Child Support entanglements
I post in the hope of the collective wisdom giving me a clue. I have deliberately used gender neutral terms. I do NOT want this to degenerate into a slanging match over gender based issues. The background is real, and very sad. If there is a detail missing please ask.
Parent 1 is a US citizen who has lived in NZ for some years.
Parent 2 is a NZ citizen.
They met overseas and decided to live in NZ.
After several years they had a child. (Born in NZ)
The relationship has failed.
They have a sort of shared care arrangement. Neither will put anything into writing!
Parent 1 has gone on DPB with the consequential CS liability on parent 2.
The questions arising,
Parent 1 is off back to the US. Do they forego DPB? (It is an open ended visit)?
If they forego DPB does this inturn relieve parent 2 from the (NZ) CS liability?
Is there any consequent liability from the US?
If in the mean time parent 2 heads to Australia to work What happens to the liability for CS?
All comments needed, they will affect decisions.
Thanks folks.
The IRD in New Zealand will chase u for CS to the end of the earth untill the child turns 19 years old or becomes independant or dies or you die.
They (IRD) will assess your income if you do not provide detials.
NB: the liabilitie dose not go away, regardless of where ANY ONE OF YOU LIVE, OR WEATHER THERE IS ANY ACESS TO THE CHILD OR NOT. EVEN IF THE CHILD IS TAKEN AND WITHHELD FROM YOU BY THE OTHER PARENT AGAINST A COURT ORDER YOU STILL HAVE TO PAY CS.
Advice; shared care of child(mimim 6 nights out of 14), them CS can be offset and depends on each parents income.
Your best bet is to play hardball.
While the child is in your care applie for a “with-out notice” parentting order in your favour and a “WITH-OUT NOTICE CAPS order” with suportting evidance that the other party is a flight risk.
“CAPS order” stops the child from traveling out of New Zealand.
There may be another option, but I’m not too up with it…..
If you phone the IRD and ask if once someone on the DPB gose off it can they request that CS stops and will the IRD stop it.
THe DPB can be collected for some 6 too 8 weeks while over seas.
Welcome to our night mare.
I would say good luck, but luck has nothing to do with it, it all comes down to good managment.
Comment by paul — Mon 22nd February 2010 @ 4:55 pm
best advice…live a peasants life…earn the minimum wage…pay the minimum cs…keep up with the payments
Comment by ford — Mon 22nd February 2010 @ 5:16 pm
Parent 1 is off back to the US. Do they forego DPB as an open ended visit
– they forgo DPB after a certain number of weeks – immediate if the trip can be shown as beyond 26 weeks
If they forego DPB does this inturn relieve parent 2 from the (NZ) CS liability?
– yes
Is there any consequent liability from the US?
– yes. there is liability once applied for via the US system
If in the mean time parent 2 heads to Australia to work What happens to the liability for CS?
– liability is via Aus CS system
Each of these questions has more details that follow. In short your CS liability is determined by the country of your residence. Hope there’s some help in that.
Comment by Nik — Mon 22nd February 2010 @ 7:00 pm
Unfortunately Nik you know little.
If Parent 1 has a bank account in New Zealand we will top it up until the child is 19 years of age. Does not matter where she lives, we don’t care or even want to know. She has made application here and we will pursue the liable parent no matter if she is on the DPB or not. It is support her her and the child and although DPB is recovered to the consolidated fund is she goes off it then we will pay it to her nominated bank account which we hold.
If parent 2 goes to Aussie NZ still remains the primary agency (even if she has gone somewhere else in the world) but you are correct that our colleagues in Aussie will ensure father meets his obligation via their CSA.
Comment by IRD Officer — Mon 22nd February 2010 @ 9:54 pm
Does a parent applying for and receiving the D.P.B. constitute an application being made to the I.R.D. for them to collect child tax until the child turns 19yrs even if that beneficiary later cancels their benefit and yet hasn’t made a separate application to the I.R.D.? Does that custodial parent need to apply to the I.R.D. if the only application by the I.R.D. has been received from WINZ and yet they’re no longer a beneficiary?
Comment by SicKofNZ — Mon 22nd February 2010 @ 10:23 pm
Added my missing word to help with comprehension :p
Does that custodial parent need to apply to the I.R.D. if the only application received by the I.R.D. has …..
Comment by SicKofNZ — Mon 22nd February 2010 @ 10:25 pm
Where did it say Parent 1 was a woman? I hope you’re not being sexist. lol
Comment by julie — Mon 22nd February 2010 @ 10:53 pm
Reply to Mr IRD ‘Nazi’ officer
You piece of Nazi scum bag ……’Obligation’ like hell it is …
More like Feminazi persecution ..Yes,and I quite happy to meet you and say ‘Nazi’ direct to your Face…You Nazi scum bag…!!!
The dealings I had with one of your ‘Feminazi’ staff members I will never,ever forget…!!!!!
I can remember so clearly when one of your ‘Feminazi’ staff members told to me my face,if She had it her way she wouldn’t hesitate to leave me totally penniless and take everything I so called owned and earned and would have given to my ex partner……Even when I left with nothing….So my Children wouldn’t suffer financially !!!!
Go and ‘rot in hell’,where you and with the rest of your ‘Nazi’ colleges belong….!!!!!!!!!!
Kind regards to you ‘Nazi’….John Dutchie
Comment by John Dutchie — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 5:16 am
….Oh,and by the way Mr/Miss I.R.D Nazi did your I.R.D ‘FemiNazi’ Feminized department try to enforce this Femi Nazi policy from Australia and Sweden….. see below….!!!!!
‘Feminists Try To Ban Urinals (peeing standing up degrades women’ …
Deadly Serious….. ‘Feminists’ in Australia and Sweden were trying ban Urinals
Again kind regards to you Nazi…..John Dutchie
….Yes,I am on the Warpath from all this ‘Dumb’, ‘Stupid’,’Idiotic’ dangerous ‘FemiNazi’ social engineering Feminist crap……
Comment by John Dutchie — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 7:19 am
Hi Sick of NZ and others,
An application made while signing on for DPB is no different than any other application. The only problem we have is WINZ is often slow at sending the forms to us very late and we can only pursue liable fathers from the date we recieve them.
Just because someone goes off DPB is no reason why Child Support should not be paid to mummy and the kids. We continue to collect and enrich mummies personal bank account.
Comment by Ms IRD Officer — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 8:08 am
Mr Dutchie, I could not find your records on our database. Please privide your IRD number and I will ensure that you become penniless and centless and Bhatless. We do like to serve and do our job properly.
Comment by Ms IRD Officer — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 8:11 am
Saw that comment coming but to be fair maybe Ms IRD would like to leave her contact details just we can talk to the right person if we want to be screwed (metaphor of course)
Comment by Paul MacKay — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 8:39 am
Happy to do so.
You can get me on 0800 221 221 anytime. We pay for your calls as it is our pleasure to piss you off when you call. If you want to increase the cost of compliance you can even call us from your mobiles (assuming you have hands free kits of course).
We don’t publish the figures but rumour has it that it costs about 60% of every dollar collected by us just to pay for my wages and the morning teas the boss occasionally shouts.
Comment by Ms IRD Officer — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 10:29 am
Wahhhh haaaa haaa
Your hilarious
And and the name Ms IRD Officer Truly Inspired
your sense of humour is breathtaking and the insensitivity levels off the chart…… Chortle snort hardy har har brilliant.
Joke it up about child tax you funny as….
Im glad to see idiots like yourself can break free from the PC mould and be deliberately offensive.
“Mr Dutchie, I could not find your records on our database”
I didnt think you actually worked for IRD until I read that and then thought, Not being able to find anything in the IRD data base, maybe you do work there after all.
The incompetence level does seem to match.
Heee heeee
Keep them coming those quips are funny in such a crap situation like child tax.
Comment by mits — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 11:08 am
Can we please leave the ‘mummy bit out’. There are alot of single fathers out there and alot of women paying child support whether to a father or to CYFS. I myself paid it for years.
Also, child support is supposed to be about the children, it is not supposed to be alimony.
Comment by julie — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 11:37 am
Yet another useful thread ruined by ppl intend on spreading unhelpful comments. Yes; you might seem funny but why don’t you create a separate thread for your funnies please so we know that’s what they are and can enjoy them if we see fit.
Julie; my own 5 cents though.. Why oh why do you not call it a child tax like it actually is. The term ‘support’ gives joe public the illusion that it is something that helps the children when in fact a lot of it goes directly into the government coffers.
Apologies if I’m a but grumpy today…
Comment by noconfidence — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 11:53 am
Reply to Mr/Miss I.R.D Nazi
‘I will ensure that you become penniless and cent less and Bhatless. We do like to serve and do our job properly.’
Your statement above,and after my humbly and enlightening experience dealing you I.R.D Feminazis …
I can truly believe…A pity you ‘Nazis’ weren’t as ‘Ruthless’ when taking on the so called White collar corruption in the Corporate sector…e.g Like ‘Bridgecorp’…
But that is far to difficult and complex for you Nazis to handle or to even comprehend…..
Yep,far better to ‘Rob’ and ‘Destroy’ some one that you ‘Nazis’ scumbags damn well know don’t the have money or the resources to fight back at you Nazis scumbags……
Kind regards to Mr/Miss Nazi John Dutchie
Comment by John Dutchie — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 12:06 pm
I still hear you, OK. 😉
I am not in the habit of calling child support child tax, that’s all. Thanks for reminding me.
Comment by julie — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 12:10 pm
Reply to Julie
I am sorry too Julie,that makes two of us,in a ‘Grumpy Mood’ ………No,wrong,I would rather say I am in a definate ‘foul and grumpy mood’ today…….!!!!
‘Child support is supposed to be about the children, it is not supposed to be alimony.’….That is how it ought to be Julie…
But it isn’t …The way our so called Child support is so called ‘calculated’ by our ‘Feminazi Feminist bureaucrats’ is a ‘Con’ Job…..
Also what I have heard from my Legal friends….That the Feminist I.R.D. are lot more ‘Lenient’ and more ‘Flexible’ on a Liable parent if it happens to be ‘Woman’….If its a Man…Well we all know that is a totally different Story …….
Kind regards John Dutchie
Comment by John Dutchie — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 12:26 pm
IRD is obviously not an IRD officer, just a feminazi (who usually are no where near feminine) who is wanting to stir **** up!
Comment by Scott B — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 2:22 pm
Reply to JD,
Well, … I guess I better make an apology also because I am off colour (so to speak) myself today.
Maybe this grumpy old sod’s article can cheer you up a bit as it has me. Sometimes you have to find humour in this madness to cope. IMO
Comment by julie — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 2:30 pm
@julie…
Please record Ms IRD Officer’s IP address.
If she is indeed an employee of IRD her activity here and the attempts to look up detail regarding other contributors are most inappropriate.
I would suggest to Ms IRD Officer that she be prepared to answer to her masters over her workplace activities and her possible breach of privacy laws.
Comment by gwallan — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 2:52 pm
Reply to Julie
..First off Julie you have nothing to apologize for,and sorry that you are a ‘bit of colour’ a ‘O’ hug for you and hope your day gets better…..Just leave the ‘King’ of ‘Grump master attitude’ for me…Okay…L.O.L……
Yikes.!!!… Holy S@#t..!!!!….Read the article I swear that Feminazi ‘Harriet Harman’ as got be ‘blood’ related to our beloved Ex Feminazi Leader ‘Helen Clark’……..
Have sent this link of this article concerning ‘Harriet Harman’ to all of my Barrister Friends……
Kind regards to you Julie…John Dutchie
Comment by John Dutchie — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 2:56 pm
Done.
Comment by julie — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 6:01 pm
Ms IRD Officer is helpful, telling us how it is. Unlikely though possible that he/she has actually worked for the IRD, gives the good oil in suitably sardonic manner. I’m grateful.
Comment by Hans Laven — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 8:01 pm
This is all quite a spectacle, people thinking “Ms IRD Officer” is really from the IRD and looking people up etc! He/she is being helpful and understands the concerns of many here. Enjoy the sarcasm!
Comment by Hans Laven — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 8:05 pm
And I would say it is Mr John Dutchie who is severely in breach of the rules of the site – a very rude man indeed.
Comment by Angela — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 9:10 pm
LOLOLOL
Comment by Angela — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 9:11 pm
From what’s been said so far, would I be correct in assuming that if/when I leave the country that the child support paid to me/from me would continue to be paid at that rate until there was either a court direction/change in parenting order ?
Might be another good reason for me leave the country while I am currently unemployed !!!
Comment by noconfidence — Wed 24th February 2010 @ 10:07 am
@Hans Laven…
A couple of years ago I was attacked on the internet by an individual connected to, and possibly under the guidance of, a feminist university professor(who shall remain unnamed as a consequence). This professor wields considerable influence in gender issues and his history suggests he would gladly sabotage my own advocacy work. There have been other instances of “officials” and political connivers behaving in similar manners as, for example, Wendy McElroy and Erin Pizzey have documented.
Thankyou for letting us in on the “joke”.
I will retain my caution nonetheless.
Comment by gwallan — Wed 24th February 2010 @ 1:19 pm
Mr No confidence,
How incorrect you are. If you go to Aussie we will know exactly what you earn and yoyu will pay accordingly. If you go elsewhere we will make an assumption about your earnings and chase you accordingly. We normal guess high which “gets your attention” as the zeros add up at the end of your bill.
Please provide your correct name and or IRd number as clearly you meet our current “under-employment” definition and we want to guess at your potential earning capacity at the moment.
If you wil excuse me for a minute having a little spaz “You Fathers who think we taxpayers should suport your kids can get F**ing lost. My friends and I wil ensure you pay and pay and pay as that is our job.”
Comment by Ms IRD Officer — Wed 24th February 2010 @ 4:36 pm
Very funny.
On a serious note, does anyone know the answer to my question?
Comment by noconfidence — Wed 24th February 2010 @ 5:17 pm
Mr No Confidence. I may let my prejudices slip a tad on this site BUT I can asure you the information I provide is both Koshier and directly from the Commisioners office itself.
If you go to Aussie we get your correct details and bill you accordingly. If you go elsewhere it depends on the information sharing we have with that taxation authority. If we don’t have sharing we make it up and bill you accordingly. We try to be fair but also to encourage you to correspond with us and show us better evidence if you can.
Ms IRD Officer always trys to be incredibly accurate with her responses. Scrappy knows I try to keep a pretty good finger on my fellow IRD officers.
Comment by Ms IRD Officer — Wed 24th February 2010 @ 5:57 pm
“Also, child support is supposed to be about the children, it is not supposed to be alimony.” – Julie.
I can’t comprehend this statement Julie. Are you talking about some other country or fantasy world? MENZ is about NZ. Were you talking about some future replacement scheme?
I am at a total loss to comprehend what your point is.
Comment by Dave — Wed 24th February 2010 @ 7:27 pm
Don’t get me wrong, I have no idea who Ms IRD Officer is. It’s just that I quite appreciate his/her humour and don’t see it as any threat here.
Comment by Hans Laven — Wed 24th February 2010 @ 8:21 pm
If you wil excuse me for a minute having a little spaz “You Fathers who think we taxpayers should suport your kids can get F**ing lost. My friends and I wil ensure you pay and pay and pay as that is our job.”
Haha, well Im in the position where my ex hasn’t paid for 3 years, owes a total of nearly $40K and I’ve supplied IRD with EVERYTHING they need to find him, but will you and your friends get off their butts to find him -no! My husband pays out $900 a month for his children and they never go without but I still don’t get anything for my child! (whats that about!) so I would just love you on my case Mrs IRD to ENSURE that I will get paid – whole things a #@@@! joke if you ask me and I’ve been told to do nothing but sit on the fence and wait! ha idiots!
Comment by Debbie — Wed 24th February 2010 @ 10:32 pm
The first paragraph was quoted from Mrs IRD’s previous post – not sure how to highlight! All new to me! haha
Comment by Debbie — Wed 24th February 2010 @ 10:34 pm
IRD and Family Caught always go after and penalise the wrong people.
Comment by Scott B — Wed 24th February 2010 @ 10:40 pm
Ms IRD isn’t really an employee of the IRD. To blockquote text just use your mouse to highlight the text and then press the bquote button.
Comment by SicKofNZ — Wed 24th February 2010 @ 10:42 pm
In the context, I am saying the post referred to parent 1 and parent 2 as neither mother or father.
When someone comes online saying, IRD takes care of the mother so they come after the father, they have decided this is a gender issue. It’s not supposed to be a gender issue and it isn’t about taking care of either parent. That’s why I said child support (child tax) is not supposed to be an alimony.
I hope this is easier to understand.
Comment by julie — Wed 24th February 2010 @ 10:50 pm
Understand your frustrations. Apologies if my earlier post about leaving the country sounded like I don’t care about my kids. I do very much. I’m just very frustrated that I am very close to being made penniless due to the family court, WINZ, and by the IRD, and have had to consider all of my options, even though I’d do not want to leave my kids.
Good news today though is that it appears I’ve got the WINZ accommodation allowance. At least I think I have. I seem to have more money than I used to though I’ve had no correspondence confirming I got it. I’d call and ask but I’m scared they made a mistake and will want it back!
Slightly off-topic, and purely hypothetically of course, but should I wish to leave the country with my children and not return, does anyone know any countries with ‘safe houses’ for us to stay in to avoid NZ state continued child abuse ?
Comment by noconfidence — Wed 24th February 2010 @ 10:55 pm
Dave; We all know where we are… feminist hell :p
Julie; correct about the difference. I was going to just mention the difference between spousal maintenance and child support under law, but while looking at a certain web site I have found something that is rather newsworthy. When I say ‘newsworthy’ I mean NATIONALLY ! OMG, this will be an embarrassment to a particular organization.
Please email me urgently if you can suggest someone reputable within the media at:
[email removed by moderator]
(Have to do the above due to the spammers)
Comment by noconfidence — Wed 24th February 2010 @ 11:11 pm
Definitive Answers.
I Believe that IRD Officer & Ms. IRD Officer are not plants to extract personal information, thus rather stooges to provide debate upon the extreme auspices that IRD Child Support can evoke.
It is errant of them/him/her have baited for so long upon this website.
There are two extremely proficient advocates who have always been heavily involved with Child Support issues.
James (aka Scrap) in Wellington and Mark S in West Auckland.
I similarly have had issues at High Court, District Court, Solicitor General (threatening prosecution for publication) and IRD Manukau, and all have seem to have dissolved in uncertaintity.
My IRD # 43-072-692.
Kindest Regards
Paul Catton
East Auckland Refuge for Men and Families
(09) 271 3020
Comment by Paul Catton — Wed 24th February 2010 @ 11:31 pm
I may have been too quick off the mark with my comment above. Will be analysing the tons of information I have now found and will go through it carefully…. sleepy time first zzzzzzzzz
Comment by noconfidence — Thu 25th February 2010 @ 12:25 am
“It’s not supposed to be a gender issue and it isn’t about taking care of either parent.”
I understand this thread is not supposed to be a gender discussion. The NZ child tax certinely is a gender issue. I think that can be shown very easily and I am surprised anyone doubts it.
When you say it is not about taking care of either parent I don’t understand what you are saying. Of course it is about taking off one parent and “taking care of” the other parent. That is the entire basis of the NZ child tax system. It is fundamental to the entire system we have.
Don’t you understand how the system works and the intention of the law makers in drawing up and amending this law? It is all very clearly documented. Their rationale is fairly clearly documented in my view.
I am still very confused about what your point is. Were you taking about some system in some other country?
“I said child support (child tax) is not supposed to be an alimony.”
Since when? By whom? The NZ system is entirely about alimony and income tax. That was always the intention of the law makers. That is clearly expressed in the original rationale for the law and many times since when creating amendments to it.
Still mistified as to what your point was….
Comment by Dave — Thu 25th February 2010 @ 3:24 am
And you will stay mystified from where you stand. Anyways, I see the point you are making.
Comment by julie — Thu 25th February 2010 @ 7:18 am
If we have his car rego we will impound that and have Mr Turners auctions sell it for us. If he has a job we tell his boss to pay his earnings to us. If he owns proprty we ask the Court to sell it on our behalf.
Sounds like your ex must not have any assetts we can get our hands on.
Comment by Ms IRD Officer — Thu 25th February 2010 @ 7:40 am
Hi Paul and others,
You are right that Scrappy and Mark know lots. I talk to Scrappy occasionally but Mark hasn’t been on the phone to me lately. I’m closer geopgraphically to Scrappy’s location.
We all know your case well CvC. Personally I think you had a great case and certainly it was morally right but the law is the law is the law and we are mandadted to persecute earning parents even when their children have been abducted. Blind justice and blind civil servants we crunch the numbers and harrass all earning parents.
Sorry Julie if my gender knickers show. I like witches britches myself and nearly all the NCP’s we chase are daddies and nearly all the CP’s are mummies. Sometimes we just jump to wild conclusions that daddies are bad and mummies are good. Can you blame me 🙁 ?
Comment by Ms IRD Officer — Thu 25th February 2010 @ 7:53 am
Well, …. truth be told, I am disappointed with IRD and the way they see daddies=bad and mummies=good. It’s not that I blame you but that I’d appreciate IRD officers to look at each situation as it is alone without the bias. A lot of men will not come forward when they know IRD is bias and against them.
There are a lot of sad cases out there that really should be treated with kid gloves. (so to speak)
Because of this, I don’t appreciate the way you’ve spoken or the bias IRD officers have. Can you blame me 🙁 ?
Comment by julie — Thu 25th February 2010 @ 8:51 am
Mr Catton I like the cut of your jib my man
You have my utmost respect and admiration
It had to be said.
Mits
Comment by mits — Thu 25th February 2010 @ 10:51 am
Debbie if your Ex paid the 40K that he owes your child. Then what do you think you will buy for your child with such a sum?
What have you denied your child due to your ex not paying his child tax?
Why I ask is not to enter into a row but to try and get an understanding on the parents with the child/rens common attitude of “where is my child support money”
As Ive said before I pay child tax. I pay it throught the mandated IRD formula
I also pay child support on top of the legislated child tax to my children. Paying monies to them or for them for events toys equipment stay overs etc etc. Im happy to spend money on my children. Im not happy to support my Ex and some of her lifestyle issues with a contribution I see as child tax but she refers to as HER MONEY
She’s not on the DPB so she gets the $$$ and the only ones missing out in my case would seem to be the children.
So once again Im not trying to engage you in a row over who pays what in regards to child tax but on the off chance your ex did stump up the 40k what would your child spend it on?
Mits
Comment by mits — Thu 25th February 2010 @ 11:11 am
And let’s not forget that it’s not how much it costs to raise a child, it’s how much can we rort the paying parent for?
Comment by Scott B — Thu 25th February 2010 @ 11:51 am
Reply to reply Miss Feminazi I.R.D
Yes …….That statement you have quoted below I can truly believe,reminds of Nazi Germany…..
‘Blind justice and blind civil servants we crunch the numbers and harass all earning parents.’
‘Sometimes we just jump to wild conclusions that ‘daddies’ are bad and ‘mummies’ are good. Can you blame me?’….Of course not, as you are just a typical Kiwi Feminazi….thus,you are the poor innocent Victim from all us Evil and despicable Kiwi Men and Kiwi Fathers…Am I Correct Miss Feminazi…????
Just like the same you charming Kiwi Feminazis jump to the so call ‘conclusion’ with ‘Peter Ellis’….
Kind regards to you Miss Feminazi John Dutchie
Comment by John Dutchie — Thu 25th February 2010 @ 12:09 pm
Another comparison of Nazi germany will be revealed in the future when the next stolen generations saga is accepted into history. Many New Zealanders in organisations such as IRD child ‘support’, CYFS and the family court will say..
‘I didn’t know what our oppressive regime was doing…’, and yet they will be part of that regime. They will be guilty because they actually knew what was happening and did nothing to stop it.
History repeats itself over and over again. We humans just never seem to learn from them.
Resistance groups headed by some of the people who contribute on here and elsewhere should be awarded honours for their tireless work.
Comment by noconfidence — Thu 25th February 2010 @ 1:42 pm
@Hans Laven,
I too understand that ‘Ms IRD Officer’ is trying to pass a message that IRD is screwing parents (father) with child support.
Comment by tren Christchurch — Thu 25th February 2010 @ 2:38 pm
Reply to Tren Christchurch
Tren…Hope you don’t mind, I would like to rephrase your post…..
I too understand that ‘Ms Feminazi IRD Officer’ is trying to pass a message that IRD as in controlled by the Feminazi Feminists and its there solemn Feminazi right as in screwing parents (father) with child support.
And just my two cents worth…. Because ‘We’ here in N.Z as in Fathers have to ‘Punished’ for even to been born as a Man,let alone to make the horrible mistake with Feminazis to be Father and to love,honor and cherish our own offspring….!!!!!!
Kind regards to you Tren..John Dutchie
Comment by John Dutchie — Thu 25th February 2010 @ 3:09 pm
noconfidence: It will happen.
Comment by Hans Laven — Thu 25th February 2010 @ 6:42 pm
I’ve no doubt that it will, just not when
Comment by noconfidence — Thu 25th February 2010 @ 7:50 pm
Hi Mits, well I just wrote a nice reply to your question and lost it! Here we go again! But in answer to your question, I have no idea what I’d do with the money. It would probably set my 12 year old up for uni etc! In saying that though my girl has never gone without. I work two jobs, nearly 80 hours a week so shes always got what she needs (hey and wants!). Usually its me that misses out, you should see my wardrobe!
I was merely getting at the IRD lady that said “You Fathers who think we taxpayers should suport your kids can get F**ing lost. My friends and I wil ensure you pay and pay and pay as that is our job.”
My husband works hard and pays $900 a month for his children, I get nothing from my ex, and work two jobs because he can’t do overtime because then hÃs payments will go up even more. We are merely surviving on what we earn now!
I just think that ‘genuine fathers’ who WANT to be hands on with their children get a battering from IRD and FC. My ex gambles, drinks etc and I think if he has money for that then he should be living up to his responsibility of being a dad too. Quite frankly I think I’d be more satisfied just knowing that he’s finally been sprung by IRD to pay the CS he owes because I know for a fact he’s only trying to avoid it because of his ‘social issues’!
Lets face it everyone else has to pay so why is he singled out!
Comment by Debbie — Fri 26th February 2010 @ 4:37 pm
The words ‘Hook, Line and Sinker’ come too mind
Comment by Paul MacKay — Sat 27th February 2010 @ 11:39 am
So Mits am i nuts or no with my comment! been dying to hear from you!
Comment by Debbie — Fri 5th March 2010 @ 10:16 pm
IMO you’re not nuts! I think we’re a little sheepish of women coming on here claiming they are owed everything from their ex while denying their children access to their father. From what you’ve inferred so far I would say that’s not happening in your case.
Yes; there are loser dads out there and we admit that. The system fails the majority of us because they:
1. call it a child support but only pay it when the non-custodian parent pays it (thus not a ‘support’), and take penalties from them when late payments are made and they KEEP it!
2. Have a ridiculous formula that is income based. It means that low income non-custodial parents can’t pay sufficient as that wouldn’t be fair and high earning parents pay far too much.
3. We know how much is required to pay for the upkeep of a child, 2 children, etc. Why base it on income? I was in a well paid job a long time ago and was paying approx $850 a month to my ex for an equal custody arrangement. Now I’m unemployed I get $65. Are my kids suddenly worth less ?
4. It takes no account of partners. Income splitting would assist them in sharing their tax burden and would ensure child support could be slightly fairer.
Makes me wonder whether we should arrange a mass non-payment protest soon…….
Comment by noconfidence — Sat 6th March 2010 @ 9:54 am
Mass non payment… I was thinking the same, but we need to do more than just that, or we’ll all just get fined.
Comment by Scott B — Sat 6th March 2010 @ 11:40 am
My kids get no money and I get no financial help whatsoever, hes meant to pay but hes working for himself and uses someone elses bank accounts so far ird cant touch him,good on the dads that do help financially support their children but from my experience their are
far more misogynists in the world than femi nazis- I spose the women that dont cook eggs deserve what they get eh?
Comment by Mumof2 — Thu 11th March 2010 @ 10:00 pm
As there are more women in the world than men I think your statement would be quite inaccurate!
Regardless, I am for equality for all and justice for children.
Comment by noconfidence — Thu 11th March 2010 @ 10:12 pm
Have you ever considered that your knack of being offensive is most likely the reason for your delusions?
Good on him for avoiding having to pay child tax. The child probably isn’t his anyway.
Comment by SicKofNZ — Thu 11th March 2010 @ 10:17 pm
“My kids get no money and I get no financial help whatsoever”
that doesnt ring true,
Methinks someone has some entitlment issues.
Trolling for a bit of attention, and where else but a thread titled child support entanglements
Geez cry me a river, you got the kids isnt that enough?
Give the kids some money woman and stop being so selfish.
Mits
Comment by Mits — Thu 11th March 2010 @ 10:39 pm
I was thinking the same as you Mits.
Every non custodial parent gets charged child tax. Even someone who earns ZERO dollars must pay a minimum of $12.75 p/w + debit interest for late payments. If you’re receiving no financial help whatsoever I advise you to apply for the DPB before you all starve to death. If you’re already receiving the DPB then any increase of child tax paid by your ex won’t be received by you anyway. I suspect your complaint is not genuine and that your motive is to demonize the father of your children. Add one to your misandry list deary.
Comment by SicKofNZ — Thu 11th March 2010 @ 10:52 pm
No financial help – I don’t think so! If its that bad you need to get a 25 hr/week job,then go for Working with Families and woohoo you have the income of what some people get for working a 50 hr week! Don’t tell me theres no financial support for you – haven’t you heard of WINZ! Like I said earlier I work two jobs and have a no hoper ex that doesn’t pay me a cent where as my husband pays a truck load of CS but really I’m not whinging because like Mits says – I have my daughter and I’d give my life to her – we HAVE to make ends meet and we do, she never goes without! So lady you are the ones that put us hard working mums to shame really – moan, moan moan and obviously doing nothing about it.
Comment by Debbie — Wed 17th March 2010 @ 10:08 pm
I’ve experienced the same thing, and everyone I talk to says the same thing.
If you have been on the benefit, you see the payments being made, but as soon as you come off the benefit, the payments oddly cease. I’ve also had a IRD-ChildSupport officer more aless say that 1st priority is given to the beneficiaries, and that if your ex is over-seas in Australia even (a reciprical country) you will be relegated to the bottom, and to NEVER expect anything…. could be 20 yrs or never. And you are always hearing about these big bills. My ex had been swearing black and blue that he had been paying one time, and IRD were saying that he wasn’t, and you don’t know what to think.. and the IRD-child support staff just seemed to change the story all the time…
Finallly I contacted the local MP office, and they did find some payments after about 6 months, so it does make you wonder.
Comment by Mary Poppins : — Sat 27th March 2010 @ 10:46 pm
Could someone clear up some semantics?: People have been talking about Child Tax. It this just their term for Child Support? or is this something new/additional … the whole things gives me a stress headache… Because I haven’t bothered for 3 years, I am behind on the system, and glossed through all these posts last night, and I am still unsure what’s what. I looked on the IRD website, and see child-tax credits etc, but as far as I can see child tax credits are child tax credits, and child support is child support.
I do know that it is difficult to ever get a consistent story from IRD-child-support, so I want to know as much as possible this time round. I do know when payments get lost they go into a suspense acount which is what I use to hear alot about (or not hear alot about, and still don’t know who was telling the truth from the onset), and I also use to hear alot about penalties getting paid first. Also I thought there was some way of getting penalties wiped. What does anyone know?
Comment by Mary Poppins : — Sun 28th March 2010 @ 10:45 am
Child support = child tax
Comment by Scott B — Sun 28th March 2010 @ 10:50 am
Thanks for clearing that up. I thought it was someting new that I had missed like the tax on alcohol/cigarettes, so ignore anything I have said about the sustainability argument. When 2 parents are together they share the load. When they separate, they either come to a voluntary arrangment, or fight. If they fight, then they refer it on to IRD. IRD assesses the right amount.
If either party is unhappy, you apply for a reassessment. If ex says he is paying and IRD tell you a different story everytime you ring up, you go to your local MP. … and probably remain in the dark anyway… or you give up, or you get intimidated, or you brace yourself for it all over again… or you hope your ex is not stupid again, and thinks long term, to avoid penalties and communicates and sends you receipts, so that you can tell IRD what has been paid and when… but that would be too simple.
Comment by Mary Poppins : — Sun 28th March 2010 @ 11:20 am
I come across this website by accident, but it is really obvious that you all are just women haters!!! We arnt all bad!! You talk about how men should have more rights to their children and I guess this needs to be on a case by case basis. One thing that I have noted is that you HATE paying for your share of bringing a child up…..Thats part of being a father as well!!!!!!!
Comment by Kerrry — Thu 8th July 2010 @ 1:40 pm
I think you will find that there are very few women haters here, if any. And if you wished to look further through these pages, Kerrry, with three ‘r’s, you should see that most fathers are happy to provide for their children, within reason, and with reasonable accesss rights,without the lies and unfounded, unverifiable accusations that so many Family Court decisions are made upon. You should spend some of your valuable time trawling through here, if you can keep an open mind. If you have already made it up, then don’t bother. Good luck, either way.
Comment by glenn — Thu 8th July 2010 @ 1:59 pm
John Dutchie, I dont think you are being very fair to the nazi’s they were not all that bad…
Comment by No way i am putting my name here — Thu 15th July 2010 @ 12:55 pm
I started the payment protest ages ago, still waiting for you lot to join me…
Comment by No way i am putting my name here — Thu 15th July 2010 @ 1:16 pm
Bottom line all you people who dont want to pay Child Support for whatever reason:If the child/children are yours pay up.If not how can you claim to be an adult?How can you claim to be responsible?All your energy which just seems to be trying to get back at an ex could be put to better use.The good news for you is that when the child leaves school and gets a job or turns 19 you wont have to pay.Being angry everyday about how much children cost to raise is such a waste of energy and you must be making your face ugly with bitterness.
Comment by PCville — Thu 13th October 2011 @ 1:07 am
Hi PCville
I think youve missed the point that almost everyone here doesnt mind supporting their child.
Its being forced to pay child tax as benefit recovery that rankles. Or being forced to hand over the cash to an ex, who is not such the holy paragon of virtue willing to sacrifice everything for the sake of her meal ticket, whoops I mean child, that can prove exasperating.
I know its easier for people not forced to pay this tax to blindly ignore these things and lump everyone with a gripe about child tax as a hater who probably deserves everything they get, but try to look beyond that simplistic idea and see that supporting the children better is also what the majority want.
Take the other parent out of the equation as a gate keeper to the funds for supporting children, stop double taxing parents to pay for benefit recovery that doesnt go to the child. Make it the priority that all money raised under the guise of child support is spend on………….. wait for it………. Supporting children!
That is a scheme I could get behind.
Please stop calling this current travesty support, your only lying to yourself.
Mits
Comment by mits — Thu 13th October 2011 @ 6:06 am
@pcville – In the US, it’s being forced to pay child support that exceeds cost of raising a child by a multiple of three or four and being unable to pay it because your income doesn’t allow it and your broke and then your jailed because you can’t afford to pay. The gov’t literally breaks the man and then punishes him for being broke. During the past forty years, more than two-million fathers have been imprisoned for INABILITY to pay the excessive child support they have been ordered. The problems don’t stop there. More than 250,000 have killed themselves rather than go to prison or live on the street and unable to see their children again. There are even more problems but those are beyond the scope of this e-mail. I hope you understand the problem beyond your simple and inaccurate portrayal of it.
Comment by Darryl X — Thu 13th October 2011 @ 9:15 am
@pcville – Since arrears AND interest continue to accumulate if you are not able to keep up, you continue paying beyond the age of 21 and for states like Massachusetts, it’s 23. Most men who had children when they were in their early thirties will still be paying into their seventies and many will never be able to pay down the debt.
Comment by Darryl X — Thu 13th October 2011 @ 9:19 am