questions & answers

Question: I am the recipient of the child support that my son is to recieve. I am not working but going to school full time, my son's father had put down on the paper work when he filed that I was making minimum wage and said that it was mandatory to have that down regardless if I was working or not. Is this true. He also says that it was mandatory that he gets to put my son on his taxes every year for four years is this true?

Answer:

It is true that A.R.S. § 25-320(I) requires the court to *presume* that a parent is capable of earning at least minimum wage on a full-time basis. It is also true that A.R.S. § 25-320, Appendix E requires the court to attribute at least minimum wage to the parent who is ordered to *pay* (vs. receive) child support. However, that same appendix goes on to clarify that the court does not *have* to attribute income, and cites a parent's effort to engage in reasonable career or occupational training (i.e. education) as one reason why the court might refuse to do so. The appendix further points out that, if the court attributes income (e.g. minimum wage) to a parent receiving child support, that parent is also entitled to calculate the amount of daycare expenses she *would* have to pay if she were actually working instead of attending school. In other words, the person paying child support can't have it both ways.

Concerning your other question, the courts usually allocate the child-related tax exemptions in the same proportion as each parent's share of the combined gross income. So, just as an example, if your ex-husband makes twice as much as you do, and you have one child in common, then your share of the combined parental income would be 33% (compared to his 67%). Accordingly, he would pay 2/3 of the medical expenses not covered by insurance, but he would also get to claim your shared child as a tax exemption two out of every three years. Of course, not every couple resolves their child support case that way. Some people simply split the tax exemptions and unreimbursed medical costs 50-50, either because they don't care enough to deal with the math necessary to calculate something different. The main goal is consistency and fairness.