If, on remand, the trial court uses tax tables in finding appellant's income, they must be current tables. While we do not disagree with respondent's observation, the cases she cites involve difficulty in estimating the income figure against which the statutory deductions are allowed and to which the tax tables are applied. Here, the trial court found such a figure but, without explaining why, neither specifically addressed the statutory deductions nor applied the tax tables as recommended by statute. Appellant claims that the trial court erred by not awarding him nonmarital interests in the farm and cattle. The trial court has broad discretion to divide property.
Property acquired by either spouse during a marriage is presumptively marital.
Whether property is nonmarital is a legal question we review de novo but the trial court's findings of fact underlying a ruling on whether property is nonmarital are not set aside unless clearly erroneous. The nonmarital nature of property must be shown by a preponderance of the evidence. Appellant claims that respondent fraudulently induced appellant's father to put respondent's name on the documents conveying the farm by threatening to divorce appellant if her name were not put on those documents and by promising to put appellant's name on her assets. We find no merit in appellant's argument that the trial court erred in not relying on parol evidence appellant presented regarding the farm conveyance. Appellant's claims of fraud were implicitly denied when the trial court found the property to be marital.