On June 20, 2013, the Massachusetts Probate and Family Court released new Child Support Guidelines that become effective August 1, 2013. The new Child Support Guidelines revise the Guidelines issued in 2009, and modify several provisions from the 2009 Guidelines. Below is a summary of the changes to the new Child Support Guidelines.
Sources of Income
In the new Guidelines, the Probate and Family Court specifically excludes any income derived from means-tested public assistance programs, like TAFDC, SNAP, and SSI, from computation of child support obligations. Additionally, the Guidelines now explicitly state that the Court may consider none, some, or all overtime income even if overtime was earned prior to entry of a child support order. However, in all cases, where parents’ combined available income is over $250,000, the Guidelines should be applied on the first $250,000 in the same proportion as the Recipient’s and Payor’s actual income as provided on line 1h of the child support guidelines worksheet.
Attribution of Income
In the previous Guidelines, the Court had the authority to attribute income to a parent. Now the Court has clarified the issue of attribution of income to state that “[t]he Court shall consider all relevant factors including without limitation the education, training, health, past employment history of the party, and the availability of employment at the attributed income level.” This means that in order to attribute income to a person based upon a certain vocation or profession, there must be the chance of employment for that parent within that vocation or profession.
Consideration of Alimony Reform Act
In 2011, the Massachusetts Legislature passed the Alimony Reform Act, which became effective in March 2012. Since March 2012 there has been some confusion as to how the calculation of alimony and child support are related, and whether the same sources of income can be used for calculation of both alimony and child support. The new Guidelines clarify these issues.
First, the new Guidelines specifically “prohibit the use of gross income which the Court has already considered in making a child support order from being used again in determining an alimony order.” However, the Guidelines go on to further state, “[c]onsideration may be given by the parties to preparing alternate calculations of alimony and child support to determine the most equitable result for the child and the parties. Depending upon the circumstance, alimony may be calculated first, and in other circumstances child support will be calculated first. Judicial discretion is necessary and deviations should be considered.” This simply means that parents may find alternate ways to create a new child support and alimony order, as long as the same sources of income are not calculated for the computation of both orders.
Parenting Time
The new Guidelines explicitly state that the Guidelines assume that the children have a primary residence with one parent, and spend at least one-third of their time with the other parent. In cases with the children spend less than one-third of their time with the noncustodial parent, then the Court may consider an upward deviation of child support in favor of the custodial parent.
Conversely, where the parents share approximately equal parenting time with the children, then two separate Guidelines should be run, known as cross guidelines.
Age of Children
The new Guidelines now clarify that for child support orders of any unemancipated child over the age of 18, the Court must exercise discretion in ordering child support or a parent to contribute towards college costs. In making this determination, the Court must consider:
the reason for the continued residence with and dependence on the Recipient, the child’s academic circumstances, living situation, the available resources of the parents, the costs of postsecondary education for the child, the availability of financial aid and the allocation of those costs, if any, between the parents. Contribution to college costs is not presumptive, but is based upon the above factors. If a specific college contribution is ordered, this contribution shall be considered by the Court in setting the weekly support order, if any.”
Deviations in Child Support Orders
In the new Guidelines, the Court has also added new grounds for deviations from the presumptive child support guidelines amount. This includes deviations where:
a) a parent has extraordinary health insurance expenses;
b) one parent is absorbing a child care cost that is disproportionate to their income; and
c) one parent provides less than one-third of the parenting time with the children.
Modification of Support Orders
In March 2013, the Supreme Judicial Court issued a ruling in Morales v. Morales, 464 Mass. 507 (2013), which changed the standard for modifying a child support order. The new Guidelines now incorporate the standard from the Morales decision. Now a child support order may be modified in any of the following circumstances:
1. there is an inconsistency between the amount of the existing order and the amount that would result from the application of the child support guidelines;
2. health insurance previously available at reasonable cost is no longer available (or if available but not at reasonable cost);
3. health insurance not previously available to a party at reasonable cost has become available; and
4. any other material and substantial change in circumstances has occurred.
However, where the Department of Revenue is administering a child support order, and parent seeks to modify their child support order that is less than 3 years old, that parent must demonstrate a “substantial change in circumstances” in addition to “an inconsistency in the guidelines.”
You must be logged in to post a comment.