Typically, the courts try to milk the maximum out of you because the state makes more money that way. But every state is different. In my circumstance, it’s Alabama and they combine my gross income with my exe’s gross income and make their calculations based on that. Since she makes all of her money under the table, she is able to report $8,500 gross annual income. So, even if my income were to drop from $60k a year to $30k a year, my child support obligations would not be cut in half. They would only drop it by a few percentage points because she’s “technically” at the lowest bracket of the poverty level, even though she brings in around $40k under the table per year. But Alabama is under no obligation to lower my child support. If I tried, my ex would almost certainly argue “the best interests of the child.” And my daughter’s “best interests” would be to continue child support at the same level because she is used to that income level. I currently pay $135/week for my only child and I’m obligated to drive the entire 3 and a half hour round trip to pick my daughter up on the weekends. It amounts to about $1200 a month for the last 10 years. I believe in taking responsibility and caring for my daughter, giving her every opportunity to have a better life than me, but the courts are more interested in federal dollars than they are the father’s ability to pay.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
It is crazy that the system milk this way. I hope you can afford to pay less in a distant future and get a better life with your daughter.