Source: http://www.readbag.com/apps-americanbar-family-military-silent-mpd-spouse
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 11:08:58+00:00

Document:
INTRODUCTION: SILENT PARTNER is a lawyer-to-lawyer resource for military legal assistance attorneys and civilian lawyers. It is an attempt to explain broad generalities about the law of domestic relations. It is, of course, very general in nature since no handout can answer every specific question. Comments, corrections and suggestions regarding this pamphlet should be sent to the address at the end of the last page. Overview of the Military Pension Division Series There are five SILENT PARTNERs in this series.
· Military Pension Division: Scouting the Terrain is a general introduction to the topic. It discusses the passage of USFSPA (the Uniformed Services Former Spouses' Protection Act), what the Act does (and doesn't do), and how the question of &quot;federal jurisdiction&quot; is critical in knowing whether a pension can be divided by a court or not. It also covers deferred division of pensions and presentvalue offsets, direct payment from DFAS (Defense Finance and Accounting Service), early-out options and severance pay, dividing accrued leave, and military medical benefits. · Military Pension Division: The Servicemember's Strategy contains information on how to assist the servicemember (hereafter &quot;SM&quot;) in this area, and · Military Pension Division: The Spouse's Strategy covers how to help the SM's spouse. · The wording and administrative requirements for garnishment of retired pay from DFAS, including a sample military pension division order/agreement, are in Getting Military Pension Division Orders Honored by DFAS. It also contains a checklist used by DFAS to determine whether a court decree for pension division will be accepted for direct payment to the spouse/former spouse. · Retrieving an apparently &quot;lost&quot; pension benefit for the spouse/former spouse is covered in &quot;Lost&quot; Military Pensions: The Ten Commandments.
to risk battles over visitation, child support, alimony and other matters in a case that could be settled, just to engage in &quot;nuclear warfare&quot; regarding the pension. All states allow military pension division. As will be outlined below, only a few bar the division of pensions that are not vested. The job of a good lawyer is to guide the client with sage advice and serious judgment. Advice and guidance for the &quot;big picture&quot; along these lines is essential for those who are truly serious about helping these clients. Roadblocks and Minefields Our client in this example is Mrs. Roberts, the wife of Army Colonel Bill Roberts. He's been in the Army 20 years and now they're going through a divorce. Mrs. Roberts wants her share of the military pension. Here are the arguments he'll probably use, and her responses: Constitutionality. If COL Roberts says, &quot;They can't do that -- it's unconstitutional,&quot; don't worry. The constitutional attack on pension division will fail. This issue has been rejected in all state courts that have considered it. The same argument was also rejected by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in 1990 in Fern v. United States. 1 Retroactivity. In general, the claim for military pension division must be made at a time when both federal and state statutes allow for such division. Thus the first real inquiry is to decide whether Mrs. Roberts is too late to claim pension division. This would be the case if her divorce decree or equitable distribution judgment (without military pension division) was filed on or before June 25, 1981 or before the equivalent implementing legislation at the state level (if it was filed after this date). If she's asking now for the pension, rather than trying to amend a prior decree, she should prevail on this issue. Timeliness. The next point of analysis for COL Roberts' case is whether the claim was filed procedurally in a timely manner. This is a very technical question of state law. Some states limit the filing of equitable distribution claims to the period up to the granting of a divorce or dissolution; if you wait till after that, you're &quot;too late.&quot; Others require the filing to occur after the separation of the parties and before the divorce or dissolution occurs; you can't just file suit for property division while you're still living together. Under North Carolina law, for example, the rights of the spouses to marital property division vest at the time of the parties' separation; the right to equitable distribution does not exist if the claim for it is filed before the separation. In addition, the right to equitable distribution must be asserted before the final divorce judgment; a divorce judgment destroys the right to equitable distribution unless that right is asserted prior to the granting of a judgment of divorce. Be watchful for such limitations in the state where Mrs. Roberts files suit (or responds to the suit filed by COL Roberts). This defense involves complex procedural research that is best left to the expert; it is wise to consult a good family law attorney or refer this kind of case to a family law specialist. Waiver. Be sure that Mrs. Roberts hasn't waived her rights. Did she sign a separation agreement or property settlement agreement? An antenuptial agreement can also waive property division rights. In some jurisdictions, such an agreement does not have to define specifically the property that is involved or that is exempted from division. Even if there is no mention of the pension, a general clause in the agreement which waives the marital rights of the parties can be construed as barring a claim for equitable distribution. Nonvested Pension Benefit. There are only a few jurisdictions which provide that, by law, a military pension may not be divided. These fall into the following categories: states where there is a &quot;vesting requirement,&quot; one state where ten years of marital military service is required (Alabama) and one jurisdiction (Puerto Rico) which bars division of any noncontributory retirement pay.
First of all, the husband's post-divorce promotions and continued service are based on the foundation of marital efforts in most cases. In other words, COL Roberts might never have made it to the rank of brigadier general were it not for the marital efforts of Mrs. Roberts during those years when he was a captain, a major, a lieutenant colonel and a colonel. The second reason is that, while we have &quot;frozen&quot; the rank and years of service of COL Roberts (so that Mrs. Roberts is excluded from any portion of his pay if he gets promoted to general), we have not frozen the denominator in the marital fraction. Thus the bottom part of the fraction keeps on growing, but the grade and years of service of COL Roberts are frozen, and that's not fair. To be logical, consistent and fair about this, either the grade and years of service should go up with the total years of military service (which is the denominator in the marital fraction), or else the denominator should be frozen along with the grade and years of service. Don't mix apples and oranges!
Survivor Benefit Plan premiums. Please note that disability benefits are deducted from gross pay in order to arrive at &quot;disposable retired pay.&quot; Thus a retired servicemember can waive receipt of retired pay to receive an equivalent amount of VA disability benefits, and these latter benefits will be received tax-free. This tactic can be used by a military member to reduce the portion of retired pay that is divisible. And there's no way to stop a member from taking disability pay! See the prior section on VA disability pay on drafting a clause that indemnifies the spouse if the soldier chooses this option. The SILENT PARTNER, Military Pension Division: The Servicemember's Strategy, contains a useful introduction to &quot;concurrent receipt&quot; of retired pay and disability benefits which is mandatory reading. Another problem arises when a soldier leaves military service for a job with the federal government before he's eligible to retire. Few civilian lawyers (and even fewer spouses!) realize that a member can &quot;roll over&quot; his retirement into a federal civil service job and get a year-for-year credit on civil service retirement based on the time he spent in the military. Even fewer lawyers and spouses have the foresight to anticipate this situation will occur &quot;a few years down the road&quot; and possess a working knowledge of the statute allowing this credit. The way to handle the problem -- by anticipatory drafting - is to include a clause that states: If Defendant fails to retire from military service and elects to &quot;roll over&quot; or merge the time of his military service into federal government service in order to get credit for same, then the Plaintiff shall be entitled to her share of any federal retirement pay or annuity he receives based on the parties' period of marriage during Defendant's period of military service. Defendant shall notify Plaintiff immediately upon his termination of military service, through retirement or otherwise, and shall include in said notification a copy of his military discharge certificate, (DD Form 214), and, if applicable, his retirement orders and certificate. Defendant shall also notify Plaintiff immediately if he takes a job with the federal government, and will include in said notification a copy of his employment application and his employment address. Caring for the Survivors: Survivor Benefit Plan and Life Insurance After the battle comes caring for the survivors. Its equivalent in the area of military pension division is deciding on a replacement for the SM's pension at his death. The Survivor Benefit Plan is the usual issue at stake here. An overview of this survivor annuity is covered in the SILENT PARTNER, Military Pension Division: Scouting the Terrain. Also found there is a summary of the benefits and disadvantages of SBP coverage. Especially when deferred division is used, the attorney for the spouse of the servicemember should insist on SBP coverage to allow continued receipt of retirement benefits if the spouse survives the member. This is a valuable tool in planning for continued income for the nonmilitary spouse. The most likely strategy for the SM in this area is silence. If no one says anything about SBP, then COL Roberts won't have to elect coverage, which will save him money and also retain this option for a remarriage and a new wife, if that's in his future. Thus you'll need to speak up if you want to protect Mrs. Roberts in this area. If there is a discussion about SBP, then the SM's attorney will want to deflect the conversation into death benefits in general, of which life insurance is the most obvious choice. Life insurance for Mrs. Roberts would probably be cheaper than SBP (which generally cost 6.5% of the base amount selected), and it has the advantage of paying Mrs. Roberts a lump-sum cash amount at his death, rather than doling out the monthly payments to her. If there's a dispute, they may offer to split the cost with Mrs. Roberts ­ each will pay half the premium. Even better for him, they may propose to include the premium in the amount of alimony, if any, that COL Roberts would pay Mrs. Roberts; that way, the premium will be deductible for him at tax time each year.
Often the SM says, &quot;Why doesn't my wife have to pay for SBP? After all, she wants it! I'll be dead and gone by the time she gets it. She should have to pay the premium.&quot; Unfortunately for the SM, it doesn't work that way with DFAS. They won't shift the premium to Mrs. Roberts since the SBP premium, according to USFSPA, comes off the top before determining disposable retired pay. This results in the parties both paying the SBP premium in the same ratio as the pension is divided. But the parties can accomplish the same thing by adjusting the percentage that Mrs. Roberts receives. See the SILENT PARTNER, Military Pension Division: The Servicemember's Strategy for information on how to do this. When the other side tries to avoid the issue or change the subject, here are some suggested responses: · If you want SBP and do not have any interest in alternatives, then stick to that. Don't engage in discussions about life insurance. · If you're interested in life insurance, make sure that you don't use Servicemembers Group Life Insurance (SGLI). According to a 1983 Supreme Court decision called Ridgway v. Ridgway, 19 you cannot enforce a court order or separation agreement that provides for SGLI to secure the payment of a divorce settlement. · And if you're interested in life insurance, be sure to transfer ownership of the policy to your client. Such provisions for life insurance are commonly funded or secured by &quot;owned&quot; policies which belong to the premium payor and build up cash value or equity (e.g., whole life, variable life or universal life policies), ones which belong to the payor but build up no cash value (term life insurance), and ones which have no equity/cash value and do not belong to the person who pays the premiums (group life policies). Remember this when drafting a clause that attempts to ensure that the premium payor will not inadvertently (or intentionally) change the beneficiary to a new spouse, for example, in lieu of the beneficiary stated in the agreement. How will the other party ever know whether the intended beneficiary remains as such when the policy and all incidents of ownership remain elsewhere--with the payor or his employer? How can one prevent the payor from signing an agreement containing a life insurance clause and then immediately breaching it by designating a new beneficiary? The answer is through ownership of the policy. Except in the case of group life insurance policies (including SGLI), most insurance companies allow a collateral assignment of ownership of the policy to a person other than the premium payor. The owner of the policy is the one who designates the current beneficiary and who must consent to any proposed change in beneficiary. The owner must be informed by the company of any attempts to cancel the policy, and must also be advised as to nonpayment of premiums that would have the effect of canceling coverage. Finally the owner is the only one who, with life insurance that has cash value, can borrow against the policy. Since these are the very things which ought to be withdrawn from the premium payor--the power to borrow against the policy, cancel it or change the beneficiary--it makes sense to agree on transfer of ownership of the insurance policy. Ownership of the policies can revert back to the original owner after the support terms have been satisfied. A transfer of ownership has the effect of protecting each party, preserving their promises and putting temptation out of the way. Extra Benefits for Consideration. You'll find overview coverage of early-out options (VSI/SSB), military medical benefits and dividing accrued leave in the SILENT PARTNER, Military Pension Division: Scouting the Terrain. Here are some specific tips you need to know about representing the military spouse in regard to additional benefits.
Accrued Leave. When it comes time to do the division and distribution of marital property, one oftenoverlooked asset is accrued leave for the military member. Each person in the military service on active duty accrues 30 days of paid leave each year, regardless of rank. This leave is worth what it's equivalent would be at the monthly pay rate of the servicemember, and this can be figured out by using the pay tables available at the nearest recruiter's office or at www.dfas.mil, the DFAS website. Thus if a servicemember is paid $4,400 gross pay per month and he has 45 days of accrued leave at the point of evaluation (e.g., date of separation, date of filing, date of marital breakdown.), his accrued leave would be worth about $6,600 [45/30 x $4,400]. Since senior enlisted members and officers frequently carry as much as 60 days of accrued leave from year to year, this is a significant asset to consider in the division of marital property. Member's Medical Benefits. A separate issue that bears mentioning is the valuation of the member's medical benefits. If Colonel Roberts retires after 20 years of service, he will receive free medical care at any military medical facility on a space-available basis. He also receives military medical insurance, currently called TRICARE, for most medical expenses he incurs. All of this can be evaluated by an expert, and this value can be attributed to COL Roberts as part of the retirement benefits he receives. 20 So many attorneys are concerned solely with the evaluation of retired pay that they forget the valuation of other retirement benefits that should be included. Since this medical care for COL Roberts is part of his retirement benefits, so the argument goes, it should be included for valuation purposes, even if the statutory benefit cannot be transferred to Mrs. Roberts. Such an approach may yield a substantially better settlement for Mrs. Roberts than the valuation of only her husband's pension payments. It should also be pointed out that this valuation approach, of course, can also be applied to Mrs. Roberts' own marital medical benefits and entitlements; these can also be valued and added to her share of the marital property to the extent they were acquired during marriage. Spouse's Medical Care. Pub. L. 98-525, the Department of Defense Authorization Act of 1985, expanded the medical (and other) privileges set out in Pub. L. 97-252 to extend certain rights and benefits to unremarried former spouses of military members. If the former spouse was married to a member or former member for at least 20 years during which he performed at least 20 years of creditable service (also called &quot;20/20/20&quot; spouses, which refers to 20 years of service, 20 years of marriage, and 20 years of overlap), then she is entitled to full military medical care, including TRICARE, if she is not enrolled in an employer-sponsored health plan. She is also entitled to commissary and exchange privileges. 21 If the former spouse was married to a member or former member for at least 20 years during which he performed at least 15 years of creditable service (also called &quot;20/20/15&quot; spouses, for 20 years of service, 20 years of marriage and 15 years of overlap), and the former spouse is not enrolled in an employer-sponsored health plan, then the length of time that she is entitled to full military medical care, including TRICARE, depends upon the date of the divorce, dissolution or annulment, as set out below. No other benefits or privileges are available for her. If the date of the final decree of divorce, dissolution or annulment of marriage was before April 1, 1985, then the former spouse is authorized full military medical care for life, so long as she does not remarry. If the decree date is on or after April 1, 1985, then she is entitled to full military medical care, including TRICARE, for a period of one year from the date of divorce, dissolution or annulment. If the former spouse for some reason loses eligibility to medical care, she may purchase a conversion health policy 22 under the DOD Continued Health Care Benefit Program (CHCBP), a health insurance plan negotiated between the Secretary of Defense and a private insurer, within the 60-day period beginning on the later of the date that she ceases to meet the requirements for being considered a dependent or such other date as the Secretary of Defense may prescribe.
Upon purchase of this policy the former spouse is entitled, upon request, to medical care until the date that is 36 months after (1) the date on which the final decree of divorce, dissolution or annulment occurs or (2) the date the one-year extension of dependency under 10 U.S.C. 1072(2)(H) (for 20/20/15 spouses with divorce decrees on or after April 1, 1985) expires, whichever is later. 23 Premiums must be paid three months in advance; rates are set for two rate groups, individual and group, by the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs). CHCBP is not part of TRICARE. For further information on this program, contact a military medical treatment facility health benefits advisor, or contact the CHCBP Administrator, P.O. Box 1608, Rockville, MD 20849-1608 (1-800-809-6119). A former spouse may also obtain indefinite medical coverage through CHCBP (under 10 U.S. Code 1078a) if she or he meets certain conditions. The former spouse: · · · · Must be entitled to a share of the servicemember's pension or SBP coverage; May not be remarried if below age 55; Must pay quarterly advance premiums; and Must meet certain deadlines for initial application.
Details regarding application for this &quot;CHCBP-indefinite&quot; coverage may be found at www.tricare.mil/chcbp/default.cfm. The coverage is the same as that for federal employees, and the cost is the sum of the following: premium for a federal employee, plus premium paid by the federal agency, plus 10%. This amounts to less than $350 per month as of 2008. It is important to remember that these are statutory entitlements; they belong to the nonmilitary spouse if she or he meets the requirements of federal law set out herein. They are not terms that may be given or withheld by the military member, and thus they should not be part of the &quot;give and take&quot; of pension and property negotiations since the military member has no control over these spousal benefits.
Clausen, 831 P.2d 1257 (Alaska 1992); and McMahan v. McMahan, 567 So.2d 976 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App. 1990). The document to request in Army Reserve cases is DARP Form 249. For National Guard cases, ask for NGB Form 23. The Navy Reserve form is NRPCC Form 1070-124; and the Air Force Reserve form is AF Form 526. 17. For cases holding that classification of the marital part of a Reserve pension could be based on &quot;marital points&quot; divided by &quot;total points,&quot; see In re Poppe, 97 Cal. App. 3d 1, 158 Cal. Rptr. 500 (1979) and In re Beckman, 800 P.2d 1376 (Colo. Ct. App. 1990). Some states, on the other hand, require calculation of the marital fraction based on time, not &quot;points&quot; or some other factor. See, e.g., N.C. Gen. Stat. 50-20(b), which states, &quot;The award shall be determined using the proportion of time the marriage existed, (up to the date of separation of the parties), simultaneously with the employment which earned the vested pension, retirement, or deferred compensation benefit, to the total amount of time of employment.&quot; 18. 10 U.S.C. § 1408 (c) (1). 24. Ridgway v. Ridgway, 454 U.S. 46, 102 S. Ct. 49, 70 L.Ed. 2d 39 (1987). 20. See W. Horbatt and A. Grosman, Division of Retiree Health Benefits on Divorce: The New Equitable Distribution Frontier, 28 FAM.L.Q. 327 (Summer 1994). 21. 10 U.S.C. § 1062. 22. 10 U.S.C. § 1086 (a). 23. 10 U.S.C. § 1078 a (g) (1) (C).

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 1408
 v. 
 § 1062
 § 1086
 § 1078