A case that may be interesting to Pennsylvania residents is one of a father who is fighting a court ruling of how much he owes his ex-wife in child support. He says that the court’s calculation of his monthly income is in error, and the child support amount he owes should be much lower than the amount that has been set. The state in which this case occurred not only calculates support amount by looking at a person’s gross monthly income but at other amounts they consider to be fringe benefits.
Fringe benefits are subsidies by an employer that could help lower everyday living expenses. In certain situations, this could mean a company car or living quarters. This man once owned his own farm, but it fell into extreme debt, and he had to go to work for his father, who is also a farmer. His parents pay him for the work he does, but they also give him money to help him meet his financial obligations of transportation and housing expenses. His parents give him money because he is their son and not as extra income, and the man’s attorney has argued that the extra money is a gift and should not be counted as a fringe benefit.
Furthermore, the court wanted to count the money the man received from his farm loan before the farm went under. He is already paying for healthcare insurance as well as private school tuition for his two children. His attorneys are requesting the monthly child support amount be cut by more than half of what the trial court has set. On the other hand, the attorneys for the mother claim the man contradicted himself in the last court appearance and that the listing of fringe benefits and the verdict of the trial court is accurate and valid.
The case has been appealed by the man to his state’s Supreme Court. It will be interesting to see the ruling that will be issued. To find out whether or not fringe benefits are considered in Pennsylvania, it may be necessary to seek knowledgeable assistance to navigate the often complex laws pertaining to child support.
Source: wtvm.com, “Early Co. child support case goes to Supreme Court”, May 28, 2015
