SB 274, as introduced, Leno. Child support: statewide uniform guideline.
Under existing law, the parents of a minor child are responsible for supporting the child. Existing law establishes the statewide uniform guideline for calculating court-ordered child support, which is rebuttably presumed to be the correct amount of child support. Existing law provides that the presumption may be rebutted by admissible evidence showing that application of the formula would be unjust or inappropriate because of one or more factors found to be applicable and the court provides certain information in writing, as specified.
This bill would make a technical, nonsubstantive change to this provision.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no. State-mandated local program: no.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
Section 4057 of the Family Code is amended to
2read:
(a) The amount of child support established by the
4formula provided in subdivision (a) of Section 4055 is presumed
5to be the correct amount of child support to be ordered.
P2 1(b) The presumption of subdivision (a) is a rebuttable
2presumption affecting the burden of proof and may be rebutted by
3admissible evidence showing that application of the formula would
4be unjust or inappropriate in the particular case, consistent with
5the principles set forth in Section 4053, because one or more of
6the following factors is found to be applicable by a preponderance
7of the evidence, and the court states in writing or on the record the
8information required in subdivision (a) of Section 4056:
9(1) The parties have stipulated to a different amount of child
10support under subdivision (a) of Section 4065.
11(2) The sale of the family residence is deferred pursuant to
12Chapter 8 (commencing with Section 3800) of Part 1 and the rental
13value of the family residencebegin delete in whichend deletebegin insert whereend insert the children reside
14exceeds the mortgage payments, homeowner’s insurance, and
15property taxes. The amount of any adjustment pursuant to this
16paragraph shall not be greater than the excess amount.
17(3) The parent being ordered to pay child support has an
18extraordinarily high income and the amount determined under the
19formula would exceed the needs of the children.
20(4) A party is not contributing to the needs of the children at a
21level commensurate with that party’s custodial time.
22(5) Application of the formula would be unjust or inappropriate
23due to special circumstances in the particular case. These special
24circumstances include, but are not limited to, the following:
25(A) Cases in which the parents have different time-sharing
26arrangements for different children.
27(B) Cases in which both parents have substantially equal
28time-sharing of the children and one parent has a much lower or
29higher percentage of income used for housing than the other parent.
30(C) Cases in which the children have special medical or other
31needs that could require child support that
would be greater than
32the formula amount.
O
99