CM in equal care

Hi all

A bit of a policy question. My partner and I have his son with us 45% of the time (38% of nights as his mum won't allow the 6th night per fortnight) and we are trying to get him with us for 50%.

The reason for this is that his mum has a disability and a drinking problem and there have been too many instances when she just couldn't provide him with decent care (i.e. very dirty clothes, can't cook for him most of the time etc). She loves him and cares for him but she just can't do it given that she works full-time in a professional job, she is disabled and when she drinks in the evenings she cannot function properly.

She is a higher tax rate earner and earns marginally more than my partner (about 20%). She currently gets all the child benefits etc.

If the care switches to 50% and she loses the child benefit because of her earnings, how would the CSA decide who is the non resident parent and who has the main care on an equal split?

It is mind-boggling that there is currently a liability to pay CM on an equal split and if anything it is the wrong way around as I would suggest the one who receives the benefits should be the liable party.

So if they don't fix this before they remove child benefit how are they going to decide?

Just wondering...

Zx

Hi
I was wondering the very same thing, the CSA deem who ever gets CB as the PCW, but what happens if both parents are high rate tax payers. My assumption is that the PWC will be the one who the child stays with most of the time (sounds obvious), which opens the way for lots of argument who the PWC is going to be....

LB

Precisely!

What is really crazy is how it gets decided now who gets the child benefit and child tax credit. It is normally the parent with most care but in an equal split both parents could apply. HMRC ultimately decide that the mother would get the money if there were no other factors.

That's constitutional sexism in my books. I hope they don't just blind copy the rule in the CSA when they have no child benefit and child tax credit as a factor to make the decision...

You would also get an interesting situation if the person with the majority of the care was a higher rate taxpayer and the other wasn't. Would the parent with care let the other parent have the child benefit (as only they can claim it) and risk having to pay them CSA while having the children most of the time?

Best wishes,
Sadie

This child benefit thing really hasnt been thought through very well!!

Its time the CSA changed and dealt with 50/50 care situations more effectively.

Although it is true that CB is only paid to one parent, where there are more than 1 child one of the "elements" can be paid to the other parent, particularly in cases where care is shared or where there is a shared residence order in place.

This leads to scenarios where both parents make claims against the other.

If you look at the legislation and the legal criteria which defines a NRP and a PWC, there is no mention of CB!!

One can only assume that this "differencial" is simply a "calculated assumption", that is, the mother, who usually is the PWC, would also be the recipient of the CB.

I suppose it is down to the other parent (NRP) to stick up for themselves and challenge the CSA.

Sadly there are many,many cases where the PWC (recipient of C isn't the parent with whom the children are most of the time but is the parent who is receiving CB and therefore antitled to claim CM.

When high tax payers lose CB there will be many "upsets" especially in cases where the NRP, who up until that point could not claim CB, will suddenly find themselves elegible for that benefit (if they are within the right salary range) and therefore could then become PWC with the ability to claim against their ex's who previously were the recipients of the CB and CM even when the children spend more time with them.

Even now, the CSA cannot "box" cases where there is a shared residence order because these orders, legally, define both parents as PWC according to the current legal criteria.

It's a mess and will only get worse after January 2013!!

Imagine what will happen in January 2013 to those PWC who are high tax payers currently with CB and reciving CM from ex's who currently do not have CB but are on a lower tax band and will be elegible for CB as from January 2013...Even worse if there is a shared residence order...

I can't wait to read the posts which no doubt will make their way onto wikivorce!!