ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
EX-wife. Other than that your post is 100% correct. That is why so many non custodial parents deadbeat and go under the table, thereby burdoning all of us with more taxes to support them. I wont do that. So I suffer.
Yes they do and that was part of the boom of the check cashing stores.
Work under the table and cash your check at a check cashing store for a fee but still cheaper than having it attached.
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
PR, child support is usually negotiated and, in theory, taxes are factored in. The person who cares for the child, in theory, is contributing heavily to the child's well being and thus is the one who gets the deduction. And, let's face it, there are many different reasons for these situations to occur, some of which would probably make you more sympathetic to the parent who cares for the child. (And, shirtsleeve, I don't mean to imply anything at all about your situation.)
The father almost always gets hammered ... many become close to destitute.
The father almost always gets hammered ... many become close to destitute.
In my job, I hear both points of view, depending on my clients. (I only hear one point of view per family, though.) My impression is that child support issues hurt everyone, but the child is hurt least.
If you're saying your wife can claim your children but not have to declare the support you provide, we MUST change that ASAP! That's just plain wrong no matter how you look at it.
If you support your children financially, then you should be able to claim them.
If a $100K/yr earner gives $35K to his ex for child support, then he/she damn well deserves to claim the children on his/her taxes. I'm speechless that your wife gets to not only claim your children, but doesn't have to declare the money you give her.
WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.....
Its wrong but thats the way it works. As far as child support goes i use to pay 35% and then 1% for each kid after that. I had made a deal with my wife that i would go by the standard 35% instead of going to court, that was a big mistake. I found out that the law had changed, i called a lawyer. He told me that the ex wifes salary was now taken into account. So i went from $800+ a month to appx. $200. This was about Ten years ago. So Shirt, if your wife works you need to go back and have it adjusted.
In the end the Crazy Blood Sucking Biotch wanted CS even though the kids were in their early Twenties and all Three were working full time.
Its wrong but thats the way it works. As far as child support goes i use to pay 35% and then 1% for each kid after that. I had made a deal with my wife that i would go by the standard 35% instead of going to court, that was a big mistake. I found out that the law had changed, i called a lawyer. He told me that the ex wifes salery was now taken into account. So i went from $800+ a month to appx. $200. This was about Seven or Eight years ago. So Shirt, if your wife works you need to go back and have it adjusted. In the end the Crazy Blood Sucking Biotch wanted CS even though the kids were in their early Twenties and all Three were working full time.
But you don't have to pay ANYTHING after they're 21, right?
On what basis was she trying to get $$ out of you after they turned 21?
__________________ "No one walking this earth knows what is truly righteous"
That's how I feel about CT. My gripes have more to do with cost of living, weather, crime, political corruption, etc.
And yes, I am leaving in June. I-84 West.
__________________
We get what we deserve.
------------------ “On a day when they could have had impact players David Terrell or Koren Robinson..they took Georgia defensive tackle Richard Seymour, who had 1 sacks last season in the pass-happy SEC and is too tall to play tackle at 6-6 and too slow to play defensive end. This genius move was followed by trading out of a spot where they could have gotten the last decent receiver in Robert Ferguson and settled for tackle Matt Light, who will not help any time soon.”
But you don't have to pay ANYTHING after they're 21, right?
On what basis was she trying to get $$ out of you after they turned 21?
If they're going to school your suppose to pay until the graduate ..22 years old. And i would have but the two living at home decided to quit school and work full time. I refused to support their life style.
If they're going to school your suppose to pay until the graduate ..22 years old. And i would have but the two living at home decided to quit school and work full time. I refused to support their life style.
I would as well. Time to grow up!
__________________ "No one walking this earth knows what is truly righteous"
As I said to PR, if Bill was still with his wife, he'd be paying say a 30% tax rate and get some deductions. If Bill leaves his wife and pays child support, he'll still be paying the same 30% tax rate, but she'll get the deductions because she's also contributing heavily towards the child's welfare. You can't have both people claim deductions on the same child. That would be unfair to couples that are still together.
It seems to me that the problem may lie with the formula. It eithers needs to be more sophisticated to take into account variables or needs to be more flexible so that a judge or jury can consider modifying the terms. For instance, if you're ex earns a lot more than you, perhaps it would be unfair for you to contribute so much.
This is where you miss the point. Divorce is financially devastating. The amount I pay out of my gross income leaves me below the poverty line in take home pay, yet I gross well into middle class wages. Like Icy said. Disregarding my ex-wive's status, its clear that this is a formula for disaster. You seem to try to look at the family as one unit, but it no longer is. Its two units, each needing all of the food, clothing, shelter heat and utilities to survive. But the IRS, the court (and you) are still trying to treat this as one unit. Its illogical and this is really whats unfair. Over a million deadbeats in Mass must tell ya something. Let us deduct our child support from our income. That would fairly reflect the dual household situation that exists and would allow for a lot of current and future deadbeats to not be any longer. This would free so many of the child's units from the system and poverty.
This is where you miss the point. Divorce is financially devastating. The amount I pay out of my gross income leaves me below the poverty line in take home pay, yet I gross well into middle class wages. Like Icy said. Disregarding my ex-wive's status, its clear that this is a formula for disaster. You seem to try to look at the family as one unit, but it no longer is. Its two units, each needing all of the food, clothing, shelter heat and utilities to survive. But the IRS, the court (and you) are still trying to treat this as one unit. Its illogical and this is really whats unfair. Over a million deadbeats in Mass must tell ya something. Let us deduct our child support from our income. That would fairly reflect the dual household situation that exists and would allow for a lot of current and future deadbeats to not be any longer. This would free so many of the child's units from the system and poverty.
From everything I've hard, across states (and countries), men generally get screwed on various divorce / custody rules and rulings. Granted, that's usually from the perspective of other men.
But what you've described here sounds like another instance of it.
Why not split the dependents for tax purposes? The idea that it's too complicated certainly doesn't fly in light of the our current tax code's convoluted state, and it would at least be equitable.
Re: I Gotta Get The Hell Out Of This State.
Linear Mode
