the MORE MORE MORE attitude of CSA.

I dont know about the rest of you but I get really concerned when i see CSA Aus being handed "worlds best practice" ..

best practice in what?
a. Breaches of Privacy (700 confirmed cases LAST YEAR of staff doing things they shouldnt be - and thats just the ones that were confirmed)
b. forced compliance.
c. spying and coercion
d. Orwellian tactics of big brother and stand over merchants…

And whats the result - Yes says Matt Miller - we need to do better. Better at what Matt abiding by the law or NOT GETTING CAUGHT. Current legislation is a shield for them and the peer from behind it - throw a spear and pop back behind again…The problem is that they throw the spears at the wrong people and they hold the shield the wrong way…. In alot of cases they hold up something that they state is the shield but its actually not…. but they throw the spear anyway.

I think that CSA and the Govt. has lost sight of "for the people" and is now about keeping their current Worlds Best Practice rating…. there are 2 govt organisations that should be based on "results" and they are the Sports Commission and Tourism, the rest should be operating int he best interest of the Australian public. of which you, me, Bigred, CeeCee and LifeINsight are legal and taxpaying members.
Gift Deductible entities and Income Exempt entities (lie churches).

its the way to go. :thumbs:

I remember (musing) a homeless man in san diego - as I walked hes asked me to donate to the homeless men's group - who were building a refuge . I donated.

No matter how warm San Diego is the poor struggle - mostly men seeking respect, dignity and a purpose.

CSA is hopeless - most australians are to stupid to realize.

 Maybe I am not explaining myself well enough
Adding another layer to C$A is of questionable merit. Tax money covers the system. If C$A is hopeless that suggests that there are arguments to be put about improving the system. Accepting responsibility for one's actions includes contributing to fairness for all before any resolution entity.

What are the specific changes sought?
What is justification for the changes?
How will the changes improve the system?

Under the current arrangement there are checks and balances which in effect ensure that accountability and a capacity to contest the levied payment.
Who would trust another layer of bureaucracy which may be less secure?
Be mindful of how Aboriginals were fleeced of wages by bureaucrats.
There is an appeal process which allows decisions of C$A to be tested and precedents to be manifest. Even appeals of SSAT are heard by Federal Magistrates court. That suggests even the High Court is in the loop.
Accepting the umpires decision or appealing are the options.

What is done for you, let it be done, what you must do, be sure you do it, as the wise person does today that what the fool will do in three days - Buddha

I did not start this topic

Agreed - "who is good and who is bad" is a hard line to draw in the sand for a mere 3000 staff. But even if just 1 listens and understands then there is a small victory.

Appealing the system - Great if you have the time and the money to be able to go through 60 days of objections, then to appeals then to court.. Like so many here we give up the fight, we concede defeat, we take what little self esteem is left and slinker off into the darkness…..spirit shattered - CSA leaves us alone. Spirirt NOT shattered, they pile it on.

Accepting ones responsibility - i gather that everyone on this site has done exactly that, thats why we are here…. So now all we have to do is accept that "CSA is right everytime" and we can all sleep sound at night.

Remember sites like this would not exist if everyone just accepted the status quo and if the powers that be were fair in action and deed.

Hurt - yes i feel hurt. I was handed a decision 4 years ago that has seen me accrue a debt, I have accepted that paid my dues and suffered the ill health as a result. But because of a decision I did not make (CSA did) and the instant my debt reached $1000.00 (regardless of how much i could afford to pay of it) I was flung into the "avoiders barrel" - I am now a so called "nonpayer" and outside "natural justice" and apparently a "dodger" placed  in the barrel that entitles CSA to use the full weight of the law.

I have just crawled to the top of the barrel, seen the sun and I currently gasping for air, flinging paperwork at CSA in order to not get shoved back into the barrel again. Problem is that it will be the long arm of CSA OR the mountain of paperwork that forces me back into its depths… not what i do for a living or how much i should be paying.

I understand the "masses" are happy and because of the reforms all payers got from CSA we should not rock the boat, but there is still a segment of society that needs help to crawl out of the barrel… and I am sorry to say moderators, this segemnt is going to get larger with the new compliance initiatives of CSA.



MOderators please reflect (on the site) that this topic was started by the appropriate moderator. I have a view point on the subject but did not start the topic with a view to establishing any NEW COMPANY STRUCTURE or other entity.

Last edit: by nxus

I plan to "poke the dragon" on 3 fronts this week.  As expected, last week, they took my tax return to cover disputed arrears, sent half the required papers to the SSAT on the 28 th day (hence delaying the process) and seem to have lost an agency based payment request.  And that was the best week I have had with them.

Can't say what the responses will be so I don't tip them off but they will be busy, busy, busy!
nxus said
Yes but you are missing the point… As an investment or as directors CSA would be able to see it all and I guess sometime shortly grab handfuls from it… I am talking about a network that ties CSA up in so much paperwork and trail finding that they just say "stuff it" the guys paying fair CS, leave him alone… If it were advertised (hint Hint flwg) I am guessing lawyers, accountants, business owners, company directors, real estate agents who are all CSA payers might come out of the woodwork and start banding together.
So your topic heading is 'Lets Tie up the CSA with Paperwork' and then you go 'hint hint' for FLWG. Let get into the real world. The SPCA and FLWG have very strong ties. The SPCA along with some other organizations spent a lot of time getting the CSA forums on the Agenda and now you would like 'hint hint' the FLWG to behave unethically? so that they would not be invited to to participate in any other changes?
nxus said
like we did for the reforms.
Is that a Royal 'we'. Reminds me of Lee Iaccocas book about Ford. There were plenty of plenty that started to claim credit for the 'Mustang', when it became a success, but with the Edsel it seemed no one was involved with the project.
Conan, not sure what you are getting at here.  Could you rewrite it in plain English please?

On the subject of the current law I reckon it isn't too bad.  The problem lies in the execution and the lack of sensible information available for the average guy to make rational decisions around.  
My view of what Conan is saying is this; The capacity to successfully lobby for change depends on a number of factors, one of which is credibility. Suggestions like, "lets tie up the CSA in paperwork - that'll show ém" tends to diminish credibility and may therefore be counter-productive.  
Testing-one-two said
My view of what Conan is saying is this; The capacity to successfully lobby for change depends on a number of factors, one of which is credibility. Suggestions like, "lets tie up the CSA in paperwork - that'll show ém" tends to diminish credibility and may therefore be counter-productive.  

Thank you Testing-one-two, credibility is the point I was alluding to.

I think the Mustang comment went over many heads?  Iacocca's books are a general read in business courses (as much as a read of Sun Tzu is in military colleges) When the Mustang became such a sensational suucess 'everybody' had something to do with its creation. The Edsel on the other hand apparently had 'no one' involved in its creation. The point I was lauding to was how many people claim to have been involved in the changes to the Family Law Act. Many would like to know where they were when the hard work was being done.

There are certain must read books in every profession, how many here have read *'Cross on Evidence' by Heydon? or more pertinently all the CSA material on the WEB guide and the CSA links?

* better than hot milk or cocoa to get you sleepy.
The easy work has been done.  The hard work lies ahead.
I hope not also, but from my brief experience the real hard slog is the cultural change for CSA.  From where I sit I see the same old faces with the same old attitudes in the same old desks spruiking the same old bs.  
1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets