Opinion ID: 2077339
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Governing Statutes and Regulations

Text: The legislature has enacted several statutes to assist courts in fashioning child support orders. Section 46b-84 provides in relevant part: (a) Upon or subsequent to the annulment or dissolution of any marriage or the entry of a decree of legal separation or divorce, the parents of a minor child of the marriage, shall maintain the child according to their respective abilities, if the child is in need of maintenance. Any postjudgment procedure afforded by chapter 906 shall be available to secure the present and future financial interests of a party in connection with a final order for the periodic payment of child support.... (d) In determining whether a child is in need of maintenance and, if in need, the respective abilities of the parents to provide such maintenance and the amount thereof, the court shall consider the age, health, station, occupation, earning capacity, amount and sources of income, estate, vocational skills and employability of each of the parents, and the age, health, station, occupation, educational status and expectation, amount and sources of income, vocational skills, employability, estate and needs of the child.... The legislature also has provided for a commission to oversee the establishment of child support guidelines, which must be updated every four years, to ensure the appropriateness of child support awards.... General Statutes 46b-215a. [6] General Statutes § 46b-215c further provides that the updated guidelines issued by the commission shall be submitted to the standing legislative regulation review committee and adopted in accordance with the provisions of chapter 54, the Uniform Administrative Procedure Act, General Statutes § 4-166 et seq. Moreover, the legislature has thrown its full support behind the guidelines, expressly declaring that [t]he ... guidelines established pursuant to section 46b-215a and in effect on the date of the support determination shall be considered in all determinations of child support amounts .... In all such determinations, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the amount of such awards which resulted from the application of such guidelines is the amount of support.... A specific finding on the record that the application of the guidelines would be inequitable or inappropriate in a particular case, as determined under criteria established by the [commission] under section 46b-215a, shall be required in order to rebut the presumption in such case. (Emphasis added.) General Statutes § 46b-215b (a). The guidelines are defined as the rules, principles, schedule and worksheet established under [the applicable sections] of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies for the determination of an appropriate child support award.... Regs., Conn. State Agencies § 46b-215a-1 (5). A `[c]hild support award' is further defined as the entire payment obligation of the noncustodial parent, as determined under the ... guidelines .... (Emphasis added.) Id., at § 46b-215a-1 (6). The guidelines include a schedule for calculating the basic child support obligation for families that have two minor children and a combined net weekly income ranging from $310 to $4000. Id., at § 46b-215a-2b (f). The guidelines provide in relevant part that, [w]hen the parents' combined net weekly income exceeds [$4000], child support awards shall be determined on a case-by-case basis, and the current support prescribed at the [$4000] net weekly income level shall be the minimum presumptive amount. Id., at § 46b-215a-2b (a)(2). In appropriate cases, the guidelines also permit the entry of a supplemental order ... to pay a percentage of a future lump sum payment, such as a bonus. Such supplemental orders may be entered only when ... the percentage is generally consistent with the schedule.... Id., at § 46b-215a-2b (c)(1)(B)(ii); see also id., at § 46b-215a-1 (11)(A)(iii) (permitting, inter alia, bonuses to be included in calculation of gross income). In accordance with the statutory directives set forth in General Statutes § 46b-215b (a), the guidelines emphasize that the support amounts calculated thereunder are the correct amounts to be ordered by the court unless rebutted by a specific finding on the record that such an amount would be inequitable or inappropriate. Id., at § 46b-215a-3 (a). Any such finding shall include the amount required under the guidelines and the court's justification for the deviation, which must be based on the guidelines' [c]riteria for deviation.... Id., at § 46b-215a-3 (b); see also General Statutes § 46b-215b (a). None of the guidelines suggest that an increase, rather than a decrease, in the support obligation in higher income families is appropriate merely because the noncustodial parent has the greater earning capacity. [7] The guidelines are accompanied by a preamble that is not part of the regulations but is intended to assist in their interpretation. Child Support and Arrearage Guidelines (2005), preamble, § (a), p. i. The preamble states that the primary purpose of the guidelines is [t]o provide uniform procedures for establishing an adequate level of support for children; id., at § (c)(1), p. ii; and [t]o make awards more equitable by ensuring the consistent treatment of persons in similar circumstances. Id., at § (c)(2), p. ii. The preamble explains that the commission extended the applicable range of the schedule in 2005 to include families with a combined net weekly income of up to $4000, an increase from the combined net weekly income limit of $2500 contained in the 1999 schedule, to promote consistency in the setting of support orders at all income levels by taking advantage of more recent data on child-rearing costs that included higher income families. Id., at § (e)(6), p. vi. The preamble further explains that the guidelines are based on the income shares model, which considers the income of both parents and presumes that the child should receive the same proportion of parental income as he or she would have received if the parents lived together. Id., at § (d), p. ii. Children's economic needs do not increase automatically, however, with an increase in household income. Although parents may spend more on their children in absolute dollars as their income grows, thus raising the child's station and standard of living, the income shares model reflects the principle that spending on children as a percentage of household income actually declines as family income rises. The preamble specifically notes that economic studies have found that spending on children declines as a proportion of family income as that income increases, and a diminishing portion of family income is spent on each additional child. Id., at § (d), p. iii; see also Gentile v. Carneiro, 107 Conn.App. 630, 648, 946 A.2d 871 (2008) ([t]he guidelines are based on the premise that a parent with a high net income pays a lower percentage of his income for child support as compared to an obligor with a lower net income). The preamble suggests that spending declines because families at higher income levels do not have to devote most or all of their incomes to perceived necessities. Rather, they can allocate some proportion of income to savings and other [nonconsumption] expenditures, as well as discretionary adult goods. Child Support and Arrearage Guidelines (2005), preamble, § (e)(4)(A), p. iv; see also Ford v. Ford, 600 A.2d 25, 30 (Del.1991) (When the income of an individual is substantial, he or she will use a smaller percentage of that income to maintain a certain standard of living as compared to an individual with less income. This is because, outside of unusually extravagant lifestyles, only a limited sum can be spent on a standard of living. At some point income is directed less and less towards `needs' and more and more towards savings or investments and thus becomes part of an individual's estate.); In re Marriage of Bush, 191 Ill. App.3d 249, 261, 138 Ill.Dec. 423, 547 N.E.2d 590 (1989) (A large income does not necessarily trigger an extravagant [lifestyle] or the accumulation of a trust fund. A large increase in income will not necessarily result in an equal change in one's [lifestyle]. There are other rational options for an individual with a large income than just conspicuous consumption. The wealthy person may prefer personal frugality, or the enrichment of others through charitable giving, or simply deferring income through tax-delay investments, in order to build an estate.), appeal denied, 129 Ill.2d 561, 140 Ill.Dec. 668, 550 N.E.2d 553 (1990). Consequently, the 2005 guidelines, like those that came before them, incorporate declining percentages at all levels of combined net weekly income ... consistent with the income shares model.... Child Support and Arrearage Guidelines (2005), preamble, § (e)(4)(B), p. iv. In sum, the applicable statutes, as well as the guidelines, provide that all child support awards must be made in accordance with the principles established therein to ensure that such awards promote equity, uniformity and consistency for children at all income levels.  (Emphasis added.) Id., at § (c)(1) and (2), p. ii; id., at § (e)(6), p. vi. General Statutes § 46b-84 specifically instructs that courts shall consider various characteristics and needs of the child in determining whether support is required, the amount of support to be awarded and the respective abilities of the parents to provide such support. Although the guidelines grant courts discretion to make awards on a case-by-case basis above the amount prescribed for a family at the upper limit of the schedule when the combined net weekly income of the parents exceeds that limit, which is presently $4000; Regs., Conn. State Agencies § 46b-215a-2b (a)(2); the guidelines also indicate that such awards should follow the principle expressly acknowledged in the preamble and reflected in the schedule that the child support obligation as a percentage of the combined net weekly income should decline as the income level rises. Thus, an award of child support based on a combined net weekly income of $8000 must be governed by the same principles that govern a child support award based on a combined net weekly income of $4000, even though the former does not fall within the guidelines' schedule. Finally, although courts may, in the exercise of their discretion, determine the correct percentage of the combined net weekly income assigned to child support in light of the circumstances in each particular case, including a consideration of other, additional obligations imposed on the noncustodial parent, any deviation from the schedule or the principles on which the guidelines are based must be accompanied by the court's explanation as to why the guidelines are inequitable or inappropriate and why the deviation is necessary to meet the needs of the child. [8] See also General Statutes § 46b-84 (d).