When a Court calculates child support in Pennsylvania it considers the amount of income both parties generate. The monthly incomes are calculated and then compared using a chart generated by the legislature. The incomes are plugged in along with the number of children and a general amount of child support is determined from the chart. There are also numerous other factors and credits that go into the determination of the final amount which include the amount of custody, medical insurance credits and other payments. However, how is a fair child support amount calculated when one party either refuses to work, or there is an allegation that the part is earning an income much less than their commensurate earning capacity?
Child support is a shared responsibility, both parents are obligated to support their children “in accordance with their relative incomes and ability to pay.” Reinert v. Reinert, 2007 PA Super 170, 926 A.2d 539, 542 (Pa. Super. 2007). The important concept here is how the Court fairly determines income potential.
“Ordinarily, a party who willfully fails to obtain appropriate employment will be considered to have an income equal to the [party’s] earning capacity.” Pa.R.Civ.P. 1910.16-2(d)(4). The determination of a parent’s ability to provide child support is based upon the parent’s earning capacity rather than the parent’s actual earnings. This includes the type of jobs and earning capacity that the parent has demonstrated in the past, education and vocational training. See Kelly v. Kelly, 430 Pa. Super. 31, 633 A.2d 218 (1993). The bottom line is that if a Court is presented evidence that demonstrates that an individual’s income is below their actual earning capacity, the Court is within its discretion to base an award on an imputed income. An example of such a situation would be a doctor or lawyer deliberately earning less money to artificially lower income capacity by working in a McDonalds.
Laws v. Laws, 2000 PA Super 248, 758 A.2d 1226, 1229 (Pa. Super. 2000). As stated a party’s age, education, training, health, work experience, earnings history, and childcare responsibilities are factors that shall be considered in determining earning capacity. Id. (citing Pa.R.Civ.P. 1910.16-2(d)(4)). We have also stated, however, that in appropriate cases, the “earning capacity of a parent who elects to stay home with a young child need not be considered.” Reinert, 926 A.2d at 543 (citing Kelly v. Kelly, 430 Pa. Super. 31, 633 A.2d 218, 219 (Pa. Super. 1993)).
A wife’s willful lack of full-time employment can result in a Court imputing income to the wife. In Bogdon v. Bogdon, 2018 Pa. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 327, 2018 WL 700823, the wife had five years to become employed in a full-time position. Wife was awarded alimony for a period of one year. The Court stated that rather than finding work commensurate with her previous employment, Wife chose to become employed in a part-time position where she earns $11.35 per hour. An earning capacity of $30,000 per year comes down to approximately $15.62 per hour for forty hours per week. Given Wife’s age and employment history, it is not unreasonable to expect that she will be able to find such a position. The Court based upon the wife’s failure to find work commensurate with her work capacity when she had time to do so should result in an imputed work capacity. The Court awarded a $30,000.00 work capacity to the wife for the purposes of Child Support payments.
Thus, the reality is that if an individual earns less than their past income for what the Court deems poor reasons, it can be argued that an earning capacity can be imputed to that individual.