child support amount and spouse income

I live in CA and I have been paying my ex support for 5 years or so....we
basically share custody 50-50, with me being the custodial parent (on paper
at least)

She was remarried a few years ago and now her husband makes a ton of money
(he changed jobs)....so: she has decided not to go back to work. She lives
in a huge house, providing loads of great things for the family, while I
live in a small 1 bedroom apartment and have to pay her.

how is this fair? should I have to pay her support while she is doing so
much better financially? If she hadn't married this other guy, she would
have an income, and therefore lower the support that i need to pay her
right?

Well, either way, things have always been very friendly between us, so I am
always hesitant to even bring up the subject. Plus, I feel an obligation to
provide support as well. I would never cut off payments to her, unless it
was agreed on. But, it truly seems wrong for me to pay her so much every
month when she and her family has so much more than i.

Would it be true that if she were to marry donald trump, and have millions
of dollars available to her, that I would still need to pay her every month
the few hundred dollars?

S.

S.K. wrote:
I live in CA and I have been paying my ex support for 5 years or
so....we basically share custody 50-50, with me being the custodial
parent (on paper at least)

She was remarried a few years ago and now her husband makes a ton of
money (he changed jobs)....so: she has decided not to go back to
work. She lives in a huge house, providing loads of great things for
the family, while I live in a small 1 bedroom apartment and have to
pay her.

how is this fair? should I have to pay her support while she is
doing so much better financially? If she hadn't married this other
guy, she would have an income, and therefore lower the support that i
need to pay her right?

Well, either way, things have always been very friendly between us,
so I am always hesitant to even bring up the subject. Plus, I feel
an obligation to provide support as well. I would never cut off
payments to her, unless it was agreed on. But, it truly seems wrong
for me to pay her so much every month when she and her family has so
much more than i.

Would it be true that if she were to marry donald trump, and have
millions of dollars available to her, that I would still need to pay
her every month the few hundred dollars?

If she doesn't truly need the money, she shouldn't take it, but that's
another issue.

Even though I'm in CA also, I'm not sure about this, but I believe that
her income should be "imputed" as if she were still working and your
payments shouldn't be affected. If she doesn't work, that's her choice.

Technically, your kids are not his kids, they're your kids. So,
expecting his money (even if he were Donald Trump) to be a basis for
lowing your obligation is not right.

--
"Reagan proved deficits don't matter."
~ Dick Cheney to Paul O'Neill during a Cabinet meeting.

You are correct to my knowledge regarding imputed income.

Hoever, it's likely that CS was set pre marriage and he's paying what he'd
be paying if she were working (and it's still to high). Gee, I wonder if
he could get Spousal Support due to her now "joint income" that is higher?


It wouldn't hurt to run it past an attorney though. If you don't have much
money, go to www.nolo.com and try one of the "dial a lawyer" people on that
site. I've used them and gotten competent legal advice and the cost is
minimal (about $70.00 the last time I used them).

barry

S.K. wrote:
I live in CA and I have been paying my ex support for 5 years or so....we
basically share custody 50-50, with me being the custodial parent (on paper
at least)

I don't understand why you have to pay if you're the "custodial parent"
on paper. It must be worse than I thought.
Bob




She was remarried a few years ago and now her husband makes a ton of money
(he changed jobs)....so: she has decided not to go back to work. She lives
in a huge house, providing loads of great things for the family, while I
live in a small 1 bedroom apartment and have to pay her.

how is this fair? should I have to pay her support while she is doing so
much better financially? If she hadn't married this other guy, she would
have an income, and therefore lower the support that i need to pay her
right?

Well, either way, things have always been very friendly between us, so I am
always hesitant to even bring up the subject. Plus, I feel an obligation to
provide support as well. I would never cut off payments to her, unless it
was agreed on. But, it truly seems wrong for me to pay her so much every
month when she and her family has so much more than i.

Would it be true that if she were to marry donald trump, and have millions
of dollars available to her, that I would still need to pay her every month
the few hundred dollars?

S.





--

When did we divide into sides?

"As president, I will put American government and our legal system back
on the side of women." John Kerry, misandrist Democratic candidate for
President. http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/women/


























[Bob does not advocate any illegal, seditious, or immoral acts. All
posts are for discussion, rhetorical, or humorous purposes only.]

I pay because ...legally, my daughter spends 51% with me, and 49% with her
mom...at the time we signed our CS papers she had 0 income and I made around
35k...

That's another reason for me to be careful about the whole thing as well: I
make more now. so if i were to stir things up, then lose my arguement, I
may end up paying even more.

S.


"Bob" wrote in message
...
S.K. wrote:
I live in CA and I have been paying my ex support for 5 years or
so....we
basically share custody 50-50, with me being the custodial parent (on
paper
at least)

I don't understand why you have to pay if you're the "custodial parent"
on paper. It must be worse than I thought.
Bob




She was remarried a few years ago and now her husband makes a ton of
money
(he changed jobs)....so: she has decided not to go back to work. She
lives
in a huge house, providing loads of great things for the family, while I
live in a small 1 bedroom apartment and have to pay her.

how is this fair? should I have to pay her support while she is doing
so
much better financially? If she hadn't married this other guy, she
would
have an income, and therefore lower the support that i need to pay her
right?

Well, either way, things have always been very friendly between us, so I
am
always hesitant to even bring up the subject. Plus, I feel an
obligation to
provide support as well. I would never cut off payments to her, unless
it
was agreed on. But, it truly seems wrong for me to pay her so much
every
month when she and her family has so much more than i.

Would it be true that if she were to marry donald trump, and have
millions
of dollars available to her, that I would still need to pay her every
month
the few hundred dollars?

S.





--

When did we divide into sides?

"As president, I will put American government and our legal system back
on the side of women." John Kerry, misandrist Democratic candidate for
President. http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/women/


























[Bob does not advocate any illegal, seditious, or immoral acts. All
posts are for discussion, rhetorical, or humorous purposes only.]

"The Dave©" wrote in message ...
S.K. wrote:
I live in CA and I have been paying my ex support for 5 years or
so....we basically share custody 50-50, with me being the custodial
parent (on paper at least)

She was remarried a few years ago and now her husband makes a ton of
money (he changed jobs)....so: she has decided not to go back to
work. She lives in a huge house, providing loads of great things for
the family, while I live in a small 1 bedroom apartment and have to
pay her.

how is this fair? should I have to pay her support while she is
doing so much better financially? If she hadn't married this other
guy, she would have an income, and therefore lower the support that i
need to pay her right?

Well, either way, things have always been very friendly between us,
so I am always hesitant to even bring up the subject. Plus, I feel
an obligation to provide support as well. I would never cut off
payments to her, unless it was agreed on. But, it truly seems wrong
for me to pay her so much every month when she and her family has so
much more than i.

Would it be true that if she were to marry donald trump, and have
millions of dollars available to her, that I would still need to pay
her every month the few hundred dollars?

If she doesn't truly need the money, she shouldn't take it, but that's
another issue.

Even though I'm in CA also, I'm not sure about this, but I believe that
her income should be "imputed" as if she were still working and your
payments shouldn't be affected. If she doesn't work, that's her choice.

Technically, your kids are not his kids, they're your kids. So,
expecting his money (even if he were Donald Trump) to be a basis for
lowing your obligation is not right.


I disagree.
She's married to the new husband now. They share home, autos, and
chekcing accounts.
I do not believe that should be expected to provide full support for
his new wifes children, but the fathers chld support payments SHOULD
be lowered on the basis that 1/2 of the new spouses income is owned by
the wife/mother.
The new husbands income would be used to calculate everything else.
medicaid, eligibility for WIC, sliding scale services, etc even though
the services would be provided to only the wife and children, so yes,
it should also be used to calculate the fathers support payments.
Now tell me, if this lady walks into welfare and wants a welfare check
because she doesn't work what do you think they will tell her?
They will tell her that half of her husbands income is hers.
If it counts for the government why not for the dad too?

witchwirsen wrote:
Technically, your kids are not his kids, they're your kids. So,
expecting his money (even if he were Donald Trump) to be a basis for
lowing your obligation is not right.

I disagree.
She's married to the new husband now. They share home, autos, and
chekcing accounts.
I do not believe that should be expected to provide full support for
his new wifes children, but the fathers chld support payments SHOULD
be lowered on the basis that 1/2 of the new spouses income is owned by
the wife/mother.
The new husbands income would be used to calculate everything else.
medicaid, eligibility for WIC, sliding scale services, etc even though
the services would be provided to only the wife and children, so yes,
it should also be used to calculate the fathers support payments.
Now tell me, if this lady walks into welfare and wants a welfare check
because she doesn't work what do you think they will tell her?
They will tell her that half of her husbands income is hers.
If it counts for the government why not for the dad too?

Because it's not the new husband's kid. The new husband isn't the
government. End of story.

--
Whose cruel idea was it to put an 's' in the word lisp?

"S.K." wrote in message
m...
I pay because ...legally, my daughter spends 51% with me, and 49% with her
mom...at the time we signed our CS papers she had 0 income and I made
around
35k...
------------------
Did they impute income at that time?
------------------

That's another reason for me to be careful about the whole thing as well:
I
make more now. so if i were to stir things up, then lose my arguement, I
may end up paying even more.
-----------------
I know what you mean. In our case they imputed income to my future fiancee
but not to the mom which was totally unfair. But now my FF is making over
twice as much as was imputed and the mom is still unemployed, (she
remarried, new hubby works while she sits on her fat ass), We figure it
would still be 50% of the paycheck which it is now due to arrearages so
there's really no point. It would just end up making any arrearages in the
future, (job loss, etc), larger.

~AZ~


S.


"Bob" wrote in message
...
S.K. wrote:
I live in CA and I have been paying my ex support for 5 years or
so....we
basically share custody 50-50, with me being the custodial parent (on
paper
at least)

I don't understand why you have to pay if you're the "custodial parent"
on paper. It must be worse than I thought.
Bob




She was remarried a few years ago and now her husband makes a ton of
money
(he changed jobs)....so: she has decided not to go back to work. She
lives
in a huge house, providing loads of great things for the family, while
I
live in a small 1 bedroom apartment and have to pay her.

how is this fair? should I have to pay her support while she is doing
so
much better financially? If she hadn't married this other guy, she
would
have an income, and therefore lower the support that i need to pay her
right?

Well, either way, things have always been very friendly between us, so
I
am
always hesitant to even bring up the subject. Plus, I feel an
obligation to
provide support as well. I would never cut off payments to her,
unless
it
was agreed on. But, it truly seems wrong for me to pay her so much
every
month when she and her family has so much more than i.

Would it be true that if she were to marry donald trump, and have
millions
of dollars available to her, that I would still need to pay her every
month
the few hundred dollars?

S.





--

When did we divide into sides?

"As president, I will put American government and our legal system back
on the side of women." John Kerry, misandrist Democratic candidate for
President. http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/women/


























[Bob does not advocate any illegal, seditious, or immoral acts. All
posts are for discussion, rhetorical, or humorous purposes only.]

New spouse income can be factored into the CS payment equation in CA I
believe.


"The Dave©" wrote in message
...
S.K. wrote:
I live in CA and I have been paying my ex support for 5 years or
so....we basically share custody 50-50, with me being the custodial
parent (on paper at least)

She was remarried a few years ago and now her husband makes a ton of
money (he changed jobs)....so: she has decided not to go back to
work. She lives in a huge house, providing loads of great things for
the family, while I live in a small 1 bedroom apartment and have to
pay her.

how is this fair? should I have to pay her support while she is
doing so much better financially? If she hadn't married this other
guy, she would have an income, and therefore lower the support that i
need to pay her right?

Well, either way, things have always been very friendly between us,
so I am always hesitant to even bring up the subject. Plus, I feel
an obligation to provide support as well. I would never cut off
payments to her, unless it was agreed on. But, it truly seems wrong
for me to pay her so much every month when she and her family has so
much more than i.

Would it be true that if she were to marry donald trump, and have
millions of dollars available to her, that I would still need to pay
her every month the few hundred dollars?

If she doesn't truly need the money, she shouldn't take it, but that's
another issue.

Even though I'm in CA also, I'm not sure about this, but I believe that
her income should be "imputed" as if she were still working and your
payments shouldn't be affected. If she doesn't work, that's her choice.

Technically, your kids are not his kids, they're your kids. So,
expecting his money (even if he were Donald Trump) to be a basis for
lowing your obligation is not right.

--
"Reagan proved deficits don't matter."
~ Dick Cheney to Paul O'Neill during a Cabinet meeting.

If you are paying less than 300 to 400 bucks, I'd leave it at that man. You
are rolling the dice by ****ing her off, you KNOW she has all the cards. I
make 75G's a year, my ex 50G's a year, and I pay 1,000 a month in CS. I
have my kids about 35% of the time. When my ex took me back to court to
increase CS from the previously negotiated 600/month at the time of divorce,
to the new amount, the court basically had NO empathy for me at all. All
the receipts, all of the expenses I itemized, the savings I demonstrated for
my children's college mattered not. The man is the cash cow, pure and
simple. 5 minutes in front of the judge, bada bing, bada boom, instant pay
decrease. And I still try and provide all the things I did before for my
kids.

Just suck it up at this point.



"S.K." wrote in message
m...
I pay because ...legally, my daughter spends 51% with me, and 49% with her
mom...at the time we signed our CS papers she had 0 income and I made
around
35k...

That's another reason for me to be careful about the whole thing as well:
I
make more now. so if i were to stir things up, then lose my arguement, I
may end up paying even more.

S.


"Bob" wrote in message
...
S.K. wrote:
I live in CA and I have been paying my ex support for 5 years or
so....we
basically share custody 50-50, with me being the custodial parent (on
paper
at least)

I don't understand why you have to pay if you're the "custodial parent"
on paper. It must be worse than I thought.
Bob




She was remarried a few years ago and now her husband makes a ton of
money
(he changed jobs)....so: she has decided not to go back to work. She
lives
in a huge house, providing loads of great things for the family, while
I
live in a small 1 bedroom apartment and have to pay her.

how is this fair? should I have to pay her support while she is doing
so
much better financially? If she hadn't married this other guy, she
would
have an income, and therefore lower the support that i need to pay her
right?

Well, either way, things have always been very friendly between us, so
I
am
always hesitant to even bring up the subject. Plus, I feel an
obligation to
provide support as well. I would never cut off payments to her,
unless
it
was agreed on. But, it truly seems wrong for me to pay her so much
every
month when she and her family has so much more than i.

Would it be true that if she were to marry donald trump, and have
millions
of dollars available to her, that I would still need to pay her every
month
the few hundred dollars?

S.





--

When did we divide into sides?

"As president, I will put American government and our legal system back
on the side of women." John Kerry, misandrist Democratic candidate for
President. http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/women/


























[Bob does not advocate any illegal, seditious, or immoral acts. All
posts are for discussion, rhetorical, or humorous purposes only.]