I believe that there is a serious math error in the computer program the Santa Clara County Courts use to calculate temporary spousal support. This math error means that persons receiving spousal support are getting LESS support.
Santa Clara County, like most counties in California, has a temporary spousal support (alimony) formula, which judges and attorneys use to set temporary spousal support.
I believe that the computer program that the court uses to automatically do the math for the support formula is incorrectly doing the calculations for tax consequences.
If you take the formula and do the calculations using a calculator, the amount to be paid is ALWAYS greater than the amount set by the computer program. This defies logic, because the person who pays spousal support gets to deduct the support from his taxes, while the person receiving support must pay taxes on the support income. Even a rough estimate by a mathematician will confirm that one does not have to reduce a payment that is tax deductible in order to make the payment more fair.
These formulas are an add on to the state child support formula. Child support is NOT deductible to the person paying, and is not income to the person receiving child support. In such an instance, tax consequences become important. If child support takes 40% of the payor's income, and the payor's income taxes are 40% of income, the payor may have only 20% of his income left for living expenses.
However, spousal support is tax deductible to the payor. A spousal support payment of $1000 a month could save the payor $400 a month in taxes. So the payor can actually afford to pay MORE in spousal support because of the tax savings.
It should also be noted that the court formula uses "net income", rather than gross income, but does not define "net income". In the past, people who expected to share in movie profits discovered that it is REALLY IMPORTANT to define net income.
This is serious stuff. Older women, who have raised their children, are the most affected by this math error. I do not understand why no one else has noticed this problem.
No comments:
Post a Comment