Any advice on Admin Reviews
I’m about to go to my first Admin Review. Apparently I earn a small fortune, have a small fortune tucked away, and am extremely anti my daughter. I have no idea what I’ve done with my fortune and my partner is going to be very angry when she finds out I’ve lost this small fortune, plus I quite like my daughter, altho I do tell her off when she is rude. Anyway, I’m being sarcastic. I would really appreciate any advice (including horror stories) of what to expect in an Admin Review and how to approach one.
I’ve read a few horror stories about what goes on with Family Court decisions… are the Admin Reviews anything like this? My main concern is that they can assess you on your “earning capacity”, meaning that they have the right to assess me on what I might earn if I worked 20 hours a day, leaving my partner to do all the childcare (we have a baby of our own). I find it quite amazing that someone can make totally unsubstantiated and damaging claims (that will probably result in an audit) in order to get more money out of me. I know too damn well that no evidence will be required to back up her claims and even if I spent some of my small fortune proving that her allegations are nothing more than lies, there will be no consequences to pay for her.
I admit I have no faith in the justice system, Child Support or Family Court… 12 years ago, our daughter was 2 and I had spent those 2 years raising her pretty much full time. Upon our separation I asked for joint custody… but no… in one day I discovered the mother had abducted the child, went to the USA for 2 months while serving me with a sole custody application, AND I had the police arrive on my doorstep to serve me with a restraining order because I had assaulted both the mother and the daughter. Being utterly naive, I thought justice would prevail and that surely you can’t just say these lies and get away with it, surely you’d need evidence… No! So that’s when I lost my daughter. Since then I’ve been lying low, paying far more than I should in a voluntary agreement, but also seeing quite a bit of my daughter as a result. But nothing ever resembling co-parenting. Now my partner and I have had a baby, and man the sh&* has hit the fan. Psycho ex just can’t contain herself. So now I find myself going off to an Admin Review to explain how I don’t remember where I’ve lost my small fortune.
Joking aside, any advice appreciated.
Posts RSS 2.0
I agree entirely Ben, the fact that it’s only about money to the state seems to be the fundamental problem. I’m sure you’ve quoted it up above but isn’t it something like… the Commissioner of IRD’s main objective is to get as much revenue as possible. Hardly a great way to run a country. What I don’t understand is the IRD attitude to the payments from Non Custodial parents to Custodial parents who aren’t receiving any benefit. How does that affect the IRD? Why do they feel so compelled to screw the father financially? They don’t get any of it themselves. Altho surely if the Admin Review decides that I income split and claim expenses I’m not entitled to, SURELY the IRD will need to investigate my company and take everything they’re entitled to. Or would that not work because I’m allowed a lawyer then? Would that not work because the IRD would need evidence to support it’s charges? Is it just a one-size-fits-all mentality? Why is no legal representation allowed at an Admin Review hearing (particularly when you’re about to have significant financial interference, particularly when you’re getting accused of all sorts of tax evasion – otherwise known as extortion)? How on Earth do they justify the fact that the Commissioner doesn’t actually need any evidence when making a decision? These all point to something quite sinister but I don’t think I’m yet prepared to believe it. I feel like I’m still too influenced by tv in the 80s! What exactly is in it for the IRD?
Cheers
Gary
Gary,
To maximise its income, IRD would ideally like to place “earnings quotas” on all of us. These quotas would be set a little above our demonstrated earning power, in order to incentivise us to work harder and smarter. Exactly like companies do when they set a sales quota for their sales-people, then raise it the following year once the quota has been met.
Separated fathers can be easily manipulated to conform to this system, as the gross violation of civil rights that it involves can be effectively ignored by the machinery that keeps Child Support in motion.
The last thing IRD wants is people who are content to live on a small income, and happily do without many of the products and services that are now considered ‘essential’.
The State is waging war on our right to live a lifestyle of our own choosing by laying claim to ownership of our labour.
There is an International movement for men’s rights and the best site that I know about is honornetwork.com
I think we as a group did not realise how important they were going to be for us to move forward. Someone should have shut me up when I challenged us being in the MRA. lol
(Intrepid, if you are out there please come back.)
There was a male writer who had great information on how to get around the Child Support but without being less of a father or paying what is fair. What happened to that writer?
Scrap, we really need to get something together on this site. John is back now.
Julie,
I dont waste my time any more providing information to people who just want there situation fixed and wont work for real change to CS.
Child Support is very primary for the 700-750,000 kiwis that are directly impacted by it.An impacted number that far exceeds the FC,CYP,DV impact. Objectively, in most cases, the court crap goes away but the CS lingers till your youngest is 19.
The matrix of Family law will never change till the issue of support of children post seperation is resolved. It is about the money – and the politics behind the money.
Making it a gender war will not solve the issue but thats what happens when, people incorrectly define a problem and read symptoms as causes. This site is full of people who see a symptom and think its a cause and suddenly Don Quotixe is tilting at windmills with no change obtained.
When faced with a problem in a complex interrelated system (Family Law Matrix) it is frequent for those affected to see the problem only as symptoms that affect them.This then in the case of many men incorrectly defining the symptom as the problem and thus ending up in a gender centric position. e.g Its all about dads rights.
Same happens to women and thats why you have the current DV model that sees violence as soley caused by men. They see a symptom and think they have the cause.
Regards
Scrap
Scrap, I am for you and I just love Mark. So does our group. Our darling chairperson (he is player but like a younger brother to me) has been roped into believing the Duluth method. His own journey .. but us women do challenge him because we don’t have to fall for that crap. He has to think of himself too because that is what we are about.
He works for, can’t think of her name off hand but she is postered up in libraries and is on Odyssey House’s Trust Board (I am sure but not 100%) and is working against family violence. You know her. She is our top NZ designer. Name on the top of my tongue but can’t say it. Face even there. But…
I understand where you are coming from. I am all for what you are doing. I only wish you or Bevan could be the leader. Or even Jim because I have my own personal problem with Kerry. I don’t like him. So when it comes time I will back for a seat in the area rather than a seat in the house.
Cause? Symptom?
Cause: parents split up and the state has an obligation to provide for the children.
Symptom $ pressure on families after separation.
Cause: Government policy or lack of.
Symptom: Breaking down families.
Remedy: deals with the symptom.
Cure: challenges the cause.
The respondents to my allegations as yet have not factored responsible replies to the NZ Bill of Rights and its impact on EVERY single piece of legislation, nor less recognised for opening the statute that s.7 is the primary protection for any citizen under any area of unlawful discrimination to which all cited legislation by James is a host.
Theory, stratergy and tactics, as is causal intrusion before the disaffecting symptomatic complaint a question of priority. This is not a competition. It is an issue of fixing the problem. Concentrating on a symptom of the primary problem will not protect the nations children. In teh case of Child Support it will protect someones wallet.
Benjamin. check out http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz and all the right political site. The socialists/left are being challenged. I am sorry, but I need to understand you before I can follow you.
The library does not permit the link to the kiwiblog.co.nz site so I won’t be able to look at it until the week.
But you miss what I am saying constantly Julie. I don’t want you to follow me. I want you to comprehend what I am saying and if you have the commitment that you profess then concentrate on it. To say that you need to be led is like recognising you are walking in the dark. The information I suggested you send on in question to Mark Burton and later to the Prime Minister is really very simple. It is about challenging the injustice by concentratin on what the injustice really is. You won’t need to follow me, you’re waiting on Bevan.
I am very interested in this thread as I am also in the throws of my first administrative review. For 6 years my sons father has paid around $$40 – $50 pw child support, immediately getting it dropped when he changed jobs and was paid cash under the table etc. During the last 18 months he had been in a job that he described as receiving the best money he had ever earned. Hence, I anticipated the child suport increasing slightly. Low and behold when I received a notice and it had reduced to $25 per week I nearly fell off my chair ! Upon enquiry with IRD, I discovered, he had declared his new partner and her 3 children as dependants. They had recently purchased a home together of around $800,000 , she is finacially independant has a very good income from self employment and an ex partner who supports generously both financially and time wise etc. The formula for child support assessment does not include her income, yet it includes an allowance for her and 3 children !!!! I dont know why most men dont take this up ? For the record, I have never received a DPB, I have worked in a professional environment all my life. As a single parent I do not rely on child support, I could not afford to given my ex’s attitude.
Compounded with this is he now wants more access, after 6 years of being a bachelor and taking almost no interest in his son, he now wants to be a father and would like 50/50 shared custody !
Problem is, its all about him not our son.
Tash,
First thing that comes to mind is what wrong with him wanting 50/50 shared custody.. You should be grateful at his interest at wanting to take a greater part in your sons life..
But on your other question.. Admin Review, I can only assume you have applied for the review under grounds 8.
As for his change in living allowance, this may not be totally his fault as the forms that you HAVE to fill out are very generic for change in circumstance and do not take into account the partners income or how they support them selves. So to this affect if the partner is deemed self supporting (income above the dole) during a Admin review they deemed to be able to support themselves and at least the living allowance will be changed to Single, so you will be back to the amount you were being paid. As for his general income, it is anyones guess. There are many ways to hide income and not declare your true taxable income some are legal some are illegal. Trusts, LQAC etc are methods to reduce and limit taxable income while still being honest. The Admin review process will not touch a Trust and this is normally up to the family courts if you take it that far as IRD do not have jurisdiction over them. If he owns or runs a company this is a different story and IRD will look at those financial reports unless he is in OZ etc as they only have rights to personal income from OZ as an example.
SMNP
Maybe not. There is a growing body of case law that holds this situation is not a special circumstance.
.
Changes to the Act give IRD the power to to create a departure order that targets any structure that they believe is used to minimize income or create an asset base at the expense of income in the hand.
However such a review could only be initiated by IRD and from the ones I have seen they are targeting paying parents where the receiving parent is on the benefit. They are being very ruthless!
Tash
I don’t understand why if you are not in receipt of a benefit you would bother with collecting child support via IRD?
Why don’t you talk with him? Use a mediation service and work out whats best for your boy
The best outcome for you is to get him to voluntarily agree to pay a set amount.
I have seen how the act does not work for paying and receiving parents or the kids. Thats why I promote change and reform.
Like it or not, junior is going to want to know dad.
I would suggest you try and get hold of
Raising your children cooperatively after separation
Regards
Scrap
Tash, your situation is similar to my own. I am deemed a high income earner by IRD so, even though I am struggling to feed the 2 kids in my custody, IRD are forcing me to pay a huge slice of my income to their mother. This is due to the fact that she has one child in her care and hides much of her income. Seeing that IRD think she is only earning about 28K per year she gets away with paying me nothing, once offsetting is taken into account, while I have to pay her $550 per month. Fair??, I think not! IRD’s stupid formula rewards those who wish to stay on benefits, work under the table, or enjoy a part time work lifestyle, while punishing those who work hard for a living in PAYE employment. Your Ex sounds very similar to mine in his attitude. Wanting to be a parent but not wishing to meet the financial commitment that comes with parenthood. I am currently in a situation where I may have to house me and my children in sub standard accommodation because I can no longer afford to pay for ALL of their expenses plus pay for ALL of my non custodial child’s expenses. I have a burning hatred for IRD because of the hardship their policies have inflicted on me and my custodial children. Scraps suggestion that you reach a private agreement would be about as useful in your circumstance as it would be in mine by the look of it. Some parents just don’t want to pay their share and IRD enables them to do so thanks to their stupid retarded brain dead formula. I have had 2 admin reviews done on her using grounds 3, 5 and 8. I was unsuccessful on all counts despite a huge amount of supporting evidence which I supplied to the IRD admin review cretins. I don’t even know why the admin review office employs people. Everything is based on their grossly unfair formula so they may as well get a computer to do the reviews as no human thought, compassion or flexibility goes into the current process. . Tony
Thanks everyone for your comments. In reply to SNMP re whats wrong with him wanting 50/50 shared custody. My son has had the security and stability of living with me for over 6 years. During this period his dad was a bachelor and could’nt even commit to 2 days a fortnight, I have been my ex’s full time baby sitter on weekends when our son was suppose to be in his care. Father has never even had our son for more than 2-3 days max, never taken him on a holiday etc etc. I think the ex needs to give this new relationship some more time before he starts changing our sons life , I mean the relationship could be all over in 6 months or so , what then ? His partner is more likely to be the one doing all the work for our son, ie drop offs and picks up for school and sports,washing, cooking etc so what happens if it all falls apart ? Ex is rushing in like a bull in a china shop. He has a lot of changes to make before I would ever seriously consider it, committment for one. Another would be to communicate with me, he gets son who has just turned 11 to pass on all his messages. Since he and new partner got together , only 6 months ago, he has done nothing but criticise me, he seems to have turned it into a competition of who our son loves most, who son prefers being with etc etc I could go on and on. I am fully understanding of the fact that our son loves both of us, but ex is clearly very immature. Fundamentally for 50/50 to work, the parents need to have a very good relationship with great communication , unfortunately we do not.
Once again tx very much to you all for the info regarding IRD Admin Reviews, much appreciated.
Reply to Sscrap, as to why I go through IRD. I would definitely prefer not to go through IRD, but ex would pay zero then lol ! Only way I get anything at all from him is to go through IRD, sad but true.
What I said was the best outcome would be achieved by a voluntary agreement, because that is true.
Going to an admin review is fueling the conflict between parents. Who does that benefit?
Tony. you state
Its blatantly obvious that you are unhappy with the amount the formula assessment is producing in your situation.
Maybe you need to think outside the square.
Regards
Scrap
Tash you say,
Thats a myth. Its helps to be able to put aside all the other shit and focus the kids but even without that a large number of parents share parenting where ongoing conflict exists.
Regards Scrap
Tash,
Why? Why would he refuse to contribute to his son? There has to be a reason.
End of the day if you go to admin review it is likely you are just going to increase the level of conflict.
I just think you need to be aware up front what happens in many cases when a parent seeks an admin review.
They fuel the fires of ongoing conflict be aware!
Regards
Scrap
Regards
Scrap
The facts that create/cause a percentage of the described conflict have little to do with any admin review or administrative formula of the IRD. I would argue the percentage would be as high as almost all of it.
The primary problem is th eacrimony, and as long as this is supported and exploited by the state governed system there will be no end of these debates empathic of red tape and limitations as leaches from a misdirection by social dysfuntion and as then demanded its arbitrary control. So if we look for any common alternative from the thread the debate would surely be better centred at how the mediations should be implimented their rules as against the wills or will nots of any particulat case. This position establishes a different and alternative economic frame to both the process of government departments as it is likely for its effective and professional maturity, the positive results for separating families.
The instrument of rule to change all of the conditions covered in the thread, in order to achieve the higher status promoted as achievable is less cost of exchange but what is achievable as required by the child from the associable perspectives of everyone concerned. This is to say that the primary values that are considered and explored before any numbers are concluded are not conflictory but centred on the care of teh child. Care cannot although at present is, be simply interpretable into a dollar and cents equation. Until the love (aroha) for the child is factored into the equation as expressed by each parent, no $ sum will hold any specific bearing on teh child from the child’s immediate perspective of need. While we continue to push $ down the child’s throat as the primary functional value in humanity we continue, skillfully, with this process of bastardising the nations’ children.
tash
in 64 ypou have made all the text book excuses that one makes.
in fact if you are as mature as you imply why don’t you agree to 50-50 share with no money exchanging hands. afterall you can afford your kid and the father can at his end. why prolong the conflict for no reason but to get even as it is obvious from your comments and arguments??
hi, could some advise me how to post a new topic for people to make comments on?? I seem to only be able to reply to existing ones. I’d just really like someone to talk to. I’m sorry for interupting this conversation, just that it seems to be getting attention…. – cheers
Hi, new to this group, can someone tell me if anybody is actually driving change to the Child Support system through parliament here? I read accounts from a lot of people, some are similar a situation to mine and lots of other scenarios. I was party to a bill put to select committee 12 months ago by a Rob Kilkolly; does anybody know what happened to this effort? My situation for anybody who’s interested is a classic 50/50 custody case; I’m self employed and earn very average wage paying about $400 p/m to ex wife who makes sure she’s below the earning threshold so not to pay child support. She hooked up with a multi millionaire and drives $120k Landrover to child support review from her 3mil home in Merivale pleading poverty with review officers!! This is when she is not travelling Europe or some other continent for 4-5 weeks at a time leaving children with me whole time and you guessed it I still pay the child support while she’s away so she can get those flash Italian clothes she wants. LOL, absolutely unbelievable that a relatively wealth nation still has laws that can let this happen. We must have the numbers supporting us!! Done the parliamentary letter thing, got the Peter Dune standard issue letter, I’m not prepared to accept this.
Having skimmed a lot of this it appears that it’s the same story over and over again.
In the last three months I have been reassessed 3 times, first is the standard, then the July reassessment and now I’ve had another one, because I submitted the form to say I have a new baby – and of course they’ve picked up on a slight (and belive me, it was slight) increase in income. So instead of going down, it’s gone backup again and backdated. I questioned that since they haven’t backdated the birth of my son – response, it went through the registration system in July, which is interesting since I sent it off in the first week he was born.
The thought of submitting a admin review crossed my mind – but I can guarantee it wouldn’t go well – basically I just earn too much money in their eyes. Of course they are happy to alleviate me of that issue as fast as possible.
My wife and I have a very tight budget, but everytime I talk to IRD, I get the impression that I’m rich and I deserve to pay every cent they tell me too.
MP’s don’t care – this whole subject is far too hard to do anything with – with the upcoming election next year, there will be another mention made on CS, and it will magically disappear as it has done every other time in the past.
One thing I do know – unlike my ex, I cannot afford holiday’s, I cannot afford ipods and I damn well cannot afford to go skiing… I have worked hard to get to the income level I’m on now – but I really wonder where the worth in it is because everytime I’m paid there isn’t a lot left over when a quarter of it goes to CS.
I have been read all the above with much interest.
Nine years ago I paid out my ex Kathie Ellery a sum in excess of $400000 from the sale of our farm which was held in a family trust and I was forced to sell by order of family court judge Ingles.I was continually refused access to my children and gave up on the fight.I met someone else 6 years ago and we married.My new wife persuaded me to try and stay in touch with my children so we tried to start contact only to find my ex had married and moved to England with the children.I managed to get an e-mail address and started contact with my daughter but my son refused contact. They returned from England in November 2005 and I got in touch with the children. I had difficulty with my ex over contact and at that time she had found out that my wife and I had sold a property and purchased a farm in Australia.This prompted an Admin Review.Which went badly and the review officer Penny Weaver of PN decided that I should pay a figure based on the value of the assets owned by my now wife and I.I had not had an income since Aug 2001 and was supported by my wife while I tried to build up a business.I appealed the review decision to no avail but I then went for a review because of our changed circumstances.The review officer appeared to be supportive of my application but his decision was that it was too hard for him and I needed to take the matter to the Family Court.This I attempted to do on my own own. Late the afternoon on the day before my hearing I was served with papers from a Crown Law solicitor acting for IRD who were now making claims on maintenance based on the value of our assets and back dated to 2001. I pannicked and at the hearing told the judge that as Crown Law had become involved I need Legal representation.The judge Hikaka became aggressive towards me, accused me of wasting the courts time, granted me an adjournment, but awarded costs against me sum $3000.I have since employed a barrister in Wellington at great cost. Crown Law have recently applied to have the matter heard in the High Court which to my Barristers surprise has been granted and we are gearing up for a Test Case fight.My wife has had to give up work because of stress we have been unable to farm in Australia and are renting in NZ. We have spent over $25000 in legal fees so far and have $300 in the bank and life has turned to s–t.I will be 60 at the end of this year and my ex is 44. The only positive so far is that my barrister has gained me contact with my children by Court application.I am usure if the rest of NZ men realise that if this High Court case goes bad then we will all be assessed on our assets and not our income.I have considered applying for legal aid to fight this but my Barrister won’t comment on this suggestion.Perhaps I had better start praying.
Good luck is all I can say. I have been seperated for over six years & pay c/s for one child. My partner & I have two pre-school aged children & as for most parents with young children times are very tough. I recently phoned IRD to discuss whether we might be eligible for an administrative review to ease our financial burden. It transpired that we would not be, but to my surprise what followed was a lecture on parenting & the ensuing responsibilities. I was also advised that as my son was lived with my ex wife & her income far exceeded mine (not including my c/s payments) that he was in the “best place”. Apparrently what makes the best living environment for children these days is affluence. Sorry folks, no longer are love, affection,or a genuine interest in the child (or any other children affected by the IRD’s extortionate formula) a factor….parenting is now assessed by the thickness of your wallet according to the lovely lady at the IRD. What also truly impressed me about her was her ability to formulate an opinion as to the suitability of placement of a child with absolutely no background knowledge at all. I realised very quickly how weighted the system is against non-custodial parents & that the ignorance & prejudice that exists within the department is unsurpassed. My instinct told me I had hit a brick wall at 100mph. Reading other peoples experiences above I think we have made the right assessment just to take a deep breath & let it go. Unfortunately most of the above seem to have had their reviews brought about or instigated by there ex-partners so probably a slightly different scenario. If from your point of view though the wheel is wobbly – you are probably better to just let it fall off than to try & fix it as you may well buckle it in the process.
I have 50/50 shared custody of my three children and my x has asked for a admin review as I have stoped paying through a private arrangement as I ahve had a change in financial circumstances which means I earn no where near what I would have been assessed at and our private arrangement was based on . She is asking that the review disregard this change in circumstances and assess me on the old income which means I would pay $900 per month , which we can’t afford and would mean we would have to sell our house and go renting ….I have always had 50/50 shared custody and my x is remarried and both hosue holds are earning almost the same money ….is any of this taken into account ..it sounds by the commensts on the site that I am in for a losing battle??…if I produce financial evidence that I can not afford to pay $900 what happens then ??…
The answer here is maybe. If you have TRUE 50/50 care and you can prove it that is your first hurdle. The calculation will only be borne on your income and your ex’s not the household income so if those are the same then 50/50 care would cancel out any CS payment to one another, if you earn more then you will have to pay the difference of over and above her calculation.. i.e say you are calculated to pay $100 and she was calculated on paying $80, you will only have to pay the $20 only. The calculations are based on your income and the full percentages i.e 24% for two children less a single living allowance on your full taxable income (before tax).
As for your previous income being taken into account, sorry to say this is very very very possible. It all comes down to why you have a reduced income some reasons are acceptable and you will be calculated on current income others will not this is at the discretion of the admin review officer (Hope you get a nice one). If you lost your job say due to current cutbacks from you employer then you should be ok, but they normally base your income on what you can earn, not what you are earning if you have a reduced your income. Say your care type can earn $50k per year and you were earning that, but you take a lesser paid job and now earn $30k you will most likely be calculated on $40+ from my experience, as for loosing your house etc, telling them that will not work even if it is true and depending on how you present that it may be detrimental as from there perspective you should have thought of that before changing jobs!!!
$900 per month is quite a lot for shared care so I would be surprised if it is made this high unless your ex has no income and her new husband earns the money as his income is not taken into account and neither is your wife/partner.
Hope this helps
Thanks for that ….the reduced income is from a rental property that we tried to sell to move into our existing property but of course the market fell over and so we have rented it out for the mean time but it is running at a $20k loss which we have to pick up .( but this loss can be claimed against my income for tax purposes and also for assessment of income for C/S) …the 50/50 shared care ok as we both agree that it exists ….it’s just the previous comments really do scare me and if we get a dickhead as a review officer , then we are in the crapper and that means so are our children when they are at our house ….it should be all about the children , my partner and I just want to get on with our own lives and provide for the children ( including her daughter who is with us full time ) , but it seems IRD don’t want this to happen ….x is asking for the loss from the rental to be disrecarded whcih means I would be due to pay $905 per month on a 50/50 shared custody situation …how fair is that ????
Hi Richard,
From my horrible experiances what the IRD “dickheads” do is access a guy on his possible potental income. ie you are deliberately causing yourself a loss (by not selling the rented house) therefore it is your choice and you will likely
get accessed on what the property could be earning or as less the equidy. Their stupid thinking is likely to be you should sell the property that makes a loss and use that money to pay CS/child tax.
Don’t tell them anything they will screw it around in some twisted way to get your money. That’s from my sad experiance. I never did pay the buggers they came after me. Two old croans came to my work place I chased them down the road with the truth. I owed $40k said the IRD which was mostly penilties. My x agreed to accept $13k (private deal) cause she didn’t know what the figure was. Then the dipstix at IRD told her it had been $40 and I got it in the neck but nothing could be done as the deal had been sealed. I thank my lucky stars and God above every day! Cheers I wish you good luck my man!
I have 50/50 shared custody of my three children and my x has asked for a admin review as I have stoped paying through a private arrangement
Question – if you are paying through a private arrangement I don’t understand how IRD could could accept an administrative review.
Do you have a formula assessment from IRD?
I have had a change in financial circumstances which means I earn no where near what I would have been assessed at and our private arrangement was based on . She is asking that the review disregard this change in circumstances and assess me on the old income which means I would pay $900 per month , which we can’t afford and would mean we would have to sell our house and go renting ….
Your correct course of action if an assessment is in place is to estimate your income. This can be done if a 15% or greater decrease in income has occurred.
I have always had 50/50 shared custody and my x is remarried and both households are earning almost the same money
If IRD have assessed you and found you have shared care you can claim CS against the mother. Given income parity it would reduce your payment to close to Zero.
….is any of this taken into account ..it sounds by the commensts on the site that I am in for a losing battle??…if I produce financial evidence that I can not afford to pay $900 what happens then ??…
Before anyone can provide guidance you need to clearly outline the circumstances. Get IRD to send you out all their pamphlets (or download them) about CS it will give you a basic grounding . Admin reviews are a complex area of revenue law so relevant details are economic.
For clarity if an IRD admin review officer finds that you have the ability/capacity to pay at $900 a month the reality is that is what you will be required by NZ Law to pay. Look to the powers of IRD for how they will collect it.
You need to clearly state the relevant details as it is extremely difficult to offer any guidance based on the information provided.
Regards
Scrap
Hi,
Sorry to change the subject somewhat but I am worried that IRD CS are going to completely drive me under financially in the next financial year. Last year I was made redundant and was given a payout of about 40K (gross). About 10 days after receiving my final pay (c/w redundancy cheque) and leaving my old job, I started a new job with another firm. The new job pays about 10 K more than the old one so I’m not complaining too much about that. BUT I have been told by the halfwit IRD CSR I spoke with on the phone a short time ago that my 40K redundancy cheque will be regarded as income and I will be assessed on my 2008 – 2009 PAYE + the redundancy cheque, from April 1st 09. This has the effect of increasing my payments by about 50% which will make it impossible for me to live as well as support the child that I have in my care. She has two in her care and I have one in my care. Can anyone tell me if redundancy pay is regarded as earnings from a CS assessment point of view? If it does it REALLY SUCKS because I will be paying champagne CS on a beer income. Shite this pisses me off!! That bludging scab, who doesn’t spend a cent of the $1080 I give her each month on the kids, manages to profit out of any financial windfall I might receive. What about all the anxiety and money and time that went into losing my last job and finding another one?? No one compensates me for that. Also, can anyone recommend a good lawyer and/or accountant who could help me? Thanks in advance.
Tony
If you don’t do something the answer is yes you will be calculated on your redundancy amount as it is income… So your best option is when you calculation comes out in Feb for the coming year write to IRD applying for your income to be estmated for the coming year to be a set amount (http://www.ird.govt.nz/childsupport/paying-parents/estimation/estimate-cs/) i.e $50k… Not the $90k you got last year. But this amount needs to be correct as if you get it wrong you will be penalised but you can update the amount through the year if things change. Good luck but get in early before they send the entitlements to your Ex…. As the reduction will no doubt cause a Admin Review… (Did for me..)
Hi Scrap .
The private arrangement was losely based on an IRD assessment but the admin review has come about as she applied to ahve me assessed and then I applied to ahve my income reduced due to loss from a rental property….which the IRD accepted with regards to tax rates…..ex is asking for this loss adjustment to be excluded from my assessment for CS which would make my payments go back to $900 from the reduced rate of $220 per month which is the assessment with the loss adjustment applied ….hope this helps
Thanks for the advice SNMP. I will certainly do that although I am certain that she will respond by subjecting me to yet another admin review. Worth a go though. I’m currently in the process of responding to the 5th Admin Review she’s put me through in four years. When my eldest boy came back into my custody last December I had IRD adjust my living allowance downwards and chase her for the huge sum of $71 per month which she was liable for. She’s having a big hissy fit because this means that she ends up being out of pocket by about $250 per month. Funny how these custodial parents are sometimes so pampered by IRD that they actually expect that they shouldn’t have to pay anything toward the support of THEIR children!! It should be interesting though because I found that her year to date earnings aren’t much lower than mine + she gets buttloads from IRD and WINZ with Working for Families and other payments that she’s managed to wangle out of the system. I think she’s panicking because she knows that if my boy is still living with me after April 1st she will be reassessed BIG TIME, ha ha. Anyway I have lost all previous Admin Reviews even when I was able to prove that I didn’t have enough income to support the two kids in my care plus pay her $650 per month to support the one child in her care, while she got away with paying me $69 per month. If they come down in her favour again this time I WILL TAKE THE BASTARDS TO COURT! I don’t care how much it costs me. I have kept the documentation from all previous reviews and these corrupt, biased Admin Review Officers need to be exposed. Watch this space..
Tony
Careful Tony,
Re court: Read my post #8 and point ‘7′ towards the end.
And Tony, a good accountant? Perhaps I can help email me at jamsandwich@xtra.co.nz.
Cheers