High Income Earners – Child Support and Incomes Over $150,000

  1. Home
  2. News
  3. High Income Earners – Child Support and Incomes Over $150,000
High Income Earners – Child Support and Incomes Over $150,000/

High Income Earners – Child Support and Incomes Over $150,000

Nick Van Duyvenbode 24 November 2015

The Child Support Guidelines, which were first adopted federally in 1997, and subsequently shortly after in Alberta have become a strong source for the standardization of child support payments in family law.  

There are however particular exceptions that are built into the Guidelines to provide the courts with greater flexibility to determine child support obligations.  One such exception is S. 4 of the Guidelines dealing with incomes over $150,000 annually.  While the table amount of the Guidelines are revised annually with adjustment for increased cost of living, S. 4 dealing with incomes over $150,000 has remained a static figure since the inception of the Guidelines.  As incomes rise from year-to-year, a growing number of individuals are beginning to fall within this category.

There are three common misconceptions surrounding the use of S. 4 of the Guidelines that have significant implications for individuals earning more than $150,000.  The first misconception is that per S. 4(b) of the Guidelines, in deferring from the table amounts set out in S.3, a child support payment made pursuant to this section is always a decrease from what the prescribed amount would be under the table amount.  While often it may be the case that a court could deem that the table amount is too high, the court may also use its deference under S. 4 to select an amount higher than the table amounts based on the facts of the case.   In dealing with this matter, the SCC in Francis v. Baker overturned the Ontario Court of Appeal decision which had interpreted “inappropriate” under S. 4 as meaning “inadequate”, and stated that the word inappropriate can either mean an increase or decrease to the table amounts of the Guidelines.  

The second major misconception is that there is a “silver bullet” in determining how child support for incomes over $150,000 will be interpreted by the courts.    Clients may be drawn to one case or another that aligns with their perception of how their case should be equally interpreted.  A client may find it extremely frustrating to learn that characterization of their family law issue when in court can often be highly divergent to how they envisioned the case.  In this regard, clients should be attuned to knowing how their case can be aligned with several comparable cases, dealing with specific sub-components of calculating child support, that their case will depend on the persuasive arguments of their lawyer, and finally, but not least, that a justice’s decision is based on their own reasoned interpretation of the case.

This lends itself to the third major misconception concerning the belief that the court shall follow the table amount of the Guidelines that creates a formula for income up to $150,000 and a subsequent formula for all income above that amount.   While the intent of the Guidelines was to ensure practical application and consistency, S. 4 has given the courts the flexibility to apply these prescribed table amounts, as well as other methods for accounting for provision of the welfare of the child or children.  Frequently, depending on the facts of the case, the courts have been quite creative in their methods in determining what “appropriate” on-going child support is or even awards for retro-active child support.

The recent Alberta Queen’s Bench case M. (D.G.) v. M. (K.M.), in dealing with retroactive child support on the basis of the father’s income that was over $150,000, the court made its calculation based on a methodology of an “off-set” in lieu of the table amounts.  This off-set was calculated on the basis of what the mother had claimed she had spent on raising the children while they were in her custody, and what the father had paid, to date, in child support.  This case directly depicts the high discretion that remains with justices to defer from using the table amounts of the Guidelines, in favour of their reasoned accounting.

To date there has been no standardization of when a court should defer from the table amounts in the Guidelines, nor is there an indication that a developing body of cases is being relied upon by justices when deciding to depart from the table amounts. Rather, there continues to be a contextual and liberal approach to dealing with incomes over $150,000, in lieu of a principled/legal theory approach.

The Divorce and Family Law Attorneys at the Calgary partnership of RCM LLP have experience and knowledge in advocating for your claims concerning child support. Our Lawyers are understanding, trained and highly efficient and are here to assist you during the difficult and emotional transition caused by your separation and Divorce. Please contact us today for an appointment.

Contact Us

Stay up–to–date

Debra J. Price 8 August 2017

WHAT IS THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROGRAM AND WHY IS IT COMPULSORY?

The Dispute Resolution Officer program was first introduced in Calgary in 2001 as a pilot project.  It is now, and has been for many years, mandatory in both Calgary and Edmonton prior to any child s…

Alison J. Chickloski 4 August 2017

Negotiation, Mediation or Arbitration in Family Law: Which is Best?

When parties separate and commence the divorce process or when they decide to settle support or parenting matters, many times they advise their family lawyer that they do not want to end up in court o…

Alison J. Chickloski 21 June 2017

Post-Secondary Education Expense Obligations for Separated or Divorced Parents

Section 7 of the Alberta Child Support Guidelines and the Federal Child Support Guidelines sets out a number of expenses that are to be shared by the parents of a child. Such expenses are above and be…

Alison J. Chickloski 20 June 2017

Unequal Division of Matrimonial Property

Under Alberta’s Matrimonial Property Act, there is a presumption that all property acquired during marriage is divided equally between the spouses, as long as the property is not exempt (see my pos…

Aaron M. Vanin 11 May 2017

How am I able to claim the dependent deductions?

The decision of Harder v. The Queen 2016 TCC197 dealt with the Appeal of a Child Support Order in which there was shared parenting. Mr. Harder earned more money than his ex-wife, and the two shared th…

More