What Are My Rights Under Colorado Child Support Laws?

Child support laws are designed to ensure that both parents contribute to their child’s well-being and support, even after separation or divorce. When a parent fails to meet their financial obligations, the Colorado Child Support Enforcement Act provides mechanisms for the custodial parent to enforce the support agreement.

Once a court orders child support, it becomes a binding legal obligation. The non-paying parent cannot evade this responsibility. Colorado courts use a mathematical formula to calculate child support, determining each parent’s income, time spent with the child, and other financial responsibilities.

Under Colorado Revised Statutes § 14-10-115, courts calculate child support based on both parents’ incomes, ensuring that children maintain their standard of living as much as possible. Once a child support order is in place, unless exceptional circumstances arise, it’s enforceable until the child turns 19.

How Can I Enforce Child Support?

If the payments stop, you don’t have to wait or wonder what to do next—several legal options are available. The Colorado Division of Child Support Services (CSS) agency offers a variety of enforcement tools. These include garnishing wages, withholding tax refunds, or even suspending the delinquent parent’s license. Let’s explore some of the most effective methods for how to get child support enforced.

Wage Garnishment

One of the most common methods to enforce child support is wage garnishment. Through wage garnishment, CSS can require the co-parent’s employer to automatically deduct a portion of their wages, ensuring you get the payments owed. The withheld amount is then directed to you to cover the overdue payments. Wage garnishment is automatic and continues until the arrears are paid in full.

Tax Refund Interception

If wage garnishment is not feasible or doesn’t cover the full amount, CSS can intercept the non-paying parent’s federal and state tax refunds. This method ensures that any refund due to them is instead applied to the outstanding child support.

License Suspension

Another effective enforcement tool is license suspension. If the parent fails to pay, their driver’s, professional, or hunting and fishing licenses can be suspended. This often acts as a powerful motivator for parents to resume their payments.

Contempt of Court

When all other enforcement methods fail, either the CSS or the receiving parent can ask the court to hold the non-paying parent in contempt. This process is described in more detail below as it involves the courts. For now, we’ll just note that being held in contempt is serious—if the court finds the parent guilty, they could face hefty fines, jail time, or both. Contempt proceedings can be effective, but courts use this enforcement method as a last resort.

Property Liens and Seizures

In more severe cases, CSS can place liens on the non-paying parent’s property, such as real estate or vehicles. They can even seize assets from bank accounts. This method ensures that the parent fulfills their financial obligations, using their own property or funds to cover the debt.

What If the Non-Paying Parent Is Self-Employed?

Enforcing child support can get tricky when the non-paying parent is self-employed, but it’s not impossible. Without an employer to garnish wages, enforcement can seem complicated, but it is still possible. For self-employed parents, the court may order direct payments from their income sources or require them to provide financial documentation to determine available assets.

Additionally, the court can issue contempt orders or property liens just as it would with a traditionally employed parent. Staying proactive in these cases is essential, and working closely with legal counsel can help you through the complicated steps of enforcing child support against a self-employed parent.

How to Get Child Support Enforced Through the Courts?

If the above-referenced CSS enforcement tools fail, you may need to turn to the court system. How can I enforce child support through the court? Let’s look at the court process, which begins with filing a motion to enforce the child support order.

File a Motion to Enforce

This motion informs the court that the co-parent is failing to meet their support obligations. To strengthen your case, gather clear evidence—missed payments, failed communication, or broken promises all show the court you’re serious about enforcement.

Attend a Court Hearing

The court will schedule a hearing where both parties can present their sides. If the non-paying parent cannot provide a valid reason for their lack of payments, the judge will likely issue enforcement measures.

Contempt Proceedings

As mentioned earlier, if the parent continuously refuses to comply, you can request the court to hold them in contempt. Colorado courts treat child support enforcement seriously, with penalties that may involve jail time or substantial fines.

Following the correct legal procedures and submitting all essential documentation is crucial to strengthen your case. It is also advisable to seek legal counsel to guide you through the process and protect your rights.

What Is the Timeline for Child Support Enforcement?

The timeline for child support enforcement varies depending on the method used and the case’s complexity. For example, wage garnishment is typically swift, as employers must legally comply. However, property liens or contempt proceedings can take longer. It’s important to remain patient but persistent and consult with an attorney who can help guide you through the process.

How Can Plog & Stein P.C. Assist with Colorado Child Support Enforcement?

When it comes to child support enforcement, you don’t have to face the battle alone. At Plog & Stein P.C., we are well-versed in Colorado child support enforcement and can help you pursue the appropriate legal remedies. Our knowledgeable family law attorneys are here to fight for your child’s future, ensuring you get the support you need.

Whether you need assistance with wage garnishment, filing a motion with the court, or auditing the finances of a self-employed parent, we have the knowledge and skills to help. Our firm’s experience, dedication, and commitment to delivering results make us the go-to choice for family law matters in Colorado. Contact us to schedule a consultation and start the enforcement process today.

Resources:

• Enforcing Orders. Division of Child Support Services, link
• Father’s Guide to Child Support, Colorado Judicial Branch, link

By: Stephen J. Plog

As indicated in many previous Plog & Stein blog posts, Colorado Revised Statutes indicate that parents have a legal obligation to provide financial support for their children. This requirement is manifested in child support orders flowing from child custody, divorce, or stand-alone child support cases. Monthly child support amounts are calculated pursuant to C.R.S. 14-10-115 and pursuant to a table or formula which is essentially based on the parents’ combined incomes and the number of children to be supported. Statute expressly caps the formula at a combined adjusted gross income for the parents at $30,000 per month or $360,000 per year. Where does this leave high income families with a combined monthly income over the $30,000 cap?

In cases in which the parents’ combined gross monthly income is over $30,000, the court has various options available to it, though it cannot enter a child support order below what it would be at exactly $30,000 combined income, unless it has a good reason to deviate from the guidelines. Specifically, C.R.S. 14-10-115 (7)(a)(II)(E) states, “The judge may use discretion to determine child support in circumstances where combined adjusted gross income exceeds the uppermost levels of the schedule of basic child support obligation; except that the presumptive basic child support obligation shall 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 obligation.” While a minimum amount is clearly set by statute, an amount above that minimum is squarely up to the judge presiding over the case, as reiterated or clarified in a recent Colorado child support case.

In practice, the dynamic will usually go that the party with the higher income will argue that the top guideline amount should not be exceeded and that child support should be set at the minimum level (maximum on the table). The other side, earning less income, will generally argue that child support should exceed the guideline amount and will ask the court to extrapolate using the guidelines or to set an arbitrary monthly support amount based on other factors. In assessing this type of case, what are the factors the court should look at? Guidance can be found in C.R.S. 14-10-115 (2)(b), which indicates, “In determining the amount of child support …, 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.

While in the typical case, the attorneys know that child support is most likely (if not always) going to be set based on the monthly guidelines, they must be prepared to address and argue these specific factors when dealing with high income families. Thus, while child support is often a clear cut issue, it is not so clear when the $30,000 cap is exceeded. For lack of a better term, the outcome of a high income child support case can be “grey.”

Over the years I have seen some judges preemptively state they do not exceed the guidelines in high income cases. I have seen other judges more open to exceeding that cap. The norm would be appropriate application of statute without preconceived notions.

In reality, the pivotal factor in a high income child support case is still going to be the parties’ incomes. However, in some cases, such as a divorce, high income comes with high assets, meaning both parties may receive a significant amount of assets such that the potential payer might argue the recipient is financially fine on his or her own as relates to the ability to support the child without exceeding the cap. That being said, high income household may often come with more expensive needs, such as private school, costly activities, etc. The family law practitioner needs to be abreast of the relevant statutory sections and ready to make arguments, both as part of settlement discussions or litigation, tied into their position as relates to those factors.

As July 1 soon approaches, it’s that time of year again when revisions to Colorado statutes often come into effect. Family law statutes related to divorce, child custody, and child support are no exception to this phenomenon. While things do not generally change too radically, even simple, nuanced changes can have an impact on family law cases. In this blog post, I will discuss changes to the primary Colorado child support statute, C.R.S. 14-10-115, which go into effect in 2019. Interestingly, the 2019 version of statute also references changes which will go into effect in 2020.

The first somewhat significant change ties into you children and imputation of income to their caregivers. Pursuant to C.R.S. 14-10-115, a child support court has the ability to assign or “impute” income to a parent based on their earning potential. Imputation can be requested when one parent is voluntarily unemployed or under-employed. For years, in recognition of the involved nature of raising young children, Colorado statute has indicated that a court cannot impute income to a parent “who is caring for a child under the age of thirty months for whom the parents owe a joint legal responsibility…” The 2019 changes now make that age 24 months. The Colorado legislature, in making this change, likely formulated the belief that today’s society is filled with two income households, with both parents working. With that comes children becoming accustomed to day care or preschool at an earlier age than they may have in the past. Right or wrong, the change is here.

Those parents facing a new child support obligation will be jumping for joy at the notion of being able to have at least some income imputed to the other parent at an earlier age. Conversely, those parents who are the ones tasked with primarily caring for the children will now be forced to make the decision much sooner as to whether to go to work or have income imputed to them. In cases in which that imputation would be minimum wage, the impact on the bottom line child support amount may not be that great. However, when that stay at home parent had a career or professional degree, he or she can expect their child support to potentially be impacted sooner. Thus, while some parents will be happy with this change, others will not.

The second 2019 change to C.R.S. 14-10-115 also relates to income. While courts have been able to impute income for years, they have largely been guided by case law in making determinations as to underemployment or unemployment. Now courts have some statutory guidance enumerated in Subsection (b.5)(II), which sets forth a specific list of factors the court must look at, including the parent’s assets, residence, employment and earning history, job skills, educational attainment, literacy, age, health, criminal record, other employment barriers, record of seeking work, the local job market, the availability of employers hiring in the community, without changing existing law regarding the burden of proof, and other relevant background factors in the case. While attorneys have found it relevant to present some or all of these factors when dealing with child support cases, they are now codified, requiring courts to make findings as to them.

At risk of bashing my own profession, it is safe to say that the more statutory factors listed, the more attorneys (or parties) will have to argue over. It will be interesting to see, over time, how the new enumerated factors compete in any given case and which ones a court might give more weight to over others. Only time will tell.

Expected Changes in 2020

The changes to the voluntarily unemployment/underemployment section are the primary 2019 changes. The only other 2019 change requires parties filing a verified entry of support judgment (a method by which to enforce child support orders) to send such to all parties. That being said, the legislature has preemptively enacted changes to go into effect in 2020, which will be discussed further below.

The 2019 changes are immediate and affect all child support proceedings. Specifically, the law states that it “shall apply to all child support obligations, established or modified, as a part of any proceeding…regardless of when filed” (C.R.S. 14-10-115(1)(c)). In other words, if you filed a divorce case two months ago, the current child support law, including all recent changes, affect your case (new law, not old law applies). This could cause a multitude of difficulties for individuals facing potential underemployment claims. For example, if you were not working at the time your case was filed because you were caring for a child twenty-five months of age, you would not have been considered voluntarily unemployed at the time the case was filed; but, due to recent statutory changes, you now could be considered voluntarily unemployed. As the changes are very recent, it is yet to be seen how judges will take this into consideration, if at all.

Adjustments to Gross Income

Beyond the 2019 changes to the child support law, there are additional changes coming July 1, 2020. One such change was to amend the description of adjustments to gross income, including the descriptions of the low income adjustments. Most notably, the minimum monthly amount of child support, when the paying party’s monthly adjusted gross income was less than $1,100, was $50. Starting July 1, 2020, when the paying party’s monthly adjusted gross income is less than $650, the minimum amount of child support is only $10 per month. Starting July 1, 2020, the table of child support amounts will also be adjusted.

How Child Support Will be Calculated

Additionally, starting July 1, 2020, the child support law codifies child support cases law regarding how support is calculated when there are two or more children subject to the child support calculation but each child has a different number of overnights with each parent. Prior to this case, there was case law that explained how overnight parenting time should be calculated, but it was not clearly laid out in the law. Starting July 1, 2020, the law will clarify the way to calculate the number of overnights. Specifically, you will add together the number of overnights for each child, then divide that number by the number of children included on the worksheet. For example, if a parent has 104 scheduled overnights per year with two out of the three children and 182 scheduled overnights per year with the other child, you would add up all the overnights (104+104+182) and divide by 3 to arrive at the number of overnights to use on the worksheet. For this scenario, you would then run a child support worksheet for three children with the parent having the average,130, scheduled overnights per year.

School Fees

Furthermore, starting July 1, 2020, mandatory school fees, defined as “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…[but] not… uniforms, meals, or extracurricular activity fees,” will be addressed (C.R.S. 14-10-115(3)(c.5)). Currently, the child support statute only addresses payment of fees for expenses for special or private elementary or secondary schools to meet the particular educational needs of the child. However, next year, the mandatory school fees will also be divided by parents in proportion to their incomes (for example, if father earns $7,500 gross per month and mother earns $2,500 gross per month, mother will be responsible for 25% of mandatory school fees and father will be responsible for 75% of such).

Disability

Finally, starting July 1, 2020, there are changes to the disability section of the child support law. Specifically, if a noncustodial parent receives disability benefits or employer-paid retirement benefits from the federal government, the noncustodial parent shall notify the custodial parent, and child support enforcement, if they are a party to the case, within 60 days of receipt of notice of said benefits. The custodial parent must then apply for dependent benefits for the child(ren) within 60 days of receiving this notice. The ultimate conclusion, when benefits are received, will be a dollar-for-dollar reduction in child support paid. Though this scenario is not that common, it will impact some cases and is certainly worth mentioning.

Clearly the point of these statutory changes was to fill in holes (like including the payment of mandatory school fees) and to solidify prior case law (like with the calculation of overnights). However, there are still some areas of the child support statute that lack clarity that these legislative changes did not resolve. My next blog post will detail these additional areas that still need clarification. Perhaps one day they will make it onto the legislature’s radar, too.

By: Michelle L. Searcy

At the most basic level, the Colorado child support calculation is based on the combined income of the parents, the number of children and the number of overnights exercised by each parent in Colorado. Calculating income for a parent with a job that issues a W-2 is a fairly straight forward process. However, less traditional forms of income have the potential to complicate calculating child support. One of the more difficult issues in determining child support occur when a disability occurs with parents, step-parents, or children. This article addresses those issues under the child support statute, section 14-10-115, C.R.S.

However, death and disability payments are treated differently depending on who is disabled (or deceased) and who is the named recipient of the benefit. These distinctions determine whether the benefit is considered as income to the parent, income to the child, or an offset against a child support obligation. As set forth below, the interplay between child support and social security benefits can be somewhat complex.

The first step in any child support calculation is determining the income of the parents. Section 14-10-115 (5), C.R.S. sets forth the criteria for determining a parent’s income for child support calculation purposes and includes many forms of financial payments. Where a parent receives social security benefits as a result of the disability of that parent or the death of a stepparent, it is included as income to the parent for child support calculation purposes. However, only those benefits received directly by the parent for those reasons are considered income of the parent.

Often, in addition to the benefit received by the parent, a benefit is paid to the child. The benefits received by the minor child or on behalf of the minor child, due to the death or disability of a stepparent, are not included as income to the parent or the child. However, benefits received by the minor child or on behalf of the minor child as a result of the disability of a parent can be included as income of the child for support calculation purposes, depending on the circumstances. This can make a difference because in some cases, the child’s income may be considered as a factor to lower both parents’ support obligation. The benefit received may result in a proportionate reduction of each parent’s child support obligation in the same way that a child’s income from a part-time job, who is expected to pay some of his or her basic expenses, may be considered.

As stated previously, the court will consider a disability benefit paid to a disabled parent as that parent’s income. If the disabled parent is not the custodial parent (the parent with the majority of the parenting time), the custodial parent can request to be made the payee for the child’s portion of disability benefits paid by the federal government or employer-paid retirement benefits from the federal government based on the non-custodial parent’s disability or retirement. In these cases, the non-custodial, disabled parent will receive a dollar for dollar offset of his or her child support obligation. Furthermore, any lump sum payments received by the custodial parent must be applied to any child support arrearages incurred since the disability or retirement of the non-custodial parent. If the non-custodial parent receives this payment, it is income to the parent and child support is calculated accordingly.

The different nuances tied into social security disability payments and child support, particularly as relates to income of a child, can greatly impact a calculation. Regardless of which parent is disabled, the child support recipient is generally going to be the one who faces a reduction in the monthly child support he or she receives. Looking at it from a different perspective, when the child receives income due to the disability of either parent, that money is generally going to be used in the home of the custodial parent.

Whenever the issue of social security disability payments arises in a child support case, it’s important to understand your rights, options, and risks. It’s also advisable to consult with a child support lawyer before making any significant decisions.

It is not a common occurrence to have individuals separating immediately around the time of the birth of a child, but it does happen. When parties are married, this child support and custody issues are usually through the courts via a dissolution of marriage (divorce case). But what happens to those situations where the parties were never married, or maybe even never together in a relationship? Often times the issue and concern of birth and pregnancy related medical expenses can arise as a financially important issue that requires resolution through the courts as well. Most often these issue of allocating birth and pregnancy costs is something that arises in a paternity case under Colorado Revised Statutes, Title 19.

Most people who share children, but were never married will file what is called an allocation of parental responsibilities (custody) case, in which issues of parenting time, decision-making, and child support will be dealt with. These types of cases governed under Title 14 of the Colorado Revised Statute and the Uniform Dissolution of Marriage Act. Don’t let the Act fool you, the Section still applies to parties that were never married when going through a APR case. In regular APR or custody situations, the paternity of the child is not in question and the case can be filed anytime between the birth of the child and the age of emancipation (18). You cannot file a standard custody case prior to the birth of the child in anticipation of custody issues that may arise thereafter. However, what is important for expectant mothers contemplating separation, new mothers who have separated from the other parent, and even mothers with young children who have not filed anything with the biological father to know is that there is no statutory authority for an award of birth-related and pregnancy-related expenses when you file a case under C.R.S. Title 14. Pursuant to In Re Custody of Garcia, 695 P.2d 774 (Colo. App. 1984), a case filed under C.R.S. §14-10-123, the Uniform Dissolution of Marriage Act, which encompasses APR cases, the trial court does not have jurisdiction to make an award of medical expenses associated with the pregnancy/birth of the minor child.

The reasoning behind this holding is that first, the parties who file for an APR case were never married, and therefore the court cannot award the medical expenses as a form of a marital debt pursuant to C.R.S. §14-10-113. Secondly, the court does not have the authority to award past expenses, such as the pregnancy/birth costs prior to the filing of a Petition for APR as a form of child support under C.R.S. §14-10-115. Jurisdiction over the other party in an APR case only starts upon service of the Petition. The exclusive jurisdiction to award pregnancy and birth-related costs lies in Title 19 of the Colorado Revised Statute, specifically Article 4, the Uniform Parentage Act, in a paternity case.

C.R.S. §19-6-101, et seq., allows for paternity to be established, even prior to the birth of the child, and any presumption of paternity, as detailed in §19-4-105 and shown by a preponderance of the evidence, may then be rebutted by clear and convincing evidence. Once paternity is established, the court can make findings regarding parenting time, decision-making, and child support. This also allows the court, as part of the child support aspects of the case, to include orders regarding allocating birth related and pregnancy related medical expenses between the parents. Specifically, C.R.S. §19-4-116, holds that a father may be responsible for the reasonable expenses of the mother’s pregnancy and that “bills for pregnancy, childbirth expenses, and genetic testing are admissible evidence without the necessity of third-party foundation testimony and shall constitute prima facie evidence of the amounts incurred for such services or for expenses incurred on behalf of the child.” Any expenses awarded under this statute will be entered in the form of a judgment, which can be paid through periodic payments or a lump sum. The court also has the authority to allocate the expenses in conjunction with child support, C.R.S. §19-4-129. In those instances, the C.R.S. §14-10-115 Guidelines for child support will generally be used, though the court is not bound by them in a Title 19 case. Contact our law firm to speak with our lawyers about birth expenses and allocation of parental responsibilities.