Colorado § 14-10-115 - Child support guidelines - purpose - determination of income - schedule of basic child support obligations - adjustments to basic child support - additional guidelines - child support commission - definitions.
Full text of Colorado Colorado Revised Statutes § 14-10-115 — Child support guidelines - purpose - determination of income - schedule of basic child support obligations - adjustments to basic child support - additional guidelines - child support commission - definitions., with citation guidance and answers to common questions.
§ 14-10-115. Child support guidelines - purpose - determination of income - schedule of basic child support obligations - adjustments to basic child support - additional guidelines - child support commission - definitions.
(1) Purpose and applicability.
(a) The child support guidelines and schedule of basic child support obligations have the following purposes:
(I) To establish as state policy an adequate standard of support for children, subject to the ability of parents to pay;
(II) To make awards more equitable by ensuring more consistent treatment of persons in similar circumstances; and
(III) To improve the efficiency of the court process by promoting settlements and giving courts and the parties guidance in establishing levels of awards.
(b) The child support guidelines and schedule of basic child support obligations do the following:
(I) Calculate child support based upon the parents' combined adjusted gross income estimated to have been allocated to the child if the parents and children were living in an intact household;
(II) Adjust the child support based upon the needs of the children for extraordinary medical expenses and work-related child care costs; and
(III) Allocate the amount of child support to be paid by each parent based upon physical care arrangements.
(c) This section shall apply to all child support obligations, established or modified, as a part of any proceeding, including, but not limited to, articles 5, 6, and 10 of this title and articles 4 and 6 of title 19, C.R.S., regardless of when filed.
(2) Duty of support - factors to consider.
(a) In a proceeding for dissolution of marriage, legal separation, maintenance, or child support, the court shall, to the extent allowable within the court's jurisdiction, enter an order directing either or both parents owing a duty of support to a child of the marriage to pay an amount reasonable or necessary for the child's support and may order an amount determined to be reasonable under the circumstances for a time period that occurred after the date of the parties' physical separation or the filing of the petition or service upon the respondent, whichever date is latest, and prior to the month the child support obligation begins, without regard to marital misconduct.
(b) In determining the amount of support under this subsection (2), the court shall consider all relevant factors, including:
(I) The financial resources of the child;
(II) The financial resources of the custodial parent;
(III) The standard of living the child would have enjoyed had the marriage not been dissolved;
(IV) The physical and emotional condition of the child and his or her educational needs; and
(V) The financial resources and needs of the noncustodial parent.
(3) Definitions. As used in this section, unless the context otherwise requires:
(a) (I) "Adjusted gross income" means gross income, as specified in subsection (5) of this section, less preexisting child support obligations and less alimony or maintenance actually paid by a parent, as described in subsection (3)(a)(II) of this section.
(II) For purposes of this subsection (3)(a), if the alimony or maintenance actually paid by a parent is deductible for federal income tax purposes by that parent, and the alimony or maintenance is paid and received by the same parties as the child support calculation, then the actual amount of alimony or maintenance paid by that parent must be deducted from that parent's gross income. If the alimony or maintenance actually paid by a parent is not deductible for federal income tax purposes by that parent, then the amount of alimony or maintenance deducted from that parent's gross income is the amount of alimony or maintenance actually paid by that parent subject to the following adjustments:
(A) If the combined monthly adjusted gross income of the parties to the maintenance payment is ten thousand dollars or less, the maintenance actually paid will be multiplied by 1.25;
(B) If the combined monthly adjusted gross income of the parties to the maintenance payment is more than ten thousand dollars, the maintenance actually paid will be multiplied by 1.33; and
(C) If the amount of alimony or maintenance actually paid is increased as described in this section because it is not deductible for federal income tax purposes, there is a rebuttable presumption that the multiplier is correct. The presumption may be rebutted with evidence indicating a different multiplier is more accurate due to the tax implications of the maintenance payment being different than that reflected by the multiplier.
(III) If a court-ordered alimony or maintenance obligation actually paid by a party does not involve the same parties as the child support calculation and is not deductible for federal income tax purposes by that party, then the amount of the court-ordered alimony or maintenance that is deducted from that party's gross income is the amount actually paid by that party multiplied by 1.25.
(b) "Combined gross income" means the combined monthly adjusted gross incomes of both parents.
(c) "Income" means the actual gross income of a parent, if employed to full capacity, or potential income, if unemployed or underemployed. Gross income of each parent shall be determined according to subsection (5) of this section.
(c.5) "Mandatory school fees" means fees charged by a school or school district, including a charter school, for a child attending public primary or secondary school for activities that are directly related to the educational mission of the school, including but not limited to laboratory fees; book or educational material fees; school computer or automation-related fees, whether paid to the school directly or purchased by a parent; testing fees; and supply or material fees paid to the school. "Mandatory school fees" does not include uniforms, meals, or extracurricular activity fees.
(d) "Number of children due support", as used in the schedule of basic child support obligations specified in subsection (7) of this section, means children for whom the parents share joint legal responsibility and for whom support is being sought.
(e) "Other children" means children who are not the subject of the child support determination at issue.
(f) "Postsecondary education" includes college and career and technical education programs.
(g) "Postsecondary education support" means support for the following expenses associated with attending a college, university, or career and technical education program: Tuition, books, and fees.
(g.5) "Self-support reserve" means an amount equal to the state hourly minimum wage multiplied by twenty-nine hours per week, multiplied by fifty weeks per year, divided by twelve months.
(h) "Shared physical care", for the purposes of the child support guidelines and schedule of basic child support obligations specified in this section, and as further specified in subsection (8)(b) of this section, means that each parent keeps the children for at least one overnight each year and that both parents contribute to the expenses of the children in addition to the payment of child support.
(i) "Split physical care", for the purposes of the child support guidelines and schedule of basic child support obligations specified in this section, and as further specified in subsection (8)(c) of this section, means that each parent has physical care of at least one of the children by means of that child or children residing with that parent more than fifty percent of the time.
(4) Forms - identifying information - advisement.
(a) The child support guidelines must be used with standardized child support guideline forms to be issued by the judicial department. The judicial department is responsible for promulgating and updating the Colorado child support guideline forms, schedules, worksheets, instructions, and advisements.
(b) All child support orders entered pursuant to this article shall provide the names and dates of birth of the parties and of the children who are the subject of the order and the parties' residential and mailing addresses. The social security numbers of the parties and children shall be collected pursuant to section 14-14-113 and section 26-13-127, C.R.S.
(c) All child support orders entered pursuant to this article 10 must include a written advisement to the parties that conforms with the written child support advisement approved by the judicial branch, covering the following topics, in plain language:
(I) That a party who does not pay child support may be subject to judicial and administrative enforcement remedies and examples of those remedies;
(II) The operation of income assignments;
(III) The application of interest on arrears;
(IV) The parties' obligations concerning proof of payment;
(V) The basis for a modification or change of support, including the definition of a substantial and continuing change of circumstances;
(VI) The effect of agreements to modify or amend child support and the requirement for court authorization or administrative process action of all modifications or amendments;
(VII) The effect of emancipation; and
(VIII) The effect of spousal maintenance.
(5) Determination of income.
(a) For the purposes of the child support guidelines and schedule of basic child support obligations specified in this section, the gross income of each parent is determined according to the following guidelines:
(I) "Gross income" includes income from any source, except as otherwise provided in subsection (5)(a)(II) of this section, and includes, but is not limited to:
(A) Income from salaries;
(B) Wages, including tips declared by the individual for purposes of reporting to the federal internal revenue service or tips imputed to bring the employee's gross earnings to the minimum wage for the number of hours worked, whichever is greater;
(C) Commissions;
(D) Payments received as an independent contractor for labor or services, which payments must be considered income from self-employment;
(E) Bonuses;
(F) Dividends;
(G) Severance pay;
(H) Pensions and retirement benefits, including but not limited to those paid pursuant to articles 51, 54, 54.5, and 54.6 of title 24, C.R.S., and article 30 of title 31, C.R.S.;
(I) Royalties;
(J) Rents;
(K) Interest;
(L) Trust income;
(M) Annuities;
(N) Capital gains;
(O) Any moneys drawn by a self-employed individual for personal use that are deducted as a business expense, which moneys must be considered income from self-employment;
(P) Social security benefits, including social security benefits actually received by a parent as a result of the disability of that parent or as the result of the death of the minor child's stepparent but not including social security benefits received by a minor child or on behalf of a minor child as a result of the death or disability of a stepparent of the child;
(Q) Workers' compensation benefits;
(R) Unemployment insurance benefits;
(S) Disability insurance benefits;
(T) Funds held in or payable from any health, accident, disability, or casualty insurance to the extent that such insurance replaces wages or provides income in lieu of wages;
(U) Monetary gifts;
(V) Monetary prizes, excluding lottery winnings not required by the rules of the Colorado lottery commission to be paid only at the lottery office;
(W) Income from general partnerships, limited partnerships, closely held corporations, or limited liability companies. However, if a parent is a passive investor, has a minority interest in the company, and does not have any managerial duties or input, then the income to be recognized may be limited to actual cash distributions received.
(X) Expense reimbursements or in-kind payments received by a parent in the course of employment, self-employment, or operation of a business if they are significant and reduce personal living expenses;
(Y) Alimony or maintenance received, as adjusted, if applicable, pursuant to subsection (5)(a)(I.5) of this section; and
(Z) Overtime pay, only if the overtime is required by the employer as a condition of employment.
(I.5) For purposes of subsection (5)(a)(I)(Y) of this section, if the alimony or maintenance actually received by a parent is taxable income to that parent for federal income tax purposes, then the actual amount of alimony or maintenance received is included in that parent's gross income. If the alimony or maintenance actually received by a parent is not taxable income to that parent for federal income tax purposes, and the alimony or maintenance is paid and received by the same parties as the child support calculation, then the amount of alimony or maintenance that is included in that parent's gross income is the amount of alimony or maintenance received by that parent subject to the following adjustments:
(A) If the combined monthly adjusted gross income of the parties to the maintenance payment is ten thousand dollars or less, the maintenance actually received will be multiplied by 1.25;
(B) If the combined monthly adjusted gross income of the parties to the maintenance payment is more than ten thousand dollars, the maintenance actually received will be multiplied by 1.33; and
(C) If the amount of alimony or maintenance actually received is increased as described in this section because it is not deductible for federal income tax purposes, there is a rebuttable presumption that the multiplier is correct. The presumption may be rebutted with evidence indicating a different multiplier is more accurate due to the tax implications of the maintenance payment being different than that reflected by the multiplier.
(II) "Gross income" does not include:
(A) Child support payments received;
(B) Benefits received from means-tested public assistance programs, including but not limited to assistance provided under the Colorado works program, as described in part 7 of article 2 of title 26, C.R.S., supplemental security income, food stamps, and general assistance;
(C) Income from additional jobs that result in the employment of more than forty hours per week or more than what would otherwise be considered to be full-time employment;
(D) Social security benefits received by the minor children, or on behalf of the minor children, as a result of the death or disability of a stepparent are not to be included as income for the minor children for the determination of child support; and
(E) Earnings or gains on a retirement account, including an IRA, which earnings or gains must not be included as income unless or until a parent takes a distribution from the account. If a distribution from a retirement account may be taken without being subject to an IRS penalty for early distribution and the parent decides not to take the distribution, the court may consider the distribution that could have been taken in determining the parent's gross income if the parent is not otherwise employed full-time and the retirement account was not received pursuant to the division of marital property.
(III) (A) For income from self-employment, rent, royalties, proprietorship of a business, or joint ownership of a partnership or closely held corporation, "gross income" equals gross receipts minus ordinary and necessary expenses, as defined in sub-subparagraph (B) of this subparagraph (III), required to produce such income.
(B) "Ordinary and necessary expenses" does not include amounts allowable by the internal revenue service for the accelerated component of depreciation expenses or investment tax credits or any other business expenses determined by the court to be inappropriate for determining gross income for purposes of calculating child support; except that the court may consider straight-line depreciation, if appropriate, even if accelerated depreciation was used in the party's income tax forms.
(IV) If a preexisting court-ordered alimony or maintenance obligation actually paid by a party does not involve the same parties as the child support calculation and is not deductible for federal income tax purposes by that party, then the amount of preexisting court-ordered alimony or maintenance that is deducted from that party's gross income is the amount actually paid by that party multiplied by 1.25.
(b) (I) If a parent is voluntarily unemployed or underemployed, child support must be calculated based on a determination of potential income; except that a determination of potential income must not be made for:
(A) A parent who is physically or mentally incapacitated;
(B) A parent who is caring for a child under the age of twenty-four months for whom the parents owe a joint legal responsibility; or
(C) An incarcerated parent sentenced to one hundred eighty days or more.
(I.5) If the court or delegate child support enforcement unit imputes income pursuant to this subsection (5), the provisions of subsection (5)(b.5) of this section apply.
(II) If a noncustodial parent who owes past-due child support is unemployed and not incapacitated and has an obligation of support to a child receiving assistance pursuant to part 7 of article 2 of title 26, C.R.S., the court or delegate child support enforcement unit may order the parent to pay such support in accordance with a plan approved by the court or to participate in work activities. Work activities may include one or more of the following:
(A) Private or public sector employment;
(B) Job search activities;
(C) Community service;
(D) Vocational training; or
(E) Any other employment-related activities available to that particular individual.
(III) For the purposes of this section, a parent is not deemed "underemployed" if:
(A) The employment is temporary and is reasonably intended to result in higher income within the foreseeable future; or
(B) The employment is a good faith career choice that is not intended to deprive a child of support and does not unreasonably reduce the support available to a child; or
(C) The parent is enrolled full-time in an educational or vocational program or is employed part-time while enrolled in a part-time educational or vocational program, based on the institution's enrollment definitions, and the program is reasonably intended to result in a degree or certification within a reasonable period of time; completing the program will result in a higher income; the program is a good faith career choice that is not intended to deprive the child of support; and the parent's participation in the program does not unreasonably reduce the amount of child support available to a child.
(b.5) (I) Except as otherwise provided in this section, if the court or delegate child support enforcement unit determines that a parent is voluntarily unemployed or underemployed or employment information is unreliable, the court or delegate child support enforcement unit shall determine and document, for the record, the parent's potential income.
(II) In determining potential income, the court or delegate child support enforcement unit shall consider, to the extent known, the specific circumstances of the parent, including consideration of the following information, when available:
(A) The parent's assets;
(B) Residence;
(C) Employment and earnings history;
(D) Job skills;
(E) Educational attainment;
(F) Literacy;
(G) Age;
(H) Health;
(I) Criminal record;
(J) Other employment barriers;
(K) Record of seeking work;
(L) The local job market;
(M) The availability of employers hiring in the community, without changing existing law regarding the burden of proof;
(N) Prevailing earnings level in the local community. The typical hours available to workers in the parent's job sector as established by any reliable source generally used and relied on by the public or persons in a particular occupation, including, but not limited to, verified statements, work history, the United States department of labor's bureau of labor statistics or other reliable compilations, the department of labor and employment, or other information provided by the parent. In the absence of any such information, the court or delegate child support enforcement unit shall determine the parent's income based on a reasonable rate of pay for a thirty-two-hour workweek for fifty weeks each year, subject to other factors set forth in this section that may affect the number of hours the parent is capable of working, such as age, health, or the specific needs of the subject child.
(O) Transportation; and
(P) Other relevant background factors in the case.
(c) Income statements of the parents shall be verified with documentation of both current and past earnings. Suitable documentation of current earnings includes pay stubs, employer statements, or receipts and expenses if self-employed. Documentation of current earnings shall be supplemented with copies of the most recent tax return to provide verification of earnings over a longer period. A copy of wage statements or other wage information obtained from the computer database maintained by the department of labor and employment shall be admissible into evidence for purposes of determining income under this subsection (5).
(6) Adjustments to gross income.
(a) At the time a child support order is initially established, or in any proceeding to modify a child support order, if a parent is also legally responsible for the support of any other children for whom the parents do not share joint legal responsibility, the court shall make an adjustment to the parent's gross income prior to calculating the basic child support obligation for the child or children who are the subject of the support order in question as follows:
(I) If a parent is obligated to pay support for another child pursuant to an order, the amount actually paid on the order must be deducted from that parent's gross income;
(II) If the other child is residing in the home of a parent, the court shall deduct from that parent's gross income the amount calculated pursuant to paragraph (b) of this subsection (6);
(III) If another child of a parent is residing outside the home of that parent, the court shall deduct from that parent's gross income the amount of documented money payments actually paid by the parent for the support of the other child, not to exceed the schedule of basic support obligations set forth in subsection (7) of this section.
(b) The amount of the adjustment must not exceed the schedule of basic support obligations listed in this section. For a parent with gross income of less than one thousand five hundred dollars, the adjustment is seventy-five percent of the amount listed under the schedule of basic child support obligations in subsection (7)(b) of this section that would represent a child support obligation based only upon the responsible parent's income, without any other adjustments for the number of children for whom the parent is responsible. For a parent with gross income of one thousand five hundred dollars or more per month, the adjustment is seventy-five percent of the amount listed under the schedule of basic child support obligations in subsection (7)(b) of this section that would represent a child support obligation based only upon the responsible parent's income, without any other adjustments for the number of other children for whom the parent is responsible. The amount calculated as set forth in this subsection (6)(b) must be subtracted from the amount of the parent's gross income prior to calculating the basic child support obligation based upon both parents' gross income, as provided in subsection (7) of this section.
(7) Schedule of basic child support obligations.
(a) (I) The basic child support obligation must be determined using the schedule of basic child support obligations contained in subsection (7)(b) of this section. The basic child support obligation must be divided between the parents in proportion to each parent's adjusted gross income.
(II) For a combined gross income that falls between amounts shown in the schedule of basic child support obligations, basic child support amounts must be interpolated.
(III) (A) In any circumstance in which the obligor's monthly adjusted gross income is less than or equal to six hundred fifty dollars, regardless of the monthly adjusted gross income of the obligee, the court shall order the obligor to pay the minimum monthly order amount in child support. The minimum order amount is ten dollars per month, regardless of the number of children between the parties. If, as a result of shared parenting time, the obligor's presumptive total monthly child support obligation is less than ten dollars then the ten-dollar minimum monthly order amount does not apply and the presumptive total monthly child support obligation applies.
(B) In circumstances in which the obligor's monthly adjusted gross income is less than or equal to the self-support reserve but more than six hundred fifty dollars, the obligor's basic child support obligation is reduced to fifty dollars per month for one child, seventy dollars per month for two children, ninety dollars per month for three children, one hundred ten dollars per month for four children, one hundred thirty dollars per month for five children, and one hundred fifty dollars per month for six or more children. The reduced low-income adjustment does not apply if, as a result of shared parenting time, the adjustment is greater than the obligor's presumptive total monthly child support obligation calculated pursuant to the child support guidelines. The amount of child support owed by a parent with shared physical care must not exceed the amount owed by that same parent if the parent had no overnights.
(C) For an obligor with an adjusted gross income that is less than or equal to the self-support reserve but more than six hundred fifty dollars, the obligor's basic child support obligation as reduced by the low-income adjustment pursuant to subsection (7)(a)(III)(B) of this section, must be adjusted pursuant to subsection (11)(c)(III) of this section. The obligor's child support amount may be further adjusted to include a share of the work-related and education-related child care costs, health insurance, extraordinary medical expenses, and other extraordinary adjustments as described in subsections (9), (10), (11)(a), and (11)(b) of this section. However, if at the time the child support obligation is calculated, adjustments made pursuant to subsections (9), (10), (11)(a), and (11)(b) of this section, together with the reduced low-income adjustment amount, exceed ten percent of the obligor's adjusted gross income, the child support obligation must be capped at ten percent of the obligor's adjusted gross income. The amount of child support owed by a parent with shared parenting time must not exceed the amount owed by that same parent if the parent had no overnights.
(IV) The final presumptive child support obligation, including adjustments made pursuant to subsections (9), (10), (11)(a), (11)(b), and (11)(c)(III) of this section, must not exceed twenty percent of the obligor's adjusted gross income if the obligor's monthly adjusted gross income is above the self-support reserve and less than or equal to the state minimum wage multiplied by forty hours, multiplied by fifty-two weeks a year, divided by twelve months. The amount of child support owed by a parent with shared physical care must not exceed the amount owed by that same parent if the parent had no overnights.
(V) (A) For an obligor with an adjusted gross income that is above the self-support reserve, the obligor's basic child support obligation must be adjusted by deducting the self-support reserve amount from the obligor's adjusted gross income. The difference calculated must be equal to eighty percent of the difference for one child, eighty-five percent of the difference for two children, eighty-nine percent of the difference for three children, ninety-two percent of the difference for four children, ninety-four percent of the difference for five children, and ninety-five percent of the difference for six or more children.
(B) If the resulting difference calculated pursuant to subsection (7)(a)(V)(A) of this section is less than the reduced low-income adjustment calculated pursuant to subsection (7)(a)(III)(B) of this section, the obligor's basic child support obligation is equal to the reduced low-income adjustment.
(C) If the resulting difference calculated pursuant to subsection (7)(a)(V)(A) of this section is more than the reduced low-income adjustment calculated pursuant to subsection (7)(a)(III)(B) of this section but less than the schedule of basic child support obligation, the obligor's basic child support obligation is equal to the amount calculated pursuant to subsection (7)(a)(V)(A) of this section.
(D) If the resulting difference calculated pursuant to subsection (7)(a)(V)(A) of this section is equal to or more than the schedule of basic child support obligation, the amount listed in the schedule of basic child support obligation applies.
(VI) In addition to the adjustments described in this subsection (7)(a), the obligor's child support amount must be further adjusted for work-related and education-related child care costs, health insurance, extraordinary medical expenses, and other extraordinary adjustments as described in subsections (9), (10), (11)(a), (11)(b), and (11)(c)(III) of this section.
(VII) The judge may use discretion to determine child support in circumstances when the combined adjusted gross income exceeds the uppermost levels of the schedule of basic child support obligations; except that the presumptive basic child support obligation must not be less than it would be based on the highest level of adjusted gross income set forth in the schedule of basic child support obligations.
(b) Schedule of basic child support obligations:
Combined
Adjusted
Gross
Income
One
Child
Two
Children
Three
Children
Four
Children
Five
Children
Six or
More
Children
100
150
200
108
250
101
113
124
135
300
100
121
135
149
162
350
117
141
158
174
189
400
133
161
180
198
215
450
149
180
201
221
241
500
108
165
199
223
245
266
550
119
181
219
244
269
292
600
129
197
238
266
292
318
650
140
213
257
287
316
343
700
150
228
276
308
339
369
750
160
244
295
330
363
395
800
171
260
315
351
387
420
850
181
276
334
373
410
446
900
192
292
353
394
434
471
950
202
308
372
416
457
497
1000
213
324
391
437
481
523
1050
223
340
411
459
505
548
1100
234
356
430
480
528
574
1150
244
371
449
502
552
600
1200
253
386
466
521
573
623
1250
263
400
483
540
594
645
1300
272
414
500
559
615
668
1350
281
428
517
578
636
691
1400
290
442
534
597
657
714
1450
300
456
551
616
678
736
1500
309
470
568
635
698
759
1550
318
484
585
654
719
782
1600
327
498
602
673
740
805
1650
337
512
620
692
761
827
1700
346
527
637
711
782
850
1750
355
541
654
730
803
873
1800
364
555
671
749
824
896
1850
374
569
688
768
845
918
1900
383
583
705
787
866
941
1950
392
597
722
806
887
964
2000
401
611
739
825
908
987
2050
411
625
756
844
929
1009
2100
420
639
772
863
949
1032
2150
429
653
789
881
970
1054
2200
438
666
806
900
990
1076
2250
447
680
822
918
1010
1098
2300
456
694
839
937
1031
1120
2350
465
708
855
956
1051
1143
2400
474
721
872
974
1071
1165
2450
483
735
889
993
1092
1187
2500
492
749
905
1011
1112
1209
2550
501
763
922
1030
1133
1231
2600
510
776
938
1048
1153
1253
2650
519
790
955
1067
1173
1275
2700
528
804
972
1085
1194
1298
2750
537
817
988
1104
1214
1320
2800
546
831
1005
1122
1235
1342
2850
555
845
1021
1141
1255
1364
2900
564
859
1038
1159
1275
1386
2950
573
872
1055
1178
1296
1408
3000
582
886
1071
1196
1316
1431
3050
591
900
1088
1215
1336
1453
3100
600
913
1104
1234
1357
1475
3150
609
927
1121
1252
1377
1497
3200
618
941
1137
1271
1398
1519
3250
627
955
1154
1289
1418
1541
3300
636
968
1171
1308
1438
1564
3350
645
982
1187
1326
1459
1586
3400
654
996
1204
1345
1479
1608
3450
663
1010
1220
1363
1500
1630
3500
672
1023
1237
1382
1520
1652
3550
681
1037
1254
1400
1540
1674
3600
690
1051
1270
1419
1561
1696
3650
699
1064
1287
1437
1581
1719
3700
708
1078
1303
1456
1601
1741
3750
717
1092
1320
1474
1622
1763
3800
726
1106
1337
1493
1642
1785
3850
735
1119
1353
1511
1663
1807
3900
744
1133
1370
1530
1683
1829
3950
753
1147
1386
1549
1703
1852
4000
762
1161
1403
1567
1724
1874
4050
771
1173
1417
1583
1742
1893
4100
780
1185
1431
1598
1758
1911
4150
789
1197
1445
1614
1775
1930
4200
798
1209
1458
1629
1792
1948
4250
807
1221
1472
1644
1809
1966
4300
816
1232
1486
1659
1825
1984
4350
825
1244
1499
1675
1842
2002
4400
834
1256
1513
1690
1859
2020
4450
843
1268
1526
1705
1875
2039
4500
852
1280
1540
1720
1892
2057
4550
861
1292
1554
1735
1909
2075
4600
870
1304
1567
1751
1926
2093
4650
879
1316
1581
1766
1942
2111
4700
888
1328
1596
1783
1961
2131
4750
896
1342
1612
1800
1980
2152
4800
904
1355
1627
1818
1999
2173
4850
912
1368
1643
1835
2019
2194
4900
920
1381
1658
1852
2037
2214
4950
927
1393
1672
1867
2054
2233
5000
934
1404
1685
1882
2071
2251
5050
941
1416
1699
1898
2087
2269
5100
948
1427
1713
1913
2104
2287
5150
955
1439
1726
1928
2121
2306
5200
962
1450
1740
1943
2138
2324
5250
969
1462
1754
1959
2155
2342
5300
977
1473
1767
1974
2171
2360
5350
984
1485
1781
1989
2188
2379
5400
990
1496
1794
2004
2204
2396
5450
996
1504
1804
2015
2216
2409
5500
1002
1513
1814
2026
2229
2423
5550
1008
1522
1824
2038
2241
2436
5600
1013
1530
1834
2049
2254
2450
5650
1019
1539
1845
2060
2266
2464
5700
1025
1547
1855
2072
2279
2477
5750
1031
1556
1865
2083
2292
2491
5800
1036
1565
1875
2095
2304
2504
5850
1042
1573
1885
2106
2317
2518
5900
1048
1582
1896
2117
2329
2532
5950
1054
1590
1906
2129
2342
2545
6000
1060
1599
1916
2140
2354
2559
6050
1065
1608
1926
2151
2367
2573
6100
1071
1616
1936
2163
2379
2586
6150
1076
1624
1946
2173
2391
2598
6200
1080
1629
1951
2180
2398
2606
6250
1083
1634
1957
2186
2405
2614
6300
1087
1639
1963
2193
2412
2622
6350
1091
1644
1969
2199
2419
2629
6400
1094
1650
1974
2205
2426
2637
6450
1098
1655
1980
2212
2433
2645
6500
1101
1660
1986
2218
2440
2652
6550
1105
1665
1992
2225
2447
2660
6600
1108
1670
1998
2231
2454
2668
6650
1112
1675
2003
2238
2461
2676
6700
1115
1680
2009
2244
2469
2683
6750
1119
1685
2015
2251
2476
2691
6800
1122
1690
2021
2257
2483
2699
6850
1126
1695
2026
2264
2490
2707
6900
1129
1700
2032
2269
2496
2714
6950
1133
1704
2035
2273
2500
2718
7000
1136
1708
2038
2276
2504
2722
7050
1139
1711
2041
2279
2507
2726
7100
1142
1715
2044
2283
2511
2730
7150
1145
1719
2047
2286
2515
2734
7200
1149
1722
2050
2290
2518
2738
7250
1152
1726
2053
2293
2522
2742
7300
1155
1730
2056
2296
2526
2746
7350
1158
1733
2059
2300
2530
2750
7400
1161
1737
2062
2303
2533
2754
7450
1165
1741
2065
2306
2537
2758
7500
1168
1744
2068
2310
2541
2762
7550
1171
1748
2071
2313
2544
2766
7600
1174
1752
2074
2316
2548
2770
7650
1178
1756
2078
2321
2553
2775
7700
1182
1763
2088
2332
2565
2788
7750
1187
1771
2098
2343
2577
2801
7800
1191
1778
2107
2354
2589
2815
7850
1195
1786
2117
2365
2602
2828
7900
1200
1793
2127
2376
2614
2841
7950
1204
1801
2137
2387
2626
2855
8000
1209
1808
2147
2398
2638
2868
8050
1213
1816
2157
2410
2651
2881
8100
1218
1823
2167
2421
2663
2894
8150
1222
1831
2177
2432
2675
2908
8200
1227
1838
2187
2443
2687
2921
8250
1231
1846
2197
2454
2699
2934
8300
1236
1853
2207
2465
2712
2948
8350
1240
1861
2217
2476
2724
2961
8400
1244
1868
2226
2487
2735
2973
8450
1247
1871
2229
2489
2738
2977
8500
1250
1874
2231
2492
2741
2980
8550
1253
1877
2234
2495
2745
2983
8600
1255
1881
2236
2498
2748
2987
8650
1258
1884
2239
2501
2751
2990
8700
1261
1887
2241
2504
2754
2993
8750
1263
1890
2244
2506
2757
2997
8800
1266
1893
2246
2509
2760
3000
8850
1269
1896
2249
2512
2763
3004
8900
1272
1899
2251
2515
2766
3007
8950
1274
1902
2254
2518
2769
3010
9000
1277
1905
2256
2520
2772
3014
9050
1280
1909
2259
2523
2776
3017
9100
1282
1912
2261
2526
2779
3020
9150
1285
1915
2264
2529
2782
3024
9200
1289
1920
2269
2534
2788
3030
9250
1292
1924
2274
2540
2794
3037
9300
1296
1929
2279
2545
2800
3043
9350
1300
1934
2284
2551
2806
3050
9400
1303
1939
2288
2556
2812
3056
9450
1307
1944
2293
2562
2818
3063
9500
1311
1948
2298
2567
2824
3069
9550
1314
1953
2303
2572
2830
3076
9600
1318
1958
2308
2578
2836
3082
9650
1322
1963
2313
2583
2842
3089
9700
1325
1968
2318
2589
2848
3095
9750
1329
1972
2322
2594
2854
3102
9800
1333
1977
2327
2600
2860
3108
9850
1336
1982
2332
2605
2866
3115
9900
1340
1987
2337
2611
2872
3121
9950
1345
1993
2344
2618
2880
3130
10000
1350
2001
2352
2628
2890
3142
10050
1355
2008
2361
2637
2901
3153
10100
1361
2016
2369
2646
2911
3164
10150
1366
2024
2378
2656
2922
3176
10200
1372
2031
2386
2665
2932
3187
10250
1377
2039
2395
2675
2942
3198
10300
1383
2047
2403
2684
2953
3210
10350
1388
2054
2412
2694
2963
3221
10400
1394
2062
2420
2703
2973
3232
10450
1399
2070
2429
2713
2984
3243
10500
1404
2077
2437
2722
2994
3255
10550
1410
2085
2445
2732
3005
3266
10600
1415
2092
2454
2741
3015
3277
10650
1421
2100
2462
2750
3025
3289
10700
1426
2108
2471
2760
3036
3300
10750
1432
2115
2479
2769
3046
3311
10800
1437
2123
2488
2779
3057
3323
10850
1443
2131
2496
2788
3067
3334
10900
1448
2138
2505
2798
3077
3345
10950
1453
2146
2513
2807
3088
3357
11000
1459
2154
2522
2817
3098
3368
11050
1464
2161
2530
2826
3109
3379
11100
1469
2169
2539
2836
3119
3390
11150
1473
2175
2547
2845
3130
3402
11200
1477
2182
2556
2855
3140
3413
11250
1481
2188
2564
2864
3151
3425
11300
1485
2195
2573
2874
3161
3436
11350
1489
2201
2581
2883
3171
3447
11400
1493
2208
2590
2893
3182
3459
11450
1497
2214
2598
2902
3192
3470
11500
1501
2221
2607
2912
3203
3482
11550
1505
2228
2615
2921
3213
3493
11600
1509
2234
2624
2931
3224
3504
11650
1513
2241
2632
2940
3234
3516
11700
1517
2247
2641
2950
3245
3527
11750
1521
2254
2649
2959
3255
3538
11800
1525
2260
2658
2969
3266
3550
11850
1529
2267
2666
2978
3276
3561
11900
1533
2273
2675
2988
3287
3573
11950
1537
2280
2683
2997
3297
3584
12000
1541
2287
2692
3007
3308
3595
12050
1545
2293
2701
3016
3318
3607
12100
1549
2300
2709
3026
3329
3618
12150
1553
2306
2718
3036
3339
3630
12200
1557
2313
2726
3045
3350
3641
12250
1561
2319
2735
3055
3360
3652
12300
1564
2324
2739
3060
3366
3659
12350
1567
2328
2744
3065
3372
3665
12400
1570
2332
2749
3070
3377
3671
12450
1573
2337
2754
3076
3383
3678
12500
1576
2341
2758
3081
3389
3684
12550
1579
2345
2763
3086
3395
3690
12600
1583
2349
2768
3092
3401
3697
12650
1586
2354
2772
3097
3406
3703
12700
1589
2358
2777
3102
3412
3709
12750
1592
2362
2782
3107
3418
3715
12800
1595
2367
2787
3113
3424
3722
12850
1598
2371
2791
3118
3430
3728
12900
1601
2375
2796
3123
3436
3734
12950
1604
2380
2801
3129
3441
3741
13000
1607
2384
2806
3134
3447
3747
13050
1610
2388
2810
3139
3453
3753
13100
1614
2393
2815
3144
3459
3760
13150
1617
2397
2820
3150
3465
3766
13200
1620
2401
2824
3155
3470
3772
13250
1623
2406
2829
3160
3476
3779
13300
1626
2410
2834
3166
3482
3785
13350
1629
2414
2839
3171
3488
3791
13400
1633
2419
2844
3177
3494
3798
13450
1637
2425
2850
3183
3502
3806
13500
1641
2430
2856
3190
3509
3814
13550
1646
2436
2862
3197
3516
3822
13600
1650
2442
2868
3203
3524
3830
13650
1654
2448
2874
3210
3531
3838
13700
1659
2454
2880
3217
3538
3846
13750
1663
2460
2886
3223
3546
3854
13800
1667
2465
2892
3230
3553
3862
13850
1672
2471
2898
3237
3560
3870
13900
1676
2477
2904
3243
3568
3878
13950
1681
2483
2910
3250
3575
3886
14000
1685
2489
2916
3257
3583
3894
14050
1689
2495
2922
3264
3590
3902
14100
1694
2500
2928
3270
3597
3910
14150
1698
2506
2934
3277
3605
3918
14200
1703
2512
2940
3284
3612
3926
14250
1707
2518
2946
3290
3619
3934
14300
1711
2524
2952
3297
3627
3942
14350
1716
2529
2958
3304
3634
3950
14400
1720
2535
2964
3310
3641
3958
14450
1724
2541
2970
3317
3649
3966
14500
1729
2547
2976
3324
3656
3974
14550
1733
2553
2982
3331
3664
3982
14600
1738
2559
2988
3337
3671
3990
14650
1742
2564
2994
3344
3678
3998
14700
1746
2570
3000
3351
3686
4006
14750
1751
2576
3006
3357
3693
4014
14800
1755
2582
3012
3364
3700
4022
14850
1759
2586
3016
3369
3706
4028
14900
1761
2590
3019
3373
3710
4033
14950
1764
2593
3023
3376
3714
4037
15000
1767
2597
3026
3380
3718
4042
15050
1770
2600
3029
3384
3722
4046
15100
1773
2604
3033
3388
3726
4051
15150
1775
2607
3036
3391
3731
4055
15200
1778
2611
3040
3395
3735
4060
15250
1781
2614
3043
3399
3739
4064
15300
1784
2618
3046
3403
3743
4069
15350
1786
2621
3050
3406
3747
4073
15400
1789
2625
3053
3410
3751
4077
15450
1792
2628
3056
3414
3755
4082
15500
1795
2632
3060
3418
3759
4086
15550
1798
2635
3063
3421
3763
4091
15600
1800
2639
3066
3425
3768
4095
15650
1803
2642
3070
3429
3772
4100
15700
1806
2646
3073
3433
3776
4104
15750
1809
2649
3076
3436
3780
4109
15800
1812
2653
3080
3440
3784
4113
15850
1814
2656
3083
3444
3788
4118
15900
1817
2660
3086
3448
3792
4122
15950
1820
2663
3090
3451
3796
4127
16000
1823
2667
3093
3455
3801
4131
16050
1825
2670
3096
3459
3805
4136
16100
1828
2674
3100
3463
3809
4140
16150
1831
2677
3103
3466
3813
4145
16200
1834
2681
3107
3470
3817
4149
16250
1837
2686
3112
3476
3823
4156
16300
1843
2693
3121
3486
3834
4168
16350
1847
2701
3129
3495
3845
4179
16400
1852
2707
3137
3504
3855
4190
16450
1857
2714
3145
3513
3864
4201
16500
1861
2721
3153
3522
3874
4211
16550
1866
2728
3161
3531
3884
4222
16600
1870
2735
3169
3540
3894
4233
16650
1875
2741
3177
3549
3904
4243
16700
1879
2748
3185
3558
3913
4254
16750
1884
2755
3193
3566
3923
4264
16800
1888
2761
3201
3575
3933
4275
16850
1893
2768
3208
3584
3942
4285
16900
1897
2775
3216
3593
3952
4296
16950
1902
2781
3224
3601
3962
4306
17000
1906
2788
3232
3610
3971
4317
17050
1911
2795
3240
3619
3981
4327
17100
1915
2801
3248
3628
3990
4338
17150
1920
2808
3256
3636
4000
4348
17200
1924
2815
3263
3645
4010
4359
17250
1929
2821
3271
3654
4019
4369
17300
1933
2828
3279
3663
4029
4380
17350
1938
2835
3287
3672
4039
4390
17400
1942
2841
3295
3680
4048
4401
17450
1947
2848
3303
3689
4058
4411
17500
1951
2855
3311
3698
4068
4422
17550
1956
2861
3318
3707
4077
4432
17600
1960
2868
3326
3715
4087
4443
17650
1965
2875
3334
3724
4097
4453
17700
1969
2881
3342
3733
4106
4464
17750
1974
2888
3350
3742
4116
4474
17800
1978
2895
3358
3751
4126
4484
17850
1983
2901
3366
3759
4135
4495
17900
1987
2908
3373
3768
4145
4505
17950
1992
2915
3381
3777
4155
4516
18000
1996
2921
3389
3786
4164
4526
18050
2001
2928
3397
3794
4174
4537
18100
2005
2935
3405
3803
4183
4547
18150
2010
2941
3413
3812
4193
4558
18200
2014
2948
3420
3821
4203
4568
18250
2019
2955
3428
3829
4212
4579
18300
2023
2961
3436
3838
4222
4589
18350
2028
2968
3444
3847
4232
4600
18400
2032
2975
3452
3856
4241
4610
18450
2037
2982
3460
3865
4251
4621
18500
2041
2988
3468
3873
4261
4631
18550
2046
2995
3475
3882
4270
4642
18600
2050
3002
3483
3891
4280
4652
18650
2055
3008
3491
3899
4289
4662
18700
2058
3013
3496
3905
4295
4669
18750
2062
3017
3501
3910
4301
4675
18800
2065
3022
3505
3916
4307
4682
18850
2069
3027
3510
3921
4313
4688
18900
2073
3032
3515
3926
4319
4695
18950
2076
3036
3520
3932
4325
4701
19000
2080
3041
3525
3937
4331
4708
19050
2083
3046
3530
3943
4337
4714
19100
2087
3051
3535
3948
4343
4721
19150
2091
3055
3539
3954
4349
4727
19200
2094
3060
3544
3959
4355
4734
19250
2098
3065
3549
3964
4361
4740
19300
2101
3070
3554
3970
4367
4747
19350
2105
3074
3559
3975
4373
4753
19400
2109
3079
3564
3981
4379
4760
19450
2112
3084
3569
3986
4385
4766
19500
2116
3089
3573
3992
4391
4773
19550
2119
3093
3578
3997
4397
4779
19600
2123
3098
3583
4002
4403
4786
19650
2126
3103
3588
4008
4409
4792
19700
2130
3108
3593
4013
4415
4799
19750
2134
3112
3598
4019
4421
4805
19800
2137
3117
3603
4024
4427
4812
19850
2141
3122
3608
4030
4433
4818
19900
2144
3127
3612
4035
4439
4825
19950
2148
3131
3617
4040
4445
4831
20000
2152
3136
3622
4046
4451
4838
20050
2155
3141
3627
4051
4456
4844
20100
2159
3146
3632
4057
4462
4851
20150
2162
3150
3637
4062
4468
4857
20200
2166
3155
3642
4068
4474
4864
20250
2170
3160
3646
4073
4480
4870
20300
2173
3164
3651
4079
4486
4877
20350
2177
3169
3656
4084
4492
4883
20400
2180
3174
3661
4089
4498
4890
20450
2184
3179
3666
4095
4504
4896
20500
2187
3183
3670
4100
4510
4902
20550
2191
3188
3675
4105
4516
4908
20600
2194
3192
3680
4110
4521
4915
20650
2197
3197
3684
4115
4527
4921
20700
2201
3201
3689
4121
4533
4927
20750
2204
3206
3694
4126
4538
4933
20800
2208
3210
3698
4131
4544
4939
20850
2211
3215
3703
4136
4550
4945
20900
2215
3219
3707
4141
4555
4952
20950
2218
3224
3712
4146
4561
4958
21000
2221
3228
3717
4152
4567
4964
21050
2225
3233
3721
4157
4572
4970
21100
2228
3237
3726
4162
4578
4976
21150
2232
3242
3731
4167
4584
4982
21200
2235
3246
3735
4172
4589
4989
21250
2238
3251
3740
4177
4595
4995
21300
2242
3255
3744
4183
4601
5001
21350
2245
3260
3749
4188
4606
5007
21400
2249
3264
3754
4193
4612
5013
21450
2252
3269
3758
4198
4618
5020
21500
2255
3273
3763
4203
4623
5026
21550
2259
3278
3768
4208
4629
5032
21600
2262
3282
3772
4213
4635
5038
21650
2266
3287
3777
4219
4641
5044
21700
2269
3291
3781
4224
4646
5050
21750
2273
3296
3786
4229
4652
5057
21800
2276
3300
3791
4234
4658
5063
21850
2279
3305
3795
4239
4663
5069
21900
2283
3309
3800
4244
4669
5075
21950
2286
3314
3805
4250
4675
5081
22000
2289
3319
3811
4257
4683
5090
22050
2292
3324
3818
4265
4691
5099
22100
2295
3329
3825
4273
4700
5109
22150
2298
3334
3832
4280
4708
5118
22200
2301
3340
3839
4288
4717
5127
22250
2304
3345
3846
4296
4725
5137
22300
2307
3350
3853
4304
4734
5146
22350
2310
3355
3860
4311
4743
5155
22400
2313
3360
3867
4319
4751
5164
22450
2316
3365
3874
4327
4760
5174
22500
2319
3371
3881
4335
4768
5183
22550
2322
3376
3888
4342
4777
5192
22600
2325
3381
3895
4350
4785
5201
22650
2328
3386
3901
4358
4794
5211
22700
2331
3391
3908
4366
4802
5220
22750
2334
3396
3915
4373
4811
5229
22800
2337
3401
3922
4381
4819
5239
22850
2340
3407
3929
4389
4828
5248
22900
2343
3412
3936
4397
4836
5257
22950
2346
3417
3943
4404
4845
5266
23000
2349
3422
3950
4412
4853
5276
23050
2352
3427
3957
4420
4862
5285
23100
2355
3432
3964
4428
4871
5294
23150
2358
3437
3971
4436
4879
5304
23200
2361
3443
3978
4443
4888
5313
23250
2364
3448
3985
4451
4896
5322
23300
2367
3453
3992
4459
4905
5331
23350
2370
3458
3999
4467
4913
5341
23400
2373
3463
4006
4474
4922
5350
23450
2376
3468
4013
4482
4930
5359
23500
2379
3474
4020
4490
4939
5369
23550
2382
3479
4027
4498
4947
5378
23600
2385
3484
4033
4505
4956
5387
23650
2388
3489
4040
4513
4964
5396
23700
2391
3494
4047
4521
4973
5406
23750
2394
3499
4054
4529
4982
5415
23800
2397
3504
4061
4536
4990
5424
23850
2400
3510
4068
4544
4999
5433
23900
2403
3515
4075
4552
5007
5443
23950
2406
3520
4082
4560
5016
5452
24000
2409
3525
4089
4567
5024
5461
24050
2412
3530
4096
4575
5033
5471
24100
2415
3535
4103
4583
5041
5480
24150
2418
3541
4110
4591
5050
5489
24200
2421
3546
4117
4599
5058
5498
24250
2424
3551
4124
4606
5067
5508
24300
2427
3556
4131
4614
5075
5517
24350
2430
3561
4138
4622
5084
5526
24400
2433
3566
4145
4630
5093
5536
24450
2436
3571
4152
4637
5101
5545
24500
2439
3577
4159
4645
5110
5554
24550
2442
3582
4165
4653
5118
5563
24600
2445
3587
4172
4661
5127
5573
24650
2448
3592
4179
4668
5135
5582
24700
2451
3597
4186
4676
5144
5591
24750
2454
3602
4193
4684
5152
5601
24800
2457
3608
4200
4692
5161
5610
24850
2460
3613
4207
4699
5169
5619
24900
2463
3618
4214
4707
5178
5628
24950
2466
3623
4221
4715
5186
5638
25000
2469
3628
4228
4723
5195
5647
25050
2472
3633
4235
4730
5204
5656
25100
2475
3638
4242
4738
5212
5665
25150
2478
3644
4249
4746
5221
5675
25200
2481
3649
4256
4754
5229
5684
25250
2484
3654
4263
4762
5238
5693
25300
2487
3659
4270
4769
5246
5703
25350
2490
3664
4277
4777
5255
5712
25400
2493
3669
4284
4785
5263
5721
25450
2496
3675
4291
4793
5272
5730
25500
2499
3680
4297
4800
5280
5740
25550
2502
3685
4304
4808
5289
5749
25600
2505
3690
4311
4816
5297
5758
25650
2508
3695
4318
4824
5306
5768
25700
2511
3700
4325
4831
5314
5777
25750
2514
3705
4332
4839
5323
5786
25800
2517
3711
4339
4847
5332
5795
25850
2520
3716
4346
4855
5340
5805
25900
2523
3721
4353
4862
5349
5814
25950
2526
3726
4360
4870
5357
5823
26000
2529
3731
4367
4878
5366
5833
26050
2532
3736
4374
4886
5374
5842
26100
2535
3742
4381
4893
5383
5851
26150
2538
3747
4388
4901
5391
5860
26200
2541
3752
4395
4909
5400
5870
26250
2544
3757
4402
4917
5408
5879
26300
2547
3762
4409
4924
5417
5888
26350
2550
3767
4416
4932
5425
5897
26400
2553
3772
4423
4940
5434
5907
26450
2556
3778
4430
4948
5443
5916
26500
2559
3783
4436
4956
5451
5925
26550
2562
3788
4443
4963
5460
5935
26600
2565
3793
4450
4971
5468
5944
26650
2568
3798
4457
4979
5477
5953
26700
2571
3803
4464
4987
5485
5962
26750
2574
3808
4471
4994
5494
5972
26800
2577
3814
4478
5002
5502
5981
26850
2580
3819
4485
5010
5511
5990
26900
2583
3824
4492
5018
5519
6000
26950
2586
3829
4499
5025
5528
6009
27000
2589
3834
4506
5033
5536
6018
27050
2592
3839
4513
5041
5545
6027
27100
2595
3844
4518
5047
5552
6035
27150
2598
3849
4524
5053
5558
6042
27200
2601
3853
4529
5058
5564
6048
27250
2605
3857
4534
5064
5570
6055
27300
2608
3862
4539
5070
5577
6062
27350
2611
3866
4544
5075
5583
6068
27400
2614
3871
4549
5081
5589
6075
27450
2617
3875
4554
5087
5595
6082
27500
2620
3880
4559
5092
5601
6089
27550
2623
3884
4564
5098
5608
6095
27600
2626
3889
4569
5103
5614
6102
27650
2629
3893
4574
5109
5620
6109
27700
2633
3897
4579
5115
5626
6116
27750
2636
3902
4584
5120
5632
6122
27800
2639
3906
4589
5126
5638
6129
27850
2642
3911
4594
5131
5645
6136
27900
2645
3915
4599
5137
5651
6142
27950
2648
3920
4604
5143
5657
6149
28000
2651
3924
4609
5148
5663
6156
28050
2654
3929
4614
5154
5669
6163
28100
2657
3933
4619
5160
5676
6169
28150
2661
3938
4624
5165
5682
6176
28200
2664
3942
4629
5171
5688
6183
28250
2667
3946
4634
5176
5694
6190
28300
2670
3951
4639
5182
5700
6196
28350
2673
3955
4644
5188
5706
6203
28400
2676
3960
4649
5193
5713
6210
28450
2679
3964
4654
5199
5719
6216
28500
2682
3969
4659
5205
5725
6223
28550
2685
3973
4664
5210
5731
6230
28600
2689
3978
4669
5216
5737
6237
28650
2692
3982
4675
5221
5744
6243
28700
2695
3986
4680
5227
5750
6250
28750
2698
3991
4685
5233
5756
6257
28800
2701
3995
4690
5238
5762
6263
28850
2704
4000
4695
5244
5768
6270
28900
2707
4004
4700
5250
5775
6277
28950
2710
4009
4705
5255
5781
6284
29000
2713
4013
4710
5261
5787
6290
29050
2717
4018
4715
5266
5793
6297
29100
2720
4022
4720
5272
5799
6304
29150
2723
4027
4725
5278
5805
6311
29200
2726
4031
4730
5283
5812
6317
29250
2729
4035
4735
5289
5818
6324
29300
2732
4040
4740
5295
5824
6331
29350
2735
4044
4745
5300
5830
6337
29400
2738
4049
4750
5306
5836
6344
29450
2741
4053
4755
5311
5843
6351
29500
2745
4058
4760
5317
5849
6358
29550
2748
4062
4765
5323
5855
6364
29600
2751
4067
4770
5328
5861
6371
29650
2754
4071
4775
5334
5867
6378
29700
2757
4075
4780
5340
5873
6384
29750
2760
4080
4785
5345
5880
6391
29800
2763
4084
4790
5351
5886
6398
29850
2766
4089
4795
5356
5892
6405
29900
2769
4093
4800
5362
5898
6411
29950
2773
4098
4805
5368
5904
6418
30000
2776
4102
4810
5373
5911
6425
30050
2779
4107
4815
5379
5917
6432
30100
2782
4111
4821
5385
5923
6438
30150
2785
4116
4826
5390
5929
6445
30200
2788
4120
4831
5396
5935
6452
30250
2791
4124
4836
5401
5942
6458
30300
2794
4129
4841
5407
5948
6465
30350
2798
4133
4846
5413
5954
6472
30400
2801
4138
4851
5418
5960
6479
30450
2804
4142
4856
5424
5966
6485
30500
2807
4147
4861
5429
5972
6492
30550
2810
4151
4866
5435
5979
6499
30600
2813
4156
4871
5441
5985
6505
30650
2816
4160
4876
5446
5991
6512
30700
2819
4164
4881
5452
5997
6519
30750
2822
4169
4886
5458
6003
6526
30800
2826
4173
4891
5463
6010
6532
30850
2829
4178
4896
5469
6016
6539
30900
2832
4182
4901
5474
6022
6546
30950
2835
4187
4906
5480
6028
6553
31000
2838
4191
4911
5486
6034
6559
31050
2841
4196
4916
5491
6040
6566
31100
2844
4200
4921
5497
6047
6573
31150
2847
4205
4926
5503
6053
6579
31200
2850
4209
4931
5508
6059
6586
31250
2854
4213
4936
5514
6065
6593
31300
2857
4218
4941
5519
6071
6600
31350
2860
4222
4946
5525
6078
6606
31400
2863
4227
4951
5531
6084
6613
31450
2866
4231
4956
5536
6090
6620
31500
2869
4236
4961
5542
6096
6627
31550
2872
4240
4966
5548
6102
6633
31600
2875
4245
4972
5553
6109
6640
31650
2878
4249
4977
5559
6115
6647
31700
2882
4253
4982
5564
6121
6653
31750
2885
4258
4987
5570
6127
6660
31800
2888
4262
4992
5576
6133
6667
31850
2891
4267
4997
5581
6139
6674
31900
2894
4271
5002
5587
6146
6680
31950
2897
4276
5007
5593
6152
6687
32000
2900
4280
5012
5598
6158
6694
32050
2903
4285
5017
5604
6164
6700
32100
2906
4289
5022
5609
6170
6707
32150
2910
4294
5027
5615
6177
6714
32200
2913
4298
5032
5621
6183
6721
32250
2916
4302
5037
5626
6189
6727
32300
2919
4307
5042
5632
6195
6734
32350
2922
4311
5047
5638
6201
6741
32400
2925
4316
5052
5643
6207
6748
32450
2928
4320
5057
5649
6214
6754
32500
2931
4325
5062
5654
6220
6761
32550
2934
4329
5067
5660
6226
6768
32600
2938
4334
5072
5666
6232
6774
32650
2941
4338
5077
5671
6238
6781
32700
2944
4342
5082
5677
6245
6788
32750
2947
4347
5087
5683
6251
6795
32800
2950
4351
5092
5688
6257
6801
32850
2953
4356
5097
5694
6263
6808
32900
2956
4360
5102
5699
6269
6815
32950
2959
4365
5107
5705
6276
6821
33000
2962
4369
5112
5711
6282
6828
33050
2966
4374
5117
5716
6288
6835
33100
2969
4378
5123
5722
6294
6842
33150
2972
4383
5128
5727
6300
6848
33200
2975
4387
5133
5733
6306
6855
33250
2978
4391
5138
5739
6313
6862
33300
2981
4396
5143
5744
6319
6869
33350
2984
4400
5148
5750
6325
6875
33400
2987
4405
5153
5756
6331
6882
33450
2990
4409
5158
5761
6337
6889
33500
2994
4414
5163
5767
6344
6895
33550
2997
4418
5168
5772
6350
6902
33600
3000
4423
5173
5778
6356
6909
33650
3003
4427
5178
5784
6362
6916
33700
3006
4431
5183
5789
6368
6922
33750
3009
4436
5188
5795
6374
6929
33800
3012
4440
5193
5801
6381
6936
33850
3015
4445
5198
5806
6387
6942
33900
3019
4449
5203
5812
6393
6949
33950
3022
4454
5208
5817
6399
6956
34000
3025
4458
5213
5823
6405
6963
34050
3028
4463
5218
5829
6412
6969
34100
3031
4467
5223
5834
6418
6976
34150
3034
4472
5228
5840
6424
6983
34200
3037
4476
5233
5846
6430
6990
34250
3040
4480
5238
5851
6436
6996
34300
3043
4485
5243
5857
6442
7003
34350
3047
4489
5248
5862
6449
7010
34400
3050
4494
5253
5868
6455
7016
34450
3053
4498
5258
5874
6461
7023
34500
3056
4503
5263
5879
6467
7030
34550
3059
4507
5269
5885
6473
7037
34600
3062
4512
5274
5891
6480
7043
34650
3065
4516
5279
5896
6486
7050
34700
3068
4521
5284
5902
6492
7057
34750
3071
4525
5289
5907
6498
7063
34800
3075
4529
5294
5913
6504
7070
34850
3078
4534
5299
5919
6511
7077
34900
3081
4538
5304
5924
6517
7084
34950
3084
4543
5309
5930
6523
7090
35000
3087
4547
5314
5936
6529
7097
35050
3090
4552
5319
5941
6535
7104
35100
3093
4556
5324
5947
6541
7111
35150
3096
4561
5329
5952
6548
7117
35200
3099
4565
5334
5958
6554
7124
35250
3103
4569
5339
5964
6560
7131
35300
3106
4574
5344
5969
6566
7137
35350
3109
4578
5349
5975
6572
7144
35400
3112
4583
5354
5981
6579
7151
35450
3115
4587
5359
5986
6585
7158
35500
3118
4592
5364
5992
6591
7164
35550
3121
4596
5369
5997
6597
7171
35600
3124
4601
5374
6003
6603
7178
35650
3127
4605
5379
6009
6609
7185
35700
3131
4610
5384
6014
6616
7191
35750
3134
4614
5389
6020
6622
7198
35800
3137
4618
5394
6025
6628
7205
35850
3140
4623
5399
6031
6634
7211
35900
3143
4627
5404
6037
6640
7218
35950
3146
4632
5409
6042
6647
7225
36000
3149
4636
5414
6048
6653
7232
36050
3152
4641
5420
6054
6659
7238
36100
3155
4645
5425
6059
6665
7245
36150
3159
4650
5430
6065
6671
7252
36200
3162
4654
5435
6070
6678
7258
36250
3165
4658
5440
6076
6684
7265
36300
3168
4663
5445
6082
6690
7272
36350
3171
4667
5450
6087
6696
7279
36400
3174
4672
5455
6093
6702
7285
36450
3177
4676
5460
6099
6708
7292
36500
3180
4681
5465
6104
6715
7299
36550
3183
4685
5470
6110
6721
7306
36600
3187
4690
5475
6115
6727
7312
36650
3190
4694
5480
6121
6733
7319
36700
3193
4699
5485
6127
6739
7326
36750
3196
4703
5490
6132
6746
7332
36800
3199
4707
5495
6138
6752
7339
36850
3202
4712
5500
6144
6758
7346
36900
3205
4716
5505
6149
6764
7353
36950
3208
4721
5510
6155
6770
7359
37000
3211
4725
5515
6160
6776
7366
37050
3215
4730
5520
6166
6783
7373
37100
3218
4734
5525
6172
6789
7379
37150
3221
4739
5530
6177
6795
7386
37200
3224
4743
5535
6183
6801
7393
37250
3227
4747
5540
6189
6807
7400
37300
3230
4752
5545
6194
6814
7406
37350
3233
4756
5550
6200
6820
7413
37400
3236
4761
5555
6205
6826
7420
37450
3240
4765
5560
6211
6832
7427
37500
3243
4770
5565
6217
6838
7433
37550
3246
4774
5571
6222
6845
7440
37600
3249
4779
5576
6228
6851
7447
37650
3252
4783
5581
6234
6857
7453
37700
3255
4788
5586
6239
6863
7460
37750
3258
4792
5591
6245
6869
7467
37800
3261
4796
5596
6250
6875
7474
37850
3264
4801
5601
6256
6882
7480
37900
3268
4805
5606
6262
6888
7487
37950
3271
4810
5611
6267
6894
7494
38000
3274
4814
5616
6273
6900
7500
38050
3277
4819
5621
6279
6906
7507
38100
3280
4823
5626
6284
6913
7514
38150
3283
4828
5631
6290
6919
7521
38200
3286
4832
5636
6295
6925
7527
38250
3289
4836
5641
6301
6931
7534
38300
3292
4841
5646
6307
6937
7541
38350
3296
4845
5651
6312
6943
7548
38400
3299
4850
5656
6318
6950
7554
38450
3302
4854
5661
6323
6956
7561
38500
3305
4859
5666
6329
6962
7568
38550
3308
4863
5671
6335
6968
7574
38600
3311
4868
5676
6340
6974
7581
38650
3314
4872
5681
6346
6981
7588
38700
3317
4877
5686
6352
6987
7595
38750
3320
4881
5691
6357
6993
7601
38800
3324
4885
5696
6363
6999
7608
38850
3327
4890
5701
6368
7005
7615
38900
3330
4894
5706
6374
7012
7622
38950
3333
4899
5711
6380
7018
7628
39000
3336
4903
5717
6385
7024
7635
39050
3339
4908
5722
6391
7030
7642
39100
3342
4912
5727
6397
7036
7648
39150
3345
4917
5732
6402
7042
7655
39200
3348
4921
5737
6408
7049
7662
39250
3352
4925
5742
6413
7055
7669
39300
3355
4930
5747
6419
7061
7675
39350
3358
4934
5752
6425
7067
7682
39400
3361
4939
5757
6430
7073
7689
39450
3364
4943
5762
6436
7080
7695
39500
3367
4948
5767
6442
7086
7702
39550
3370
4952
5772
6447
7092
7709
39600
3373
4957
5777
6453
7098
7716
39650
3376
4961
5782
6458
7104
7722
39700
3380
4966
5787
6464
7110
7729
39750
3383
4970
5792
6470
7117
7736
39800
3386
4974
5797
6475
7123
7743
39850
3389
4979
5802
6481
7129
7749
39900
3392
4983
5807
6487
7135
7756
39950
3395
4988
5812
6492
7141
7763
40000
3398
4992
5817
6498
7148
7769
(8) Computation of basic child support - shared overnight parenting time - split physical care - stipulations - deviations - basis for periodic updates.
(a) A total child support obligation is determined by adding each parent's respective basic child support obligation, as determined through the child support guidelines and schedule of basic child support obligations specified in subsection (7) of this section, education and work-related net child care costs, extraordinary medical expenses, and extraordinary adjustments to the schedule of basic child support obligations, as described in subsections (9), (10), (11)(a), (11)(b), and (11)(c)(III) of this section. The parent receiving a child support payment is presumed to spend the total child support obligation directly on the children. The parent paying child support to the other parent owes the total child support obligation as child support to the other parent minus any ordered payments included in the calculations made directly on behalf of the children for education and work-related net child care costs, extraordinary medical expenses, or extraordinary adjustments to the schedule of basic child support obligations, as described in subsections (9), (10), (11)(a), (11)(b), and (11)(c)(III) of this section.
(b) Shared overnight parenting time presumes that certain basic expenses for the children will be paid directly by the overnight parent; therefore, expenses may be duplicated and an adjustment for shared parenting time is necessary. The shared parenting time adjustment is calculated by identifying the parenting time credit percentage listed in the parenting time table in subsection (8)(h) of this section based upon the number of overnights for each parent. The parenting time credit is the total basic child support obligation multiplied by that parent's parenting time credit percentage. The shared parenting adjustment is deducted from each parent's share of the basic child support obligation, which is in addition to each parent's proportionate share of education and work-related net child care costs, extraordinary medical expenses, and extraordinary adjustments to the schedule of basic child support obligations, as described in subsections (9), (10), (11)(a), (11)(b), and (11)(c)(III) of this section. The parent owing the greater amount of child support owes the difference between the two amounts as a child support order minus any ordered direct payments made on behalf of the children for education and work-related net child care costs, extraordinary medical expenses, or extraordinary adjustments to the schedule of basic child support obligations, as described in subsections (9), (10), (11)(a), (11)(b), and (11)(c)(III) of this section. The amount of child support ordered to be paid must not exceed the amount owed by that same parent if the parent had no overnights. For purposes of calculating overnights when two or more children are included in the child support worksheet calculation and the parties have a different number of overnights with each of the two or more children, the number of overnights is determined by adding the number of overnights for each child and dividing the resulting number by the number of children included in the child support worksheet calculation.
(c) In cases of split physical care, the number of overnights used to calculate a child support obligation must be computed in the same manner as shared overnight parenting time: By adding the number of overnights for each child and dividing the resulting number by the number of children included in the child support worksheet calculation.
(d) Stipulations presented to the court shall be reviewed by the court for approval. No hearing shall be required; however, the court shall use the guidelines and schedule of basic child support obligations to review the adequacy of child support orders negotiated by the parties as well as the financial affidavit that fully discloses the financial status of the parties as required for use of the guidelines and schedule of basic child support obligations.
(e) In an action to establish or modify child support, whether temporary or permanent, the guidelines and schedule of basic child support obligations set forth in subsection (7) of this section shall be used as a rebuttable presumption for the establishment or modification of the amount of child support. A court may deviate from the guidelines and schedule of basic child support obligations where its application would be inequitable, unjust, or inappropriate. Any such deviation shall be accompanied by written or oral findings by the court specifying the reasons for the deviation and the presumed amount under the guidelines and schedule of basic child support obligations without a deviation. These reasons may include, but are not limited to, instances where one of the parents spends substantially more time with the child than is reflected by a straight calculation of overnights, the extraordinary medical expenses incurred for treatment of either parent or a current spouse, extraordinary costs associated with parenting time, the gross disparity in income between the parents, the ownership by a parent of a substantial nonincome producing asset, consistent overtime not considered in gross income under sub-subparagraph (C) of subparagraph (II) of paragraph (a) of subsection (5) of this section, or income from employment that is in addition to a full-time job or that results in the employment of the obligor more than forty hours per week or more than what would otherwise be considered to be full-time employment. The existence of a factor enumerated in this section does not require the court to deviate from the guidelines and basic schedule of child support obligations but may be a factor to be considered in the decision to deviate. The court may deviate from the guidelines and basic schedule of child support obligations even if a factor enumerated in this section does not exist.
(f) The guidelines and schedule of basic child support obligations may be used by the parties as the basis for periodic updates of child support obligations.
(g) Repealed.
(h) Parenting time table:
Overnights
Credit %
Overnights
Credit %
Overnights
Credit %
Overnights
Credit %
Overnights
Credit %
0.00%
8.87%
146
32.32%
218
67.23%
291
90.93%
0.07%
9.07%
147
32.77%
219
67.68%
292
91.13%
0.14%
9.27%
148
33.22%
220
68.12%
293
91.33%
0.21%
9.48%
149
33.68%
221
68.56%
294
91.53%
0.28%
9.68%
150
34.13%
222
69.00%
295
91.72%
0.35%
9.90%
151
34.59%
223
69.44%
296
91.91%
0.42%
10.11%
152
35.05%
224
69.87%
297
92.09%
0.49%
10.33%
153
35.52%
225
70.30%
298
92.28%
0.57%
10.55%
154
35.99%
226
70.73%
299
92.46%
0.65%
10.77%
155
36.45%
227
71.15%
300
92.64%
0.72%
11.00%
156
36.93%
228
71.57%
301
92.81%
0.80%
11.23%
157
37.40%
229
71.99%
302
92.99%
0.88%
11.47%
158
37.88%
230
72.40%
303
93.16%
0.96%
11.70%
159
38.35%
231
72.81%
304
93.33%
1.04%
11.94%
160
38.83%
232
73.22%
305
93.49%
1.13%
12.19%
161
39.32%
233
73.62%
306
93.66%
1.21%
12.43%
162
39.80%
234
74.02%
307
93.82%
1.29%
12.68%
163
40.29%
235
74.42%
308
93.98%
1.38%
12.94%
164
40.77%
236
74.81%
309
94.13%
1.47%
13.19%
165
41.26%
237
75.20%
310
94.29%
1.56%
13.45%
166
41.75%
238
75.59%
311
94.44%
1.65%
13.72%
167
42.25%
239
75.97%
312
94.59%
1.74%
13.98%
168
42.74%
240
76.35%
313
94.73%
1.84%
14.25%
169
43.23%
241
76.73%
314
94.88%
1.93%
14.53%
170
43.73%
242
77.10%
315
95.02%
2.03%
14.80%
171
44.23%
243
77.46%
316
95.16%
2.12%
15.08%
172
44.73%
244
77.83%
317
95.30%
2.22%
100
15.37%
173
45.23%
245
78.19%
318
95.44%
2.32%
101
15.66%
174
45.73%
246
78.55%
319
95.57%
2.43%
102
15.95%
175
46.23%
247
78.90%
320
95.70%
2.53%
103
16.24%
176
46.73%
248
79.25%
321
95.84%
2.64%
104
16.54%
177
47.23%
249
79.60%
322
95.96%
2.74%
105
16.84%
178
47.73%
250
79.94%
323
96.09%
2.85%
106
17.15%
179
48.24%
251
80.28%
324
96.22%
2.96%
107
17.46%
180
48.74%
252
80.61%
325
96.34%
3.08%
108
17.77%
181
49.24%
253
80.94%
326
96.46%
3.19%
109
18.09%
182
49.75%
254
81.27%
327
96.58%
3.30%
110
18.41%
182.5
50.00%
255
81.59%
328
96.70%
3.42%
111
18.73%
183
50.25%
256
81.91%
329
96.81%
3.54%
112
19.06%
184
50.76%
257
82.23%
330
96.92%
3.66%
113
19.39%
185
51.26%
258
82.54%
331
97.04%
3.78%
114
19.72%
186
51.76%
259
82.85%
332
97.15%
3.91%
115
20.06%
187
52.27%
260
83.16%
333
97.26%
4.04%
116
20.40%
188
52.77%
261
83.46%
334
97.36%
4.16%
117
20.75%
189
53.27%
262
83.76%
335
97.47%
4.30%
118
21.10%
190
53.77%
263
84.05%
336
97.57%
4.43%
119
21.45%
191
54.27%
264
84.34%
337
97.68%
4.56%
120
21.81%
192
54.77%
265
84.63%
338
97.78%
4.70%
121
22.17%
193
55.27%
266
84.92%
339
97.88%
4.84%
122
22.54%
194
55.77%
267
85.20%
340
97.97%
4.98%
123
22.90%
195
56.27%
268
85.47%
341
98.07%
5.12%
124
23.27%
196
56.77%
269
85.75%
342
98.16%
5.27%
125
23.65%
197
57.26%
270
86.02%
343
98.26%
5.41%
126
24.03%
198
57.75%
271
86.28%
344
98.35%
5.56%
127
24.41%
199
58.25%
272
86.55%
345
98.44%
5.71%
128
24.80%
200
58.74%
273
86.81%
346
98.53%
5.87%
129
25.19%
201
59.23%
274
87.06%
347
98.62%
6.02%
130
25.58%
202
59.71%
275
87.32%
348
98.71%
6.18%
131
25.98%
203
60.20%
276
87.57%
349
98.79%
6.34%
132
26.38%
204
60.68%
277
87.81%
350
98.87%
6.51%
133
26.78%
205
61.17%
278
88.06%
351
98.96%
6.67%
134
27.19%
206
61.65%
279
88.30%
352
99.04%
6.84%
135
27.60%
207
62.12%
280
88.53%
353
99.12%
7.01%
136
28.01%
208
62.60%
281
88.77%
354
99.20%
7.19%
137
28.43%
209
63.07%
282
89.00%
355
99.28%
7.36%
138
28.85%
210
63.55%
283
89.23%
356
99.35%
7.54%
139
29.27%
211
64.01%
284
89.45%
357
99.43%
7.72%
140
29.70%
212
64.48%
285
89.67%
358
99.51%
7.91%
141
30.13%
213
64.95%
286
89.89%
359
99.58%
8.09%
142
30.56%
214
65.41%
287
90.10%
360
99.65%
8.28%
143
31.00%
215
65.87%
288
90.32%
361
99.72%
8.47%
144
31.44%
216
66.32%
289
90.52%
362
99.79%
8.67%
145
31.88%
217
66.78%
290
90.73%
363
99.86%
364
99.93%
365
100.00%
(9) Adjustments for child care costs.
(a) Net child care costs incurred on behalf of the children due to employment or job search or the education of either parent shall be added to the basic obligation and shall be divided between the parents in proportion to their adjusted gross incomes.
(b) Child care costs shall not exceed the level required to provide quality care from a licensed source for the children. The value of the federal income tax credit for child care shall be subtracted from actual costs to arrive at a figure for net child care costs.
(10) Adjustments for health-care expenditures for children.
(a) In orders issued pursuant to this section, the court shall also provide for the child's or children's current and future medical needs by ordering either parent or both parents to initiate medical or medical and dental insurance coverage for the child or children through currently effective medical or medical and dental insurance policies held by the parent or parents, purchase medical or medical and dental insurance for the child or children, or provide the child or children with current and future medical needs through some other manner. If a parent has been directed to provide insurance pursuant to this section and that parent's spouse provides the insurance for the benefit of the child or children either directly or through employment, a credit on the child support worksheet shall be given to the parent in the same manner as if the premium were paid by the parent. At the same time, the court shall order payment of medical insurance or medical and dental insurance deductibles and copayments.
(a.5) If a child is covered by insurance, the parent securing the coverage, the employer providing the coverage, or the insurance provider shall provide, upon request by the policy holder or by court order, the insurance provider's name, the insurance provider's telephone number, the group and policy number, and the claim address to the non-policy holder. The information must be provided unless otherwise ordered by the court for good cause shown. This subsection (10) authorizes the release of information to the other party or parties. After notice to the party or parties of this obligation, the court has the authority to fine the parent securing coverage for failure to provide the required information.
(b) The payment of a premium to provide health insurance coverage on behalf of the children subject to the order shall be added to the basic child support obligation and shall be divided between the parents in proportion to their adjusted gross income.
(c) The amount to be added to the basic child support obligation shall be the actual amount of the total insurance premium that is attributable to the child who is the subject of the order. If this amount is not available or cannot be verified, the total cost of the premium should be divided by the total number of persons covered by the policy. The cost per person derived from this calculation shall be multiplied by the number of children who are the subject of the order and who are covered under the policy. This amount shall be added to the basic child support obligation and shall be divided between the parents in proportion to their adjusted gross incomes.
(d) After the total child support obligation is calculated and divided between the parents in proportion to their adjusted gross incomes, the amount calculated in paragraph (c) of this subsection (10) shall be deducted from the obligor's share of the total child support obligation if the obligor is actually paying the premium. If the obligee is actually paying the premium, no further adjustment is necessary.
(e) Prior to allowing the health insurance adjustment, the parent requesting the adjustment must submit proof that the child or children have been enrolled in a health insurance plan and must submit proof of the cost of the premium. Any parent providing insurance coverage for the child pursuant to this section must notify the other party or parties and the delegate child support enforcement unit of any change or discontinuation of coverage as soon as practicable, but no later than fourteen days after the change.
(f) If a parent who is ordered by the court to provide medical or medical and dental insurance for the child or children has insurance that excludes coverage of the child or children because the child or children reside outside the geographic area covered by the insurance policy, the court shall order separate coverage for the child or children if the court determines coverage is available at a reasonable cost.
(g) Where the application of the premium payment on the guidelines and schedule of basic child support obligations results in a child support order of fifty dollars or less, or the premium payment is five percent or more of the parent's gross income, the court or delegate child support enforcement unit may elect not to require the parent to include the child or children on an existing policy or to purchase insurance. The parent is, however, required to provide insurance when it becomes available at a reasonable cost.
(h) (I) Any extraordinary medical expenses incurred on behalf of the children must be added to the basic child support obligation and divided between the parents in proportion to each parent's adjusted gross income. Ongoing extraordinary medical expenses may be added as an adjustment on the child support worksheet calculation only if the expenses are consistent and expected to continue. Extraordinary medical expenses that are not ongoing and consistent or that are otherwise not added to the child support worksheet claculation are subject to reimbursement among the parties.
(II) Extraordinary medical expenses include, but are not limited to, copayments, deductibles, and uninsured out-of-pocket expenses for reasonable costs that are reasonably necessary for professional medical care, prescription medication, medical equipment, orthodontia, dental treatment, asthma treatments, physical therapy, vision care, professional counseling or psychiatric therapy for behavioral or mental health disorders, and any uninsured health problem. For adults and children with disabilities or with a disabling condition who are eligible for long-term services and supports pursuant to article 6 of title 25.5 and who are not emancipated pursuant to subsection (13)(a)(II) of this section, extraordinary medical expenses may include any expense resulting from the adult's or child's disability or disabling conditions, including expenses that are reasonably necessary to support the adult's or child's health, protection, and quality of life. Extraordinary medical expenses may include, but are not limited to, medically necessary equipment, home and vehicle modification, recommended therapeutic activities, and reasonable respite care. Ordinary medical expenses included in the schedule of basic child support obligations that are not subject to allocation pursuant to subsection (10)(h)(I) of this section include minor expenses incurred in the course of caring for an adult or child, such as over-the-counter medication, bandages, or regular hygiene and health products, except when the minor expenses are recommended by the adult's or child's treatment provider to treat or manage the adult's or child's chronic conditions.
(III) (A) The party seeking reimbursement for an extraordinary medical expense that is not included as an adjustment in the monthly child support worksheet calculation and monthly child support order shall provide proof of the expense to the reimbursing party within a reasonable time after incurring the expense. Absent extraordinary circumstances, failure to provide proof of the expense to the reimbursing party by July 1 of the year following the calendar year in which the expense was incurred results in a waiver of the reimbursement.
(B) The party seeking reimbursement may file a motion for judgment of extraordinary medical expenses for that particular calendar year if the party fails to respond and reimburse the expenses or reach a payment arrangement with the requesting party within forty-nine days after the date the request was received. The motion must specify the amount of the expense incurred, the amount sought from the other party pursuant to subsection (10)(h)(I) of this section, and when and how the request for reimbursement was made to the other party. Any response to the motion must include any objection to the costs requested or proposed payment arrangements.
(11) Extraordinary adjustments to the schedule of basic child support obligations - periodic disability benefits.
(a) By agreement of the parties or by order of court, the following reasonable and necessary expenses incurred on behalf of the child must be divided between the parents in proportion to their adjusted gross income:
(I) Any expenses for attending any special or private elementary or secondary schools to meet the particular educational needs of the child or public school mandatory school fees; and
(II) Any expenses for transportation of the child, or the child and an accompanying parent if the child is less than twelve years of age, between the homes of the parents.
(b) Any additional factors that actually diminish the basic needs of the child may be considered for deductions from the basic child support obligation.
(c) (I) If the noncustodial parent receives periodic disability benefits granted by the federal "Old-age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance Act", 42 U.S.C. sec. 401 et seq., due to the disability of the noncustodial parent or receives employer-paid retirement benefits from the federal government due to the retirement of the noncustodial parent, the noncustodial parent shall notify the custodial party, and the delegate child support enforcement unit, if a party to the case, within sixty days after the noncustodial party receives notice of such benefits.
(II) Absent good cause shown, the custodial party must apply for dependent benefits for the child or children within sixty days after the custodial party receives notification pursuant to subsection (11)(c)(I) of this section and shall cooperate with the appropriate federal agency in completing any application for benefits. No later than seven days after receiving a social security benefit verification letter or other correspondence from the federal social security administration confirming the amount of the lump sum retroactive payment and the dates covered, the custodial party shall provide the noncustodial parent and the delegate child support enforcement unit, if the unit is a party to the case, with a copy of the letter or correspondence.
(III) In cases where the custodial parent receives periodic disability benefits granted by the federal "Old-age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance Act", 42 U.S.C. sec. 401 et seq., on behalf of dependent children due to the disability of the noncustodial parent or receives employer-paid retirement benefits from the federal government on behalf of dependent children due to the retirement of the noncustodial parent, the noncustodial parent's share of the total child support obligation as determined pursuant to subsection (8) of this section must be reduced in an amount equal to the amount of the benefits.
(d) In cases where the custodial parent receives a lump sum retroactive award for benefits granted by the federal old-age, survivors, or disability insurance benefits program, 42 U.S.C. sec. 7, on behalf of a dependent child due to the disability of the noncustodial parent, or receives a lump sum retroactive award for employer-paid retirement benefits from the federal government on behalf of a dependent child due to the retirement of the noncustodial parent, the lump sum award received by the custodial parent must be credited against any retroactive support judgment or any past-due child support obligation, regardless of whether the past-due obligation has been reduced to judgment owed by the noncustodial parent. This credit must not be given against any amounts owed by the noncustodial parent for debt as defined in section 14-14-104 or for any retroactive support or any arrearage that accrued prior to the date of eligibility for disability or retirement benefits as determined by the social security administration. Any lump sum retirement or disability payments due to the retirement or disability of the noncustodial parent, received by the custodial parent as a result of the retirement or disability of the noncustodial parent, paid for a period of time that precedes the date of such benefit date eligibility, or any amount in excess of the established child support order or judgment, must be deemed a gratuity to the child.
(12) Dependency exemptions.
(a) The court may allocate an income tax dependency exemption and the resulting tax benefit for a child and require the party who has the child in the party's physical custody for more than fifty percent of the calendar year to provide the other party a properly executed declaration that releases the party's claim to the child as a dependent pursuant to the federal "Internal Revenue Code of 1986", 26 U.S.C. sec. 152 (e). If an allocation of exemption is contested, the court must make findings supporting the court's decision for the allocation.
(b) In determining the allocation pursuant to subsection (12)(a) of this section, the court shall consider the following:
(I) The financial resources of each party;
(II) Any negative impacts on a party's ability to provide for the needs of the child if the party is not awarded the allocation of exemption;
(III) If one party or both parties would each receive a tax benefit from the right to claim the child for tax purposes pursuant to the federal "Internal Revenue Code of 1986", 26 U.S.C. sec. 152 (e). The filing status as head of household is not impacted by this designation.
(IV) The impact of the allocation of exemption on either party's ability to claim a premium tax credit or a premium subsidy pursuant to the federal "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act", 42 U.S.C. sec. 18001 et seq., as amended by the federal "Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010", 42 U.S.C. sec. 1305 et seq., and any federal guidance or regulations issued pursuant to the federal acts.
(c) (I) The court may place reasonable conditions on a party's right to claim an allocation of exemption, including a requirement that the party remains in compliance with a child support obligation. In the event the party is not in compliance with a child support obligation or other court order, either party may move to modify the allocation of exemption.
(II) As used in this subsection (12)(c), "compliance with a child support obligation" means making ordered payments for the applicable tax year.
(d) If the court determines that a party has claimed an income tax dependency exemption in violation of a court order or applicable law, or has failed or refused to provide a properly executed written declaration that releases the party's claim to a child as a dependent to the other party as required by court order, the court may issue an order requiring compensation in the amount of the lost tax benefit and reasonable attorney fees and costs to the party who was wrongfully deprived of the income tax dependency exemption. A motion for relief must be brought within three years after the date of filing the income tax return in which the exemption was claimed or could have been claimed. A party who brings a meritless motion for relief may be ordered to pay reasonable attorney fees and costs to the other party.
(13) Emancipation.
(a) For child support orders entered on or after July 1, 1997, unless a court finds that a child is otherwise emancipated, emancipation occurs and child support terminates without either party filing a motion when the last or only child attains nineteen years of age unless one or more of the following conditions exist:
(I) The parties agree otherwise in a written stipulation after July 1, 1997;
(II) If the child is mentally or physically disabled, the court or the delegate child support enforcement unit may order child support, including payments for medical expenses or insurance or both, to continue beyond the age of nineteen;
(III) If the child is still in high school or an equivalent program, support continues until the end of the month following graduation. A child who ceases to attend high school prior to graduation and later reenrolls is entitled to support upon reenrollment and until the end of the month following graduation, but not beyond age twenty-one. A concurrent enrollment program, as defined in section 22-35-103, does not qualify as an equivalent program. A child participating in a concurrent enrollment program is emancipated once the child completes the local education provider's minimum high school graduation requirements.
(IV) If the child marries, the child shall be considered emancipated as of the date of the marriage. If the marriage is annulled, dissolved, or declared invalid, child support may be reinstated.
(V) If the child enters into active military duty, the child shall be considered emancipated.
(b) Nothing in paragraph (a) of this subsection (13) or subsection (15) of this section shall preclude the parties from agreeing in a written stipulation or agreement on or after July 1, 1997, to continue child support beyond the age of nineteen or to provide for postsecondary education expenses for a child and to set forth the details of the payment of the expenses. If the stipulation or agreement is approved by the court and made part of a decree of dissolution of marriage or legal separation, the terms of the agreement shall be enforced as provided in section 14-10-112.
(14) Advisement to parties - annual exchange of information.
(a) When a child support order is entered or modified, unless otherwise ordered by the court, the parties shall exchange information relevant to child support calculations on changes that have occurred since the previous child support order, and other appropriate information once a year or less often, for the purpose of updating and modifying the order without a court hearing. The parties shall use the approved standardized child support forms specified in subsection (4) of this section in exchanging financial information. The parents shall include the forms with any agreed modification or an agreement that a modification is not appropriate at the time. If the agreed amount departs from the guidelines and schedule of basic child support obligations, the parties shall furnish statements of explanation with the forms and shall file the documents with the court. The court shall review the agreement pursuant to this paragraph (a) and inform the parties by regular mail whether or not additional or corrected information is needed, or that the modification is granted, or that the modification is denied. If the parties cannot agree, a modification pursuant to this paragraph (a) shall not be entered; however, either party may move for or the court may schedule, upon its own motion, a modification hearing.
(b) Upon request of the noncustodial parent, the court may order the custodial parent to submit an annual update of financial information using the approved standardized child support forms, as specified in subsection (4) of this section, including information on the actual expenses relating to the children of the marriage for whom support has been ordered. The court shall not order the custodial parent to update the financial information pursuant to this paragraph (b) in circumstances where the noncustodial parent has failed to exercise parenting time rights or when child support payments are in arrears or where there is documented evidence of domestic violence, child abuse, or a violation of a protection order on the part of the noncustodial parent. The court may order the noncustodial parent to pay the costs involved in preparing an update to the financial information. If the noncustodial parent claims, based upon the information in the updated form, that the custodial parent is not spending the child support for the benefit of the children, the court may refer the parties to a mediator to resolve the differences. If there are costs for such mediation, the court shall order that the party requesting the mediation pay such costs.
(c) In any status conference, administrative conference, or hearing in which child support is at issue, the court or the delegate child support unit shall verbally advise the parties that failure to pay child support ordered by the court or as a result of an administrative process action may result in enforcement actions and the addition of interest on arrears and that an agreement to modify child support is not effective until approved by the court, or delegate child support unit for administrative orders, and entered as an order.
(15) Postsecondary education.
(a) This subsection (15) shall apply to all child support obligations established or modified as a part of any proceeding, including but not limited to articles 5, 6, and 10 of this title and articles 4 and 6 of title 19, C.R.S., prior to July 1, 1997. This subsection (15) shall not apply to child support orders established on or after July 1, 1997, which shall be governed by paragraph (a) of subsection (13) of this section.
(b) For child support orders entered prior to July 1, 1997, unless a court finds that a child is otherwise emancipated, emancipation occurs and child support terminates without either party filing a motion when the last or only child attains nineteen years of age unless one or more of the following conditions exist:
(I) The parties agree otherwise in a written stipulation after July 1, 1991;
(II) If the child is mentally or physically disabled, the court or the delegate child support enforcement unit may order child support, including payments for medical expenses or insurance or both, to continue beyond the age of nineteen;
(III) If the child is still in high school or an equivalent program, support continues until the end of the month following graduation, unless there is an order for postsecondary education, in which case support continues through postsecondary education as provided in this subsection (15). A child who ceases to attend high school prior to graduation and later reenrolls is entitled to support upon reenrollment and until the end of the month following graduation, but not beyond age twenty-one.
(IV) If the child marries, the child shall be considered emancipated as of the date of the marriage. If the marriage is annulled, dissolved, or declared invalid, child support may be reinstated.
(V) If the child enters into active military duty, the child shall be considered emancipated.
(c) If the court finds that it is appropriate for the parents to contribute to the costs of a program of postsecondary education, then the court shall terminate child support and enter an order requiring both parents to contribute a sum determined to be reasonable for the education expenses of the child, taking into account the resources of each parent and the child. In determining the amount of each parent's contribution to the costs of a program of postsecondary education for a child, the court shall be limited to an amount not to exceed the amount listed under the schedule of basic child support obligations in paragraph (b) of subsection (7) of this section for the number of children receiving postsecondary education. If such an order is entered, the parents shall contribute to the total sum determined by the court in proportion to their adjusted gross incomes as defined in paragraph (a) of subsection (3) of this section. The amount of contribution that each parent is ordered to pay pursuant to this subsection (15) shall be subtracted from the amount of each parent's gross income, respectively, prior to calculating the basic child support obligation for any remaining children pursuant to subsection (7) of this section.
(d) In no case shall the court issue orders providing for both child support and postsecondary education to be paid for the same time period for the same child regardless of the age of the child.
(e) Either parent or the child may move for an order at any time before the child attains the age of twenty-one years. The order for postsecondary education support may not extend beyond the earlier of the child's twenty-first birthday or the completion of an undergraduate degree.
(f) Either a child seeking an order for postsecondary education expenses or on whose behalf postsecondary education expenses are sought, or the parent from whom the payment of postsecondary education expenses are sought, may request that the court order the child and the parent to seek mediation prior to a hearing on the issue of postsecondary education expenses. Mediation services shall be provided in accordance with section 13-22-305, C.R.S. The court may order the parties to seek mediation if the court finds that mediation is appropriate.
(g) The court may order the support paid directly to the educational institution, to the child, or in such other fashion as is appropriate to support the education of the child.
(h) A child shall not be considered emancipated solely by reason of living away from home while in postsecondary education. If the child resides in the home of one parent while attending school or during periods of time in excess of thirty days when school is not in session, the court may order payments from one parent to the other for room and board until the child attains the age of nineteen.
(i) If the court orders support pursuant to this subsection (15), the court or delegate child support enforcement unit may also order that the parents provide health insurance for the child or pay medical expenses of the child or both for the duration of the order. The order shall provide that these expenses be paid in proportion to their adjusted gross incomes as defined in subsection (3) of this section. The court or delegate child support enforcement unit shall order a parent to provide health insurance if the child is eligible for coverage as a dependent on that parent's insurance policy or if health insurance coverage for the child is available at reasonable cost.
(j) An order for postsecondary education expenses entered between July 1, 1991, and July 1, 1997, may be modified pursuant to this subsection (15) to provide for postsecondary education expenses subject to the statutory provisions for determining the amount of a parent's contribution to the costs of postsecondary education, the limitations on the amount of a parent's contribution, and the changes to the definition of postsecondary education consistent with this section as it existed on July 1, 1994. An order for child support entered prior to July 1, 1997, that does not provide for postsecondary education expenses shall not be modified pursuant to this subsection (15).
(k) Postsecondary education support may be established or modified in the same manner as child support under this article.
(16) Child support commission.
(a) The child support guidelines, including the schedule of basic child support obligations, and general child support issues must be reviewed at least once every four years by a child support commission, which commission is hereby created. After the periodic review described in this section, the commission shall submit a report to the governor and to the general assembly explaining the commission's recommendations.
(b) As part of its review, the commission shall consider economic data on the cost of raising children and analyze case data on the application of, and deviations from, the guidelines and the schedule of basic child support obligations to be used in the commission's review to ensure that deviations from the guidelines and schedule of basic child support obligations are limited. Further, as part of its review, the commission shall consider:
(I) Establishing an adequate standard of support for children, subject to the parents' ability to pay;
(II) Making awards more equitable by ensuring more consistent treatment of persons in similar circumstances; and
(III) Improving the efficiency of the court process by promoting settlements and giving courts and the parties guidance on establishing levels of awards.
(c) (I) The child support commission consists of no more than twenty-one members. The commission is dedicated to including diverse perspectives in its recommendations.
(II) The governor shall appoint up to nineteen persons to the commission, who must include:
(A) Representatives of the judiciary and the Colorado bar association;
(B) The director of the division in the state department of human services who is responsible for child support services or the director's designee;
(C) A director of a county department of human or social services;
(D) The child support liaison to the judicial department;
(E) Interested parties;
(F) A certified public accountant; and
(G) At least four parent representatives, at least two of whom are present or past obligors and two of whom are present or past obligees.
(III) In making appointments to the commission, the governor shall attempt to ensure racial, economic, gender, and geographical diversity.
(IV) The remaining two members of the commission are a member of the house of representatives appointed by the speaker of the house of representatives and a member of the senate appointed by the president of the senate and must not be members of the same political party.
(d) Members of the child support commission shall be reimbursed for actual and necessary expenses for travel and mileage incurred in connection with their duties. The child support commission is authorized, subject to appropriation, to incur expenses related to its work, including the costs associated with public hearings, printing, travel, and research.
(d.5) and (e) (Deleted by amendment, L. 2013.)
Source: L. 71: R&RE, p. 527, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 46-1-15. L. 85: (2) added, p. 592, § 10, effective July 1. L. 86: (3) to (16) added, p. 718, § 1, effective November 1. L. 87: (3)(b), (5), IP(7)(a), (10)(a), (11), and (12) amended, (7)(b)(II), (15), and (16) repealed, (7)(d), (7)(e), (10)(c), and (17) added, and (8), (9), (13), and (14) R&RE, pp. 587, 588, 600, 591, 589, §§ 5, 7, 38, 9, 6, 8, effective July 10. L. 89: (7)(d.5) added and (17) amended, p. 792, §§ 14, 15, effective July 1. L. 90: (18) added, p. 890, § 10, effective June 7; (7)(a)(I)(A), (7)(c), and (13)(a)(III) amended and (7)(b)(III) added, pp. 564, 890, 889, §§ 35, 10, 9, effective July 1. L. 91: (18)(a) amended, p. 359, § 21, effective April 9; (1.5) added and (7)(b), (13), (14)(b), and (18) amended, p. 234, § 1, effective July 1. L. 92: (17) amended, p. 2171, § 18, effective June 2; (1.5)(b)(I), (2), (3)(a), (3)(b), (7)(a), (7)(e), (8), (10)(a)(II), (10)(c), (14)(c)(I), (18), and (18)(a) amended, (1.5)(d), (13.5), (14.5), and (16.5) added, (7)(e) repealed, and (10)(b) R&RE, pp. 166, 203, 188, 169, 198, 193, §§ 1, 9, 2, 3, effective August 1. L. 93: (1.5)(b)(I) and (3)(b)(III) amended and (1.5)(e) added, pp. 1556, 577, §§ 1, 7, effective July 1; (1.5)(b)(I), (2), and (10)(c) amended and (3.5) and (18)(e) added, pp. 1559, 1560, §§ 7, 8, effective September 1. L. 94: (1.5)(b)(I), (1.5)(e), (7)(a)(I)(A), (7)(b)(III), (7)(d.5)(I), and (18)(e) amended, p. 1536, § 5, effective July 1; (18)(a) amended, p. 2645, § 107, effective July 1. L. 96: IP(1), (2), (3)(a), (3)(b)(II), (7)(a)(I)(A), (7)(a)(I)(C), (7)(b)(I), (10)(a)(II), (11)(a), (12), (13.5), and (16.5) amended, p. 594, § 7, effective July 1. L. 97: (1.5) amended and (1.6) and (1.7) added, p. 565, § 20, effective July 1; (1.5), (3.5), (7)(b), and (18)(a) amended and (1.6) and (1.7) added, pp. 1264, 1312, §§ 8, 49, effective July 1; (5) and (17) amended, p. 561, § 5, effective July 1; (7)(a)(I)(B) amended, p. 1240, § 37, effective July 1. L. 98: (3)(a), (7)(d.5)(I), and (13)(a)(II) amended, p. 768, § 21, effective July 1; (7)(a)(I)(A) amended, p. 921, § 7, effective July 1; (4)(c), (8), (9), (10)(c), and (14) amended, p. 1398, § 42, effective February 1, 1999. L. 99: (3.5) amended, p. 1085, § 2, effective July 1; (7)(a)(I)(A) amended, p. 621, § 15, effective August 4. L. 2000: (18) amended, p. 1709, § 6, effective July 1. L. 2001: (18)(a) amended and (19) added, p. 721, § 4, effective May 31. L. 2002: (10)(a)(II), (10)(b), and (13.5)(h)(II) amended, p. 286, § 1, effective January 1, 2003. L. 2003: (3)(b)(III) amended, p. 1011, § 15, effective July 1; (10)(a)(II)(B), (10)(a)(II)(C), and (10)(a)(II)(D) amended, p. 1264, § 51, effective July 1. L. 2004: (5), (10)(a)(II)(A), (13.5)(h)(II), and (19) amended, p. 385, § 1, effective July 1. L. 2005: (1.6) amended, p. 80, § 1, effective August 8. L. 2006: IP(1.6) amended, p. 516, § 1, effective August 7. L. 2007: Entire section amended with relocated provisions, p. 73, § 1, effective March 16; (16)(d.5) added, p. 178, § 7, effective March 22; (13)(a)(IV), (13)(a)(V), (15)(b)(IV), and (15)(b)(V) added and IP(15)(b) amended, p. 1649, §§ 5, 3, effective May 31; (6)(b)(I) and (10)(a) amended, p. 1651, § 7, effective January 1, 2008. L. 2008: (4)(b) and (5)(b)(I) amended, p. 1347, § 1, effective July 1. L. 2009: (5)(a)(I)(H) amended, (SB 09-282), ch. 288, p. 1397, § 59, effective January 1, 2010. L. 2013: (5)(a)(I)(D), (5)(a)(I)(O), (5)(a)(I)(W), (6)(b)(I), (7)(a)(II)(B), (7)(a)(II)(C), (7)(a)(II)(D), and (16) amended, (5)(a)(II)(E) and (11)(d) added, and (7)(b) R&RE, (HB 13-1209), ch. 103, pp. 327, 332, §§ 1, 2, effective January 1, 2014. L. 2014: (16)(d) amended, (SB 14-153), ch. 390, p. 1961, § 7, effective June 6. L. 2016: (6), (8)(e), (10)(g), and (14)(a) amended, (HB 16-1165), ch. 157, pp. 493, 494, 495, §§ 4, 5, 6, 7, effective January 1, 2017. L. 2017: (3)(f) and (3)(g) amended, (SB 17-294), ch. 264, p. 1391, § 29, effective May 25; (10)(h)(II) amended, (SB 17-242), ch. 263, p. 1295, § 113, effective May 25; (16)(a) amended, (SB 17-234), ch. 154, p. 520, § 1, effective August 9. L. 2018: (3)(a), IP(5)(a)(I), and (5)(a)(I)(Y) amended and (5)(a)(I.5) added, (HB 18-1385), ch. 251, p. 1546, § 2, effective August 8; (16)(c) amended, (SB 18-092), ch. 38, p. 400, § 14, effective August 8. L. 2019: (5)(b)(I) and (5)(b)(III) amended and (5)(b)(I.5) and (5)(b.5) added, (HB 19-1215), ch. 270, p. 2521, § 1, effective July 1; (16)(a) amended, (HB 19-1215), ch. 270, p. 2552, § 2, effective July 1; (3)(c.5) and (8)(g) added and (6)(b), (7)(a)(II)(B), (7)(a)(II)(C), (7)(a)(II)(D), (7)(b), IP(11)(a), (11)(a)(I), and (11)(c) amended, (HB 19-1215), ch. 270, p. 2521, § 1, effective July 1, 2020. L. 2021: (6)(b), (7)(a)(II)(C), (7)(a)(II)(D), and (7)(b) amended, (HB 21-1220), ch. 212, p. 1118, § 1, effective July 1. L. 2022: (16)(c) amended, (SB 22-013), ch. 2, p. 21, § 24, effective February 25. L. 2023: (3)(a)(II), (3)(a)(III), (5)(a)(I.5), (5)(a)(II)(C), (5)(b.5)(II)(N), (5)(b.5)(II)(O), (10)(e), and (10)(h)(II) amended and (5)(a)(IV), (5)(b.5)(II)(P), (10)(a.5), and (10)(h)(III) added, (SB 23-173), ch. 330, p. 1971, § 3, effective July 1; (16)(b), (16)(c)(I), (16)(c)(II)(B), (16)(c)(II)(G), (16)(c)(III), and (16)(d) amended, (SB 23-173), ch. 330, p. 1981, § 21, effective August 1; (2)(a) amended, (SB 23-173), ch. 330, p. 1970, § 1, effective September 1; (4)(a) amended and (4)(c) and (14)(c) added, (SB 23-173), ch. 330, p. 1970, § 2, effective July 1, 2024. L. 2025: (2)(a), IP(5)(a), (5)(a)(III)(B), (5)(a)(IV), (10)(h), (11)(c)(II), (12), and (13)(a)(III) amended, (HB 25-1159), ch. 334, p. 1731, § 2, effective May 31; (3)(g.5) and (8)(h) added, (3)(h), (3)(i), (7)(a), (8)(a), (8)(b), and (8)(c) amended, and (7)(b) R&RE, (HB 25-1159), ch. 334, p. 1731, § 2, effective March 1, 2026; (8)(g)(II) added by revision, (HB 25-1159), ch. 334, pp. 1731, 1766, §§ 2, 13. L. 2026: (7)(a)(V)(B), (7)(a)(V)(C), (7)(a)(VI), (8)(a), and (8)(b) amended, (HB 26-1217), ch. 113, p. 454, § 1, effective May 5.
Editor's note: (1) This section was amended in Senate Bill 07-015, resulting in the relocation of provisions. For a detailed comparison of relocated provisions, see the table located in the back of the index.
(2) Subsection (16.5)(d.5) was originally numbered as subsection (18)(a.5), and the amendments to it in Senate Bill 07-076 were harmonized with Senate Bill 07-015 and renumbered as subsection (16)(d.5).
(3) Subsection (8)(g)(II) provided for the repeal of subsection (8)(g), effective March 1, 2026. (See L. 2025, pp. 1731, 1766.)
Cross references: (1) For provisions concerning deductions for health insurance from wages due an obligor ordered to provide health insurance, see § 14-14-112.
(2) For the legislative declaration contained in the 1993 act amending subsection (3)(b)(III), see section 1 of chapter 165, Session Laws of Colorado 1993. For the legislative declaration contained in the act amending subsection (18)(a), see section 1 of chapter 345, Session Laws of Colorado 1994. For the legislative declaration contained in the 1997 act amending subsections (1.5), (3.5), (7)(b), and (18)(a) and enacting subsections (1.6) and (1.7), see section 1 of chapter 236, Session Laws of Colorado 1997. For the legislative declaration in SB 17-242, see section 1 of chapter 263, Session Laws of Colorado 2017. For the legislative declaration in SB 18-092, see section 1 of chapter 38, Session Laws of Colorado 2018.
(3) For the "Old-age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance Act", see 42 U.S.C. sec. 401 et seq.
ANNOTATION
I. General Consideration.
II. Duty of Support.
IV. Past Due Support.
I. GENERAL CONSIDERATION.
Law reviews. For article, "What Really Happens in Child Support Cases: An Empirical Study of Establishment and Enforcement of Child Support Orders in the Denver District Court", see 57 Den. L.J. 21 (1979). For article, "Automatic Escalation Clauses Relating to Maintenance and Child Support", see 12 Colo. Law. 1083 (1983). For article, "Support Calculation Revisited", see 12 Colo. Law. 1647 (1983). For article, "Domestic Case Update", see 14 Colo. Law. 209 (1985). For article, "Child Support Guidelines: Will They Cause More Problems Than They Cure?", see 15 Colo. Law. 408 (1986). For article, "Summary of the Report on the Colorado Commission Child Support and Proposed Child Support Guidelines", see 15 Colo. Law. 665 (1986). For article, "New Child Support Guideline Adopted", see 15 Colo. Law. 1662 (1986). For article, "Key Issues in the Colorado Child Support Guidelines", see 16 Colo. Law 51 (1987). For article, "Postsecondary Education Costs: Forging Through a Legislative Labyrinth", see 24 Colo. Law. 43 (1995). For article, "Calculating Income in Child Support Cases", see 25 Colo. Law. 53 (Mar. 1996). For article, "Post-secondary Education Expenses: A Multi-tiered Approach", see 27 Colo. Law. 61 (Jan. 1998). For article, "Determining Gross Income for Child Support Purposes", see 32 Colo. Law. 65 (May 2003). For article, "The State of Voluntary Unemployment and Underemployment in Colorado", see 34 Colo. Law. 49 (Nov. 2005). For article, "Colorado Child Support Case Law Update", see 36 Colo. Law. 79 (Oct. 2007). For article, "Postsecondary Education Expenses after Chalat: Paying College Expenses after Divorce", see 38 Colo. Law. 19 (Jan. 2009). For article, "Child Support Continuation for Disabled Children", see 40 Colo. Law. 61 (Dec. 2011). For article, "Retroactive Child Support: Conflicting Decisions and Practical Advice", see 41 Colo. Law. 91 (Aug. 2012). For article, "'Til Death Do Us Part", see 46 Colo. Law. 34 (July 2017). For article, "A Primer on Executive Compensation in a Colorado Divorce — Part 1", see 51 Colo. Law. 26 (May 2022). For article, "A Primer on Executive Compensation in a Colorado Divorce — Part 2", see 51 Colo. Law. 34 (June 2022). For article, "Psychological Parents and Child Support", see 51 Colo. Law. 24 (Nov. 2022). For article, "The Treatment of SLATs in the Event of a Dissolution of Marriage", see 53 Colo. Law. 42 (June 2024). For article, "The Algorithmic Family", see 53 Colo. Law. 44 (Sept.-Oct. 2024).
Annotator's note. Since § 14-10-115 is similar to § 14-10-115 as it existed prior to the 2007 amendment relocating provisions, § 46-1-5 (1)(c), C.R.S. 1963, § 46-1-5, CRS 53, and CSA, C. 56, § 8, relevant cases construing those provisions have been included in the annotations to this section.
This section does not violate equal protection, due process, and privacy rights, and enforcement of the section is not an unconstitutional taking of property or an ongoing threat of imprisonment for debt. A distinction between sets of parents based on marital status is rationally related to the legitimate state interest to insure that children of divorced or separated parents receive support despite the divorce or separation. Stillman v. State, 87 P.3d 200 (Colo. App. 2003).
Because it approximates the amount of parental income that the child would have received in an intact family, application of the child support guidelines is not arbitrary, capricious, fundamentally unfair, or coercive. Stillman v. State, 87 P.3d 200 (Colo. App. 2003).
There may be a remedy for child support apart from a divorce action. Scheer v. District Court, 147 Colo. 265, 363 P.2d 1059 (1961).
Duty of child support is independent, and is not limited to, entry of decree of dissolution. In re Price, 727 P.2d 1073 (Colo. 1986).
Uniform Dissolution of Marriage Act provides separate sections that govern the different elements of a dissolution order, specifically property disposition, maintenance, child support, and attorney fees. The court is required to make separate orders regarding these elements based on separate considerations and may not commingle one element with another. In re Huff, 834 P.2d 244 (Colo. 1992).
Child has standing to seek support for herself under this section. In re Conradson, 43 Colo. App. 432, 604 P.2d 701 (1979).
Reasonable and necessary business expenses may be satisfied before support payment. Obligations relating to reasonable and necessary expenses associated with maintaining the structure and solvency of a business or the production of income can be satisfied before payment of child support. In re Crowley, 663 P.2d 267 (Colo. App. 1983).
Interest accrues on arrearages from the date each installment becomes due. In re Pote, 847 P.2d 246 (Colo. App. 1993).
Award of past pregnancy expenses and support. There is no jurisdiction under this section to award expenses incurred prior to the date of the filing of a motion for child support. In re Garcia, 695 P.2d 774 (Colo. App. 1984).
Reasonable to charge support against Colorado property of out-of-country father. Where the trial court ordered the father, who resides in Norway, to pay child support in a lump sum amount, and the court further ordered that such sum should be a charge against certain Colorado property interests of the father, such order was reasonable and not confiscatory. Berge v. Berge, 189 Colo. 103, 536 P.2d 1135 (1975).
Subsection (1.5)(a)(II) provides that emancipation occurs and an order for child support terminates when a child attains 19 years of age, unless the child is then mentally or physically disabled and, if a child is physically or mentally incapable of self-support upon attaining majority at age 21, the duty of parental support continues for the duration of the disability. Koltay v. Koltay, 667 P.2d 1374 (Colo. 1983); In re Cropper, 895 P.2d 1158 (Colo. App. 1995).
The plain language of subsection (1)(b)(I) creates no exemption for separation agreements entered into under and consistent with earlier legislation. Although the parties' specific intention in 1991 separation agreement to share four years of college costs prevailed over general intention that child would be emancipated at 21 years of age, subsection (1)(b)(I) nevertheless controls and requires that father's college cost obligation terminates upon the earlier of the child's 21st birthday or completion of a four-year college program. In re Crowder, 77 P.3d 858 (Colo. App. 2003).
Subsection (1.5)(c) was modified to distinguish between orders for postsecondary education costs entered prior to, and after, July 1, 1997, when in a distinct departure from prior law, the court could no longer enter orders for postsecondary education expenses absent written agreement of the parties. In re Chalat, 94 P.3d 1191 (Colo. App. 2004), aff'd in part, rev'd in part on other grounds, 112 P.3d 47 (Colo. 2005).
Subsection (1.5)(c.5) was added in 1997 to clarify that the convoluted legislation that had been passed since 1991 was applicable to all orders that concerned postsecondary education expenses and that were established or modified prior to July 1, 1997. In re Chalat, 94 P.3d 1191 (Colo. App. 2004), aff'd in part, rev'd in part on other grounds, 112 P.3d 47 (Colo. 2005).
Tax exemptions. Court has authority to divide tax exemptions between the parents. In re Berjer, 789 P.2d 468 (Colo. App. 1989); In re Nielson, 794 P.2d 1097 (Colo. App. 1990); In re Larsen, 805 P.2d 1195 (Colo. App. 1991).
Court must allocate dependency exemption between the parties based on their respective gross incomes. Federal tax law contemplates such an allocation, and does not preempt it. S.F.E. in Interest of T.I.E., 981 P.2d 642 (Colo. App. 1998).
When allocating tax exemptions between the parents, the phrase "contributions to the costs of raising the children" refers to the percentage of child support attributed to each parent in the course of making the child support computation. In re Staggs, 940 P.2d 1109 (Colo. App. 1997).
The trial court may consider the allocation of tax exemptions in a motion for modification. In re Oberg, 900 P.2d 1267 (Colo. App. 1994).
A parent may not be ordered to pay an ex-spouse child support amounts for a period prior to entry of a child support order. In re Pote, 847 P.2d 246 (Colo. App. 1993).
Husband's discovery request that wife list all gifts, including without limitation, jewelry, clothes, entertainment, travel, and restaurant meals provided to her or the children by her current husband; list all amounts paid by wife's current husband directly to wife or to other parties from which she received a benefit, including attorney fees, maid service, cable television, mortgage payments, car and home repairs, insurance, and utilities; and list all assets purchased for which her current husband contributed, and husband's definition of "income" to include "all funds available for your use, including gifts" was significantly broader than the statutory definition of gross income, and therefore, denial of husband's motion to compel was proper. In re Seanor, 876 P.2d 44 (Colo. App. 1993).
Applied in Smith v. Casey, 198 Colo. 433, 601 P.2d 632 (1979); In re Hartford, 44 Colo. App. 303, 612 P.2d 1163 (1980); In re Dickey, 658 P.2d 276 (Colo. App. 1982); In re Steele, 714 P.2d 497 (Colo. App. 1985); In re Stone, 749 P.2d 467 (Colo. App. 1987).
II. DUTY OF SUPPORT.
Law reviews. For article, "Psychological Parents and Child Support", see 51 Colo. Law. 24 (Nov. 2022).
This section includes adopted children as well as natural children. In re Ashlock, 629 P.2d 1108 (Colo. App. 1981).
Absent a legal parent-child relationship, there is no duty to support a child under this section. In re Bonifas, 879 P.2d 478 (Colo. App. 1994).
Husband and wife who sought and were granted custody of a non-biological child under a parental responsibility order owed a duty of support to the child, and trial court had the authority in their dissolution of marriage proceeding to order husband to pay child support pursuant to subsections (1) and (17). In re Rodrick, 176 P.3d 806 (Colo. App. 2007).
Although this section does not define "psychological parent", it is a well-founded legislative concept in other parts of statute. In this case, the father was unquestionably the psychological parent to children. He fought for and obtained orders for parenting time and certain decision-making responsibilities. Because he not only sought to remain in the children's lives but was granted such opportunity by the court, he is also bound by the parental duty to financially support those children. In re A.C.H., 2019 COA 43, 440 P.3d 1266.
A maternal grandmother who received parental responsibilities through a dependency and neglect proceeding is not a "psychological parent" under In re A.C.H. annotated above and therefore not a parent under this section and therefore cannot be ordered to pay child support. The maternal grandmother voluntarily assumed parental responsibilities for the child through a dependency and neglect proceeding and never sought permanent custody through an adoption proceeding. Her willingness to assume responsibilities while parents were unfit did not transform her into a permanent custodian or psychological parent. Therefore, the court did not err in not imposing a child support obligation on her after father became fit. In re Bergeson-Flanders, 2022 COA 18, 509 P.3d 1083.
Only the parents' incomes and not the guardians' are to be included in the determination of child support, as supported by § 15-14-209 (2), which states, "A guardian need not use the guardian's personal funds for the ward's expenses". Sidman v. Sidman, 240 P.3d 360 (Colo. App. 2009).
Section contemplates a parent being responsible for the support of his children, not his former spouse, however reprehensible his behavior. Therefore it was error to award the reimbursement of mother's transportation costs as child care. In re Kluver, 771 P.2d 34 (Colo. App. 1989).
Child must reside and be supported by spouse granted custody and support. Wife who has been granted child custody is only entitled to support payments when the children were actually with her and supported by her. Brown v. Brown, 183 Colo. 356, 516 P.2d 1129 (1973).
This section contemplates that, when in a divorce case, custody of a minor child is awarded to the wife, an order for its support may be made on the husband, and in proceeding to such order the court looks only to the future. Gourley v. Gourley, 101 Colo. 430, 73 P.2d 1375 (1937).
It was not an abuse of discretion for trial court to award child support during the pendency of the dissolution proceeding. In re Atencio, 47 P.3d 718 (Colo. App. 2002).
Where plaintiff alleged that defendant was the father of the minor children of the parties, but had failed and refused to support them, and that they were in need of support which he has the means and ability to provide, if established by evidence, plaintiff would be entitled to appropriate relief. Hutchinson v. Hutchinson, 149 Colo. 38, 367 P.2d 594 (1961).
Person without funds or profitable employment not relieved of support obligation. Merely because a spouse desires to work on a long-range investment does not relieve him of his obligation to support his children, and the fact that a person is without funds and without profitable employment has been held not to preclude the allowance of reasonable alimony and support where nothing but a disinclination to work, regardless of the motive therefor, interferes with his ability to earn a reasonable living. Berge v. Berge, 33 Colo. App. 376, 522 P.2d 752 (1974), aff'd, 189 Colo. 103, 536 P.2d 1135 (1975).
Where the oldest of three children of the parties was living with father, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in declining to award plaintiff support money for all of the children, since such award would require defendant to pay twice for support of child in his custody. Cohan v. Cohan, 150 Colo. 249, 372 P.2d 149 (1962).
Custodial parent can be ordered to pay support to noncustodial parent under Uniform Dissolution of Marriage Act. In re Fest, 742 P.2d 962 (Colo. App. 1987).
In order for child support to be calculated according to shared physical custody, sufficient evidence must be submitted that each parent keeps the children overnight for more than 25% of the time and that both parents contribute to the expenses of the children in addition to the payment of child support. In re Redford, 776 P.2d 1149 (Colo. App. 1989).
There is no statutory requirement that any particular amount of expense be proven by the parent seeking a support adjustment for shared physical custody. In re Redford, 776 P.2d 1149 (Colo. App. 1989).
Application of shared custody formula that results in a support payment by the custodial parent to the noncustodial parent is not necessarily prohibited. In re Antuna, 8 P.3d 589 (Colo. App. 2000).
Where there was an absence of evidence from husband establishing that he contributed to the child's financial needs, there was no basis for application of the shared custody formula under worksheet B. In re Antuna, 8 P.3d 589 (Colo. App. 2000).
Where a mother removed her child from the state and deliberately concealed her whereabouts from the father, and by her affirmative acts voluntarily assumed responsibility for the child's support for a period of several years, during which time it appears that the child wanted for nothing necessary to health, comfort, and welfare, the mother was not in a position to claim reimbursement for such support. Griffith v. Griffith, 152 Colo. 292, 381 P.2d 455 (1963).
Where a father asserted that his right to direct and select the nature of the education of his son coexisted with the obligation to contribute to the costs of the education, it was held that it was for the divorced wife as custodian to make the decisions concerning the place and nature of the son's college education, subject only to the approval of the divorce court acting with due regard for the financial capabilities of the father. Van Orman v. Van Orman, 30 Colo. App. 177, 492 P.2d 81 (1971).
A divorced father did not have an absolute duty to pay for the college expenses of his minor child. Van Orman v. Van Orman, 30 Colo. App. 177, 492 P.2d 81 (1971).
When it had been properly demonstrated at trial that the welfare of the child would be served by further education at the college level, the father could properly be compelled to contribute to the costs of such education on a basis commensurate with the father's ability to pay until such time as the child attained majority or was otherwise emancipated. Van Orman v. Van Orman, 30 Colo. App. 177, 492 P.2d 81 (1971).
Travel expenses for a child, including the travel expenses of the guardians accompanying the child, shall be divided between the parents. Court did not apply the correct legal standard when it ordered the guardians to travel with juvenile at their own expense. Sidman v. Sidman, 240 P.3d 360 (Colo. App. 2009).
Award of retroactive child support is error. Since the court lacked proper jurisdiction to enter support orders until husband was personally served, its attempt to order retroactive child support was void. In re McKendry, 735 P.2d 908 (Colo. App. 1986).
Termination of support pursuant to decree. Absent a provision in the decree or a court order to the contrary, a father's duty to support pursuant to a decree which was paid to his ex-wife terminated with her death, although his common law and statutory duty of support continued. Application of Connolly, 761 P.2d 224 (Colo. App. 1988).
Phrase "each will contribute whatever may be necessary for the support of their children" creates a binding promise on part of father to contribute to children's financial support. In re Meisner, 807 P.2d 1205 (Colo. App. 1990).
"Absolute requirement" or "necessary requirement" is not the appropriate standard to apply in determining whether private school was an appropriate placement for a child. The court should consider whether private schooling meets the child's particular educational needs. In re Eaton, 894 P.2d 56 (Colo. App. 1995).
A motion to quash subpoenas issued to third persons allegedly contributing to support of children was properly granted where the voluntary donations of such parties had nothing to do with a defendant's duty to support children. Garrow v. Garrow, 152 Colo. 480, 382 P.2d 809 (1963).
Support for adult child. A dissolution action is a proper proceeding to enforce continued support of an adult child. Koltay v. Koltay, 667 P.2d 1374 (Colo. 1983).
III. AWARD OF SUPPORT.
A. Amount.
B. Discretion of Court.
C. Modification.
D. Termination upon Emancipation.
A. Amount.
Law reviews. For article, "Calculation of Potential Income in Child Support Matters", see 20 Colo. Law. 233 (1991). For article, "Postsecondary Education Costs: Forging Through a Legislative Labyrinth", see 24 Colo. Law. 43 (1995).
Needs of the children are of paramount importance in determining child support obligations. Wright v. Wright, 182 Colo. 425, 514 P.2d 73 (1973); In re Van Inwegen, 757 P.2d 1118 (Colo. App. 1988).
There is no mathematical formula for establishing a just and equitable property settlement or alimony or support. Carlson v. Carlson, 178 Colo. 283, 497 P.2d 1006 (1972).
The guidelines for calculating child support require a court to calculate a monthly amount of child support based on the parties' combined adjusted gross income, adjust the child support based upon the needs of the children for extraordinary medical expenses and work-related child care costs, and allocate each parent's share based on the physical custody arrangements. In re Aldrich, 945 P.2d 1370 (Colo. 1997).
Adoption subsidy. An adoption subsidy should not be considered a credit against the noncustodial parent's child support obligation. The underlying intent of the child support statute is best served by declining to offset a noncustodial parent's support obligation by the amount of an adoption subsidy or to consider the subsidy as a factor that may diminish the child's basic needs within the meaning of subsection (13)(b). In re Bolding-Roberts, 113 P.3d 1265 (Colo. App. 2005).
An award of alimony and child support should bear a reasonable relationship to the needs of a wife and children. Vines v. Vines, 137 Colo. 449, 326 P.2d 662 (1958).
Subsection (1)(a) authorizes the court to consider social security disability payments received on behalf of the children in calculating child support. In re Quintana, 30 P.3d 870 (Colo. App. 2001).
Social security disability benefits received by custodial parent for benefit of child on account of custodial parent's disability are not included in the custodial parent's gross income but are instead considered a financial resource of the child pursuant to subsections (2)(b)(I) and (11)(b). In re Anthony-Guillar, 207 P.3d 934 (Colo. App. 2009).
The extent to which the child's social security disability payment represents a "reduction in need" of the child is a question to be determined by the trial court based upon the totality of the circumstances. The court is not bound to deduct the entire amount of the child's social security disability payment from the basic support obligation. In re Anthony-Guillar, 207 P.3d 934 (Colo. App. 2009).
Social security survivor benefits should not be treated any differently than disability benefits. Thus, survivor benefits received by the wife in a representative capacity for son from previous marriage should not be included in wife's gross income for purposes of calculating husband's support obligation for daughter. In re Ross-Ooley, 251 P.3d 1221 (Colo. App. 2010).
Trial court did not err in excluding adoption subsidies and foster care payments from mother's gross income in child support considerations. These payments are income of the children on whose behalf the mother receives them and are not part of mother's income. In re Dunkle, 194 P.3d 462 (Colo. App. 2007).
Father is not entitled to an offset of his support obligation against the benefit amount he receives through his railroad retirement on behalf of his child since he retains the payments and he is the noncustodial parent. In re Zappanti, 80 P.3d 889 (Colo. App. 2003).
Subsection (1.5)(b)(I) does not require that expenses be absolutely necessary but only that they be reasonable. In re Eaton, 894 P.2d 56 (Colo. App. 1995); In re Elmer, 936 P.2d 617 (Colo. App. 1997).
Determination of conscionability of support provisions. To determine whether the child support provisions of a separation agreement which has been incorporated into a prior dissolution decree are fair, reasonable, and just, a trial court should consider and apply all the criteria provided by the general assembly for judicial evaluation of the provisions of property settlement agreements: the economic circumstances of the parties, § 14-10-112; the division of property, § 14-10-113(1); and the provisions for maintenance, § 14-10-114(1). In re Carney, 631 P.2d 1173 (Colo. 1981).
In determining whether the terms of the original child support decree have become unconscionable, the trial court should apply the criteria set forth in subsection (1). In re Hughes, 635 P.2d 933 (Colo. App. 1981); In re Gomez, 728 P.2d 747 (Colo. App. 1986).
In a divorce action, particularly with respect to the care, custody, and maintenance of minor children, the court, at the time of making an award for the minor children, was obligated to appraise conditions as they exist at the time of the presentation. Brown v. Brown, 131 Colo. 467, 283 P.2d 951 (1955); Watson v. Watson, 135 Colo. 296, 310 P.2d 554 (1957); Garrow v. Garrow, 152 Colo. 480, 382 P.2d 809 (1963); In re Serfoss, 642 P.2d 44 (Colo. App. 1981); In re McKendry, 735 P.2d 908 (Colo. App. 1986).
Parent's net income is primary consideration in determining support. With regard to a parent's ability to pay support for his child, net income after reasonable and justifiable business expenses should be the primary consideration. In re Crowley, 663 P.2d 267 (Colo. App. 1983).
The applicable rule of support ability is the father's ability to pay weighed against the reasonable needs of his children, because society does not require a father in poor or moderate circumstances to support children on a higher scale just because the family once so lived or because the mother may desire to so live after the divorce. Kane v. Kane, 154 Colo. 440, 391 P.2d 361 (1964).
In making its award of child support, a trial court must weigh the father's ability to pay against the reasonable needs of the children. Berge v. Berge, 33 Colo. App. 376, 522 P.2d 752 (1974), aff'd, 189 Colo. 103, 536 P.2d 1135 (1975).
Where the father's income, while substantial, is limited and subject to numerous demands, an order contemplating only the needs of the child and not bearing any relationship to the ability of the father to pay, and that could possibly become confiscatory of all of the father's available resources, is not valid. Van Orman v. Van Orman, 30 Colo. App. 177, 492 P.2d 81 (1971).
Finding as to earning capacity not confiscatory. Where the evidence supports the court's finding that the husband is capable of earning sums greatly in excess of his present net salary, although it appears that the court based its order on the present net income of the husband, the orders are not confiscatory. In re Anderson, 37 Colo. App. 55, 541 P.2d 1274 (1975).
Order that husband pay one-half of extraordinary medical and dental bills of the children, while unlimited as to amount or duration, was not confiscatory considering that the expenses were to be borne equally by each parent. In re Anderson, 37 Colo. App. 55, 541 P.2d 1274 (1975).
Factors considered in assessing propriety of child support provisions in separation agreement. In assessing the propriety of child support provisions in a separation agreement, the court must consider, in addition to unconscionability, other factors, such as the living standards the child would have enjoyed had the parties not dissolved the marriage and the physical and emotional well-being of the child. In re Brown, 626 P.2d 755 (Colo. App. 1981).
Child support obligations cannot be altered by agreement of the parents. Wright v. Wright, 182 Colo. 425, 514 P.2d 73 (1973).
Child support cannot be based on financial resources of nonparent with whom child living. The factors to be considered in making a support award do not include the financial resources of a nonparent with whom the child is living. In re Conradson, 43 Colo. App. 432, 604 P.2d 701 (1979).
Estimates of children's expenses to be considered. A trial court should not determine the amount of child support to be paid by a husband based solely on some amount that it feels is commensurate with his income but should make the determination on evidence that includes estimates of the actual needs and expenses of the children involved. In re Berry, 660 P.2d 512 (Colo. App. 1983).
A court must consider and make findings concerning a reasonable pro rata portion of necessary general family expenses as "necessary for support of the child." In re Klein, 671 P.2d 1345 (Colo. App. 1983).
Standard of living employed in determination of child support. Where the evidence shows that the standard of living at the time of separation in all probability would have continued but for the dissolution, that is the standard of living the court must employ in its determination of child support. In re Klien, 671 P.2d 1345 (Colo. App. 1983).
This section does not require specific findings of fact concerning children's assets, but only that, before determining the amount of support to be paid by a parent, the court consider, among other things the financial resources of the child. In re Wolfert, 42 Colo. App. 433, 598 P.2d 524 (1979).
Obligation of support not affected by gifts or transfers. The intent of the uniform act, § 11-50-101 et seq., is to allow custodians to disburse funds whether or not the children are adequately supported. Gifts under that act do nothing to relieve a parent of the separate duty to support the children, nor does that act authorize the custodian to disburse the funds as a means of fulfilling the parent's obligation of support. In re Wolfert, 42 Colo. App. 433, 598 P.2d 524 (1979).
Where a parent or parents voluntarily make gifts to children during the parents' marriage and the gifts are not in fulfillment of a court order to pay support, and where the parents are, at the time of dissolution of the marriage, able to meet their support obligations, the court may order that such gifts not be used to reduce the legal obligation of support. This rule assumes that the court has properly considered the financial resources of the children as required by subsection (1), before ordering the amount of support to be paid by the parents. In re Wolfert, 42 Colo. App. 433, 598 P.2d 524 (1979).
Court may order life insurance naming children as beneficiaries be maintained by parent obligated to pay child support, just as its provisions for child support now extend beyond the death of the parent, unless otherwise provided. In re Icke, 35 Colo. App. 60, 530 P.2d 1001 (1974), aff'd, 189 Colo. 319, 540 P.2d 1076 (1975).
Award of additional $6,000 for "recreational opportunities" for children was fairly embraced within the factors to be considered by court in dividing marital property and did not create a separate "recreational fund" for the needs of the children in the nature of child support. In re Jackson, 698 P.2d 1347 (Colo. 1985).
The judgment in the divorce action did not determine the limits of the husband's obligation to support the children, and the children were not parties to that action, and their rights were not concluded thereby. Scheer v. District Court, 147 Colo. 265, 363 P.2d 1059 (1961).
Where there was no verification of the father's income as required by this section, the trial court was directed to take additional evidence to determine the income and to modify the support order. In re Velasquez, 773 P.2d 635 (Colo. App. 1989).
Trial court may draw inference that parent was concealing income, where parent refused to make a willing disclosure of financial status. In re Sgarlatti, 801 P.2d 18 (Colo. App. 1990).
Although the general assembly specifically provided for the use of extrapolation for combined gross income amounts falling between amounts shown in the guideline schedule, it did not provide for the use of extrapolation when combined gross incomes fall above or below the guideline schedule. In re Van Inwegen, 757 P.2d 1118 (Colo. App. 1988).
Section guidelines applicable in determination of amount of modified award despite fact that guidelines were enacted after the original support order. In re Anderson, 761 P.2d 293 (Colo. App. 1988).
Application of new child support guidelines resulting in more than a ten percent change in support due creates a rebuttable presumption that existing support award must be modified. In re Pugliese, 761 P.2d 277 (Colo. App. 1988).
The general assembly intended income imputation to be an important exception to the normal rule of computation based on actual gross income of the parent. This exception applies when the parent shirks his or her child support obligation by unreasonably foregoing higher paying employment that he or she could obtain. The legislature meant this exception to prevent detriment to children by deterring parents from making employment choices that do not account for their children's welfare. Nevertheless, the general assembly intended courts to approach income imputation with caution. People v. Martinez, 70 P.3d 474 (Colo. 2003).
Imputing to voluntarily unemployed wife an income equal to income that of a person employed at the minimum wage even though evidence indicated that wife had been offered a higher paying job was not abuse of court's discretion given evidence of wife's ill health and problems in obtaining day care. In re Beyer, 789 P.2d 468 (Colo. App. 1989).
Imputing of full-time income to mother working part-time was error where mother did not voluntarily choose part-time employment but was required to stay home during the day to care for one of her children who had Downs syndrome. In re Pote, 847 P.2d 246 (Colo. App. 1993).
Court abused its discretion in finding that mother's underemployment was voluntary where mother worked only 32 hours per week so that she would have time to take the parties' child, who had cerebral palsy, to physical therapy. In re Foss, 30 P.3d 850 (Colo. App. 2000).
Interest was properly included in calculation of imputed income. In re Jaeger, 883 P.2d 577 (Colo. App. 1994).
"Overtime", in determination of parent's gross income (prior to 1996 amendment), does not include income from "extra" jobs. In re Marson, 929 P.2d 51 (Colo. App. 1996).
It was proper for the trial court to find that the overtime worked by father was required and to include such income within the father's gross income for the following reasons: (1) In his position as equity owner, director, and officer of the family-owned corporation, he was his own supervisor; (2) the evidence established, and the court found, that his position as vice-president and job-site foreman required that he work more than other employees as evidenced by his own testimony that his job as foreman could not always be done in a 40-hour week; and (3) the evidence established that the reason the father was required to work twenty to 25 hours of overtime per week was to assure that the jobs for which he was responsible would be completed in a timely fashion in order to avoid penalties that would work a direct financial disadvantage to the father. In re Rice & Foutch, 987 P.2d 947 (Colo. App. 1999).
Trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding mother's overtime pay from the determination of her gross income. Mother chose to work extra hours voluntarily, and the overtime was not required as a condition of her employment. In re Dunkle, 194 P.3d 462 (Colo. App. 2007).
Section imposes no burden on one parent to prove that an available job exists for the other parent. Rather, the determination of income hinges on the ability of the parent to perform work. In re Mackey, 940 P.2d 1112 (Colo. App. 1997).
Court is merely required by subsection (7)(b)(I) to determine potential income and statute imposes no burden on one parent to prove that an available job exists for the other parent or that a particular job is available. In re Bregar, 952 P.2d 783 (Colo. App. 1997).
In order to impute income based upon a parent's voluntary underemployment, the trial court must examine all relevant factors bearing on whether the parent is shirking his or her child support obligation by unreasonably foregoing higher paying employment that he or she could obtain, and, if the parent is, the trial court must determine what he or she can reasonably earn and contribute to the child's support. If the trial court does not find that the parent is shirking his or her child support obligation by unreasonably foregoing higher paying employment, the court should calculate the amount of child support from actual gross income only. People v. Martinez, 70 P.3d 474 (Colo. 2003).
In determining if a parent is voluntarily underemployed, the factors the court may consider may include: The firing and post-firing conduct of the parent; the amount of time the parent spent looking for a job of equal caliber before accepting a lower paying job; whether the parent refused an offer of employment at a higher salary; whether the parent sought a job in the field in which he or she has experience and training; the availability of jobs for a person with the parent's level of education, training, and skills; the prevailing wage rates in the region; the parent's prior employment experience and history; and the parent's history of child support payment. People v. Martinez, 70 P.3d 474 (Colo. 2003).
The court must make findings sufficient to support a determination of underemployment. Imputing support without factual findings supporting a determination of underemployment is in error. In re Martin, 42 P.3d 75 (Colo. App. 2002); In re Garrett, 2018 COA 154, 444 P.3d 812.
Father not underemployed where mother presented no evidence that employment at income previously earned by father was available to him, no evidence of alternative employment at a higher level of remuneration than he presently earned, and no evidence that support to the children had been unreasonably reduced. In re Campbell, 905 P.2d 19 (Colo. App. 1995).
Trial court properly found father was voluntarily underemployed where father, a licensed attorney, had opted for inactive status and worked seasonally for an apple orchard at $10 per hour. In re Elmer, 936 P.2d 617 (Colo. App. 1997).
Trial court properly declined to find that father was voluntarily unemployed or underemployed where he voluntarily refused to file a claim for damages resulting from a work-related accident. In re England, 997 P.2d 1288 (Colo. App. 1999).
Loss of employment due to addiction and re-employment at a lower wage does not constitute voluntary underemployment; however, a person who has been involuntarily terminated from a position for drug use may subsequently become voluntarily unemployed or underemployed based on actions taken after the termination. In re Atencio, 47 P.3d 718 (Colo. App. 2002).
The trial court erroneously computed child support by relying solely upon the husband's income and disregarding the wife's statutory obligation to contribute to the child's support. If both parents have actual income, or a reasonable ability to earn income, it is erroneous as a matter of law to allocate the support obligation to one parent. In re Sewell, 817 P.2d 594 (Colo. App. 1991).
In computing child support, the trial court erred in failing to consider either the wife's income as represented by the monthly maintenance award or her ability to earn income from the marital property distributed to her under the court's decree. In re Sewell, 817 P.2d 594 (Colo. App. 1991).
For purposes of child support, father's income, as derived from the exercise of stock options, is limited to the difference between his purchase price of the optioned stock and the price at which he then sold it. In re Campbell, 905 P.2d 19 (Colo. App. 1995).
Court should initially include the amount of a capital gain as a component of gross income for the year in which the gain was received. Thereafter, the court has authority to deviate from the child support guidelines if their application would be inequitable, unjust, or inappropriate. In re Zisch, 967 P.2d 199 (Colo. App. 1998).
When considering capital gains from the sale of property awarded in a property division, the court shall include in gross income only those capital gains realized from post-property division appreciation in the property. In re Upson, 991 P.2d 341 (Colo. App. 1999).
Court erred in not deducting ordinary and necessary expenses from capital gains when self-employed. For purposes of determining a person's gross income, when the person was self-employed as a builder of custom homes, ordinary and necessary expenses incurred to sell property should have been deducted from the person's gross income. In re Glenn, 60 P.3d 775 (Colo. App. 2002).
Husband's taxable distributions from a subchapter S corporation owned wholly by him and two partners, one of whom had left, while not properly considered as extra income, should have been included as gross income, less ordinary and necessary business expenses. In re Upson, 991 P.2d 341 (Colo. App. 1999).
In determining monthly child support obligation for the period following the year in which a capital gain is received, the court should impute as income to the party a rate of return that the net capital gain, after taxes, can reasonably be expected to generate. In re Zisch, 967 P.2d 199 (Colo. App. 1998).
Unrealized capital gains in an investment account do not constitute income for purposes of calculating child support. In re Schaefer, 2022 COA 112, 522 P.3d 732.
Subsection (7)(a) does not provide for deduction of federal and state income taxes in computing gross income, including from lottery winnings, for purposes of calculating child support. In re Bohn, 8 P.3d 539 (Colo. App. 2000).
The amount received as gross income from lottery winnings is used to calculate child support for the year in which the income is received. Thereafter, if a parent invests a portion of the funds which were received as income in one year, any interest earned in the subsequent years is properly included as gross income for purposes of calculating child support in those years. In re Bohn, 8 P.3d 539 (Colo. App. 2000).
Income from an irrevocable trust of which wife was beneficiary should not be omitted from wife's gross income for purposes of calculating child support, even though the trial court correctly declined to treat the income as property subject to division. In re Pooley, 996 P.2d 230 (Colo. App. 1998).
If a parent is voluntarily unemployed or underemployed, child support must be based on the parent's potential income. While a parent is entitled to remain underemployed, the other parent's child support obligation may not be increased as a result. In re Mackey, 940 P.2d 1112 (Colo. App. 1997).
The magistrate did not err in imputing to the father the annual income he had earned prior to his resignation. The evidence amply supports the magistrate's determination that the father quit his job because he won the lottery, that he was physically capable of working but was voluntarily unemployed, and that his decision to resign from his job was not a good faith career choice. In re McCord, 910 P.2d 85 (Colo. App. 1995).
Trial court did not err in imputing income to husband absent findings regarding involuntary job loss, ability to pay, and needs of the child. Although the child's needs may be considered in determining the amount of child support that must be paid at a given level of income, nothing in subsection (7) suggests that the child's needs are relevant to the determination of a parent's income. In re Yates, 148 P.3d 304 (Colo. App. 2006).
Mother's decision to accept travel agency job, rather than to collect unemployment benefits until she found a higher paying job, was a good faith career choice and she therefore was not voluntarily underemployed. In re McCord, 910 P.2d 85 (Colo. App. 1995).
Trial court has the prerogative to determine that husband's decision to leave the practice of law and pursue cattle ranching does not fit the exceptions set forth in subsection (7)(b)(III)(B), where husband argued the change was a good faith career choice, was not intended to reduce the support available to his children, and did not unreasonably reduce support. In re Bregar, 952 P.2d 783 (Colo. App. 1997).
Person who is involuntarily terminated from his position due to his own misconduct is not voluntarily unemployed or underemployed. Whether a person lost a job because of willful or knowing misconduct is not determinative of whether the person is voluntarily unemployed or underemployed. What is determinative is the person's subsequent course of action and decision making. A person who has been involuntarily terminated from a position may thereafter become voluntarily unemployed or underemployed by not attempting in good faith to obtain new employment at a comparable salary or by refusing to accept suitable employment offers. People ex rel. J.R.T., 55 P.3d 217 (Colo. App. 2002), aff'd sub nom. People v. Martinez, 70 P.3d 474 (Colo. 2003).
"Support available to a child" in subsection (7)(b)(III)(B) is not synonymous with "basic child support obligation" elsewhere in this section. "Basic child support obligation", as defined in subsection (10), typically involves consideration of both parties' respective incomes. "Support available to a child" in subsection (7)(b)(III)(B), however, focuses on the career decision and any associated income change of the putatively underemployed parent that affects his or her ability to provide child support. People ex rel. Cerda v. Walker, 32 P.3d 628 (Colo. App. 2001).
Thus, if the mother has improved her ability to provide child support, it does not necessarily mean that the father's voluntary underemployment did not unreasonably reduce his ability to provide child support. Because both parents have a duty to support a child to the best of their abilities, an increase in one parent's ability to provide child support cannot serve as justification for the other parent's unreasonable reduction in his or her ability to provide child support. People ex rel. Cerda v. Walker, 32 P.3d 628 (Colo. App. 2001).
In computing parental income for purposes of establishing child support payments, child support for other dependents which a parent is legally obligated to pay, shall be deducted, and such deduction is not limited to amounts actually paid pursuant to such obligation. In re Eze, 856 P.2d 75 (Colo. App. 1993).
The intent of this section is that a parent who is legally responsible for the support of other children be given a deduction, within statutory guidelines, for child support actually paid, regardless whether an order for that support had been entered. Thus, when a prior support order does not reflect the parent's full legal responsibility for support, the parent is entitled to a deduction under paragraph (d.5) of subsection (7), instead of under paragraph (d), in determining the parent's gross income. In re K.M.T., 33 P.3d 1276 (Colo. App. 2001).
Adequate proof of child support obligations actually paid for other dependents is required when computing parental income for the purpose of establishing child support for present dependents. In re Dickson, 983 P.2d 44 (Colo. App. 1998).
"Maintenance actually paid by a parent", as used in subsection (10)(a)(II), includes payments made by a parent to a former spouse. It is not limited to payments made to the mother of the child in the paternity proceedings before the court; it includes all maintenance payments made by a parent. In Interest of A.R.W., 903 P.2d 10 (Colo. App. 1994).
The court must consider the father's and the child's financial resources in addition to considering the mother's resources in deciding the appropriate amount of the parents' contributions to the child's college expenses. In re Eaton, 894 P.2d 56 (Colo. App. 1995) (decided under law in effect prior to 1993 amendment).
Court did not err in including $350 rent in father's gross income without excluding allowable business deductions since record revealed nothing to warrant reversal of the trial court's implicit determination that any claimed expenses were not necessary or required to produce the rental income in question. In re Cropper, 895 P.2d 1158 (Colo. App. 1995).
Trial court should have considered mother's detailed evidence of the children's living expenses and the fact that father provided and fully paid for a residence for the children in determining the child support obligation, given the difficulty in applying Colorado child support guidelines to the needs of children in Russia. People ex rel. A.K., 72 P.3d 402 (Colo. App. 2003).
Once the requisites for shared physical custody have been established, subsection (10)(c) requires that the child support obligation be adjusted by the mathematical formula contained in subsection (14)(b). In re Redford, 776 P.2d 1149 (Colo. App. 1989).
If trial court deviates from the guidelines, it is required to make findings that application of the guidelines would be inequitable and specifying the reasons for the deviation. Thus, when court deviated from guidelines, it was required to find either that one of the relevant factors in subsection (1) applied or that the husband did not make contributions to the child's expenses beyond what he was obligated to pay in child support. In re Marshall, 781 P.2d 177 (Colo. App. 1989).
Modification of award required where trial court deviates from guidelines but fails to make findings required by subsection (3)(a). In re Sgarlatti, 801 P.2d 18 (Colo. App. 1990).
Trial court must make provision for expense of transportation of child between homes of parents, which expense is to be divided between parents in proportion to their adjusted gross income. In re Marshall, 781 P.2d 177 (Colo. App. 1989); In re Sgarlatti, 801 P.2d 18 (Colo. App. 1990).
Trial court did not err in including transportation expenses in the child support calculation before those expenses were actually known since there was no dispute as to the parents' income and the magistrate was free to adopt the percentage share of the father's income as shown in the father's computation. In re Andersen, 895 P.2d 1161 (Colo. App. 1995).
Husband's personal injury settlement payments are a financial resource that constitutes "gross income" under the child support guidelines. In re Fain, 794 P.2d 1086 (Colo. App. 1990).
Proper for court to base child support calculation on father's monthly income from his railroad annuity despite that income deriving from a previously divided asset since the property division does not change the status of those monthly payments as an income source to be considered in determining the husband's child support obligation. In re Zappanti, 80 P.3d 889 (Colo. App. 2003).
For investments, income is limited to the gain on the original investment. However, a party's characterization of payments as a return on investment is not binding on the court. In re Laughlin, 932 P.2d 858 (Colo. App. 1997).
Trial court did not err in using a two-year average of father's investment income when calculating father's overall income for the purposes of calculating child support. In re Rice and Foutch, 987 P.2d 947 (Colo. App. 1999).
No error in the trial court's conclusion that father's "actual gross income" included interest or dividends which had accrued to his IRA but which he had not withdrawn. The use of the word "actual" in subsection (7)(a) does not limit gross income to that "actually received". In re Tessmer, 903 P.2d 1194 (Colo. App. 1995).
Trial court correctly excluded father's voluntary enhanced retirement program (VERP) benefit from calculation of his gross income. In determining whether the VERP benefit constitutes income for child support purposes, the court must answer the following questions: (1) Is the VERP benefit severance pay? (2) Is the VERP benefit an employer contribution to pension and retirement benefits? (3) Should an undistributed employer contribution be treated as income? (4) Does father's option to elect a lump sum distribution or monthly annuity payments of his retirement account, including the VERP benefit, mean that the VERP benefit should be credited as income? In re Mugge, 66 P.3d 207 (Colo. App. 2003).
The requirements that father voluntarily retire rather than be terminated and that he provide a general release of the employer distinguish the VERP benefit from a typical severance pay program, and thus the VERP benefit was not severance pay includable within the statutory definition of gross income. In re Mugge, 66 P.3d 207 (Colo. App. 2003).
The employer denominated the VERP benefit as a retirement benefit, credited the benefit to the father's retirement account in its pension plan, and calculated the amount using age and years of service, therefore the VERP benefit was an employer-contributed pension or retirement benefit. In re Mugge, 66 P.3d 207 (Colo. App. 2003).
Because the employer determined the amounts of pension plan contributions and the employees did not have the option of directly receiving the amounts as wages, prior to any distribution, the employer's VERP contribution to father's account in its pension plan did not constitute gross income for consideration under the child support guidelines. In re Mugge, 66 P.3d 207 (Colo. App. 2003).
VERP benefit should not be treated as gross income for child support purposes merely because father could have elected a lump sum distribution or monthly annuity payments instead of rolling the benefit over into another qualified pension plan. In re Mugge, 66 P.3d 207 (Colo. App. 2003).
Employer contributions to father's insurance plans not income for child support purposes. Similar to employer retirement plan contributions, father did not have the option to take the contributions as wages and use them for general living expenses, so such contributions are not properly considered income for purposes of the child support calculation. In re Davis, 252 P.3d 530 (Colo. App. 2011).
Deferred compensation in father's nonqualified retirement plan is not income for child support purposes under the Uniform Parentage Act. Applying the definition of income in this section, the court determined that it was not income because father did not have the ability to use it to pay his expenses, including child support. Father was not vested in the plan, there was no account in his name, the plan would pay only upon retirement if certain conditions were met, and father would forfeit the plan if he was fired, quit, or retired before age sixty-five, and once retired, it would pay out over 10 years. In re N.J.C., 2019 COA 153M, 467 P.3d 1209.
Extraordinary medical expenses were required to be divided between the parties in direct proportion to their adjusted gross income and added to the basic child support, even where the child's condition existed and was known at the time of the original agreement where the parties agreed to each pay one-half of these expenses. In re Nielsen, 794 P.2d 1097 (Colo. App. 1990).
Meaning of "adjusted gross income". Definition of "adjusted gross income" in subsection (10)(a) does not provide for the deduction of federal and state income taxes or FICA taxes in computation for child support purposes. In re Baroni, 781 P.2d 191 (Colo. App. 1989).
The fact that certain items may be deductible on a party's federal income tax return does not require exclusion from gross income under the child support guideline. In re Eaton, 894 P.2d 56 (Colo. App. 1995).
Trial court did not err in determining that "gross income" included the foreign service premium, the commodities and services allowance, and the expatriate tax equalization payment made to compensate person for the cost of living in a foreign locale. In re Stress, 939 P.2d 500 (Colo. App. 1997).
Meaning of "extraordinary medical expenses". Extraordinary medical expenses, as defined in subsection (12)(b), must be "uninsured". Where psychological counseling services were insured expenses under the father's medical insurance plan, trial court erred in requiring him to pay for child's counseling by a psychologist not participating in the plan absent a finding that such counseling was not adequately or reasonably covered by the plan. In re Ahrens, 847 P.2d 257 (Colo. App. 1993).
A parent's obligation for extraordinary medical expenses is an integral part of the child support obligation and, as such, is nondischargeable in bankruptcy. Parent who provided letter to court asserting the obligation had been discharged was ordered to pay for his share of the extraordinary medical expenses on behalf of the children. In re Campbell, 140 P.3d 320 (Colo. App. 2006).
Basic allowance for quarters (BAQ) constitutes an in-kind payment that is income for child support purposes. In re Long, 921 P.2d 67 (Colo. App. 1996).
Military housing and food allowances are part of gross income under the plain language of subsection (5)(a)(I)(X). In re Parental Responsibilities of L.K.Y., 2013 COA 108, 410 P.3d 492.
Military housing and food allowances that are not paid to children or on behalf of the children but rather are paid to the parent as part of parent's salary should not be deducted under subsection (11)(b) as financial resources of the children despite the fact that the parent is the recipient of temporary child support. In re Parental Responsibilities of L.K.Y., 2013 COA 108, 410 P.3d 492.
Increased cost for the addition of teenage son to automobile insurance is not an extraordinary expense under subsection (13). In re Long, 921 P.2d 67 (Colo. App. 1996).
Court does not have authority to impute a gross income where actual income is tax exempt. Rather the amount received each month shall be deemed to be a gross income. In re Fain, 794 P.2d 1986 (Colo. App. 1990).
"Gross" income for purposes of calculating child support can include the amount of income an asset could reasonably be expected to generate even if that asset has been consumed prior to the support determination. In re Laughlin, 932 P.2d 858 (Colo. App. 1997).
The burden is upon the parent contesting the support order to prove that a deviation from the presumptive award is both reasonable and necessary. In re Baroni, 781 P.2d 191 (Colo. App. 1989).
No automatic adjustment of gross income for non-ordered support. Non-ordered child support payments to others are not to be determined by a mechanical application of the child support schedule. Rather the impact of payment of non-ordered obligations must be evaluated as provided in subsection (3)(a). People in Interest of C.D., 767 P.2d 809 (Colo. App. 1989).
Party alleging that payment of non-ordered support obligation requires deviation from presumptive award determined under statutory guidelines has burden to prove the claim. Deviation from guidelines must be shown reasonable and necessary considering certain enumerated factors. People in Interest of C.D., 767 P.2d 809 (Colo. App. 1989).
An agreement of the parties regarding child support, custody, and visitation does not bind the court, and the court must review child support guidelines to determine the adequacy of the child support agreement of the parties. In re Micaletti, 796 P.2d 54 (Colo. App. 1990).
Trial court's apportionment of costs for child's guardian ad litem upheld where court apportioned costs between mother and father on the basis of the underemployed mother's potential income. Weber v. Wallace, 789 P.2d 427 (Colo. App. 1989).
Specific written or oral findings must be made by the court to support deviation from the child support amounts specified by the statutory schedule, and this applies to approving a stipulation of the parties. In re Miller, 790 P.2d 890 (Colo. App. 1990); In Interest of D.R.V., 885 P.2d 351 (Colo. App. 1994).
Where the parties' gross income exceeded the uppermost level of income scheduled in the guidelines and the minimum child support amount is presumed to be set forth in the highest level in the guidelines, this presumption may be rebutted, and the court must exercise discretion considering the financial resources of both parents and the children, the physical and emotional condition of the children and their educational needs, the needs of the noncustodial parent, and the standard of living that the children would have enjoyed had the parents' marriage not been dissolved. In re Schwaab & (Colo. App. 1999), aff'd in part, rev'd in part on other grounds, 25 P.3d 28 (Colo. 2001).
Where parties' gross income exceeded the uppermost level of income in the guidelines, trial court was required to calculate the minimum presumptive amount of support and, in addition, translate the children's higher standard of living into specific monetary requirements. In re Bookout, 833 P.2d 800 (Colo. App. 1990).
There is a rebuttable presumption that the basic child support obligation at the upper level of the guidelines is the minimum presumptive amount of support. Where father won five million dollars in the Colorado state lottery and the parties' adjusted gross incomes thereafter exceeded the uppermost levels of the guidelines, the court remanded the case for a redetermination of child support. In re Foss, 30 P.3d 850 (Colo. App. 2000).
Where parties' income exceeded the highest combined gross income level set out in the guidelines, the gross disparity in their incomes may explain the initial basis for deviation by the court, but additional findings concerning the needs of the children must be entered to establish the amount of deviation ordered. In re Upson, 991 P.2d 341 (Colo. App. 1999).
Where parties' income exceeded the highest combined gross income level set forth in the guidelines, the amount set for child support at the highest combined gross income level reflects the minimum, not maximum, presumptive amount. In such circumstances, the court may use its discretion to determine a higher amount based on the factors set forth in subsection (2)(b). In re Boettcher, 2018 COA 34, 454 P.3d 321, aff'd, 2019 CO 81, 449 P.3d 382.
Because the children's needs are of paramount importance in determining the child support obligation, in calculating the appropriate amount of child support, the court should look at, among other things, the costs of food, shelter, clothing, medical care, education, and recreational costs at the level enjoyed before the dissolution. In re Schwaab & Rollins, 794 P.2d 1112 (Colo. App. 1990).
Viewing the statute as a whole, the means of meeting the "particular educational needs of a child" are not limited to providing private school only when a child has a learning disability or otherwise qualifies for a program of special education. In re Payan, 890 P.2d 264 (Colo. App. 1995).
Where the mother has sole custody of the three children, and there is a different visitation schedule for each child, in deciding whether the shared custody calculation for child support is applicable, the court must calculate the number of overnight stays for each child, divide each by three and total the results to determine the total amount of time the father spends with the children. If the cumulative number of overnights is less than 25% of the year, the shared custody calculation is inapplicable. In re Quam, 813 P.2d 833 (Colo. App. 1991).
Court erred in beginning the child support calculation for children with different parenting time schedules who are in the mother's primary care by using a separate worksheet for each child. This error effectively treated each child as an only child under the guidelines and resulted in an inflated child support amount. The court did not enter sufficient findings to support a deviation from the presumed amount under the guidelines. In re Wells, 252 P.3d 1212 (Colo. App. 2011).
Each parent in a dissolution proceeding has the obligation to support their children to the best of their abilities, and the court may determine that one parent's failure to find or keep a job is a voluntary refusal to carry out a support obligation. In re Nordahl, 834 P.2d 838 (Colo. App. 1992).
Costs of high school extracurricular activities such as cheerleading, driver's education, sports, and debate do not qualify as higher educational expenses under subsection (13). In re Ansay, 839 P.2d 527 (Colo. App. 1992).
Inclusion of ice skating fees in the support calculation as a reasonable and necessary expense was warranted. In re Laughlin, 932 P.2d 858 (Colo. App. 1997).
Trial court erred in ordering parent to pay percentage of children's estimated educational expenses without specifying sum to be paid. In re Pollock, 881 P.2d 470 (Colo. App. 1994).
Because of a lack of certainty of future bonuses, the court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to estimate the amount of any possible future bonuses for present support purposes. In re Finer, 920 P.2d 325 (Colo. App. 1996).
The trial court did not err in not considering income from the parties' mentally retarded adult son in calculating child support obligation. The trial court is not bound to deduct automatically the amount of a child's income from the basic child support obligation when that income does not reduce the need for parental support. In re Folwell, 910 P.2d 91 (Colo. App. 1995).
Trial court did not abuse its discretion setting appropriate amount of child support when it included the child's pro rata share of the standard and ongoing living expenses in wife's monthly needs. In re Balanson, 996 P.2d 213 (Colo. App. 1999), aff'd, 25 P.3d 28 (Colo. 2001).
The first $250 of uninsured medical expenses per child per year is included in the shared basic child support obligation of parents with equal parenting time. The trial court properly rejected father's argument that wife should pay the first $250 in uninsured medical expenses per year per child. Each party must pay uninsured medical expenses incurred during their parenting time until the child's expenses for the year exceed $250, at which time a parent may seek reimbursement from the other for the proportional share of expenses incurred for the child. A court could deviate from the guidelines if one parent were likely to incur all of these expenses despite shared equal parenting time. In re Alvis, 2019 COA 97, 446 P.3d 963.
Court did not err in failing to include husband's GI bill tuition assistance and stipend for books and supplies in husband's income for purposes of calculating child support. The tuition payment was not available for husband's discretionary use or to reduce living expenses and would in no discernable way assist him in paying maintenance or child support. In re Tooker, 2019 COA 83, 444 P.3d 856.
For the purposes of calculating child support obligation, father's veteran's disability benefits fall within the broad definition of gross income, despite being nontaxable. In re M.E.R-L., 2020 COA 173, 490 P.3d 1010.
B. Discretion of Court.
Determination of child support is in the sound discretion of the trial court, and in the absence of an abuse of that discretion, not shown here, it will not be disturbed on review. Brigham v. Brigham, 141 Colo. 41, 346 P.2d 302 (1959); Lanz v. Lanz, 143 Colo. 73, 351 P.2d 845 (1960); Huber v. Huber, 143 Colo. 255, 353 P.2d 379 (1960); Carlson v. Carlson, 178 Colo. 283, 497 P.2d 1006 (1972); Ferguson v. Ferguson, Colo. App. , 507 P.2d 1110 (1973); Berge v. Berge, 33 Colo. App. 376, 522 P.2d 752 (1974), aff'd, 189 Colo. 103, 536 P.2d 1135 (1975); In re Krise, 660 P.2d 920 (Colo. App. 1983); In re Garcia, 695 P.2d 774 (Colo. App. 1984); In re Pierce, 720 P.2d 591 (Colo. App. 1985).
Alimony, support, and property settlement issues were formerly considered together to determine whether the court had abused its discretion, and in making the determination, the court would consider a variety of factors, including whether the property was acquired before or after marriage, the efforts and attitudes of the parties towards its accumulation, the respective ages and earning abilities of the parties, the conduct of the parties during the marriage, the duration of the marriage, their stations in life, their health and physical condition, the necessities of the parties, their financial condition, and other relevant circumstances. Carlson v. Carlson, 178 Colo. 283, 497 P.2d 1006 (1972).
Court may consider only relevant provisions of section. In awarding child support, a trial court is obligated to consider only the relevant provisions of this section. It commits reversible error by considering matters related to adoption. In re Ashlock, 629 P.2d 1108 (Colo. App. 1981).
In granting a divorce a court has no authority under the statute to decree that a part of the property of the husband shall be the sole property of his children. Menor v. Menor, 154 Colo. 475, 391 P.2d 473 (1964); Giambrocco v. Giambrocco, 161 Colo. 510, 423 P.2d 328 (1967).
The trial court was without authority to direct the husband to give to each of his children a share in a future estate which he may or may not acquire, because the obligation of the defendant is to provide reasonable support for his children according to their need, within the range of his ability, and a father of children is under no obligation to settle any property upon his children, or to deed them an interest in any asset; on the contrary he may by will or deed or other voluntary act disinherit a child if he sees fit to do so. Menor v. Menor, 154 Colo. 475, 391 P.2d 473 (1964); Giambrocco v. Giambrocco, 161 Colo. 510, 423 P.2d 328 (1967).
Former husband may not discover the amount of former wife's current husband's income but may discover the existence of former wife's income in the form of regular payments made to the former wife by her current husband. In re Nimmo, 891 P.2d 1002 (Colo. 1995).
Although trial court abused its discretion in modifying child support and cause was remanded upon appeal, the trial court order for child support remained in full force and effect pending entry of a new support order. In re Van Inwegen, 757 P.2d 1118 (Colo. App. 1988).
Court improperly ordered noncustodial mother to make support payments when the court made a finding that the mother did not have the financial ability to pay child support. In re Jarman, 752 P.2d 1068 (Colo. App. 1988).
There is a rebuttable presumption in any action to establish or modify child support that $1,000 is the minimum presumptive amount of child support for one child when the parental combined income exceeds the uppermost levels of the guideline; however, the trial court may exercise its discretion and choose to set a different amount after consideration of all relevant factors. In re Van Inwegen, 757 P.2d 1118 (Colo. App. 1988).
As a matter of law, the trial court may not initially refuse to apply child support guidelines. In re Thornton, 802 P.2d 1194 (Colo. App. 1990).
Cost of a nanny may be included in the calculation of child support. S.F.E. in Interest of T.I.E., 981 P.2d 642 (Colo. App. 1998).
Trial court erred in failing to divide uninsured medical expenses in proportion to parents' adjusted gross incomes without making necessary findings to support deviation from guidelines. In re Pollock, 881 P.2d 470 (Colo. App. 1994).
The trial court has discretion to order that the reasonable and necessary costs of a child's attendance at a private school be divided between the parents in proportion to their income. In re Elmer, 936 P.2d 617 (Colo. App. 1997) (decided prior to 1998 amendment to subsection (13)(a)(II)); In re West, 94 P.3d 1248 (Colo. App. 2004).
Attendance at a private school may be approved where it is necessary to meet the particular educational needs of the child. In re West, 94 P.3d 1248 (Colo. App. 2004).
In determining whether the children's parochial school tuition should be approved prospectively as a reasonable and necessary expense, the court should consider the parents' income, the standard of living that the children would have enjoyed if the parents' marriage had not been dissolved, and other factors as appropriate. In re West, 94 P.3d 1248 (Colo. App. 2004).
The trial court exceeded its authority in ordering the husband to fund an educational trust for the benefit of the parties' son. The courts have been granted no authority to order the creation of a trust for the benefit of minor children. In re Sewell, 817 P.2d 594 (Colo. App. 1991).
Trial court did not abuse its discretion in ordering the husband to pay all college expenses of the parties' son. Use of word "divided" in subsection (13) does not imply that both parents must contribute to each item of support; court is given discretion in subsection (1) to order "either or both" parents to pay support. In re Huff, 834 P.2d 244 (Colo. 1992) (decided under law in effect prior to enactment of subsection (1.5), dealing specifically with postsecondary education support).
A parent may also be required to contribute to the costs associated with a child's athletic activities in some cases. The child's particular needs and predissolution standard of living are among the factors to be considered by the court. In re West, 94 P.3d 1248 (Colo. App. 2004).
Psychiatric therapy for child was properly included as an extraordinary medical expense in an order under this section. In re Elmer, 936 P.2d 617 (Colo. App. 1997).
Trial court erred in allocating to father all of child's travel expenses for visitation, rather than proportionately allocating them between the parties, in absence of finding that such allocation was appropriate. In re Elmer, 936 P.2d 617 (Colo. App. 1997) (decided prior to 1998 amendment to subsection (13)(a)(II)).
Child support guideline does not provide for allocation between the parties of a parent's travel expenses. In re Elmer, 936 P.2d 617 (Colo. App. 1997) (decided prior to 1998 amendment to subsection (13)(a)(II)).
Adjustment of the child support amount to allow for transportation expenses is not limited to expenses incurred in long distance or interstate travel and does apply to automobile expenses incurred in transporting a child between the homes of the parents. In re L.F., 56 P.3d 1249 (Colo. App. 2002).
Award constituted an application of, and not a deviation from, the guidelines where the evidence and the findings were sufficient to support only a partial offset of the child's income for her pro rata share of reasonable and necessary monthly expenses as well as the maintenance of a fund for vacations, one-time purchases, and other occasional expenses. In re Cropper, 895 P.2d 1158 (Colo. App. 1995).
The burden is upon the parent contesting the support order to prove that a deviation from the presumptive award is both reasonable and necessary. In re Stress, 939 P.2d 500 (Colo. App. 1997).
Trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding that parent did not meet this burden. In re Stress, 939 P.2d 500 (Colo. App. 1997).
Trial court may deviate from the child support guidelines set forth in this section if the application of such guidelines would be inequitable, but if it does deviate, the court must make specific factual findings to support any deviation and failure to make such specific findings requires reversal. In re English, 757 P.2d 1130 (Colo. App. 1988); In re Hoffman, 878 P.2d 103 (Colo. App. 1994); In re Andersen, 895 P.2d 1161 (Colo. App. 1995).
The trial court has discretion to deviate from the guidelines where justified, provided it makes appropriate findings. In re Thornton, 802 P.2d 1194 (Colo. App. 1990); In re Payan, 890 P.2d 264 (Colo. App. 1995).
Deviation from child support guidelines is not justified by hardship resulting solely from application of the guidelines, absent other unusual or unique financial circumstances. In re Thornton, 802 P.2d 1194 (Colo. App. 1990).
Taking care of three-year-old triplets may be considered extraordinary circumstances justifying a deviation from the child support guidelines. In re Ikeler, 148 P.3d 347 (Colo. App. 2006), rev'd on other grounds, 161 P.3d 663 (Colo. 2007).
The court must make specific factual findings, however, justifying such a deviation. In re Ikeler, 148 P.3d 347 (Colo. App. 2006), rev'd on other grounds, 161 P.3d 663 (Colo. 2007).
The finding that it is important for the child to spend extended time with mother is, in itself, irrelevant to the issue of whether there should be a deviation in child support. In re Andersen, 895 P.2d 1161 (Colo. App. 1995).
A finding that one parent has a higher cost of living will not, in and of itself, ordinarily justify deviating from the guidelines. In re Andersen, 895 P.2d 1161 (Colo. App. 1995).
Case remanded for reconsideration of deviation from guidelines based on new spouse's income under the guidelines in In re Nimmo, 891 P.2d 1002 (Colo. 1995). In re Andersen, 895 P.2d 1161 (Colo. App. 1995).
Subsection (13) does not require an automatic adjustment to presumptive amount of child support but rather gives the trial court discretion to determine if an adjustment on account of a child's financial resources is appropriate. In re Thornton, 802 P.2d 1194 (Colo. App. 1990).
Application of child support guidelines establishes an amount of support that is presumed to be necessary to meet a child's needs; however, the extent to which an unemancipated child's income should be used to defray basic support obligations is within the trial court's discretion and depends upon the totality of circumstances in a particular case. In re Pollock, 881 P.2d 470 (Colo. App. 1994); In re Cropper, 895 P.2d 1158 (Colo. App. 1995).
Trial court did not abuse its discretion in declining to include child's receipt of public support payments as income available to the child under subsection (13)(b). Such payments represent gratuitous contributions from the government and do not reduce the parent's duty to provide support. They are intended to supplement other income, not to substitute for it. In re Thornton, 802 P.2d 1194 (Colo. App. 1990).
But it is proper under subsection (13)(b) for the court to consider mother's receipt of social security disability payments on behalf of the children as an adjustment to child support because those payments actually diminished the children's basic needs. In re Quintana, 30 P.3d 870 (Colo. App. 2001).
Court is authorized under this section to calculate child support based on a determination of a parent's potential income if parent is voluntarily unemployed or underemployed. In re Marshall, 781 P.2d 177 (Colo. App. 1989).
Trial court did not abuse its discretion in reducing the father's amount of child support, where it found that the father was not voluntarily underemployed but had terminated his full time employment to return to college to obtain an advanced degree. In re Ehlert, 868 P.2d 1168 (Colo. App. 1994).
If a court determines that a parent engaged in a good faith effort to achieve higher income, financial independence, or a career in the foreseeable future, to impute income to that parent would unfairly penalize the parent's effort at self-sufficiency and would be contrary to the public policy of encouraging the financial independence of dependent spouses. In re Seanor, 876 P.2d 44 (Colo. App. 1993).
Wife was engaged in a good faith effort to achieve a college education in order to further her income position where the evidence showed she had not worked for approximately nine years and she had completed two years of study towards a bachelors degree in a three-year period, during which time she had achieved a 3.72 grade point average. She had not attended school the previous year because of the death of her current spouse's mother and the hospitalization and continued medical complications and concerns of one of the children. In re Seanor, 876 P.2d 44 (Colo. App. 1993).
Trial court properly determined that father, a convicted sex offender, was voluntarily underemployed. Although the conviction likely limited father's employment opportunities, father did not attempt to find gainful employment despite having an M.B.A. degree, a real estate broker's license, and many years of work experience. People ex rel. A.R.D., 43 P.3d 632 (Colo. App. 2001).
Extent to which a child's income and assets should be applied to the payment of educational expenses or basic support is a question of fact to be determined by the trial court under the totality of circumstances in each case. In re Barrett, 797 P.2d 848 (Colo. App. 1990); In re Pollock, 881 P.2d 470 (Colo. App. 1994); In re Davis, 252 P.3d 530 (Colo. App. 2011).
The limit on postsecondary expenses is the amount calculated as if the child receiving such education had been the only child. Legislative history makes it clear that the 1994 amendment was intended to clarify rather than change the statute. In re Parker, 886 P.2d 312 (Colo. App. 1994).
Trial court did not abuse discretion in not deviating from the child support guidelines in order to avoid calculating child support based on IRA interest and dividends. In re Tessmer, 903 P.2d 1194 (Colo. App. 1995).
Absent a finding that a child has been diagnosed as having a mental disorder, a noncustodial parent cannot be required to share in the costs for therapy, whether such costs are included within the child support obligation or ordered to be paid separately. Absent the need for therapy because of a mental disorder, such cost must be borne by the party who makes the decision to provide the child with therapy. In re Finer, 920 P.2d 325 (Colo. App. 1996).
Court may not deviate downward from the presumptive child support award to ensure continued eligibility for public assistance benefits. Court erred in ordering mother to pay $245 per month in child support instead of the statutory amount of $399 per month in order to preserve the paternal grandparents' public daycare benefits. In re Hein, 253 P.3d 636 (Colo. App. 2010).
Applied in In re Rosser, 767 P.2d 807 (Colo. App. 1988).
C. Modification.
The provisions of subsections (2) and (7)(e) indicate that the general assembly did not intend to include health insurance premiums in the ordinary and necessary expenses covered by the basic child support obligation set forth in the guidelines; therefore, health insurance premiums paid by the father cannot be deducted from the total amount of the father's support obligation under the child support guidelines. In re English, 757 P.2d 1130 (Colo. App. 1988).
Where there was no evidence presented to establish the asserted extra cost of purchasing health insurance through the employment of the father's present spouse, there was no basis for the trial court to apply this section. In re Ansay, 839 P.2d 527 (Colo. App. 1992).
Application of the provisions of this section by the court for the modification of a prior child support order entered under the Uniform Parentage Act was error as a matter of law. Ashcraft v. Allis, 747 P.2d 1274 (Colo. App. 1987).
Pre-1991 postsecondary education support orders. Subsection (1.5)(c.5) allows the modification of pre-1991 postsecondary education support orders. In re Chalat, 112 P.3d 47 (Colo. 2005).
Substantial and continuing changed circumstances requirement and postsecondary education support orders. Absent application of the age of emancipation (§ 14-10-122 (4)) or medical insurance (§ 14-10-122 (1)) exceptions, the court's continuing jurisdiction to modify postsecondary education support orders is invoked only upon a showing of substantial and continuing changed circumstances by the party seeking modification. Nothing in the plain language of subsection (1.5)(c.5) or § 14-10-122 alters this clear, unambiguous requirement. In re Chalat, 112 P.3d 47 (Colo. 2005).
Effect of amendments to postsecondary education support scheme on the substantial and continuing changed circumstances requirement. The general assembly did not express an intent that its enactments of amendments to the postsecondary education support scheme alone automatically triggers a court's continuing jurisdiction to modify child support. The requirement for substantial and continuing changed circumstances must still be shown. In re Chalat, 112 P.3d 47 (Colo. 2005).
Order specifying amount where original order merely imposed duty. Where an original court order imposes a duty of support without specifying an amount under the criteria of this section, a subsequent court order specifying the amount need only conform with this section, rather than the modification requirements of § 14-10-122. In re Saiz, 634 P.2d 1020 (Colo. App. 1981).
If the financial ability of the husband and father improves, and the needs of the minor children increase, the jurisdiction of the court to make additional orders for the care and maintenance of the minor children may be invoked at any time in a proper proceeding. Brown v. Brown, 131 Colo. 467, 283 P.2d 951 (1955).
Trial court properly denied father's motion for modification, which was based solely on the 1993 statutory amendment to subsection (1.5)(b)(I) and which did not allege any substantial or continuing change in the parents' or the child's circumstances. In re Eaton, 894 P.2d 56 (Colo. App. 1995).
The provisions of any decree respecting child support may be modified only as to installments accruing subsequent to the filing of the motion for modification. Thus, if child support is modified, the modification should be effective as of the date of filing of the request therefor. In re Mackey, 940 P.2d 1112 (Colo. App. 1997).
Any order reducing the amount of support money operated only in future. Engleman v. Engleman, 145 Colo. 299, 358 P.2d 864 (1961).
The proposition that future support payments could not be reduced as long as a husband was in default, even though a proper showing could be made of inability to pay, was not the law in Colorado. Kane v. Kane, 154 Colo. 440, 391 P.2d 361 (1964).
Parent's medical expenses relevant to modification as well as to initial determination of support. Where change in presumed support under guideline based on gross income is less than ten percent, the parent seeking modification may nonetheless establish a substantial and continuing change in circumstances, justifying a deviation from the guideline, due to an increase in the parent's personal medical expenses. In re Ford, 851 P.2d 295 (Colo. App. 1993).
Deviation from the guidelines in calculating the basic child support obligation was error where court reasoned that father would not be able to support himself if required to pay the amount specified in the guidelines in light of his required contribution to the extraordinary medical expenses required by the child. In re Nielsen, 794 P.2d 1097 (Colo. App. 1990).
In circumstances where father is providing health insurance coverage for new spouse and father's other children living with him, in addition to child who is subject to order, the amount of the premium attributable to such child was "not available or cannot be verified" and trial court erred by refusing to allow the addition to the support obligation for a portion of that premium. In re Andersen, 895 P.2d 1161 (Colo. App. 1995).
Child's income may allow for a reduction of the support obligation if the court determines that it does "actually diminish basic needs" of child. In re Kluver, 771 P.2d 34 (Colo. App. 1989).
Mother's receipt of social security disability payments on behalf of the children actually diminished children's basic needs and court did not abuse its discretion by including the payments in the adjustment of the father's child support obligation. In re Quintana, 30 P.3d 870 (Colo. App. 2001).
Modification of award based on child's income for purposes of extraordinary educational expenditures or the satisfaction of basic needs is a question of fact to be determined under the totality of circumstances in each case. In re Barrett, 797 P.2d 848 (Colo. App. 1990).
A trial court is not bound to deduct automatically the entire amount of a child's income from his or her educational costs or basic support obligation but must look at the child's reduced need, if any, for parental support. In re Barrett, 797 P.2d 848 (Colo. App. 1990); In re Cropper, 895 P.2d 1158 (Colo. App. 1995).
Trial court abused its discretion in refusing to deviate from a strict application of the guideline calculations for basic child support where certain expenses were shown to be duplicative. In re Barrett, 797 P.2d 848 (Colo. App. 1990).
The court did not err in denying a modification for contributions earned by the children where evidence showed that the older children did not receive any Pell grants toward their college expenses, and testimony regarding the additional expenses towards which the children put their earnings was sufficient for the court to determine that a reduction in the amount of support was not appropriate. In re Ansay, 839 P.2d 527 (Colo. App. 1992).
A trial court does not err if it requires parents who are legally responsible for support to contribute to a dependent child's needs in lieu of requiring the child to expend all of his or her own resources. In re Pring, 742 P.2d 343 (Colo. App. 1987); In re Cropper, 895 P.2d 1158 (Colo. App. 1995).
Child support obligations to children of a second marriage may be deducted from a parent's income when the court is considering a modification of child support ordered for children of a first marriage. In re Hannum, 796 P.2d 57 (Colo. App. 1990).
The allocation of tax exemptions may be considered when the court is considering a modification of child support. In re Oberg, 900 P.2d 1267 (Colo. App. 1994).
In considering a modification of child support, the trial court is bound by the facts and circumstances of the parents and the children as they exist at the time of the hearing. If there is a pending foreclosure sale, the court should await the sale's completion and complete its record on the amount of debt incurred before it determines the modification question. In re Kimbrough, 784 P.2d 852 (Colo. App. 1989).
Court did not violate prohibition against adjustment that results in support payments lower than previously existing support order under subsection (7)(d.5)(II) when the decrease in the husband's child support obligation was due solely to the switch to a shared custody child support calculation and a decrease in the wife's work-related child care expenses. The decrease was entirely unrelated to the income adjustment given to the wife for her after-born child. In re Martin, 910 P.2d 83 (Colo. App. 1995).
Court had authority to recalculate child support using a different worksheet than previously used. Once court gained jurisdiction to modify child support pursuant to the wife's motion, the court is not prohibited from utilizing the proper formula for such support, particularly when that formula was part of the same statute under which the wife filed her motion to modify. In re Martin, 910 P.2d 83 (Colo. App. 1995).
Rebuttable presumption of a change of circumstances existed under the child support guidelines where the parties changed custody of one of the minor children from the mother to the father. In re Miller, 790 P.2d 890 (Colo. App. 1990).
For purpose of calculating and modifying child support, trial court properly included in gross income of husband an amount which a one-time post-decree inheritance could be expected to yield, although calculation of such amount was incorrect. In re Armstrong, 831 P.2d 501 (Colo. App. 1992).
Trial court did not impermissibly interfere with husband's constitutional property rights by including in gross income an amount which a one-time post-decree inheritance received by husband could be expected to yield. In re Armstrong, 831 P.2d 501 (Colo. App. 1992).
A monetary inheritance should be included in gross income for purposes of calculating child support in the year that the beneficiary withdraws from the inheritance and relies on it as a source of income. In re A.M.D., 78 P.3d 741 (Colo. 2003).
That remainder of a monetary inheritance that is not withdrawn and spent should be treated as an income-producing asset and the actual interest income it generates should be included in gross income. In re A.M.D., 78 P.3d 741 (Colo. 2003).
In determining how much of the principal of an inheritance to include in gross income, the trial court should apply a two-part test: (1) The court must decide whether an inheritance is monetary; and, if so, (2) whether the recipient used the principal as a source of income either to meet existing living expenses or to increase the recipient's standard of living. In re A.M.D., 78 P.3d 741 (Colo. 2003).
Court did not make findings required by subsection (14.5) to modify the allocation of federal income tax exemptions between the parties. Order allocating exemptions to the parties in alternating years, therefore, was reversed and the cause remanded to the trial court. In re Trout, 897 P.2d 838 (Colo. App. 1994).
Failure to submit financial information to the trial court and the failure of the trial court to review the modified agreement between the parties rendered the resulting trial court order subject to being set aside under C.R.C.P. 60 (b)(5). In re Smith, 928 P.2d 828 (Colo. App. 1996).
Court's award of income tax exemption to father in alternate years, as part of court's judgment on mother's motion to modify child support was supported by the record and complies with the requirements of this section. The court was not required to hold an additional hearing before amending the judgment when it had already heard testimony concerning the parties' incomes and had determined the percentage contribution of the parties to the costs of raising the child. The court could conclude on that record that father would receive a tax benefit from the exemption award. In Interest of A.R.W., 903 P.2d 10 (Colo. App. 1994).
Father's post-dissolution motion for reimbursement of previously paid child care expenses was properly denied. Reimbursement is not mandated under this section and the court has discretion whether to refer the parties to mediation. In re Lishnevsky, 981 P.2d 609 (Colo. App. 1999).
Court should compare child support order currently in effect with child support guidelines to determine whether a substantial and continuing change of circumstances exists. Although the parties' current child support order was the result of the parties' agreement to a reduced amount of child support, the court should have compared the current child support order with the presumed child support obligation under the guidelines at the time of mother's motion to determine if mother had shown a substantial and continuing change of circumstances sufficient to maintain her motion for modification. In re M.G.C.-G., 228 P.3d 271 (Colo. App. 2010).
A maternal grandmother who received parental responsibilities through a dependency and neglect proceeding is not a "psychological parent" under In re A.C.H., 2019 COA 43, 440 P.3d 1266, and therefore not a parent under this section and therefore cannot be ordered to pay child support. The maternal grandmother voluntarily assumed parental responsibilities for the child through a dependency and neglect proceeding and never sought permanent custody through an adoption proceeding. Her willingness to assume responsibilities while parents were unfit did not transform her into a permanent custodian or psychological parent. Therefore, the court did not err in not imposing a child support obligation on her after father became fit. In re Bergeson-Flanders, 2022 COA 18, 509 P.3d 1083.
D. Termination upon Emancipation.
The resolution of the question of emancipation was concerned more with the extinguishment of parental rights and duties than with the removal of the disabilities of infancy, and it occurred only when there was a complete severance of the filial tie, and the child's possession or lack of possession of the right to vote had little or no bearing on the determination as to whether such tie had or had not been severed. Van Orman v. Van Orman, 30 Colo. App. 177, 492 P.2d 81 (1971).
The enactment of the voting rights act of 1970, lowering the federal voting age to 18 years, did not emancipate a 20 year old son, as a matter of law. Van Orman v. Van Orman, 30 Colo. App. 177, 492 P.2d 81 (1971).
In Colorado, a person retains the status of minority until the age of 21 years, and that statutory definition is controlling as to the age at which emancipation occurs as a matter of law, except where otherwise provided by statute. Van Orman v. Van Orman, 30 Colo. App. 177, 492 P.2d 81 (1971).
In the absence of emancipation occurring upon attainment of majority, the question of whether a child was emancipated was essentially one of fact determinable by the trier of fact. Van Orman v. Van Orman, 30 Colo. App. 177, 492 P.2d 81 (1971).
Change in the age of emancipation and duty of support in this section did not automatically modify a parent's existing obligation of support which required obligor to pay support until child reached 21 years. In re Dion, 970 P.2d 968 (Colo. App. 1997).
The marriage of the minor daughter terminated the parental duty of support and no enforceable rights to support payments could thereafter accrue to the mother. Berglund v. Berglund, 28 Colo. App. 382, 474 P.2d 800 (1970).
Support for dependent child after attainment of majority. This article gives the court jurisdiction to enter a decree for support of a dependent child of the marriage after attainment of majority. In re Koltay, 646 P.2d 405 (Colo. App. 1982), aff'd, 667 P.2d 1374 (Colo. 1983).
Once a child is over 21 and physically and mentally capable of self support, such child is not entitled to receive support payments from father, despite the fact that the child had an expectation of attending college had parents not divorced. Factors such as standard of living child would have enjoyed and educational needs can only be applied in determining child support if the child had not reached majority. In re Plummer, 735 P.2d 165 (Colo. 1987).
Express provision for post-emancipation support, where circumstances warrant, may be made in a decree entered before the child's twenty-first birthday. In such a case, factors such as standard of living and expectation of attending college may be considered. In re Huff, 834 P.2d 244 (Colo. 1992) (decided under law in effect prior to enactment of subsection (1.5), dealing specifically with postsecondary education support).
Provision for post-emancipation support may also be made by written agreement of the parties, as is indicated by reading this section together with § 14-10-122 (3). In re Huff, 834 P.2d 244 (Colo. 1992).
Meaning of "previously existing support order". An order entered October 22, 1993, nunc pro tunc August 12, 1993, made retroactive to August 1, 1992, modifying a March 1992 support order, is not a "previously existing support order" with regard to a modification of support to take into account a child born to the father and his new wife in December 1992, because it was not "previously existing" until it was actually entered by the court. In re Oberg, 900 P.2d 1267 (Colo. App. 1994).
IV. PAST DUE SUPPORT.
Past due child support payments in themselves constitute debt. Colo. State Bank v. Utt, 622 P.2d 584 (Colo. App. 1980).
Amount owed may be garnished by bank which held judgment against former wife. Colo. State Bank v. Utt, 622 P.2d 584 (Colo. App. 1980).
It was not error to require a husband to pay arrears of support money for his minor children during the period of time the wife refuses him the right to visit the children, where no objection was made to the entry of such order. Hayes v. Hayes, 134 Colo. 315, 303 P.2d 238 (1956).
A trial court could not punish a father, delinquent in his child support payments through no fault of his own, by denying him visitation rights until he became current in his payments. Kane v. Kane, 154 Colo. 440, 391 P.2d 361 (1964).
A trial court was without authority to forgive delinquent payments of support money. Gier v. Gier, 139 Colo. 289, 339 P.2d 677 (1959); Engleman v. Engleman, 145 Colo. 299, 358 P.2d 864 (1961); Drazich v. Drazich, 153 Colo. 218, 385 P.2d 259 (1963).
Overpayments on child support made direct to one child could not be set off against accrued overdue installments which were owed to the mother on behalf of another child. Dorsey v. Dorsey, 28 Colo. App. 63, 470 P.2d 581 (1970).
The general rule was to the effect that when a father was required by a divorce decree to pay to the mother money for the support of their dependent children, and the unpaid and accrued installments became judgments in her favor, he could not, as a matter of law, claim credit on account of payments voluntarily made directly to the children, special considerations of an equitable nature could justify a court in crediting such payments on his indebtedness to the mother when that could be done without injustice to her. Dorsey v. Dorsey, 28 Colo. App. 63, 470 P.2d 581 (1970).
Promissory estoppel is not a viable legal defense for a claim for past due child support payments. In re Gallo, 2024 COA 86, 558 P.3d 1016.
Source: official Colorado text · Last verified 2026-08-27
Frequently Asked Questions About Colorado § 14-10-115
What does Colorado Revised Statutes § 14-10-115 cover?
Section 14-10-115 ("Child support guidelines - purpose - determination of income - schedule of basic child support obligations - adjustments to basic child support - additional guidelines - child support commission - definitions.") is part of the Colorado Revised Statutes, the codified statutory law of Colorado. It sets out the legal rule or procedure described in the text above. Statutes are amended regularly, so always verify against the official source.
How do I cite Colorado § 14-10-115?
A common citation format is "Colorado Revised Statutes § 14-10-115" (Colorado). Legal writing may require the code abbreviation, section number, and year or edition. Match the style required by your court, professor, or publisher.
Is this the official text of Colorado law?
No. This page is for research and education and may not include the most recent amendments. For official current law, check the Colorado official source linked on this page or consult a licensed Colorado attorney.
How does Colorado § 14-10-115 apply to my situation?
Statutes are interpreted in context, and application depends on your specific facts. Only a licensed attorney in Colorado can advise on how this section applies to you. Contact your state or local bar association for a referral.
Sources & Verification
Not legal advice. Verify against the official source and consult a licensed attorney in Colorado.