BILL ANALYSIS
SB 1355
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 30, 2010
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
SB 1355 (Wright) - As Amended: June 10, 2010
Policy Committee: JudiciaryVote:9 -
1
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill suspends a noncustodial parent's obligation to pay
child support while that parent is incarcerated or involuntarily
institutionalized. Specifically, this bill:
1)Provides that a noncustodial parent's obligation to pay child
support is suspended if the parent is incarcerated or
institutionalized for over 90 days, unless that parent has the
means to continue paying the support while incarcerated.
2)Specifies that the suspension only applies during
incarceration and the obligation automatically resumes upon
release.
3)Applies to all support orders modified after July 1, 2011.
4)Requires Judicial Counsel to develop the necessary form for
the suspension.
5)Sunsets the provisions of this legislation July 1, 2015.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)To the extent that suspending child support orders encourages
incarcerated noncustodial parents to resume paying child
support upon their release, it could result in an increase in
the amount of child support that is successfully collected.
2)The accumulation of past due child support, along with the
reduction in current support payments reduces the state's
performance on federal child support measures. This, in turn,
SB 1355
Page 2
reduces the incentive funding California receives from the
federal government for its child support program. Therefore,
suspending child support orders and reducing the amount of
past due child support could increase the amount of federal
funding for the Department of Child Support Services (DCSS).
COMMENTS
1)Rationale . A 2000 study by the California Research Bureau
(CRB) found that an estimated 856,000 children in California
had a parent who was currently involved in California's adult
criminal justice system. Of those, CRB estimated that
approximately 195,000 children had parents in state prison and
97,000 had parents in jail. A portion of those parents are
noncustodial parents who may be required to pay child support.
For incarcerated parents who are subject to child support
orders, arrears and interest will accrue during their period
of incarceration unless the parent has the means to continue
to pay his or her child support order or petitions the court
for a modification of the support order. However, asking for
a modification is often not a realistic alternative for
incarcerated parents who are unlikely to know about the
modification process. In order to address this issue, this
bill seeks to automatically suspend child support obligations
when a child support obligor is incarcerated or involuntarily
institutionalized for more than 90 days, unless the
noncustodial parent otherwise has the means to pay the
support.
2)Background . Studies have shown incarcerated noncustodial
parents accumulate large amounts of past-due child support
while they are in prison and generally they do not have the
income to pay those debts. A 2003 Urban Institute study found
that the median amount of child support orders for
incarcerated parents was $291 per month, which was only
slightly lower than the median amount among all noncustodial
parents. However, the reported income and assets for
incarcerated parents was substantially lower than other
noncustodial parents. According to the study, only about half
of parents who were incarcerated and owed child support had
reported incomes in the two years prior to their incarceration
and, of those, their median annual net income was just under
$3,000. Their median arrears were $14,564.
SB 1355
Page 3
3)Child Support Arrearages . March 2009 child support data shows
that noncustodial parents in California owe almost $20 billion
in past-due child support. Of that amount, almost $16 billion
is for current and former assistance cases. The remaining $4
billion is for families that were never on assistance. Unpaid
child support arrearages accrue interest at the rate of 10%
per year.
In 2003, when California's cumulative arrearages balance was
$14.4 billion, the state contracted with the Urban Institute
to conduct a study on the arrearages owed in California. The
Urban Institute's study found that 75% of the debt was over
2.5 years old; 70% of arrearages were held by individuals with
incomes below $10,000 per year; 70% of the arrearages were
owed to the government under public assistance assignment; 27%
of the debt was interest; and California could realistically
expect to collect 26% of the debt over a 10-year period. The
main reason for the high arrearages was that orders were not
correctly established in the first place, with support being
set by default using presumed, but not actual, income.
4)Related Legislation . In 2009, SB 578 (Wright) would have
allowed certain non-custodial parents who owe child support to
have the interest waived on the past-due child support if they
paid their current month's support payment in full. That bill
was held on this committee's suspense file.
AB 862 (Bass), 2005, would have required that information and
other materials regarding child support modification be
distributed to any parent with minor children, while the
parent is in the custody of CDCR. This bill was vetoed. In
his veto message, the governor noted the bill was unnecessary
because current law provides for local and state agencies to
distribute information to incarcerated parents regarding their
child support obligations. In addition, he argued that, "At
the state level we should be looking for ways to improve child
support collection so more funds get to the children, not
investing in ways to alleviate the future financial burdens
due to incarceration."
AB 2245 (Wright), 2002, would have, among other things,
required that a child support order be suspended, including
any arrearage, interest, or penalty that may accrue, if the
support obligor is or was incarcerated in a penal institution
for more than 29 consecutive days, and is without the
SB 1355
Page 4
resources to pay child support. That bill failed passage in
the Assembly Judiciary Committee.
Analysis Prepared by : Julie Salley-Gray / APPR. / (916)
319-2081