Tuesday, 25 February 2014

Spousal and child maintenance issues- thoughts





 Spousal maintenance


1.       Maintenance – that is alimony – or spousal support is paid in cases where there is  substantial future earnings disparity.  Women’s participation in the workforce has, in a number of instances, reduced the need for spousal maintenance, although not made it disappear. Yet almost everyone has some argument about this issue applying in their own circumstances.

2.       Maintenance adjustments can come in two ways – a “toss a coin” adjustment to proceeds of asset sales (via a property settlement) or regular payment as an ongoing cash flow. A person who was primary care giver to the kids is generally worse off post-divorce, more so if they have to continue looking after the kids.  In many cases that reflect the fact that men work, and women more directly monitor kids. Unfortunately it also incentivises some women to cling to kids and justify not moving on. The preference is for a “clean break “ driven by the very concept of no fault. This should mean dealing with the matter as a precise adjustment to a property settlement, but judges again prefer lots of blurred lines. 

3.       Several factors complicate the analysis of spousal support even in a “normal case” (e.g. no health issues, no violence, reasonable dosh):
·         Judicial concern that the main care giver is financial disadvantaged is real, yet it is applied widely and the role of other care givers (grandparents, a friend to collect kids after school, paid carers) is yet to be properly teased out(actual care issue) . Accordingly more to argue about.
·         The “clean break rule” doesn’t address difficulties primary care givers face re-entering the workforce after a long break, whatever the children’s current ages and care needs (lost opportunity issue).  Yet the judicial reluctance to ignore legislative sign posts on a clean break may be one way to achieve certain fair outcomes in specific cases, but it pushes noise through the entire system at the expense of signals.  Accordingly more congestion in the queue.
·         Some wives worked for a long period so hubby could study to become a surgeon earning mega dollars (a compensatory issue, in some cases)
·         A need to reduce contingent reliance on the public purse by pushing primary economic impact onto higher earnings spouses
·         Questions of  ”structuring” future earnings (avoidance issues), or sometimes just hiding them (scumbag behaviour)
·         Re partnering stability (actually re marriage  stability) and the obligations of other persons
·         The concept that divorce is a no fault issue, although such matters are often intertwined in fact.    

4.       Unfortunately men’s rights groups complicate a decent outcome by lobbying for limited payments. On the other side academic nut jobs, genuinely concerned with the 2000s and the impoverished (who deserve far more support than currently given).

5.       Some but not many adjustments are made when there is a property split. Many middle class disputes wash up in a property adjustment. Again, no math or guidelines.  In this area it’s largely a coin toss as to quantum on the day in court. And to be fair men win out in the long run, as women are, generally, worse off financially post-divorce. For that reason some husbands’ pay 60% and move on, hoping for reciprocity of decency, by having her allow him lots of access in seeing their kids. Others try and outspend the wife- buy the kids with future loyalty rewards and trips to see grannies laden with presents from your brother.
At this point of the economic cycle though it’s not clear that a male winner trend is inevitable.


6.       Support can also take the form of an ongoing payment. Ongoing spousal support payments can in some cases be hard to practically enforce given hostility between separated parents (although these are collected now via the government). The regime requires that one spouse is unable to support themselves, while the earning spouse is financially able to provide support. About 8% of  all “pay as you go” arguments, that are litigated,  result in ongoing spousal support payments.



Child maintenance

7.       You are responsible for paying for your children, and keeping them in a manner to which these innocents should have expected, but for the separation.  That’s the law- you don’t wait for a court order.

8.       There are a set of “cash tables” in The Child Support Act. For a middle class parent that’s about $ 18,000 per year per child, cash, scaled to $26,000 for 3 children; and increasing as a child get older (turns 13, effectively). Split between the parents, so most parents, when agreeing parental time, extrapolate support on a “divide by whole days with the child, and net, basis”, although that’s not precisely how it works. These tables are a guide only and it is the actual expenses of each family in their own circumstances that matter if you litigate.  You will get a call from Child Support and should get 2-3myears tax returns ready.

9.       Arguments also arise around future schooling options for kids. For high net worth families there is an evolving argument over setting aside sinking funds or trust funds to meet private school fees.  A right to private schools- the lawyers love this stuff.


Property Orders


The Family Court has extensive powers to override legal title, beneficial ownership and bind third parties in relation to a matrimonial real estate dispute.  If the property is in her name it’s possible to register a caveat against land, but that’s not practically relevant.  Accept that you will lose. 

No comments:

Post a Comment