by MatthewPitts
19. October 2009 17:39
Well, it's kind of a loophole. You may recall that Wash. Rev. Code §26.19.071(4) excludes certain sources of income from inclusion in a parent's gross income for child support purposes. Those sources of income include: income of a new spouse or new domestic partner (or other adults in the household); child support received from other relationships; gifts and prizes; temporary assistance for needy families; supplemental security income; general assistance; and food stamps.
It is true that these sources of income remain "untouchable", but the loophole I am describing existed when one party sought a deviation from the standard calculation. Of course, there is also the issue of the newly added provision at Wash. Rev. Code § 26.19.071(4)(h) that now allows income from a second job to be protected from inclusion in a parent's gross income. There are some convoluted restrictions that should play out interestingly in future decisions.
So back to the closed loophole. Prior to the changes that took effect this month, a party was able to request a deviation from the standard calculation for any of the reasons set forth in Wash. Rev. Code § 26.19.075, without a guarantee that their previously disclosed "excluded income" would be considered by the court when deciding to grant or deny the deviation. That guarantee is no longer present. If a party has previously disclosed "excluded income" and they request a deviation for another reason, the once excluded income becomes fair game, and weighs on the decision to grant or deny the deviation.
I foresee several problems with this provision, especially because child support received from other relationships should always be excluded from calculation of a current support obligation. Yes, a deviation is not technically a calculation of the standard calculation, but child support received from previous relationships should be protected from scrutiny. I do not endorse the use of child support earnings from prior relationships by the obligor or the obligee. What do you think? How does this legislation change or affect the existing provision in Wash. Rev. Code 26.19.075(1)(a)(iii) which enumerates "child support received from other relationships" as a reason for a deviation?
Subscribe