Can I Voluntarily Reduce My Earnings and Then Petition for a Reduction in Child Support Payments?

Generally speaking, the Florida courts are quite strict when it comes to forcing a parent to pay child support. They can, in some instances, impute income, meaning that they can determine how much you should be making as opposed to how much you are making for the purpose of supporting your child. If you voluntarily take a lower paying job or quit your main job, the courts will still require that you pay the same amount of child support. However, if you lose your job through no fault of your own and take another job that pays less, you may have an argument for reducing your child support burden. In the case of Overbey v. Overbey, the Florida Supreme Court addressed a similar situation where one parent voluntarily reduced their earnings and then sought a downward modification of child support. Should that reduction count? What standard is used to determine if the reduction should count? These are the questions that are answered by Overbey.

Background of the case

The Overbeys had a child and were under a child support order. The father wanted to go to law school, which meant he would need to scale back his full-time work, which would in turn reduce his income. He petitioned the court for a downward modification of his child support obligations. He argued that his earning capacity had declined. The mother opposed, arguing that the reduction was voluntary and should not entitle him to relief.

During the trial, the court granted the father’s modification based on his reduced income. The mother appealed, and the case ultimately made its way to the Florida Supreme Court for review.

Legal issues and holdings

In this case, the main legal questions before the Florida Supreme Court were:

• Can a parent’s voluntary decision to reduce income (by going to school) justify reducing child support?
• If voluntary, does that automatically preclude modification, or should there be a discretionary component involving the child’s interests?

In this case, the Florida Supreme Court held that a mere voluntariness test is inadequate. The court decided:

• While the move to attend law school was voluntary, child support obligations are owed to the children—not the parent.
• Therefore, instead of denying the modification out of hand based on voluntariness alone, the court must assess whether the change in income is in the best interests of the children.
• If a temporary reduction supports the child’s welfare, the modification could be appropriate.
• On the other hand, the modification cannot prejudice the children. The court emphasized that a parent cannot simply “self-induce” a reduction in child support.

The Overbey court remanded the case to the trial court to reconsider the modification under the best interests standard. This entails examining the child’s needs, duration of the reduction, and whether it ultimately serves their best interests.

Talk to a Tampa, FL, Child Support Lawyer Today

Westchase Law, P.A., represents the interests of parents in child custody and support cases. Call our Tampa family lawyers today to schedule an appointment, and we can begin discussing your next steps right away.

Source:

law.justia.com/cases/florida/supreme-court/1997/88370-0.html