IFB 209

2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Guidelines Schedule Submitted by: 1570 Emerson Street Denver, CO 80218 303 / 837-1555 FAX: 303 / 837-1557 Jane C. Venohr, Ph.D. jvenohr@centerforpolicyresearch.org December 3, 2008 Points of view expressed in this document are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position of the Child Support Guidelines Committee or the State. CPR Center for POLIC Y RESEA RCH Table of Contents SECTION I: INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................1 Purpose of Report .............................................................................................................. ........................1 Organization of Report ........................................................................................................ .................... 2 Federal Requi rements........................................................................................................... .................... 2 Guidelines Models .............................................................................................................. ...................... 3 Basis of Maryland Guidelines................................................................................................... ..................................... 5 SECTION II: ESTIMATES OF CHILD REARING EXPENDITURES ............................................................... 7 Estimates of Child-Re aring Expenditures........................................................................................ ........ 7 Overview of Me thodologies ...................................................................................................... .................................... 8 van der Gaag (1981) estimates.................................................................................................. ..................................... 8 Espenshade (1984) estimates.................................................................................................... ..................................... 8 Betson (1990) estimates........................................................................................................ .......................................... 8 Betson (2001) estimates........................................................................................................ .......................................... 9 Betson (2006) estimates........................................................................................................ .......................................... 9 USDA estimates................................................................................................................. ............................................ 10 Comparisons .................................................................................................................... .............................................. 11 Data Sources of the Estimates.................................................................................................. ............... 11 Specific Consumption Items ..................................................................................................... .................................. 12 Usage of Estimates in State Guidelines......................................................................................... ..........15 Economic Estimates Considered by Maryland ...................................................................................... .................. 18 SECTION III: UPDATED OBLIGATION SCHEDULE ..................................................................................19 Overview of Steps Used to Develo p Updated Obligati on Schedule........................................................19 Proposed Updated Schedule of Basic Support Ob ligations ....................................................................21 Detailed Technical Step s and Additi onal Data ................................................................................... ....36 Technical Steps Used to De velop Obligation Schedule............................................................................ .............. 39 Section IV: Schedule Compar isons and Conc lusions.............................................................................4 5 APPENDIX A: SIDE-BY-SIDE COMPARISONS OF EXISTING TO UPDATED SCHEDULES REFERENCES Table of Contents - ii . EXHIBITS Exhibit 1: Principles of St ate Child Support Guidelines ....................................................................... .......................... 3 Exhibit 2: State Usage of Child Support Guidelines Models...................................................................... ..................... 5 Exhibit 3: Comparisons of Estima tes of Child-Rearing Expenditures............................................................. .......... 10 Exhibit 4: Variations in Child-Rearing Expenditures by Income ................................................................. ............... 11 Exhibit 5: Partial List of Expenditures Items Considered ...................................................................... ...................... 12 Exhibit 6: Composition of Av erage Spending by Families........................................................................ ................... 13 Exhibit 7: Family Consumption and Income...................................................................................... ............................ 20 Exhibit 8: Updated 2008 Schedule.............................................................................................. ...................................... 21 Exhibit 9: Parental Expenditures on Children.................................................................................. .............................. 38 Exhibit 10: Table of Support Proportions...................................................................................... ................................. 41 Exhibit 11: Illustration of the Hidden Net Income Column ...................................................................... .................. 42 Exhibit 12: Comparison of the Economic Ba sis o the Existing and Updated Schedules ....................................... 45 Exhibit 13: Comparison of Existing to Proposed Schedule: One Child........................................................... ........ 46 Exhibit 14: Comparison of Existing to Proposed Schedule: Two Children........................................................ ..... 46 Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 1 Section I: Introduction PURPOSE OF REPORT Child support contributes to the financial well-being of many Maryland children. In 2007, the Census reported that there are 1,358,576 children living in Maryland and 442,210 of those children live with only one parent.1 This amounts to one out of three children living with only one parent. Most of these children are eligible for child support. An unknown number of Maryland children living in other si tuations are also eligible for child support. One of their parents may have remarried and they now live with a step-parent or they live with foster parents or in other situations without both of their parents. The Maryland Depart-ment of Human Resources, Child Support Enforcement Program (CSE) collects about $475 million in child support annually for many of these children. An unknown amount of addi- tional support is paid to non-CSE cases. In Maryland, child support orders are set usin g the child support guidelines provided in statute (Maryland Code, Family Law, Sections 12-201 through 12-204). The core of the guidelines calculation is a lookup schedule of basic obligations for a range of incomes and number of children. The basic obligations re flect economic data on the costs of raising children. The obligated parent’s pro rata share of the basic obligation forms the basis of the child support order. Additional adjustments are made for actual child care expenses, the actual cost of health insurance for the children , shared physical custody, and other factors. With the exception of changes at incomes below minimum wage, most of the Maryland schedule has not been updated since 1989. As a consequence, it does not reflect the current costs of raising children. Moreover, the Maryland guidelines ranks low when com- pared to other states. A 2005 study (Venohr an d Griffith) found that the Maryland guide- lines amount for a mother and father with median income ranked 40 th among all states and the District of Columbia. In contrast, Maryla nd ranks first among all states and the District of Columbia in median family income.2 The purpose of this report is to provide te chnical documentation of an updated Maryland child support schedule. The updated schedule re flects the cost of raising children in Mary- land in 2008. The report also fulfills Federa l and State requirements that the child support guidelines be reviewed at least once every four years.3 As part of the federal requirement, states must consider economic data on the cost of raising children. The Child Support Enforcement Administration of the Department of Human Resources is responsible for the review and reporting its findings to the Legislature. 4 To this end, they 1 U.S. Census American Community Survey (2007). Downloaded from http://factfinder.census.gov on Novem- ber 25, 2008. 2 Supra note 1. 3 Title 45, Public Welfare, CFR 302.56 and MD Family Law §12-202 (c). 4 MD Family Law §12-202 (c). Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 2 convened a committee of diverse stakeholders (e.g., judges, family law attorneys, a legisla- tor from the Maryland House of Representatives, a representative of the Office of the Attor-ney General, and representatives of CSE) to review the guidelines and make recommenda- tions. CSE also contracted wi th the Center for Policy Resear ch (CPR) to provide technical assistance; namely, to review current economic data and develop an updated schedule with the Committee’s input. This report focuses on the updated child supp ort schedule. It does not document the nu- merous other considerations and recommendations of the Committee. ORGANIZATION OF REPORT The report is organized into four sections. ¾ Section I provides an introduct ion. This includes the purpose of the report, a summary of federal regulations pertaining to state child support guidelines; and, an overview of the Maryland child support guidelines relative to other state guidelines. ¾ Section II reviews estimates of child-rearing expenditures. It reviews those underlying state child support guidelines. ¾ Section III contains the updated schedule. The 2008 updated schedule is in Exhibit 8. This section also outlines the data and steps used to develop the updated schedule. ¾ Section IV compares the amou nts under the new and updated schedule. It also summa- rizes the changes in the economic factors underlying the schedule. Side-by-side comparisons of the new and update d schedule are provided in Appendix A. FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS Federal law has required state adviso ry child support guidelines since 1987.5 The Family Support Act of 1988 expanded the requirement. As of 1989, each state must have one guideline that is to be applied presumptively rather than on an advisory basis.6 It also re- quires each state to establish deviation criter ia that allow for the rebuttal of the state’s presumptive guideline. The state-determined cr iteria must take into consideration the best interests of the child. The Maryland guidelin es provide deviation crit eria in State statute [MD Family Law §12-202 (a)]. Federal regulation requires states to review th eir child support guidelines at least once every four years [45 CFR 302.56]. As part of that re view, states must consider economic data on the costs of child-rearing expenditures and exam ine case file data to analyze the application and deviation from the guideline.7 5Advisory statewide guidelines were required as part of Child Support Enforcement Amendments of 1984 [P.L. No. 98-378]. 6Presumptive guidelines were required as part of The Family Support Act of 1988 [P.L. No. 100-485]. 7 The Family Welfare Research and Train ing Group, School of Social Work, University of Maryland conducted the 2008 case file review. A report of their fi ndings is available from their website, URL: http://www.familywelfare.umaryla nd.edu/reports/guidelines08.pdf Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 3 GUIDELINES MODELS S t a t e s h a v e d i s c r e t i o n i n t h e g u i d e l i n e s m o d e l s t h a t t h e y u s e . Y e t , a c c o r d i n g t o f e d e r a l requirements, they must: ¾ Be based on specific descriptive and numeric criteria; ¾ Take all earnings and income of the noncustodial parent into consideration; and ¾ Provide for the child(ren)’s health care needs. Most states, including Maryland, base their gu idelines on the Income Shares Model, which was developed through the 1984-87 National Child Support Guidelines Project. 8 Convened by the federal Office of Child Support Enforc ement at a request of Congress, the Project made recommendations for the development of state guidelines. Prior to the 1987 re- quirement, few states had statewide guidelines. Income Shares Model The Income Shares model was developed to em body the principles of state child support guidelines identified by the Guidelines Project’s Advisory Panel. (Those principles are shown in Exhibit 1.) It also incorporates actual evid ence of child-rearing expenditures. The Income Shares guidelines model is based on the premis e that the child should be entitled to the same level of expenditures that the child woul d have received had the parents lived together and combined financial resources. As a co nsequence, the core of the Income Shares model is a measurement of how much families sp end on child rearing. In turn, that amount is often adjusted in a guidelines worksheet fo r different situations such as shared physical custody situations, children from other relationships, and other factors. Exhibit 1: Recommendations of the 1984-87 Child Suppor t Guidelines Project Advisory Panel: Annotated Summary of Basic Principles for State Child Support Guidelines 1. Both parents should share in the financial support of their ch ildren. The responsibility should be divided in proportion to their available income. 2. The subsistence needs of each parent should be considered, but in virtually no case, should the obligation be set at zero. 3. Child support must cover a child’s basic needs as a first pr iority; but, to the extent either parent enjoys a higher standar d of living, the child is also entitled to share in that higher standard of living. 4. Each child of a given parent has a right to a share of that parent’s income. (In other words, when a parent has other children besides the children for whom support is being determined, an adjustment may be appropriate.) 5. The guidelines should not treat children of separ ated, divorced, and never-married parents differently. 6. The guidelines should not assume whether the mother or father is the custodial parent. 7. The guidelines should not create economic disincentives to re marry or work. (An economic disincentive to remarry could exist if the guidelines considered a new spouse’s income. An economic disincentive to not work is avoided by imputing income to a parent who is voluntarily unemployed or underemployed.) 8. The guidelines should consider the involv ement of both parents in the child’s upbringing. It should take into consideration the financial support provided by parents in shared physical custody or extended visitation arrangements. Yet, this does not necessarily obviate the child support obligation in 50/50% timesharing arrangements. 8 National Center for State Courts (1987). Development of Guidelines for Ch ild Support Orders, Final Report. Report to U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Child Support Enforcement, Williamsburg, Virginia. Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 4 The premise of the Incomes Shares model applie s to children of previously married parents as well as never married parents. Children should not be forced to live in poverty because of their parents’ decisions to never marry or divorc e. Children of disrupted families, regardless of the reason for the disruption, should be afforded the same financial opportunities as children of intact families with similar incomes. Another major premise of the Income Shares model is that both parents are financially responsible for their children. To this end, the average amount expended on children is prorated between the parents. The obligated parent’s share becomes the basis of the child support award. There may be other adjustme nts for physical custody or other factors. Other Guidelines Models Judge Melson of Delaware developed the Melson formula. It first considers the basic needs of the children and each parent. If the obliga ted parent’s income is more than sufficient to cover his share of the basic needs of the children and his basic needs, an additional per- centage of his remaining income is assigned to child support. The percentage-of-obligor income guidelines model is the simplest and ol dest guidelines model. It assigns a flat or sliding-scale percentage of obligor income to support. In recent years, various groups have introduced a few new guidelines models (i.e., The Chil- dren’s Right Council first introduced a version of the Cost Shares model, the American Law Institute introduced its guidelines conc ept); yet, no state has adopted them. 9 State Usage of Guidelines Models As shown in Exhibit 2, as of 2008, there ar e 37 states that currently rely on the Income Shares model; 10 states that use a percentage-of-obligor income guidelines model; three states that rely on the Melson formula; and on e state that uses a hybrid approach between the Income Shares model and percentage-of-obligor guidelines. Until recently, few states have changed guidelines models. However, beginning in 2005, several states adopted Income Shares. Tenne ssee, Georgia and Minnesota moved from the percentage-of-obligor model to Income Shares guidelines. The most recent guidelines change occurred in the District of Columbia, wh ich moved to an Income Shares approach as of April 2007 after previously using a hybrid guidelines model. Massachusetts still uses a hybrid guidelines model. The Massachusetts gu ideline starts with a percentage-of-obligor income model when the custodia l parent had low income but sw itches to an Income Shares- like approach when the custodial parent’s in come exceeds $20,000 per year with additional adjustments for more than one child and work-r elated child care expenses. The premise is that the custodial parent needs a little more at very low incomes to boost the family out of poverty. 9 For more information on these gu idelines models see the 1999 Chil d Support Symposium published by Family Law Quarterly (Spring 1999) and Beld and Biernat (2003). Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 5 Basis of Maryland’s Guidelines Maryland bases its guidelines on the Income Shares model. The schedule was developed in the late 1980’s based on measurements of child-rearing expenditures estimated from fami-lies surveyed in 1972-73. The Committee discussed other guidelines models and agreed to retain the Income Shares model. Income Shares (37 States) Percentage of Obligor Income (10 States) Other [3 States (HI, DE, MT) are based on Melson Formula; MA use a hybrid approach] Exhibit 2 State Usage of Child Support Guidelines Models Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 6 This page is intentionally blank. Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 7 Section II: Estimates of Child-Rearing Expenditures & Expenditures Data The purpose of this section is to describe th e estimates of child-rearing expenditures. The estimates are first summarized. This is followed by a discussion of the data source used to produce the various estimates. Finally, this se ction concludes with a discussion of the us- age of these estimates in state guidelines. ESTIMATES OF CHILD-REARING EXPENDITURES Most state child support guidelin es rely on one of the following studies on the costs of rais- ing children: ¾ Van der Gaag, Jacques (1981). On Measuring the Cost of Children . Discussion Paper 663-81. University of Wisconsin Institute for Research on Poverty, Madison, Wisconsin. ¾ Thomas J. Espenshade, Investing in Children: New Estimates of Parental Expenditures , Urban Institute Press: Wa shington, D.C. (1984). ¾ David M. Betson, Alternative Estimates of the Cost of Children from the 1980-86 Con- sumer Expenditure Survey , Report to U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, University of Wisconsin In- stitute for Research on Poverty, Madison, Wisconsin (1990). ¾ David M. Betson, “Chapter 5: Parental Expenditures on Children,” in Judicial Council of California, Review of Statewide Uniform Child Support Guidelines , San Francisco, Cali- fornia (2001). Available at URL: http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/programs/cfcc/1058files2001/CH5.PDF ¾ Betson, David M. (2006). “Appendix I: New Estimates of Child- Rearing Costs in State of Oregon Child Support Guidelines Review: Up dated Obligation Scales and Other Consid- erations, Report to State of Oregon, Prepared by Policy Studies Inc., Denver Colorado. Available at URL: http://www.dcs.state.or.us/ oregon_admin_rules/psi_guidelines_review_2007.pdf ¾ Mark Lino, Expenditures on Children by Families: 2007 Annual Report , U.S. Department of Agriculture, Center for Nutrition and Poli cy Promotion. Miscellaneous Publication No. 1528-2007 (2008). Available at URL: http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/ExpendituresonChildrenbyFamilies.htm The studies rely on various methodologies to es timate child-rearing expenditures and differ- ent data years. All of the studies except va n der Gaag rely on the Consumer Expenditures Survey (CES), which we will di scuss in more detail later. Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 8 Overview of Methodologies One reason that we discuss so many different estimates of child-rearing expenditures is because not all economists arrive at the sa me estimate. Moreover, economists do not agree on which estimate best reflects actual child-rearing expenditures. Part of the problem is that there is no perfect methodology for separating the children’s share of family expendi- tures from the parents’ share. To illustrate th is issue, consider family expenditures for elec- tricity used in the home. The children’s share of electricity is not obviously separable from the parents’ share. The most common methodology is a marginal co st approach, which compares expenditures between two equally well-off families: (a) marrie d couples with children, and (b) married couples of child-rearing age without children. The difference in expenditures between these two families is deemed to be child-rearing expenditures. The Engel and Rothbarth method- ologies, named by the economists who developed them, are both forms of the marginal cost approach. The Engel methodology uses expendit ures on food, while the Rothbarth method- ology relies on expenditures for adult goods (specifically, adult clothes in the Rothbarth estimates that form the basis of state guidelines) to determine equally well-off families. Most economists believe that the Engel estima tor overstates actual child-rearing expendi- tures and the Rothbarth estimator understa tes actual child-rearing expenditures. van der Gaag (1981) estimates In his study, van der Gaag concluded that a co uple that adds one child to the household needs 25 percent more gross income in order to maintain the standard of living they en- joyed when they had no children. Wisconsin us ed van der Gaag’s estimates to develop its child support table, although adjusted this percentage to account for taxes and other fac-tors. Since then, several states adopted Wisconsi n’s flat percentage of obligor gross income as their guidelines formula. Espenshade (1984) estimates Most states, including Maryland , relied on Dr. Espenshade’s measurements when they first developed child support guidelines in the 1980s because his was the most authoritative study available at the time. It formed the ba sis of the prototype Income Shares model de- veloped through the 1984-1987 National Child Support Guidelines Project. 10 Using the Engel methodology, Espenshade found that families spend about $58,000 to $138,000 (in 1981 dollars, hence over twice as much in 2007 do llars) to raise a chil d from birth to age 18 years. Betson’s Three Studies In the past 18 years, Dr. Betson has conducte d three studies estimating child-rearing ex- penditures. Each study us es more recent data. Betson (1990) estimates . Dr. Betson applied five different methodologies to estimate child- rearing expenditures using 1980-86 CES data. 11 He concluded that estimates using the 10 National Center for State Courts (1987). 11 The five approaches were (1) Engel, (2) Rothbarth, (3 ) ISO-PROP, (4) Barten-Gorman, and (5) per capita (i.e., average cost approach, similar to the USDA approach). Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 9 Rothbarth methodology were the most robust , and hence recommended their use. He re- jected his estimates using the Engel methodol ogy, which was used by Espenshade, because they approached implausibly high levels. Be tson’s application of the Rothbarth estimator finds that the percentages of total household expenditures devoted to children are, on aver- age: (a) 24 percent for one child, (b) 34 perc ent for two children, and (c) 39 percent for three children in an intact family. Betson’s ap plication of the Engel estimator finds that the percentages of total expenditures devoted to children are, on average: (a) 33 percent for one child, (b) 39 percent for two children, and (c ) 49 percent for three children in an intact family. Betson (2001) estimates. In 2001, Dr. Betson updated his 1990 estimates based on the Rothbarth and Engel methodologies using more recent data (1996-98, initially, but later expanded it to include 1996-99). The only difference between the 2001 and earlier esti-mates was in the years the data were gathered . The source of data (CES), the estimation methodologies, and the assumptions he used to develop the estimates did not change. These estimates form the basis of many state child support guidelines including the current Pennsylvania schedule. Using the more current data, Betson’s application of the Rothbarth estimator found that the percentages of total household expenditures devoted to children are, on average: (a) 26 percent for one chil d, (b) 36 percent for two children; and (c) 42 percent for three children in an intact family . Betson’s application of the Engel estimator found that the percentages of total expenditures devoted to children are, on average: (a) 32 percent for one child, (b) 46 percent for two chil dren, and (c) 58 percent for three children in an intact family. Betson (2006) estimates . In 2006, Dr. Betson upda ted his 2001 estimates using the Rothbarth methodology with da ta from 1998 through the first quarter of 2004 for the state of Oregon. The 2004 survey was the most recent data available from the CES at that time. Dr. Betson did not update the estimates using the Engel methodology or other approaches. The Oregon table at the time was based on th e Betson-Rothbarth estimates relying on sur- vey data collected in 1996-99 and Oregon only wa nted to use updated su rvey data. (A more complete discussion of Dr. Betson’s findings using the updated data is available in the 2006 Oregon guidelines review report.) For this set of estimates, Betson relied on data from a wide range of years for two reasons. First, it increased the sample size, hence the re liability of the estimate. Secondly, it spanned several economic cycles: the high growth of the late 1990s; the short recession in 2002; and the stable economic growth afterwards. Similar to the 2001 update, he applied the same assumptions and method, but he used more recent data. His findings showed that the child-rearing expenditures as a proportion of total household expenditures are, on aver-age: (a) 25 percent for one child, (b) 37 perc ent for two children, and (c) 44 percent for three children. Over three data periods, the an alysis shows that the proportion of household expenditures devoted to children has increased, albeit somewhat less for families with one child (from 24 percent using 1980-86 data to 25 percent using 1998-2004 data) than for families with three children (39 percent to 44 percent). Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 10 USDA (2007 estimates) The USDA estimates child-rearing expenditures individually for several expenditure catego- ries (e.g., food, transportation, housing); then , adds them to develop a total. For some ex- penditure categories (e.g., housing), the USDA uses a per capita approach to estimate the child’s share of the costs. That is, they divide the expenditures for that particular good by the number of family members. Most economists believe this approach overstates the child’s actual share of expenditures. The USDA update s its estimates every year for changes in the price level; however, the database for the current estimates is CES data from 1990-92. The USDA estimates expenditures for one child in a two-child family to be between $7,830 and $17,500 per year, depending on the age of th e child and the income of the parents. Comparisons Exhibit 3 compares the estimates of child-rearing expenditures by the number of children. It shows that those estimated with the Engel meth odology result in higher amounts on average than those estimated with the Rothbarth method ology. It also shows that the USDA esti- mates generally fall between the two methodologies.12 Exhibit 3: Comparison of the Estimates of Child-Rearing Expenditures (averaged across all income ranges) 24%41%51% 33%49%59% 30%44%52% 25%37%44% 25%35%41% 25%37%44% 26%42%48% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70% 1 Child 2 Children 3 Children% of total family expenditures devoted to child-rearing costs Espenshade-Engel (1972-73 data) Betson-Engel (1980-86 data) Betson-Engel (1996-99 data) Betson-Rothbarth (1980-86 data) Betson-Rothbarth (1996-99 data) Betson-Rothbarth (1998-2004 data) USDA (1990-92 data) 12The USDA estimates are based on gross income. The fa mily-expenditures equivalent of the USDA estimate, which is cited in Lino (2007) comes from a much olde r study. We do not know what tax and expenditures assumptions were made in the conversion. When we convert current USDA estimates from gross income to family expenditures using prevailing tax rates and expe nditures data, we find that the USDA estimates are generally higher than the Engel estimates. Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 11 We note two caveats to Exhibit 3. First, it compares the average pe rcent of total family expenditures devoted to child-rearing expendit ures, while the Maryland child support sched- ule relates to “gross income” rather than “total family expenditures.” Gross income and total family expenditures differ because of two factors: income taxes; and, some families spend more or less than their after-tax income . Later in this report, we convert these measurements back to gross income. Second, Exhibit 3 reflects “average” child-rearing expenditures across all income ranges, so it does not reflect how the estimates change when there is more income. Most economists find that the percentage of total family ex- penditures devoted to child-rearing expenditures declines as income increases. Exhibit 4 illustrates this by showing the most recent Betson-Rothbarth estimates for a range of in- comes. Exhibit 4: Variation in the Percent of After-Tax Income Devoted to Child-Rearing Costs by Income Range (Betson-Rothbarth estimates in 2005 dollars) 0%10%20%30%40%50% 0-$15,000 $15,001- $25,000$25,001 - $50,000$50,001 - $75,000$75,001 - $100,000$100,001 - $125,000$125,001 or more After-tax incomePercent of income devoted to child- rearing costs One Child Two Children Three Children DATA SOURCE OF THE ESTIMATES With the exception of van der Gaag, all of th e economists estimated child-rearing expendi- tures from the Consumers Expenditures Survey (C ES) that is administered by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).13 Economists use the CES because it is the most comprehensive and detailed survey conducted on household expenditures and consists of a large sample.14 The CES surveys about 6,000 households per quarter on expenditures, income and house- hold characteristics (e.g., family size). Households remain in the survey for five consecutive quarters with households rotating in and out each quarter. Most economists use at least three quarters or a year of expenditures data for a surveyed family. This means that family expenditures are averaged for about a year rather than over a quarter, which may not be as reflective of typical family expenditures. 13 van der Gaag’s study is more of a literature review of the evidence of child-rearing expenditures that existed in the early 1970’s. 14 Detailed information about the CE S can be found at the BLS website: http://www.bls.gov . Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 12 The BLS designed the CES to produce a nationally representative sample and samples representative of the four regions (Midwest, Northeast, South, and West). The sample sizes for each state, however, are not large enough to estimate child-rearing costs for families within a state. We know of no state that has seriously contemplated replicating the CES at the state level. The costs and time requirements make it prohibitive. Specific Consum ption Items The CES asks households about expenditures on over a hundred detailed items. Exhibit 5 shows the major categories of expenditures captured by the CES. The CES focuses on cur- rent consumption. It includes the purchase pr ice and sales tax on all goods purchased within the survey period. Exhibit 5 Partial List of Expenditures Items Considered in the BLS, the Data Source Used to Esti mate Child-Rearing Expenditures Housing Rent paid for dwellings, rent received as pay , parking fees, maintenance, and other expenses for rented dwellings; and interest on mortgages, in terest on home equity loans and lines of credit, property taxes and insurance, refinancing and prepayment charges, ground rent, expenses for property management and security, homeowners' insurance, fire insurance and extended coverage, expenses for repairs and maintenance contract ed out, and expenses of materials for owner- performed repairs and maintenance for dwellings used or maintained by the consumer unit. Also includes utilities, cleaning supplies, household te xtiles, furniture, major and small appliances and other miscellaneous household equipment (tools, plants, decorative items). Food Food at home purchased at grocery or other food stores as well as meals, including tips, purchased away from home (e.g., full service and fast food restaurant, vending machines). Transportation Vehicle finance charges, gasoline and motor oil, ma intenance and repairs, vehicle insurance, public transportation, leases, parking fees and other transportation expenditures. Entertainment Admission to sporting events, movies, concer ts, health clubs, recreational lessons, televi- sion/radio/sound equipment, pets, toys, hobbies and other entertainment equipment and services. Apparel Apparel, footwear, uniforms, diapers, alterations and repairs, dry cleaning, sent-out laundry, watches and jewelry. Other Personal care products, reading materials, educat ion fees, banking fees, interest paid on lines of credit, and other expenses. Mortgage Payments The CES does not include mortgage principal pa yment as part of current expenditures. However, the CES includes payment of the mortgage interest, rent among households that rent, utilities, property taxes, and other housin g expenses as indicated in the above table. As shown in Exhibit 6, even with the exclus ion of the mortgage principal payments, these housing items comprise the largest share of total family expenditures. Housing expenses contribute to over a third of family expenditures. For purposes of developing child support schedule s, we have found it beneficial that the CES excludes mortgage principal payments. In most situations, any equity in the home is con- sidered as part of the property se ttlement during the divorce. Finance Charges The CES does not capture finance charges (wit h the exception of finance charges for homes and vehicles). Specifically, it does not reflect any interest charges for items paid by credit card. Nor, does it capture interest charges fo r installment plans often used to pay for furni- Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 13 ture, household appliances, televisions and other electronics. Nonetheless, data from the Federal Reserve Board’s Consumer Finance Surv ey (CFS) suggest that the finance charges on items not included in the CES are nominal. 15 Almost half (46%) of families make fixed installment payments on automobiles loans; st udent loans; and, loans for furniture, appli- ances and other durable goods. Automobile loan s, which are included in the CES, comprise many of these loans. For the purpose of developing child support schedules, it would be ideal to include finance charges for furniture and other items consumed by children. Yet, the CFS data do not break down finance charges in that way. Further, ba sed on the limited amount of information that is available from the CFS, it suggests that the finance charges are likely to be nominal when averaged across families. Exhibit 6 Composition of Average Spending by Families (adopted from Betson 2006) Expenditure Category Childless Couple Family with One Child Family with Two Children Family with Three or More Children Total Annual Expenditures $44,728 $46,140 $49,834 $48,341 Budget Share (% of Total Expenditures) Food 16.0% 16.7% 17.2% 19.5% Housing 36.6% 38.2% 38.3% 37.6% Apparel 3.6% 4.1% 4.3% 4.6% Transportation 21.7% 21.8% 21.0% 19.7% Entertainment 6.0% 5.6% 6.3% 6.1% Health Care 6.0% 5.3% 5.0% 4.8% Personnel Care 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 0.8% Reading 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% Education 1.2% 1. 5% 1.4% 1.4% Personal Insurance 1.6% 1.2% 1.3% 1.1% Miscellaneous 5.8% 4.3% 7.5% 3.5% Transportation and Vehicle Payments As shown in Exhibit 6, transportation expens es account for about one fifth of total family expenditures. In the category of “transportation,” the CES includes net vehicle outlays; vehicle finance charges; gasoline and motor oi l; maintenance and repairs; vehicle insurance; public transportation expenses; and vehicle rent als, leases, licenses and other charges. The net vehicle outlay is the purchase price of a ve hicle less the trade-in value. It accounts for about 40 percent of all transportation expenses among families with children in the CES, which is seven percent of total household expenditures.16 In developing estimates of child-rearing expenditures, Professor Betson excludes net vehicle outlays because it does not reflect that the vehicle can be sold again later after the survey period. In contrast, the USDA starts its estima tes with all transportation expenses including net vehicle outlays. 15 Brian Bucks, et al. “Recent Changes in U.S. Family Fi nances: Evidence from the 2002 and 2004 Survey of Con- sumer Finances”, Federal Reserve Bulletin . 16 Bureau of Labor Statistics , Table 5: Composit ion of consumer unit: Average annual expenditures and char- acteristics, Consumer Expenditures Survey 2007. Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 14 There are some advantages and disadvantages to Betson’s approach. Like home equity, vehicles are considered as part of the property settlement in a divorce. Nonetheless, the ideal would be to include a value that reflec ts depreciation of the vehicle over time. Other Adjustments to the CES Professor Betson also excludes other expendit ures items captured by the CES because they are obviously not child-rearing expenses. Specifically, he excludes contributions by family members to social security and private pension plans; and, cash contributions made to members outside the surveyed household. The USDA also excludes these expenses from its estimates of child-rearing expenditures. Net Income Gross and net incomes are report ed by families participating in the CES. The difference between gross and net income is taxes. In fact, the CES uses the terms “income before taxes” and “income after taxes” instead of gr oss and net income. Income before taxes is the total money earnings and selected money re ceipt. It includes wages and salary, self- employment income, Social Security benefits, pensions income, rental income, unemploy-ment compensation, workers’ compensation, veteran’s benefits, public assistance, and other sources of income. Income and taxes are based on self-reports and not checked against actual records. The BLS has concerns that income may be unde r-reported in the CES. Although underre- porting of income is a problem inherent to surveys, the BLS is particularly concerned be- cause expenditures exceed income among low-in come households participating in the CES. The BLS is unclear about whether the cause is underreporting of income or that low-income households are actually spending more than their incomes because of an unemployment spell, being a student, or otherwise withdrawing fr om their savings. In an effort to improve income information, the BLS added and revise d income questions in 2001. The BLS be- lieves that this has improved income data but there are no notable differences in the com-piled data reports. The Relationship of Expenditures to Income Beside mortgage principal payments, the BLS also does not include changes in net assets or liabilities as income or expenditures. In a ll, the BLS makes it clear that reconciling differ- ences between income and expenditures or prec isely measuring income are not part of the core mission of the CES. Rather, the core mission is to measure and track expenditures. The BLS recognizes that at some low-income levels, the CES shows th at total expenditures exceed after-tax incomes; and, at very high incomes, the CES shows total expenditures are considerably less than after-tax incomes. However, the BLS does not try to explain these differences. In developing child support schedules, a long -standing assumption has been that the differ- ence between after-tax income and expenditures at higher incomes is a form of “savings.” This includes traditional savings (i.e. deposits into a bank account) and other contributions to family wealth such as mortgage principal payments. For example, according to the most recent CES, high-income households (i.e., households with incomes over $150,000 per Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 15 year), the ratio of expenditures to after-tax income is 55 percent.17 This suggests a consid- erable amount of “savings.” A high level of “savings” seems to contradict reports about the national savings rate being low. However, economists calculate the national savings rate using a different methodol-ogy. 18 Some of the differences concern the tr eatment of housing and medical expenses. When calculating the national savings rate, ec onomists define savings to be the difference between disposable income and consumption. In defining consumption, economists impute the rental value of housing to homeowners ev en though the rental value may exceed the mortgage payment. Similarly, economists impute the value of all medical services received even though there was insurance coverage and the family incurred no out-of-pocket ex- pense. These imputed values increase consumption considerably; hence, reduce the na- tional savings rate. In fact, the escalating cost of health services contributes significantly to the declining national savings rate.19 Other exclusions made by Betson in his estima tes further exasperate the seemingly low ratio of expenditures to after-tax income at high in comes. As discussed above, Betson also ex- cludes net vehicle outlays, cash gifts, and co ntributions to private pension plans when esti- mating child-rearing expenditures. These items, which are significant, could explain some of the gaps between after-tax income and annual expenditures.20 USAGE OF ESTIMATES IN STATE GUIDELINES States rely on various estimate s of child-rearing expenditures as the basis of their guide- lines. Several states rely on whatever was the most current estimate available at the time they developed or last revised their guidelines and have not updated as new estimates became available. Still other states made a deliberate choice to use one estimate over another. Often, these states chose the esti mator based on which one produced guidelines amounts that differed the least from their current amounts. Based on our current knowledge, we have coun ted the number of state guidelines by their economic basis. We note that many states modified the estimates or combined them with other information to arrive at their guidelin es amounts. Consequently, even though some state guidelines share the same estimates, th eir guidelines amounts may differ. Another c a v e a t t o o u r c o u n t s i s t h a t s o m e s t a t e s h a v e r e c e n t l y c h a n g e d t h e i r g u i d e l i n e s o r h a v e adopted new guidelines that are not yet promulgated. 17 Calculated from BLS, Table 5: Composition of consum er unit: Average annual expenditures and characteris- tics, Consumer Expenditure Survey, 2007” downloaded on December 1, 2008 from: http://www.bls.gov/cex/tables.htm 18 More information about this difference can be found in California’s guidelines review report (Judicial Council, 2006). 19 Supra note 17. 20 Published reports from the 2007 CES ( supra note 15) indicate that households with $150,000 or more in annual income have annual expenditur es that average: $6,708 on net ve hicle outlays; $7,064 on cash contri- butions; $18,604 on pension and social security; and $9,008 on mortgage principal. Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 16 ¾ The van der Gaag (1981) estimates form the ba sis of about five state guidelines (i.e., California, Idaho, Nevada, New York, Wisconsin.) Most states that rely or have relied on the van der Gaag estimates use a flat percentage of obligor gross income to compute the child support obligation; that is, there is no consideration of the custodial parent’s in- come. (California and Idaho are exceptions.) ¾ The Espenshade (1984) estimates forms the ba sis of about seven state guidelines (i.e., Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Virginia). With the exception of Alabama and Michigan, these states have not updated their schedules since new studies have been released. (Alabama recently adop ted a schedule based on Betson’s most re- cent study, but it has not been promulgated. Michigan updates Espenshade’s estimates annually for changes in the price level.) ¾ The Betson-Rothbarth (1990) es timates form the basis of ab out nine state guidelines. Many states that updated their guidelines beginning in the mid-1990’s relied on these estimates. West Virginia, a state neighb oring Maryland, relies of these estimates. ¾ The Betson-Rothbarth (2001) estimates form th e basis of about twelve state guidelines. Many states that updated their guidelines at least twice since the mid-1990’s rely on the second set of Betson-Rothbarth estimates. Maryland’s neighbors, Pennsylvania and the District of Columbia, rely on these estimates. ¾ The Betson-Rothbarth (2006) estimates form the basis of about four state guidelines (i.e., Arkansas, North Carolina, Oregon, and Rhode Island). Schedules based on these es- timates have also been recommended or adop ted in a few other states (e.g., Alabama, Pennsylvania, Louisiana) but have not yet been promulgated. ¾ The average of the Betson-Rothbarth and th e Betson-Engel (2001) estimates form the basis of Georgia guidelines. ¾ Lino’s USDA estimates forms the basis of the Minnesota guidelines.21 Minnesota is the only state to rely on the USDA estimates. Adopted in 2005, Minnesota adjusted them because some economists believe that the USDA estimates overstate the child’s share of housing expenses. ¾ Kansas bases its guidelines on per capita estimates of child-rearing expenditures that are adjusted for routine parenting time (also, called the “dissolution factor”). The above list accounts for the economic basis of about 39 state guidelines. In the remain- ing states, the economic basis is unknown or th e basis is a combination of factors including previous county guidelines amounts, guidelin es amounts in bordering states and other factors. State-Specific Data. We know of no state that uses stat e-specific data as the basis of its guidelines formula. 22 Estimates for Single-Parent Families. We also know of no state th at relies on expenditures in single-parent families as the basis of its guid elines formula. States that have considered expenditures in single-parent families typica lly reject those estimates because they often result in near-poverty amounts, are not availa ble for high incomes (because too few single- 21 We do not know the year of the USDA study that forms the basis of the Minnesota schedule. 22 Some states have attempted to estimate child-rearing costs for their state but have found the effort difficult and expensive and have not used the stud y findings to develop their guidelines. Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 17 parent families have high incomes), and are not consistent with the premise that the child should share the standard of living that both or either parent can afford. Switch from Espenshade-Engel to Betson-Rothbarth Estimates About twenty states including Maryland origin ally based their guidelin es on the Espenshade estimates. Many states that updated their guidelines after 1990 switched to the Rothbarth estimates for several reasons. First, after e xamining estimates using five different method- ologies in his first study, Betson recommended its use for states guidelines. Other econo- mists with expertise in child-rearing expend i t u r e s h a v e a l s o r e c o m m e n d e d i t ( B a r n o w 1994). 23 Finally, and arguably the most important reason, the use of the Rothbarth esti- mates produced the least price-sticker shock to existing guidelines amounts. Although the Rothbarth methodology produces lower estima tes than the Engel methodology, when ad- justed for price increases and after-tax income increases resulting from federal tax reform, it typically increases most guidelines amounts. (There are exceptions for some states at higher incomes.) In contrast, updating the schedule using the Betson-Engel estimates would result in inordinate increases in many states because the Betson-Engel estimates are much more than the Espenshade-Engel estimates. Use of Other Estimates Several states have seriously considered th e Betson-Engel and USDA estimates when re- viewing their guidelines formulas. States that consider the Betson-Engel es timates, typically adapt the Lewin/ICF (1990) framework for analyzing the appropriateness of their schedule amount by comparing their guidelines amounts to the most recent Roth barth and Engel estimates. Since Lewin/ICF found that the Rothbarth and Engel estimators formed the lower and upper bounds of credi- ble estimates, they concluded that any amount in between these estimates is an appropri-ate guidelines amount. 24 Starting with this framework, one state, Ge orgia, eventually adopted a schedule based on the average of the Betson-Engel and Betson-R othbarth estimates. The decision-makers assumed that the average would be the closest to actual child-rearing expenditures. Fur- ther, the average produced amounts more simi lar to the existing Georgia’s guidelines amounts than the pure Betson-Rothb arth estimates did at the time. 23 Barnow (1994) wrote, “The Rothbarth estimator then emerges as the closest to a consensus estimator, although, as noted above, it may well underestimate expend itures on children. States should bear in mind the potential bias of the Rothbarth estimator, and they m ay wish to consider increasing the Rothbarth figures slightly to account for the bias. 24 When using this approach in 1990, Lewin found that mo st state guidelines were within the range of the estimates. Only eight state guidel ines contained amounts below the low estimate and no state guidelines contained amounts above the high estimate. A subseque nt study (Venohr and Griffith 2005), in part, updated the Lewin study. It found that that the number of st ate guidelines containing amou nts below the low estimate increased to 22 states and included Maryland. They a ttributed this to states not updating their schedules. Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 18 Minnesota is the only state known to use the US DA estimates. Other state guidelines com- mittees (e.g., Ohio) have recommended an upda ted schedule based on the USDA estimates but the proposed legislation containing the USDA-based schedule was not passed. Adjustments to the Bets on-Rothbarth Estimates Several states have adjusted the Betson-Rothbarth estimates. ¾ Some states with above- or below-average income realign the Betson-Rothbarth esti- mates, which are based on national data, to the income of their state. For example, Connecticut, a high-income state, bases its sc hedule on the Betson-Rothbarth estimates that were realigned to Connecticut by comparing national and Connecticut Census data on income distribution. ¾ The District of Columbia applies the Betson-R othbarth estimates to all after-tax income including what an intact family would spen d on mortgage principal and “savings.” ¾ Rhode Island bases its schedule on the Bets on-Rothbarth estimates with a modest up- ward adjustment to account for Rhode Is land’s relatively high housing costs. Economic Estimates Considered by Maryland CPR compared the existing Maryland schedule to several updated schedules that varied in their underlying economic data. They included: ¾ A schedule based on the pure Betson-Rothbar th estimates similar to the Pennsylvania schedule; ¾ A schedule based on the average of the Betson-Rothbarth and Betson-Engel estimates similar to the Georgia schedule; ¾ A schedule based on realigned Betson-Rothb arth estimates similar to the Connecticut schedule; ¾ A schedule based on the Betson-Rothbarth estimates applied to all after-tax income similar to the District of Columbia schedule; ¾ A schedule based on the Betson-Rothbarth estimates with adjustment for Maryland’s above average housing costs simila r to the Rhode Island schedule; 25 and, ¾ Other schedules that were modificat ions or combinations of the above. In reviewing these schedules, the Committee fa vored using the Betson-Rothbarth estimates with an adjustment to account for Maryland’s above average housing costs. Many states rely on the Betson-Rothbarth estimates includ ing states bordering Maryland. Further, economists have recommended the Rothbarth esti mator. An upward ad justment is justified on two accounts: the Rothbarth estimator is kn own to understate actual child-rearing ex- penditures; and, it is based on national data so it does not reflect Maryland’s above-average housing costs. 25 Maryland housing costs are about 25 percent more than the national average. This is based on the differ- ence in gross rent, which includes utilities, betwee n the nation and Maryland (2006 U.S. Census American Community Survey). Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 19 Section III Updated Schedule & Technical Steps CPR met with the Committee in January 2008 to review the current economic evidence on the costs of child rearing and the various step s and assumptions necessary to transform the evidence into a child support schedule. This section documents the assumptions and steps used to develop the Committee’s recommended schedule. The core economic data used to update the schedule consist of the following. ¾ The Betson-Rothbarth estimates of child-rear ing expenditures derived from expenditures data collected from national surveys (i.e ., the CES) conducted in 1998-2004. As dis- cussed in the previous section, these are the most recent, authoritative estimates avail- able. They form the basis of most state guid elines that rely on the Income Shares guide- lines model. ¾ The Betson-Rothbarth estimates are updated to 2008 price levels. ¾ The Betson-Rothbarth estimates are converte d from expenditures to incomes based on the spending and income patterns of the same 1998-2004 families that Dr. Betson con- sidered in developing his estimates. ¾ Census data on Maryland and national hous ing costs are used to adjust the Betson- Rothbarth estimates for Maryland’s above-average housing costs. ¾ The updated low-income adjustment considers the 2008 federal poverty guidelines for one person and recent changes to minimum wage. OVERVIEW OF STEPS USED TO UPDATE SCHEDULE The estimates of child-rearing expenditures ar e just a starting point to developing the schedule. The steps used to update the Maryland schedule are outlined below. 1. Adjust estimates of child-rearing ex penditures to current price levels . Dr. Betson devel- oped his new estimates using July 2005 price le vels. They are updated to January 2008 price levels using changes in the Consumer Price Index developed by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2. Subtract child care expenses; health insura nce premiums; and extraordinary, uninsured health care expenses from estimates of child-rearing expenditures . This step is neces- sary because the actual amounts of these expenses are considered elsewhere in the guidelines. 3. Extend the estimates of child-rearing expe nditures to cover four and more children. There are an insufficient number of families wi th four or more children in the survey. Hence, the estimates are extended to four and more children using economic equiva- Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 20 lence scales. These scales were developed by the National Research Council, a blue- ribbon panel of academics studying poverty and family income, after extensive research. 4. Relate the estimates of child-rearing expenditures to net incomes . The Betson- Rothbarth estimates of child-rearing expendit ures are expressed as a percent of total family expenditures. If a family spends all of their after-tax inco me, then family expendi- tures and after-tax income are equal and no additional adjustment is necessary. How- ever, as illustrated in Exhibit 7, some families— typically high-income families— do not spend all of their income on current consumpt ion items. Hence, the estimates of child- rearing expenditures are adjusted to reflect net incomes. An additional adjustment is made in this step to account fo r Maryland’s higher housing costs. It is made in this step because it is assumed that Maryland families tap into what would be “savings” or “other spending” (such as mortgage principal paym ents, which are discussed in the previous section) to pay for Maryland’s higher housing costs. 5. Calculate marginal percentages. This step is necessary to gradually phase-in the esti- mates of child-rearing expenditures between income ranges similar to how a tax table phases in different tax rates between income ranges. Otherwise, there would be sudden changes in amounts as the table moved from income range to the next income range. 6. Back out the estimates of child-rearing expenditures to gross incomes . The Maryland table considers the parents’ gross incomes. Betson’s estimates are backed out to net in- come in Step 4. In this step, they are backed out to gross income using the 2008 fed- eral, Maryland and local income tax rates and FICA. Exhibi t 7 also illustrates the need for this step. 7. Calculate schedule amounts above combined gross incomes of $10,000 . The above assumptions apply to combined incomes of $10,000 gross per month or less. Above that amount, the Committee directed CPR to update the schedule by the same percent- age increase realized at lower incomes. Th e Committee felt strongly that given the eco- nomic diversity of Maryland, higher income families should experience the same in- crease as lower income families. As is, th e existing Maryland schedule stops at com-Child’s Share of Total Family Expenditures Total Family Expenditures on Current Consumption Items for the Family Savin gs and Other Spendin g Federal and State Taxes and FICA Exhibit 7 Family Consumption and Income Net income Gross income Family Expend itures Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 21 bined incomes of $10,000 gross per month and according to members of the Commit- tee, Maryland case law provides for the extr apolation of the schedule above this. The Committee wanted to obviate any possible decr eases to these extrapolated amounts. Such a decrease could harm the stability of the children's lifestyle to which they had grown accustomed by shrinking the family budget. Finally, the alternative methodology still results in amounts within the credible range of estimates of child-rearing expendi- tures. 8. Update the low-income adjustment . The schedule incorporates a low-income adjust- ment for noncustodial parent who are disabled , incapacitated, incarcerated, or unable to earn at least minimum wage income at full-tim e employment due to a similar limitation. More detailed information about these steps and the data assumptions associated with each step can be found at the end of this section. UPDATED SCHEDULE Exhibit 8 contains updated schedule based on the above assumptions and steps. Exhibit 8 Maryland Proposed Updated Schedule of Basic Support Obligations Combined Adjusted Gross Income One Child Two Children Three Children Four Children Five Children Six Children 100-1200 $20 - $150 per month based on resources and living expenses of obligor and number of children due support. 1250 162 163 165 167 169 170 1300 195 197 199 202 204 206 1350 229 231 234 236 239 241 1400 262 265 268 271 274 277 1450 295 299 302 305 308 312 1500 310 330 334 338 341 345 1550 319 362 366 370 374 378 1600 327 394 398 402 407 411 1650 336 425 430 435 439 444 1700 344 457 462 467 472 477 1750 353 488 494 499 505 510 1800 361 520 526 532 537 543 1850 370 537 558 564 570 576 1900 378 550 590 596 603 609 1950 387 562 622 629 635 642 2000 395 574 654 661 668 675 2050 403 586 686 693 701 708 2100 412 598 706 726 733 741 Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 22 Exhibit 8 Maryland Proposed Updated Schedule of Basic Support Obligations Combined Adjusted Gross Income One Child Two Children Three Children Four Children Five Children Six Children 2150 420 610 720 758 766 774 2200 428 622 734 790 799 807 2250 437 634 748 823 831 840 2300 445 646 761 851 864 873 2350 453 657 775 866 897 906 2400 462 669 789 882 930 939 2450 470 681 803 897 962 972 2500 478 693 817 913 995 1005 2550 486 705 831 928 1021 1039 2600 495 717 845 944 1038 1072 2650 503 729 859 959 1055 1105 2700 511 741 873 975 1072 1138 2750 520 753 886 990 1089 1171 2800 528 764 900 1006 1106 1202 2850 536 776 914 1021 1123 1221 2900 544 788 928 1037 1140 1240 2950 553 800 942 1052 1157 1258 3000 561 812 956 1068 1175 1277 3050 570 825 971 1084 1193 1297 3100 578 837 985 1101 1211 1316 3150 587 849 1000 1117 1229 1335 3200 595 861 1014 1133 1246 1355 3250 603 874 1029 1149 1264 1374 3300 612 886 1044 1166 1282 1394 3350 620 898 1058 1182 1300 1413 3400 629 911 1073 1198 1318 1433 3450 636 922 1086 1213 1334 1450 3500 644 932 1098 1227 1349 1467 3550 651 943 1111 1241 1365 1483 3600 658 953 1123 1255 1380 1500 3650 665 964 1136 1268 1395 1517 3700 673 974 1148 1282 1411 1533 3750 680 985 1160 1296 1426 1550 3800 687 995 1173 1310 1441 1567 3850 694 1006 1185 1324 1457 1583 3900 702 1016 1198 1338 1472 1600 3950 709 1027 1210 1352 1487 1617 4000 716 1037 1223 1366 1502 1633 Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 23 Exhibit 8 Maryland Proposed Updated Schedule of Basic Support Obligations Combined Adjusted Gross Income One Child Two Children Three Children Four Children Five Children Six Children 4050 723 1048 1235 1379 1517 1649 4100 730 1057 1245 1391 1530 1663 4150 737 1067 1256 1403 1544 1678 4200 744 1076 1267 1416 1557 1693 4250 750 1086 1278 1428 1571 1707 4300 757 1095 1289 1440 1584 1722 4350 764 1105 1300 1452 1597 1736 4400 771 1114 1311 1464 1611 1751 4450 777 1124 1322 1477 1624 1766 4500 784 1133 1333 1489 1638 1780 4550 791 1143 1344 1501 1651 1795 4600 798 1152 1355 1513 1664 1809 4650 804 1162 1366 1525 1678 1824 4700 811 1172 1376 1538 1691 1838 4750 818 1181 1387 1550 1705 1853 4800 825 1191 1398 1562 1718 1868 4850 832 1200 1409 1574 1732 1882 4900 838 1210 1420 1586 1745 1897 4950 845 1219 1431 1599 1758 1911 5000 852 1229 1442 1611 1772 1926 5050 859 1238 1453 1623 1785 1940 5100 865 1248 1464 1635 1799 1955 5150 872 1257 1475 1647 1812 1970 5200 878 1266 1485 1659 1825 1983 5250 885 1275 1495 1670 1837 1997 5300 891 1284 1505 1681 1850 2011 5350 897 1292 1515 1693 1862 2024 5400 903 1301 1526 1704 1875 2038 5450 909 1310 1536 1715 1887 2051 5500 915 1319 1546 1727 1899 2065 5550 921 1327 1556 1738 1912 2078 5600 927 1336 1566 1749 1924 2092 5650 934 1345 1576 1761 1937 2105 5700 940 1354 1586 1772 1949 2119 5750 946 1362 1597 1783 1962 2132 5800 952 1371 1607 1795 1974 2146 5850 958 1380 1617 1806 1987 2160 5900 964 1388 1627 1817 1999 2173 Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 24 Exhibit 8 Maryland Proposed Updated Schedule of Basic Support Obligations Combined Adjusted Gross Income One Child Two Children Three Children Four Children Five Children Six Children 5950 970 1397 1637 1829 2012 2187 6000 976 1406 1647 1840 2024 2200 6050 983 1415 1658 1851 2037 2214 6100 989 1423 1668 1863 2049 2227 6150 995 1432 1678 1874 2062 2241 6200 1001 1441 1688 1885 2074 2254 6250 1007 1450 1698 1897 2086 2268 6300 1013 1458 1708 1907 2098 2281 6350 1016 1462 1713 1913 2104 2287 6400 1020 1467 1717 1918 2110 2294 6450 1023 1471 1722 1924 2116 2300 6500 1026 1476 1727 1929 2122 2307 6550 1030 1480 1732 1935 2128 2313 6600 1033 1485 1737 1940 2134 2320 6650 1037 1489 1742 1945 2140 2326 6700 1040 1494 1747 1951 2146 2333 6750 1043 1498 1751 1956 2152 2339 6800 1047 1503 1756 1962 2158 2346 6850 1050 1507 1761 1967 2164 2352 6900 1053 1512 1766 1973 2170 2359 6950 1057 1517 1771 1978 2176 2365 7000 1060 1521 1776 1983 2182 2372 7050 1064 1526 1781 1989 2188 2378 7100 1067 1530 1785 1994 2194 2385 7150 1070 1535 1790 2000 2200 2391 7200 1074 1539 1795 2005 2206 2397 7250 1077 1544 1800 2010 2211 2404 7300 1080 1548 1804 2016 2217 2410 7350 1084 1552 1809 2021 2223 2416 7400 1087 1556 1814 2026 2228 2422 7450 1090 1560 1818 2031 2234 2428 7500 1092 1563 1820 2033 2237 2431 7550 1094 1565 1823 2036 2240 2435 7600 1096 1568 1826 2039 2243 2438 7650 1097 1570 1828 2042 2247 2442 7700 1099 1573 1831 2045 2250 2445 7750 1101 1575 1834 2048 2253 2449 7800 1103 1578 1836 2051 2256 2453 Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 25 Exhibit 8 Maryland Proposed Updated Schedule of Basic Support Obligations Combined Adjusted Gross Income One Child Two Children Three Children Four Children Five Children Six Children 7850 1105 1580 1839 2054 2259 2456 7900 1107 1583 1842 2057 2263 2460 7950 1109 1586 1844 2060 2266 2463 8000 1111 1588 1847 2063 2269 2467 8050 1113 1591 1849 2066 2272 2470 8100 1115 1593 1852 2069 2276 2474 8150 1117 1596 1855 2072 2279 2477 8200 1119 1598 1857 2075 2282 2481 8250 1121 1601 1860 2078 2285 2484 8300 1123 1603 1863 2081 2289 2488 8350 1125 1606 1865 2084 2292 2491 8400 1127 1609 1868 2087 2296 2495 8450 1129 1612 1871 2090 2299 2499 8500 1132 1614 1874 2093 2303 2503 8550 1134 1617 1877 2097 2306 2507 8600 1136 1620 1880 2100 2310 2511 8650 1141 1628 1889 2110 2321 2523 8700 1147 1636 1898 2120 2332 2535 8750 1153 1644 1908 2131 2344 2548 8800 1159 1652 1917 2141 2355 2560 8850 1164 1660 1926 2151 2367 2572 8900 1170 1668 1935 2162 2378 2585 8950 1176 1676 1945 2172 2389 2597 9000 1181 1684 1954 2182 2401 2609 9050 1187 1692 1963 2193 2412 2622 9100 1193 1700 1972 2203 2423 2634 9150 1199 1708 1982 2213 2435 2647 9200 1204 1716 1991 2224 2446 2659 9250 1210 1724 2000 2234 2457 2671 9300 1216 1732 2009 2244 2469 2684 9350 1220 1739 2017 2253 2478 2694 9400 1224 1744 2023 2260 2486 2702 9450 1228 1750 2030 2267 2494 2711 9500 1232 1756 2036 2275 2502 2720 9550 1236 1761 2043 2282 2510 2728 9600 1240 1767 2049 2289 2518 2737 9650 1244 1772 2056 2296 2526 2746 9700 1248 1778 2062 2304 2534 2754 Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 26 Exhibit 8 Maryland Proposed Updated Schedule of Basic Support Obligations Combined Adjusted Gross Income One Child Two Children Three Children Four Children Five Children Six Children 9750 1252 1784 2069 2311 2542 2763 9800 1255 1789 2075 2318 2550 2772 9850 1259 1795 2082 2325 2558 2780 9900 1263 1800 2088 2333 2566 2789 9950 1267 1806 2095 2340 2574 2798 10000 1271 1811 2101 2347 2582 2806 10050 1301 1836 2126 2372 2607 2831 10100 1308 1861 2151 2397 2632 2856 10150 1314 1886 2176 2422 2657 2881 10200 1321 1911 2201 2447 2682 2906 10250 1327 1936 2226 2472 2707 2931 10300 1334 1955 2251 2497 2732 2956 10350 1340 1965 2276 2522 2757 2981 10400 1347 1974 2301 2547 2782 3006 10450 1353 1984 2326 2572 2807 3031 10500 1359 1993 2351 2597 2832 3056 10550 1366 2003 2376 2622 2857 3081 10600 1372 2012 2388 2647 2882 3106 10650 1379 2022 2399 2672 2907 3131 10700 1385 2031 2410 2697 2932 3156 10750 1392 2041 2422 2712 2957 3181 10800 1398 2050 2433 2725 2982 3206 10850 1405 2060 2444 2737 3007 3231 10900 1411 2069 2455 2750 3032 3256 10950 1418 2079 2467 2762 3056 3281 11000 1424 2088 2478 2775 3070 3306 11050 1431 2097 2489 2788 3083 3331 11100 1437 2107 2501 2800 3097 3356 11150 1444 2116 2512 2813 3111 3381 11200 1450 2126 2523 2825 3125 3406 11250 1457 2135 2534 2838 3139 3427 11300 1463 2145 2546 2851 3153 3442 11350 1470 2154 2557 2863 3167 3457 11400 1476 2164 2568 2876 3181 3472 11450 1482 2173 2579 2889 3195 3488 11500 1489 2183 2591 2901 3209 3503 11550 1495 2192 2602 2914 3223 3518 11600 1502 2202 2613 2926 3237 3533 Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 27 Exhibit 8 Maryland Proposed Updated Schedule of Basic Support Obligations Combined Adjusted Gross Income One Child Two Children Three Children Four Children Five Children Six Children 11650 1508 2211 2624 2939 3251 3548 11700 1515 2221 2636 2952 3265 3564 11750 1521 2230 2647 2964 3279 3579 11800 1528 2240 2658 2977 3293 3594 11850 1534 2249 2669 2989 3307 3609 11900 1541 2259 2681 3002 3321 3625 11950 1547 2268 2692 3015 3335 3640 12000 1554 2278 2703 3027 3349 3655 12050 1560 2287 2715 3040 3363 3670 12100 1567 2297 2726 3053 3376 3685 12150 1573 2306 2737 3065 3390 3701 12200 1580 2316 2748 3078 3404 3716 12250 1586 2325 2760 3090 3418 3731 12300 1593 2335 2771 3103 3432 3746 12350 1599 2344 2782 3116 3446 3762 12400 1605 2354 2793 3128 3460 3777 12450 1612 2363 2805 3141 3474 3792 12500 1618 2373 2816 3153 3488 3807 12550 1625 2382 2827 3166 3502 3823 12600 1631 2392 2838 3179 3516 3838 12650 1638 2401 2850 3191 3530 3853 12700 1644 2411 2861 3204 3544 3868 12750 1651 2420 2872 3217 3558 3883 12800 1657 2430 2883 3229 3572 3899 12850 1664 2439 2895 3242 3586 3914 12900 1670 2449 2906 3254 3600 3929 12950 1677 2458 2917 3267 3614 3944 13000 1683 2468 2929 3280 3628 3960 13050 1690 2477 2940 3292 3642 3975 13100 1696 2487 2951 3305 3655 3990 13150 1703 2496 2962 3317 3669 4005 13200 1709 2506 2974 3330 3683 4021 13250 1716 2515 2985 3343 3697 4036 13300 1722 2525 2996 3355 3711 4051 13350 1728 2534 3007 3368 3725 4066 13400 1735 2544 3019 3380 3739 4081 13450 1741 2553 3030 3393 3753 4097 13500 1748 2563 3041 3406 3767 4112 Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 28 Exhibit 8 Maryland Proposed Updated Schedule of Basic Support Obligations Combined Adjusted Gross Income One Child Two Children Three Children Four Children Five Children Six Children 13550 1754 2572 3052 3418 3781 4127 13600 1761 2582 3064 3431 3795 4142 13650 1767 2591 3075 3444 3809 4158 13700 1774 2601 3086 3456 3823 4173 13750 1780 2610 3098 3469 3837 4188 13800 1787 2619 3109 3481 3851 4203 13850 1793 2629 3120 3494 3865 4219 13900 1800 2638 3131 3507 3879 4234 13950 1806 2648 3143 3519 3893 4249 14000 1813 2657 3154 3532 3907 4264 14050 1819 2667 3165 3544 3921 4279 14100 1826 2676 3176 3557 3935 4295 14150 1832 2686 3188 3570 3948 4310 14200 1839 2695 3199 3582 3962 4325 14250 1845 2705 3210 3595 3976 4340 14300 1851 2714 3221 3608 3990 4356 14350 1858 2724 3233 3620 4004 4371 14400 1864 2733 3244 3633 4018 4386 14450 1871 2743 3255 3645 4032 4401 14500 1877 2752 3266 3658 4046 4416 14550 1884 2762 3278 3671 4060 4432 14600 1890 2771 3289 3683 4074 4447 14650 1897 2781 3300 3696 4088 4462 14700 1903 2790 3312 3708 4102 4477 14750 1910 2800 3323 3721 4116 4493 14800 1916 2809 3334 3734 4130 4508 14850 1923 2819 3345 3746 4144 4523 14900 1929 2828 3357 3759 4158 4538 14950 1936 2838 3368 3772 4172 4554 15000 1942 2847 3379 3784 4186 4569 15050 1949 2857 3390 3797 4200 4584 15100 1955 2866 3402 3809 4214 4599 15150 1962 2876 3413 3822 4228 4614 15200 1968 2885 3424 3835 4241 4630 15250 1974 2895 3435 3847 4255 4645 15300 1981 2904 3447 3860 4269 4660 15350 1987 2914 3458 3872 4283 4675 15400 1994 2923 3469 3885 4297 4691 Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 29 Exhibit 8 Maryland Proposed Updated Schedule of Basic Support Obligations Combined Adjusted Gross Income One Child Two Children Three Children Four Children Five Children Six Children 15450 2000 2933 3480 3898 4311 4706 15500 2007 2942 3492 3910 4325 4721 15550 2013 2952 3503 3923 4339 4736 15600 2020 2961 3514 3935 4353 4752 15650 2026 2971 3526 3948 4367 4767 15700 2033 2980 3537 3961 4381 4782 15750 2039 2990 3548 3973 4395 4797 15800 2046 2999 3559 3986 4409 4812 15850 2052 3009 3571 3999 4423 4828 15900 2059 3018 3582 4011 4437 4843 15950 2065 3028 3593 4024 4451 4858 16000 2072 3037 3604 4036 4465 4873 16050 2078 3047 3616 4049 4479 4889 16100 2085 3056 3627 4062 4493 4904 16150 2091 3066 3638 4074 4507 4919 16200 2097 3075 3649 4087 4521 4934 16250 2104 3085 3661 4099 4534 4950 16300 2110 3094 3672 4112 4548 4965 16350 2117 3104 3683 4125 4562 4980 16400 2123 3113 3694 4137 4576 4995 16450 2130 3123 3706 4150 4590 5010 16500 2136 3132 3717 4163 4604 5026 16550 2143 3141 3728 4175 4618 5041 16600 2149 3151 3740 4188 4632 5056 16650 2156 3160 3751 4200 4646 5071 16700 2162 3170 3762 4213 4660 5087 16750 2169 3179 3773 4226 4674 5102 16800 2175 3189 3785 4238 4688 5117 16850 2182 3198 3796 4251 4702 5132 16900 2188 3208 3807 4263 4716 5148 16950 2195 3217 3818 4276 4730 5163 17000 2201 3227 3830 4289 4744 5178 17050 2208 3236 3841 4301 4758 5193 17100 2214 3246 3852 4314 4772 5208 17150 2220 3255 3863 4327 4786 5224 17200 2227 3265 3875 4339 4800 5239 17250 2233 3274 3886 4352 4814 5254 17300 2240 3284 3897 4364 4827 5269 Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 30 Exhibit 8 Maryland Proposed Updated Schedule of Basic Support Obligations Combined Adjusted Gross Income One Child Two Children Three Children Four Children Five Children Six Children 17350 2246 3293 3908 4377 4841 5285 17400 2253 3303 3920 4390 4855 5300 17450 2259 3312 3931 4402 4869 5315 17500 2266 3322 3942 4415 4883 5330 17550 2272 3331 3954 4427 4897 5345 17600 2279 3341 3965 4440 4911 5361 17650 2285 3350 3976 4453 4925 5376 17700 2292 3360 3987 4465 4939 5391 17750 2298 3369 3999 4478 4953 5406 17800 2305 3379 4010 4490 4967 5422 17850 2311 3388 4021 4503 4981 5437 17900 2318 3398 4032 4516 4995 5452 17950 2324 3407 4044 4528 5009 5467 18000 2331 3417 4055 4541 5023 5483 18050 2337 3426 4066 4554 5037 5498 18100 2344 3436 4077 4566 5051 5513 18150 2350 3445 4089 4579 5065 5528 18200 2356 3455 4100 4591 5079 5543 18250 2363 3464 4111 4604 5093 5559 18300 2369 3474 4122 4617 5107 5574 18350 2376 3483 4134 4629 5120 5589 18400 2382 3493 4145 4642 5134 5604 18450 2389 3502 4156 4654 5148 5620 18500 2395 3512 4168 4667 5162 5635 18550 2402 3521 4179 4680 5176 5650 18600 2408 3531 4190 4692 5190 5665 18650 2415 3540 4201 4705 5204 5681 18700 2421 3550 4213 4718 5218 5696 18750 2428 3559 4224 4730 5232 5711 18800 2434 3569 4235 4743 5246 5726 18850 2441 3578 4246 4755 5260 5741 18900 2447 3588 4258 4768 5274 5757 18950 2454 3597 4269 4781 5288 5772 19000 2460 3607 4280 4793 5302 5787 19050 2467 3616 4291 4806 5316 5802 19100 2473 3626 4303 4818 5330 5818 19150 2479 3635 4314 4831 5344 5833 19200 2486 3645 4325 4844 5358 5848 Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 31 Exhibit 8 Maryland Proposed Updated Schedule of Basic Support Obligations Combined Adjusted Gross Income One Child Two Children Three Children Four Children Five Children Six Children 19250 2492 3654 4337 4856 5372 5863 19300 2499 3663 4348 4869 5386 5879 19350 2505 3673 4359 4882 5400 5894 19400 2512 3682 4370 4894 5413 5909 19450 2518 3692 4382 4907 5427 5924 19500 2525 3701 4393 4919 5441 5939 19550 2531 3711 4404 4932 5455 5955 19600 2538 3720 4415 4945 5469 5970 19650 2544 3730 4427 4957 5483 5985 19700 2551 3739 4438 4970 5497 6000 19750 2557 3749 4449 4982 5511 6016 19800 2564 3758 4460 4995 5525 6031 19850 2570 3768 4472 5008 5539 6046 19900 2577 3777 4483 5020 5553 6061 19950 2583 3787 4494 5033 5567 6076 20000 2590 3796 4505 5045 5581 6092 20050 2596 3806 4517 5058 5595 6107 20100 2602 3815 4528 5071 5609 6122 20150 2609 3825 4539 5083 5623 6137 20200 2615 3834 4551 5096 5637 6153 20250 2622 3844 4562 5109 5651 6168 20300 2628 3853 4573 5121 5665 6183 20350 2635 3863 4584 5134 5679 6198 20400 2641 3872 4596 5146 5693 6214 20450 2648 3882 4607 5159 5706 6229 20500 2654 3891 4618 5172 5720 6244 20550 2661 3901 4629 5184 5734 6259 20600 2667 3910 4641 5197 5748 6274 20650 2674 3920 4652 5209 5762 6290 20700 2680 3929 4663 5222 5776 6305 20750 2687 3939 4674 5235 5790 6320 20800 2693 3948 4686 5247 5804 6335 20850 2700 3958 4697 5260 5818 6351 20900 2706 3967 4708 5273 5832 6366 20950 2713 3977 4719 5285 5846 6381 21000 2719 3986 4731 5298 5860 6396 21050 2725 3996 4742 5310 5874 6412 21100 2732 4005 4753 5323 5888 6427 Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 32 Exhibit 8 Maryland Proposed Updated Schedule of Basic Support Obligations Combined Adjusted Gross Income One Child Two Children Three Children Four Children Five Children Six Children 21150 2738 4015 4765 5336 5902 6442 21200 2745 4024 4776 5348 5916 6457 21250 2751 4034 4787 5361 5930 6472 21300 2758 4043 4798 5373 5944 6488 21350 2764 4053 4810 5386 5958 6503 21400 2771 4062 4821 5399 5972 6518 21450 2777 4072 4832 5411 5986 6533 21500 2784 4081 4843 5424 5999 6549 21550 2790 4091 4855 5437 6013 6564 21600 2797 4100 4866 5449 6027 6579 21650 2803 4110 4877 5462 6041 6594 21700 2810 4119 4888 5474 6055 6610 21750 2816 4129 4900 5487 6069 6625 21800 2823 4138 4911 5500 6083 6640 21850 2829 4148 4922 5512 6097 6655 21900 2836 4157 4933 5525 6111 6670 21950 2842 4167 4945 5537 6125 6686 22000 2848 4176 4956 5550 6139 6701 22050 2855 4185 4967 5563 6153 6716 22100 2861 4195 4979 5575 6167 6731 22150 2868 4204 4990 5588 6181 6747 22200 2874 4214 5001 5601 6195 6762 22250 2881 4223 5012 5613 6209 6777 22300 2887 4233 5024 5626 6223 6792 22350 2894 4242 5035 5638 6237 6807 22400 2900 4252 5046 5651 6251 6823 22450 2907 4261 5057 5664 6265 6838 22500 2913 4271 5069 5676 6279 6853 22550 2920 4280 5080 5689 6292 6868 22600 2926 4290 5091 5701 6306 6884 22650 2933 4299 5102 5714 6320 6899 22700 2939 4309 5114 5727 6334 6914 22750 2946 4318 5125 5739 6348 6929 22800 2952 4328 5136 5752 6362 6945 22850 2959 4337 5147 5764 6376 6960 22900 2965 4347 5159 5777 6390 6975 22950 2971 4356 5170 5790 6404 6990 23000 2978 4366 5181 5802 6418 7005 Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 33 Exhibit 8 Maryland Proposed Updated Schedule of Basic Support Obligations Combined Adjusted Gross Income One Child Two Children Three Children Four Children Five Children Six Children 23050 2984 4375 5193 5815 6432 7021 23100 2991 4385 5204 5828 6446 7036 23150 2997 4394 5215 5840 6460 7051 23200 3004 4404 5226 5853 6474 7066 23250 3010 4413 5238 5865 6488 7082 23300 3017 4423 5249 5878 6502 7097 23350 3023 4432 5260 5891 6516 7112 23400 3030 4442 5271 5903 6530 7127 23450 3036 4451 5283 5916 6544 7143 23500 3043 4461 5294 5928 6558 7158 23550 3049 4470 5305 5941 6572 7173 23600 3056 4480 5316 5954 6585 7188 23650 3062 4489 5328 5966 6599 7203 23700 3069 4499 5339 5979 6613 7219 23750 3075 4508 5350 5992 6627 7234 23800 3082 4518 5361 6004 6641 7249 23850 3088 4527 5373 6017 6655 7264 23900 3094 4537 5384 6029 6669 7280 23950 3101 4546 5395 6042 6683 7295 24000 3107 4556 5407 6055 6697 7310 24050 3114 4565 5418 6067 6711 7325 24100 3120 4575 5429 6080 6725 7341 24150 3127 4584 5440 6092 6739 7356 24200 3133 4594 5452 6105 6753 7371 24250 3140 4603 5463 6118 6767 7386 24300 3146 4613 5474 6130 6781 7401 24350 3153 4622 5485 6143 6795 7417 24400 3159 4632 5497 6156 6809 7432 24450 3166 4641 5508 6168 6823 7447 24500 3172 4651 5519 6181 6837 7462 24550 3179 4660 5530 6193 6851 7478 24600 3185 4670 5542 6206 6865 7493 24650 3192 4679 5553 6219 6878 7508 24700 3198 4689 5564 6231 6892 7523 24750 3205 4698 5576 6244 6906 7539 24800 3211 4707 5587 6256 6920 7554 24850 3217 4717 5598 6269 6934 7569 24900 3224 4726 5609 6282 6948 7584 Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 34 Exhibit 8 Maryland Proposed Updated Schedule of Basic Support Obligations Combined Adjusted Gross Income One Child Two Children Three Children Four Children Five Children Six Children 24950 3230 4736 5621 6294 6962 7599 25000 3237 4745 5632 6307 6976 7615 25050 3243 4755 5643 6319 6990 7630 25100 3250 4764 5654 6332 7004 7645 25150 3256 4774 5666 6345 7018 7660 25200 3263 4783 5677 6357 7032 7676 25250 3269 4793 5688 6370 7046 7691 25300 3276 4802 5699 6383 7060 7706 25350 3282 4812 5711 6395 7074 7721 25400 3289 4821 5722 6408 7088 7736 25450 3295 4831 5733 6420 7102 7752 25500 3302 4840 5744 6433 7116 7767 25550 3308 4850 5756 6446 7130 7782 25600 3315 4859 5767 6458 7144 7797 25650 3321 4869 5778 6471 7158 7813 25700 3328 4878 5790 6483 7171 7828 25750 3334 4888 5801 6496 7185 7843 25800 3340 4897 5812 6509 7199 7858 25850 3347 4907 5823 6521 7213 7874 25900 3353 4916 5835 6534 7227 7889 25950 3360 4926 5846 6547 7241 7904 26000 3366 4935 5857 6559 7255 7919 26050 3373 4945 5868 6572 7269 7934 26100 3379 4954 5880 6584 7283 7950 26150 3386 4964 5891 6597 7297 7965 26200 3392 4973 5902 6610 7311 7980 26250 3399 4983 5913 6622 7325 7995 26300 3405 4992 5925 6635 7339 8011 26350 3412 5002 5936 6647 7353 8026 26400 3418 5011 5947 6660 7367 8041 26450 3425 5021 5958 6673 7381 8056 26500 3431 5030 5970 6685 7395 8072 26550 3438 5040 5981 6698 7409 8087 26600 3444 5049 5992 6711 7423 8102 26650 3451 5059 6004 6723 7437 8117 26700 3457 5068 6015 6736 7451 8132 26750 3463 5078 6026 6748 7464 8148 26800 3470 5087 6037 6761 7478 8163 Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 35 Exhibit 8 Maryland Proposed Updated Schedule of Basic Support Obligations Combined Adjusted Gross Income One Child Two Children Three Children Four Children Five Children Six Children 26850 3476 5097 6049 6774 7492 8178 26900 3483 5106 6060 6786 7506 8193 26950 3489 5116 6071 6799 7520 8209 27000 3496 5125 6082 6811 7534 8224 27050 3502 5135 6094 6824 7548 8239 27100 3509 5144 6105 6837 7562 8254 27150 3515 5154 6116 6849 7576 8270 27200 3522 5163 6127 6862 7590 8285 27250 3528 5173 6139 6874 7604 8300 27300 3535 5182 6150 6887 7618 8315 27350 3541 5192 6161 6900 7632 8330 27400 3548 5201 6172 6912 7646 8346 27450 3554 5211 6184 6925 7660 8361 27500 3561 5220 6195 6938 7674 8376 27550 3567 5229 6206 6950 7688 8391 27600 3574 5239 6218 6963 7702 8407 27650 3580 5248 6229 6975 7716 8422 27700 3586 5258 6240 6988 7730 8437 27750 3593 5267 6251 7001 7744 8452 27800 3599 5277 6263 7013 7757 8467 27850 3606 5286 6274 7026 7771 8483 27900 3612 5296 6285 7038 7785 8498 27950 3619 5305 6296 7051 7799 8513 28000 3625 5315 6308 7064 7813 8528 28050 3632 5324 6319 7076 7827 8544 28100 3638 5334 6330 7089 7841 8559 28150 3645 5343 6341 7102 7855 8574 28200 3651 5353 6353 7114 7869 8589 28250 3658 5362 6364 7127 7883 8605 28300 3664 5372 6375 7139 7897 8620 28350 3671 5381 6386 7152 7911 8635 28400 3677 5391 6398 7165 7925 8650 28450 3684 5400 6409 7177 7939 8665 28500 3690 5410 6420 7190 7953 8681 28550 3697 5419 6432 7202 7967 8696 28600 3703 5429 6443 7215 7981 8711 28650 3709 5438 6454 7228 7995 8726 28700 3716 5448 6465 7240 8009 8742 Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 36 Exhibit 8 Maryland Proposed Updated Schedule of Basic Support Obligations Combined Adjusted Gross Income One Child Two Children Three Children Four Children Five Children Six Children 28750 3722 5457 6477 7253 8023 8757 28800 3729 5467 6488 7266 8037 8772 28850 3735 5476 6499 7278 8050 8787 28900 3742 5486 6510 7291 8064 8803 28950 3748 5495 6522 7303 8078 8818 29000 3755 5505 6533 7316 8092 8833 29050 3761 5514 6544 7329 8106 8848 29100 3768 5524 6555 7341 8120 8863 29150 3774 5533 6567 7354 8134 8879 29200 3781 5543 6578 7366 8148 8894 29250 3787 5552 6589 7379 8162 8909 29300 3794 5562 6600 7392 8176 8924 29350 3800 5571 6612 7404 8190 8940 29400 3807 5581 6623 7417 8204 8955 29450 3813 5590 6634 7429 8218 8970 29500 3820 5600 6646 7442 8232 8985 29550 3826 5609 6657 7455 8246 9001 29600 3832 5619 6668 7467 8260 9016 29650 3839 5628 6679 7480 8274 9031 29700 3845 5638 6691 7493 8288 9046 29750 3852 5647 6702 7505 8302 9061 29800 3858 5657 6713 7518 8316 9077 29850 3865 5666 6724 7530 8330 9092 29900 3871 5676 6736 7543 8343 9107 29950 3878 5685 6747 7556 8357 9122 30000 3884 5695 6758 7568 8371 9138 DETAILED TECHNICAL STEPS AND ADDITIONAL DATA There are eight technical steps used to deri ve the updated schedule, from the numbers Betson provided, which are shown in Exhibit 9. Specifically, Exhibit 9 shows the raw num-bers from the 1998-2004 data used in critical steps: percent of tota l expenditures devoted to child-rearing expenditures for one, two and three children; percent of total expenditures devoted to child care expenses; percent of total expenditures devoted to extraordinary, uninsured health care expenses; and expenditures to net income ratios. Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 37 Child Care Expenses Betson’s measurements of child care expenses, which are shown in Exhibit 9, represent the average percent of total expenditures devoted to child care expenses across all families regardless of whether the family incurs any child care expenses. If only those families with child care expenses were included, the percentages would be much higher. The percentage across all families is necessary to back out child care expenses from total child-rearing expenses since the total is derived for all families. One limitation pertaining to child care expenses is that "necessary" child care expenses (e.g., those incurred to allow someone to work) can not be distinguished from "discretionary" child care expenses. Ideally, only work-related child care expenses would be subtracted because most state guidelines only factor work-related child care expenses in the worksheet. State guidelines may consider child care expenses a ssociated with a parent’s job search or educa- tion aimed at increasing his or her earnings. Since they cannot be distinguished, however, work-related child care expenses may be so mewhat overstated and too much may be sub- tracted from the estimates. In turn, this woul d cause the amounts in the obligation schedule to be somewhat less than if work-related an d discretionary child care expenses could be separated. Nonetheless, since most child ca re expenses are work-related, discretionary child care expenses are likely to compose a minuscule share of total expenditures. To this end, the magnitude of any bias is likely to be negligible. Health Care Expenses In the CES, health care expenses consider all out-of-pocket health-related expenses. This includes prescription medicines, over-the-cou nter medicines (e.g., aspirin), the employee’s share of health insurance premiums, co-pays and deductibles; orthodontia; and other heath-related expenses. Health care expenses on ch ildren cannot be distinguished from expenses on adult household members, so it is assume d that the child’s share is the same as the child’s share of total household expenditures. If the child’s health care expenses actually cost more, on average, this will result in down ward biases to the amounts in the obligation schedule because too little is subtracted from the estimates than the actual amount ex- pended on the child’s health care. Conversely, if the child’s health care expenses actually c o s t l e s s , o n a v e r a g e , t h i s w i l l r e s u l t i n u p w a r d b i a s e s t o t h e a m o u n t s i n t h e o b l i g a t i o n schedule. Nonetheless, if any bias exists, the amount is likely to be very small because uninsured health care expenses only compos e a small portion of total expenditures. Ordinary and routine medical expenses (e.g., ba nd-aids, over-the-counter medicines, co-pays for well visits) are assumed to be $250 per child per year for the reference family. This amount approximates average out-of-pocket health care costs per child. 26 Those medical expenses in excess of the $250 threshold are co nsidered to be extraordinary. They are likely to be expended on such items as orth odontia and uninsured expenses that may in- clude asthma treatment, certain medical equipment, visits to the emergency room of a hospital outside of the healthcare pr ovider’s network and other expenses. 26 McCormick, R. Weinick, A. Elixhauser, et al. (2001) estimated it to be about $250 using 2000 data. A study by Simpson et al. (2005) using 2001 data estimates out-of-pocket expenditures per child per year to be about $100 to $300 depending on family income. This includes office-based visits, prescribed medicine, and utilized hospital services. This does not in clude over-the-counter medicines, band -aids, and similar expenses. Exhibit 9 Parental Expenditures on Children Expenditures on Children as a % of Total Consumption Expenditures (Rothbarth 1998-2004 data) Annual Net Income Ranges (July 2005 dollars) Number of Observations Current Consumption as a % of Net Income 1 Child 2 Children 3 Children Child Care $ as a % of Consumption (per child) Medical $ as a % of Consumption Less than $15,000 193 3.056 26.12 38.36 45.73 0.17 0.54 $15,001 – $20,000 171 1.435 25.73 37.70 44.89 0.57 0.40 $20,001 - $30,000 491 1.199 25.54 37.49 44.63 0.75 0.38 $30,001 - $35,000 293 0.999 25.42 37.39 44.50 0.63 0.69 $35,001 – $45.000 686 0.950 25.34 37.03 44.03 0.91 0.66 $45,001 – $50,000 338 0.882 25.28 36.94 43.92 0.98 0.74 $50,001 - $60,000 686 0.825 25.23 36.87 43.83 1.29 0.68 $60,001 - $65,000 336 0.757 25.21 36.83 43.78 1.52 0.52 $65,001 – $70,000 248 0.754 25.17 36.76 43.69 1.54 0.65 $70,001 - $80,000 544 0.723 25.14 36.70 43.61 1.51 0.83 $80,001 - $100,000 824 0.680 25.07 36.59 43.47 1.59 0.54 $100,001 - $110,000 270 0.624 25.03 36.52 43.37 1.57 0.75 $110,001 - $125,000 255 0.601 24.99 36.44 43.28 1.72 0.63 $125,001 - $150,000 244 0.575 24.92 36.33 43.13 1.68 0.78 More than $150,000 357 0.482 24.73 36.01 42.71 1.96 0.75 Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 39 Detailed Technical Steps Step 1: Update Betson’s estimates to current price levels Betson’s most recent estimates are expressed as a percentage of total family expenditures for incomes in July 2005 dollars. The incomes are updated to 2008 price levels by using the Consumer Price Index published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for January 2008. Step 2: Subtract child care expenses; h ealth insurance premiums; and extraordi- nary, uninsured health care expenses The average percent of total family expenditures attributable to child care expenses is now subtracted from the average pe rcent of total expenditures devoted to child-rearing expendi- tures for each income range. The child’s share of out-of-pocket health care expenses is determined by multiplying the percentage of to tal expenditures devoted to the child by the percent of total family expenditures devoted to health care expenses for each income range. It is also subtracted from the average percent of total expenditures devoted to child-rearing expenditures. All of these percentages are shown in Exhibit 9. To illustrate this adjustment, look at the 1-child expenditures for a fa mily with $100,000 annual income. The average family of that income spends 25.07 percent of the total family expenditures on the one child and 1.59 percent of expenditures is devoted to child care expenses and 0.54 percent is the amount of medical expenses after consideration of health insurance and ordinary medical expenses. 27 Hence, the adjusted amount is 25. 07 percent minus 1.59 percent minus 0.14 (0.54 percent multiplied by 25.07 percent). The remainder is 23.34 percent. Step 3: Extend percentages to six children Betson’s estimates only cover one, two and thr ee children. The number of families in the CES with four or more children is insufficient to product reliable estimates. The National Research Council’s equivalence schedule, as shown below, is used to extend the three-child estimate to four and more children.28 = (Number of adults + 0.7 X number of children)0.7 Application of the equivalence schedule implies that: expenditures on four children are 11.7 percent more than the expenditures for three children; expenditures on five children are 10.0 percent more than the expenditures for four children; and, expenditures for six children are 8.7 percent more than expenditures for five children. Step 4: Relate the estimates of child-rearing expenditures to incomes The results from the above steps are child-re aring expenditures that are expressed as a percent of total family expenditures. In this st ep, they are converted to a percentage of net income using the average ratio of expenditures to net income for a particular income range. 27 As previously discussed, the child care expenses are averaged across families that incur and do incur child care expenses. If only families that incur child care expenses were included, the percentage would be much higher. Families with older children , one working parent, relative care an d other situations will not incur child care expenses. These families must be considered also. 28 Citro and Michael (1995). Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 40 The average is from the same families included in the data that Dr. Betson used to estimate child-rearing expenditures. (These percentages are shown in Exhibit 9.) An additional ad- justment is made to account for Mar yland’s above-average housing costs. To illustrate this adjustment, continue cons idering the one-child amount for a family with $100,000 in annual net income. In Step 2, the percentage of total family expenditures devoted to one child less child care expenses, health insurance, and uninsured, extraordi- nary medical expenses was 23.34 percent. That amount is multiplied by the sum of: (a) 68.0 percent (the current consumption rate show n in Exhibit 9); and, (b) 10 percent to ad- just for Maryland’s higher housing costs.29 Since the sum of 68 and 10 percent is 78 per- cent, this is multiplied by 23.34. The prod uct, 18.21 percent, represents the amount of net income spent on one child. (The prior percen tages reflected a percentage of total family expenditures devoted to child-rearing expenditures.) The consumption rate used in this calculatio n is capped at 100 percent. This effectively assumes that families should not be required to spend more than their income. However, the actual data finds that on average fami lies with incomes below about $30,000 net per year spend more than their income. Step 5: Calculate marginal percentages At this point, we now have percentages of net income attributable to child-rearing expendi- tures for one to six children that do not incl ude child care expenses, health insurance pre- miums, or uninsured, extraordinary medical ex penses for several income ranges. To gradu- ally phase between income ranges, we create marg inal percentages by taking the ratio of (a) the difference in the base support amount between one income bracket and the next bracket and (b) the difference in the monthly net income between the same income brack- ets. Base support is calculat ed by applying the percentage of net income attributable to child-rearing expenditures to the midpoint of each income range. The results for one through three children are shown in Exhibit 10. The amounts for four or more children are calculated using the multipliers shown in the previous step. The table of proportions shown in Exhibit 10 functions much like a tax schedule. The mid-point percentage is applied to the net income shown in Exhibit 10. The marginal percentage is applied to any net income above that amount and less than the amount of the net income in the next row. For example, if there is $2,000 in net monthly income and one child, 25.06 percent is applied to the first $1,575 in net income and 23.84 percent is applied to the remainder ($425 = $2,000 - $1,575). The resu lt is $257, which is the sum of $496 ($395 = 25.06% X $1,575) and $101 ($425 X 23.84%). 29 According to the 2006 Census American Community Surv ey, Maryland gross rents are 25 percent more than the national average. This is multiplied by the perc ent of expenditures devoted to housing (about 40%) to arrive at a 10 percentage-point increase to the nati onal amounts to reflect Maryland housing prices. Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 41 Exhibit 10 TABLE OF SUPPORT PROPORTIONS 1 Child 2 Children 3 Children Midpoint of Monthly Net Income Range Midpoint Marginal Midpoint Marginal Midpoint Marginal $675 0.2581 0.2449 0.3781 0.3536 0.4497 0.4152 $1,575 0.2506 0.2384 0.3641 0.3419 0.4300 0.3992 $2,251 0.2469 0.2436 0.3574 0.3535 0.4208 0.4186 $2,926 0.2461 0.2272 0.3565 0.3203 0.4202 0.3667 $3,601 0.2426 0.2058 0.3497 0.2932 0.4102 0.3407 $4,276 0.2368 0.1136 0.3408 0.1516 0.3992 0.1631 $4,951 0.2200 0.0692 0.3150 0.0894 0.3670 0.0931 $5,626 0.2019 0.1817 0.2879 0.2562 0.3342 0.2946 $6,076 0.2004 0.1250 0.2856 0.1780 0.3312 0.2072 $6,752 0.1929 0.1011 0.2748 0.1401 0.3188 0.1582 Step 6: Back out to gross income The results from Step 5 are child-rearing expend itures that are still expressed as a percent of after-tax income. In this step, they are backed out to gross income using current tax rates. To be clear, the basic obligation is calculated for net incomes first from the table of support proportions shown in Exhi bit 10, then backed out to gross. In effect, there is a hidden column for the net income equivalent to gr oss income in the obliga tion table. Exhibit 11 shows the hidden column to help illustrate how an obligation table based on gross in- come is developed. Exhibit 11 Illustration of the Hidden Net Income Column in an Obligation Schedule Net Equivalent to Gross Income (Hidden Column) Combined Adjusted Gross Income One Child Two Children Three Children 2909.66 4000 716 1037 1223 2939.44 4050 723 1048 1235 2969.21 4100 730 1057 1245 2998.99 4150 737 1067 1256 3028.76 4200 744 1076 1267 3058.54 4250 750 1086 1278 3088.31 4300 757 1095 1289 3118.09 4350 764 1105 1300 3147.86 4400 771 1114 1311 3177.64 4450 777 1124 1322 3207.41 4500 784 1133 1333 Tax Assumptions All income is assumed to be taxable and that it is taxable at the same rate; that is, all in- come is treated as if it is earned income subject to Federal and State withholding and FICA tax formulas. It also includes local tax based on the average amount weighted by the county Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 42 and State population.30 Tax rates prevailing in 2008 were used to convert gross income based on Federal and State employer withholding tax formulas.31 Taxes are computed assuming (a) all income is taxed at the rate of a single individual;32 and (b) two federal with- holding allowances (one for a single exempt ion and one to simulate the standard deduc- tion), based on IRS instructions. Limitations to the Tax Assumptions There are two common concerns to this simplified approach to taxes. First is that this tax assumption does not mimic the after-tax income available to an intact family. An intact family is likely to have more after-tax income than a single individual because the intact family claims more dependents and may be elig ible for the child tax credit or the earned income tax credit. This translates to more after-tax income available for child support. However, if the employer withholding formula is used, it does not advance the Federal child tax credit and the full EITC, so these would not be considered anyway. One reason that only part of the EITC is advanced is so low-income families are not put in the precarious position of owing federal taxes when filing their tax return. The second common concern stems from the unde restimation of the obligee’s income if the obligee claims the children as dependents for t ax purposes. The concern that this results in higher child support orders is refuted by simulations comparing order amounts using the single-tax filing status assumption to those us ing the Vermont approach for several different scenarios. Vermont bases its obligation tabl e on net income; however, Vermont provides standardized tables that convert gross to net income assuming the obligor files as a single tax filer and the obligee claims the children as dependents and receives the child care tax credit or the EITC if eligible. 33 Although this adds another st ep, this most closely resembles the typical tax situations of obligors and oblig ees. The simulations show little difference in the child support amounts between the two methods. This is because there are actually two effects of using the Vermont meth od that typically negate each other; hence, result in order amounts similar to the single-tax filing status assumption. When us ing the Vermont method, the obligor’s share of the basic obligation is less, but the basic obligation— which is the amount owned by both parents— is more. Of further interest may be the treatment of specific tax credits and other perceived child- related tax benefits. Many states consider the EI TC to be means-tested income, so exclude it from income used to determine support.34 Other concerns pertain to the head-of-household filing status and child tax credit. The IRS does not discern between single and head-of- household filing status in its employer withhold ing formula, nor does it advance the child tax credit. Further, typical income ranges of single -parent families make them ineligible or only partially eligible for the child tax credit. If the parent is working, they are likely to be eligible for the EITC, which phases out at about $30,000 per year. Without taxable income, there is 30 The weighted county tax is 3.04%. 31 Specifically, Federal and FICA tax withholding formulas provided in IRS (2008) Circular E; Employer’s Tax Guide , and State tax withholding formula provided by th e Comptroller of Maryland Revenue Administration Division, Maryland Employer Withholding Guide (January, 2008) . 32 The IRS employer withholding formula is the same fo r single persons as it is for head of households. 33 Vermont has typically used the 1040 IRS forms to calculate the child tax credit and the EITC. 34 For examples, see the Michigan an d Wyoming child support guidelines. Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 43 nothing to which a tax credit can be applied. Finally, most Income Shares guidelines adjust for the child care tax credit (calculated from IRS form 2441) in the calculation of work- related child care expenses, rather than in the conversion of gross to net income. Step 7: Develop amounts above $10,000 per month The amounts of the updated schedule for co mbined gross incomes of $10,000 per month and less are based on the above steps. Th e amounts above $10,000 gross per month are based on the extrapolated amounts from the existing schedule multiplied by the percentage increase at lower incomes. As di scussed in more detail earlier, th e intent it to create vertical equity in the guidelines changes among low-, middle- and high-income families. Extrapolation from the existing schedule resu lts in the following percentages applied to combined incomes above $10,000 per month: 10.40 percent for one child; 16.16 percent for two children; 20.26 percent for three children; 22.78 percent for four children; 24.87 percent for five children; and 26.59 percent for six children. The percentage increase at lower incomes is: 24.5 percent for one child; 17.5 percent for two children; 11.2 percent for three children; 10.7 percent for four children; 12.2 percent for five children; and 14.5 percent for six children. Using the above information, the proposed sche d u l e a m o u n t i s c a l c u l a t e d b y t a k i n g t h e combined gross income multiplied by the ex trapolation percentage; and then, multiplying that by one plus the percentage increase at lower incomes. For example, the basic obliga-tion for a combined income of $20,000 gross per month for one child is: $20,000 multi- plied by 10.40 equals $2,080, which is then mult iplied by 1.245 to arrive at the proposed basic obligation of $2,590. The above formula starts at combined gross incomes of: $10,050 for one child; $10,300 for two children; $10,600 for three children; $10, 750 for four children; $10,950 for five chil- dren; and, $11,250 for six children. It does not start at $10,050 for two or more children because it would result in a precipitous increa se. Instead, the high-income formula is gradu- ally phased in by adding $25 for each $50 in combined gross income above $10,000 per month to the basic obligation at $10,000. This phase-in is used until the high-income for- mula results in a lesser amount. Step 8: Update the low-income adjustment There are two components to the low-income adjustment: a self support reserve that is incorporated into the schedule; and, a minimu m order amount. The intent of the self sup- port reserve is to allow the obligated parent sufficient income after payment of child support to live at least at a sustainable level. The am ount of the self support reserve in the current schedule is $481 per month. It is based on the 1989 federal poverty level for one person. This amount is updated to the 2008 federal poverty level for one person, $867 per month. The self support reserve is compared to the after-tax incomes equivalent of the gross in- comes shown in the obligation schedule. (After -tax income is used because federal poverty levels are compared to after-tax income.) If the difference between net income and the self Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 44 support reserve is less than the obligation am ount, an adjustment is made. For example, when gross income is $1,300, the net equivalent is about $1,083 per month. The differ-ence between $1,083 and the self support reserve of $867 is about $216 per month, so the maximum obligation at $1,300 in gross income is $216 per month. What a family with this income actually spends on one child is $274 per month. Since this is more than the difference between the net-income equivalent an d the self support reserve, an adjustment is incorporated into the obligation schedule. The adjustment is a percentage of the differe nce between the net income and the self sup- port reserve. This allows for a work incentive; that is, for each dollar earned, some of it is retained by the obligated parent and not all of it is assigned to child support. The adjust- ment percentages are: 90 percent for one chil d; 91 percent for two children; 92 percent for three children; 93 percent for four children; 94 percent for five children; and 95 percent for six children. To illustrate the work incentive, continue the example at obligor’s gross income of $1,300 per month. As described above, based on a self support reserve of $867 per month, the difference between after-tax income and the self support is $216 per month. The formula provides that the obligated parent keeps at least one dollar of every ten dollars above the self support reserve and the remainin g is assigned to child support. Based on this formula, the one-child guidelines amount is $195 per month ($216.67—which is the actual amount before rounding -- multiplied by 90%). The self support reserve is phased out when average child-rearing expenditures for a par-ticular income is less than the self support reserve formula. This occurs above monthly gross incomes of $1,500 for one child; $1,800 for two children; $2,050 for three children; $2,250 for four children; $2,550 for five children; and $2,750 for six children. Minimum Order. The income to which the minimum order applies is also updated. The current Maryland guidelines provides for a minimum order of $20 to $150 per month based on the resources and living expense of the obli gor and number of children due support. This minimum order applies to incomes below $900 per month under the current schedule. The $900-threshold approximates full-time earnings at the previous minimum wage. However, in 2007, Congress passed increases to the minimum wage. The increases will be com- pletely phased in by July 24, 2009. It wi ll be $7.25 per hour, which is about $1,256 per month at full-time employment. The updated schedule proposes to apply the minimum order up to $1,250 per month. The intent is that the minimum order will apply to obligors whose disability or incapacitation prevents th em from working at least full-time at minimum wage. Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 45 Section V Comparisons and Conclusions The Maryland child support schedule is updated in this report using the most current eco-nomic data available in 2008. Exhibit 12 summ aries the differences between the economic data used to develop the existing and updated schedules. Exhibit 12 Comparison of the Economic Basis of the Existing and Updated Schedule Economic Factor Existing Schedule 2008 Updated Schedule Author and study year Dr. Thomas Espenshade (1984) Dr. David Betson (2006) Years that families were surveyed about expenditures 1972-73 1998-2004 Federal, State and Local Tax rates 1988 2008 Expenditures to Income Ratios National average Average for families in Betson’s 1998-2004 data with adjustment to account for Maryland’s above average housing prices Price Levels 1988 January 2008 Amount of Uninsured Medical Expenses Included in Schedule $100 per year per child $250 per year per child Federal Poverty Level for One person $481/mo (1988) $867/mo (2008) Minimum Wage $5.15/hr (effective in the early 2000’s) $7.25/hr (effective July 24, 2009) . Side-by-side comparisons of the amounts based on the existing and proposed schedule are provided in Appendix A. Exhibits 13 and 14 compare the existing and updated schedules for combined incomes of $1,250 to $20,000 gross pe r month for one and two children. Saun- ders et al. (2008) finds that 75 percent of Maryland orders cover one child; 19 percent cover two children; and six percent cover three or more children. The comparisons consider basic obligations before proration between th e parents and consideration of other factors such as the actual cost of the child’s health insurance. Below $1,250 gross per month, the minimum order applies in the proposed schedule. It is likely to be applied to obligated par- ents whose disability or incapacitation prev ents them from working full-time at minimum wage. The graphs generally indicate increases. The only exception is at very low incomes where the minimum order amount and self support reserve are gradually phased out. Center for POLICY RESEARCH 2008 Update of the Maryland Child Support Schedule Page 46 Exhibit 13 Comparisons of Existing to Updated Schedule: One Child 050010001500200025003000 1250 2000 2750 3500 4250 5000 5750 6500 7250 8000 8750 9500 10250 11000 11750 12500 13250 14000 14500 15500 16250 17000 17750 18500 19250 20000Com bined Adjusted Gross Incom eMonthly Basic ObligationExisting Proposed 2008 Update Exhibit 14 Comparisons of Existing to Updated Schedule: Two Children 050010001500200025003000350040004500 1250 2000 2750 3500 4250 5000 5750 6500 7250 8000 8750 9500 10250 11000 11750 12500 13250 14000 14500 15500 16250 17000 17750 18500 19250 20000 Combined Adjusted Gross IncomeMonthly Basic Obligation Existing Proposed 2008 Update CONCLUSION There are over half a million children in Mar yland that are affected by the child support schedule. Besides the amounts below gro ss incomes of $900 per month, the Maryland child support schedule has never been updated. It is almost 20 years old and produces amounts considerably lower than other state gu idelines formulas. In contrast, Maryland ranks first in state median income. An outdat ed child support schedule is not justifiable given Maryland incomes. The updated schedule pr epared in this report reflects the costs of raising children in Maryland in 2008. Updating the schedule would be fair, appropriate and just. Shaded (blue) area indicates amounts adjusted for low incomes Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existin g Proposed % Change 100-850 20-150 20-150 20-150 20-150 20-150 20-150 20-150 20-150 20-150 20-150 20-150 20-150 900.00 184 20-150 273 20-150 276 20-150 279 20-150 282 20-150 285 20-150 950.00 191 20-150 296 20-150 304 20-150 307 20-150 311 20-150 314 20-150 1000.00 198 20-150 307 20-150 332 20-150 336 20-150 340 20-150 343 20-150 1050.00 205 20-150 318 20-150 360 20-150 364 20-150 368 20-150 372 20-150 1100.00 212 20-150 329 20-150 389 20-150 393 20-150 397 20-150 401 20-150 1150.00 219 20-150 339 20-150 416 20-150 421 20-150 425 20-150 430 20-150 1200.00 226 20-150 350 20-150 438 20-150 449 20-150 454 20-150 458 20-150 1250.00 233 162 -30.7% 360 163 -54.6% 451 165 -63.4% 477 167 -65.0% 482 169 -65.0% 487 170 -65.0% 1300.00 239 195 -18.4% 371 197 -46.8% 465 199 -57.1% 504 202 -60.0% 510 204 -60.1% 515 206 -60.0% 1350.00 246 229 -7.1% 382 231 -39.5% 478 234 -51.1% 532 236 -55.6% 538 239 -55.6% 544 241 -55.6% 1400.00 253 262 3.6% 392 265 -32.4% 491 268 -45.4% 554 271 -51.1% 566 274 -51.6% 572 277 -51.6% 1450.00 260 295 13.6% 403 299 -25.9% 504 302 -40.1% 569 305 -46.4% 594 308 -48.1% 601 312 -48.1% 1500.00 267 310 16.1% 413 330 -20.0% 517 334 -35.4% 584 338 -42.2% 623 341 -45.2% 629 345 -45.2% 1550.00 274 319 16.3% 424 362 -14.6% 531 366 -31.1% 599 370 -38.3% 651 374 -42.6% 658 378 -42.6% 1600.00 282 327 16.0% 436 394 -9.7% 546 398 -27.1% 616 402 -34.7% 672 407 -39.5% 691 411 -40.5% 1650.00 288 336 16.5% 447 425 -4.9% 559 430 -23.1% 631 435 -31.1% 688 439 -36.2% 725 444 -38.8% 1700.00 295 344 16.6% 457 457 0.0% 572 462 -19.3% 645 467 -27.6% 704 472 -33.0% 753 477 -36.7% 1750.00 302 353 16.8% 467 488 4.6% 585 494 -15.6% 660 499 -24.4% 720 505 -29.9% 770 510 -33.8% 1800.00 308 361 17.3% 477 520 9.0% 598 526 -12.1% 674 532 -21.1% 735 537 -26.9% 787 543 -31.0% 1850.00 315 370 17.4% 488 537 10.1% 611 558 -8.7% 689 564 -18.2% 751 570 -24.1% 804 576 -28.4% 1900.00 321 378 17.8% 498 550 10.4% 624 590 -5.5% 703 596 -15.2% 767 603 -21.4% 821 609 -25.8% 1950.00 327 387 18.3% 506 562 11.1% 634 622 -1.9% 715 629 -12.1% 780 635 -18.5% 835 642 -23.1% 2000.00 332 395 19.0% 515 574 11.5% 645 654 1.4% 727 661 -9.1% 793 668 -15.8% 848 675 -20.4% 2050.00 338 403 19.4% 523 586 12.1% 655 686 4.7% 739 693 -6.2% 806 701 -13.1% 862 708 -17.8% 2100.00 343 412 20.1% 531 598 12.6% 666 706 6.0% 751 726 -3.4% 819 733 -10.5% 876 741 -15.4% 2150.00 349 420 20.4% 540 610 12.9% 677 720 6.3% 763 758 -0.7% 832 766 -7.9% 890 774 -13.0% 2200.00 354 428 21.0% 548 622 13.5% 687 734 6.8% 774 790 2.1% 845 799 -5.5% 904 807 -10.7% 2250.00 359 437 21.6% 557 634 13.8% 698 748 7.1% 786 823 4.7% 858 831 -3.1% 918 840 -8.5% 2300.00 365 445 21.9% 565 646 14.3% 708 761 7.6% 798 851 6.6% 871 864 -0.8% 931 873 -6.2% 2350.00 370 453 22.5% 573 657 14.7% 719 775 7.8% 810 866 6.9% 884 897 1.5% 945 906 -4.1% 2400.00 376 462 22.7% 582 669 15.0% 729 789 8.3% 822 882 7.2% 897 930 3.6% 959 939 -2.0% 2450.00 381 470 23.3% 590 681 15.5% 740 803 8.5% 833 897 7.7% 909 962 5.9% 973 972 -0.1% 2500.00 386 478 23.9% 598 693 15.9% 750 817 8.9% 845 913 8.0% 922 995 7.9% 987 1005 1.9% 2550.00 392 486 24.1% 607 705 16.2% 761 831 9.2% 857 928 8.3% 935 1021 9.2% 1000 1039 3.9% 2600.00 397 495 24.6% 615 717 16.6% 771 845 9.6% 869 944 8.6% 948 1038 9.5% 1014 1072 5.7% 2650.00 403 503 24.8% 624 729 16.8% 782 859 9.8% 881 959 8.9% 961 1055 9.8% 1028 1105 7.5% 2700.00 408 511 25.3% 632 741 17.2% 793 873 10.0% 893 975 9.1% 974 1072 10.1% 1042 1138 9.2% 2750.00 413 520 25.8% 640 753 17.6% 803 886 10.4% 904 990 9.5% 987 1089 10.3% 1056 1171 10.9% 2800.00 419 528 26.0% 649 764 17.8% 814 900 10.6% 916 1006 9.8% 1000 1106 10.6% 1070 1202 12.4%2850.00 424 536 26.4% 657 776 18.2% 824 914 10.9% 928 1021 10.0% 1013 1123 10.9% 1083 1221 12.7%2900.00 429 544 26.9% 666 788 18.4% 835 928 11.1% 940 1037 10.3% 1026 1140 11.1% 1097 1240 13.0%2950.00 435 553 27.1% 675 800 18.5% 846 942 11.3% 953 1052 10.4% 1039 1157 11.4% 1112 1258 13.1% 3000.00 441 561 27.2% 684 812 18.8% 857 956 11.6% 965 1068 10.7% 1053 1175 11.6% 1126 1277 13.4%3050.00 446 570 27.7% 693 825 19.0% 868 971 11.8% 978 1084 10.9% 1067 1193 11.8% 1141 1297 13.6% 3100.00 452 578 27.9% 702 837 19.2% 879 985 12.1% 990 1101 11.2% 1080 1211 12.1% 1156 1316 13.8%3150.00 458 587 28.1% 710 849 19.6% 890 1000 12.4% 1003 1117 11.4% 1094 1229 12.3% 1170 1335 14.1% 3200.00 463 595 28.5% 719 861 19.8% 901 1014 12.6% 1015 1133 11.6% 1108 1246 12.5% 1185 1355 14.3%3250.00 469 603 28.7% 728 874 20.0% 912 1029 12.8% 1028 1149 11.8% 1121 1264 12.8% 1199 1374 14.6% 3300.00 475 612 28.8% 737 886 20.2% 923 1044 13.1% 1040 1166 12.1% 1135 1282 13.0% 1214 1394 14.8%3350.00 480 620 29.3% 746 898 20.4% 934 1058 13.3% 1053 1182 12.2% 1148 1300 13.3% 1228 1413 15.1% 3400.00 486 629 29.4% 755 911 20.6% 945 1073 13.5% 1065 1198 12.5% 1162 1318 13.4% 1243 1433 15.3%3450.00 491 636 29.6% 764 922 20.6% 957 1086 13.5% 1078 1213 12.5% 1176 1334 13.4% 1258 1450 15.3%Combined Adjusted Gross Income Comparison of Existing and Updated Child Support Schedules Five Children One Child Two ChildrenAppendix A Three Children Six Children Four Children Appendix A: Page 1/12 Shaded (blue) area indicates amounts adjusted for low incomes Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existin g Proposed % ChangeCombined Adjusted Gross IncomeComparison of Existing and Updated Child Support Schedules Five Children One Child Two ChildrenAppendix A Three Children Six Children Four Children 3500.00 497 644 29.5% 773 932 20.6% 968 1098 13.4% 1090 1227 12.5% 1189 1349 13.5% 1272 1467 15.3% 3550.00 503 651 29.4% 782 943 20.6% 979 1111 13.4% 1103 1241 12.5% 1203 1365 13.4% 1287 1483 15.3%3600.00 508 658 29.6% 790 953 20.7% 990 1123 13.4% 1115 1255 12.5% 1216 1380 13.5% 1301 1500 15.3%3650.00 514 665 29.5% 799 964 20.6% 1001 1136 13.4% 1128 1268 12.4% 1230 1395 13.4% 1316 1517 15.2% 3700.00 520 673 29.4% 808 974 20.6% 1012 1148 13.4% 1140 1282 12.5% 1244 1411 13.4% 1330 1533 15.3%3750.00 525 680 29.5% 817 985 20.5% 1023 1160 13.4% 1152 1296 12.5% 1257 1426 13.4% 1345 1550 15.2% 3800.00 532 687 29.2% 827 995 20.4% 1035 1173 13.3% 1166 1310 12.4% 1273 1441 13.2% 1361 1567 15.1%3850.00 538 694 29.1% 837 1006 20.2% 1048 1185 13.1% 1181 1324 12.1% 1288 1457 13.1% 1378 1583 14.9%3900.00 544 702 29.0% 847 1016 20.0% 1060 1198 13.0% 1195 1338 12.0% 1303 1472 13.0% 1394 1600 14.8%3950.00 551 709 28.7% 857 1027 19.8% 1073 1210 12.8% 1209 1352 11.8% 1319 1487 12.7% 1411 1617 14.6% 4000.00 557 716 28.6% 867 1037 19.7% 1085 1223 12.7% 1223 1366 11.7% 1334 1502 12.6% 1427 1633 14.4%4050.00 563 723 28.5% 877 1048 19.4% 1097 1235 12.5% 1236 1379 11.6% 1349 1517 12.4% 1442 1649 14.3% 4100.00 569 730 28.3% 886 1057 19.3% 1109 1245 12.3% 1249 1391 11.4% 1363 1530 12.3% 1458 1663 14.1%4150.00 575 737 28.1% 895 1067 19.2% 1120 1256 12.2% 1262 1403 11.2% 1377 1544 12.1% 1473 1678 13.9% 4200.00 581 744 28.0% 905 1076 18.9% 1132 1267 12.0% 1275 1416 11.0% 1391 1557 11.9% 1488 1693 13.8%4250.00 587 750 27.8% 914 1086 18.8% 1143 1278 11.8% 1288 1428 10.9% 1405 1571 11.8% 1503 1707 13.6% 4300.00 593 757 27.7% 923 1095 18.7% 1155 1289 11.6% 1301 1440 10.7% 1420 1584 11.5% 1518 1722 13.4%4350.00 598 764 27.7% 932 1105 18.5% 1166 1300 11.5% 1314 1452 10.5% 1434 1597 11.4% 1534 1736 13.2% 4400.00 604 771 27.6% 942 1114 18.3% 1178 1311 11.3% 1327 1464 10.4% 1448 1611 11.2% 1549 1751 13.0%4450.00 610 777 27.4% 951 1124 18.2% 1189 1322 11.2% 1340 1477 10.2% 1462 1624 11.1% 1564 1766 12.9% 4500.00 616 784 27.3% 960 1133 18.1% 1201 1333 11.0% 1353 1489 10.0% 1477 1638 10.9% 1579 1780 12.7%4550.00 622 791 27.2% 970 1143 17.8% 1212 1344 10.9% 1366 1501 9.9% 1491 1651 10.7% 1594 1795 12.6%4600.00 628 798 27.0% 979 1152 17.7% 1224 1355 10.7% 1379 1513 9.7% 1505 1664 10.6% 1610 1809 12.4%4650.00 634 804 26.9% 987 1162 17.7% 1234 1366 10.7% 1391 1525 9.7% 1518 1678 10.5% 1624 1824 12.3% 4700.00 639 811 27.0% 995 1172 17.7% 1244 1376 10.6% 1403 1538 9.6% 1530 1691 10.5% 1637 1838 12.3%4750.00 644 818 27.0% 1003 1181 17.8% 1254 1387 10.6% 1414 1550 9.6% 1543 1705 10.5% 1650 1853 12.3% 4800.00 649 825 27.1% 1011 1191 17.8% 1264 1398 10.6% 1425 1562 9.6% 1555 1718 10.5% 1663 1868 12.3%4850.00 655 832 26.9% 1019 1200 17.8% 1274 1409 10.6% 1437 1574 9.5% 1567 1732 10.5% 1676 1882 12.3%4900.00 660 838 27.0% 1027 1210 17.8% 1284 1420 10.6% 1448 1586 9.6% 1580 1745 10.4% 1689 1897 12.3%4950.00 665 845 27.1% 1035 1219 17.8% 1294 1431 10.6% 1459 1599 9.6% 1592 1758 10.4% 1703 1911 12.2% 5000.00 670 852 27.1% 1043 1229 17.8% 1304 1442 10.6% 1470 1611 9.6% 1604 1772 10.5% 1716 1926 12.2%5050.00 676 859 27.0% 1051 1238 17.8% 1314 1453 10.6% 1482 1623 9.5% 1617 1785 10.4% 1729 1940 12.2% 5100.00 681 865 27.1% 1059 1248 17.8% 1324 1464 10.6% 1493 1635 9.5% 1629 1799 10.4% 1742 1955 12.2%5150.00 686 872 27.1% 1067 1257 17.8% 1334 1475 10.5% 1504 1647 9.5% 1641 1812 10.4% 1755 1970 12.2% 5200.00 691 878 27.1% 1075 1266 17.8% 1344 1485 10.5% 1515 1659 9.5% 1654 1825 10.3% 1768 1983 12.2%5250.00 696 885 27.1% 1083 1275 17.7% 1354 1495 10.4% 1527 1670 9.4% 1666 1837 10.3% 1781 1997 12.1% 5300.00 702 891 26.9% 1091 1284 17.7% 1364 1505 10.4% 1538 1681 9.3% 1678 1850 10.2% 1794 2011 12.1%5350.00 707 897 26.8% 1099 1292 17.6% 1374 1515 10.3% 1549 1693 9.3% 1691 1862 10.1% 1807 2024 12.0% 5400.00 712 903 26.8% 1107 1301 17.5% 1384 1526 10.2% 1561 1704 9.2% 1703 1875 10.1% 1821 2038 11.9%5450.00 717 909 26.8% 1115 1310 17.5% 1394 1536 10.2% 1572 1715 9.1% 1715 1887 10.0% 1834 2051 11.8% 5500.00 722 915 26.8% 1123 1319 17.4% 1404 1546 10.1% 1583 1727 9.1% 1728 1899 9.9% 1847 2065 11.8%5550.00 728 921 26.5% 1131 1327 17.4% 1414 1556 10.0% 1594 1738 9.0% 1740 1912 9.9% 1860 2078 11.7%5600.00 733 927 26.5% 1139 1336 17.3% 1424 1566 10.0% 1606 1749 8.9% 1752 1924 9.8% 1873 2092 11.7%5650.00 738 934 26.5% 1147 1345 17.2% 1434 1576 9.9% 1617 1761 8.9% 1765 1937 9.7% 1886 2105 11.6% 5700.00 743 940 26.5% 1155 1354 17.2% 1444 1586 9.9% 1628 1772 8.9% 1777 1949 9.7% 1899 2119 11.6%5750.00 748 946 26.4% 1163 1362 17.1% 1454 1597 9.8% 1639 1783 8.8% 1789 1962 9.7% 1912 2132 11.5% 5800.00 754 952 26.2% 1171 1371 17.1% 1464 1607 9.8% 1651 1795 8.7% 1801 1974 9.6% 1926 2146 11.4%5850.00 759 958 26.2% 1179 1380 17.0% 1474 1617 9.7% 1662 1806 8.7% 1814 1987 9.5% 1939 2160 11.4%5900.00 764 964 26.2% 1187 1388 17.0% 1484 1627 9.6% 1673 1817 8.6% 1826 1999 9.5% 1952 2173 11.3%5950.00 769 970 26.2% 1195 1397 16.9% 1494 1637 9.6% 1685 1829 8.5% 1838 2012 9.4% 1965 2187 11.3%6000.00 774 976 26.2% 1203 1406 16.9% 1504 1647 9.5% 1696 1840 8.5% 1851 2024 9.4% 1978 2200 11.2%6050.00 780 983 26.0% 1211 1415 16.8% 1513 1658 9.6% 1707 1851 8.5% 1863 2037 9.3% 1991 2214 11.2% 6100.00 785 989 25.9% 1219 1423 16.8% 1523 1668 9.5% 1718 1863 8.4% 1875 2049 9.3% 2004 2227 11.1% Appendix A: Page 2/12 Shaded (blue) area indicates amounts adjusted for low incomes Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existin g Proposed % ChangeCombined Adjusted Gross IncomeComparison of Existing and Updated Child Support Schedules Five Children One Child Two ChildrenAppendix A Three Children Six Children Four Children 6150.00 790 995 25.9% 1227 1432 16.7% 1533 1678 9.4% 1730 1874 8.3% 1888 2062 9.2% 2017 2241 11.1% 6200.00 795 1001 25.9% 1235 1441 16.7% 1543 1688 9.4% 1741 1885 8.3% 1900 2074 9.2% 2030 2254 11.1%6250.00 800 1007 25.9% 1243 1450 16.6% 1553 1698 9.3% 1752 1897 8.3% 1912 2086 9.1% 2044 2268 11.0% 6300.00 806 1013 25.7% 1251 1458 16.5% 1563 1708 9.3% 1763 1907 8.2% 1925 2098 9.0% 2057 2281 10.9%6350.00 811 1016 25.3% 1259 1462 16.2% 1573 1713 8.9% 1775 1913 7.8% 1937 2104 8.6% 2070 2287 10.5% 6400.00 815 1020 25.1% 1266 1467 15.9% 1582 1717 8.6% 1785 1918 7.5% 1947 2110 8.4% 2081 2294 10.2%6450.00 819 1023 24.9% 1271 1471 15.8% 1589 1722 8.4% 1793 1924 7.3% 1956 2116 8.2% 2091 2300 10.0% 6500.00 823 1026 24.7% 1277 1476 15.6% 1597 1727 8.1% 1801 1929 7.1% 1965 2122 8.0% 2100 2307 9.8%6550.00 827 1030 24.5% 1283 1480 15.4% 1604 1732 8.0% 1809 1935 6.9% 1974 2128 7.8% 2110 2313 9.6%6600.00 831 1033 24.3% 1289 1485 15.2% 1611 1737 7.8% 1817 1940 6.8% 1983 2134 7.6% 2119 2320 9.5%6650.00 834 1037 24.3% 1294 1489 15.1% 1618 1742 7.6% 1826 1945 6.5% 1992 2140 7.4% 2129 2326 9.3% 6700.00 838 1040 24.1% 1300 1494 14.9% 1626 1747 7.4% 1834 1951 6.4% 2001 2146 7.2% 2138 2333 9.1%6750.00 842 1043 23.9% 1306 1498 14.7% 1633 1751 7.2% 1842 1956 6.2% 2010 2152 7.1% 2148 2339 8.9% 6800.00 846 1047 23.7% 1311 1503 14.6% 1640 1756 7.1% 1850 1962 6.0% 2019 2158 6.9% 2157 2346 8.7%6850.00 850 1050 23.5% 1317 1507 14.5% 1647 1761 6.9% 1858 1967 5.9% 2028 2164 6.7% 2167 2352 8.5%6900.00 854 1053 23.4% 1323 1512 14.3% 1654 1766 6.8% 1866 1973 5.7% 2037 2170 6.5% 2176 2359 8.4%6950.00 857 1057 23.3% 1329 1517 14.1% 1662 1771 6.5% 1874 1978 5.5% 2045 2176 6.4% 2186 2365 8.2% 7000.00 861 1060 23.1% 1334 1521 14.0% 1669 1776 6.4% 1882 1983 5.4% 2054 2182 6.2% 2195 2372 8.0%7050.00 865 1064 23.0% 1340 1526 13.8% 1676 1781 6.2% 1891 1989 5.2% 2063 2188 6.0% 2205 2378 7.8% 7100.00 869 1067 22.8% 1346 1530 13.7% 1683 1785 6.1% 1899 1994 5.0% 2072 2194 5.9% 2214 2385 7.7%7150.00 873 1070 22.6% 1351 1535 13.6% 1691 1790 5.9% 1907 2000 4.9% 2081 2200 5.7% 2224 2391 7.5% 7200.00 876 1074 22.6% 1357 1539 13.4% 1698 1795 5.7% 1915 2005 4.7% 2090 2206 5.5% 2233 2397 7.4%7250.00 880 1077 22.4% 1363 1544 13.2% 1705 1800 5.6% 1923 2010 4.5% 2099 2211 5.4% 2243 2404 7.2% 7300.00 884 1080 22.2% 1369 1548 13.1% 1712 1804 5.4% 1931 2016 4.4% 2108 2217 5.2% 2253 2410 7.0%7350.00 888 1084 22.0% 1374 1552 13.0% 1720 1809 5.2% 1939 2021 4.2% 2117 2223 5.0% 2262 2416 6.8% 7400.00 892 1087 21.8% 1380 1556 12.8% 1727 1814 5.0% 1947 2026 4.1% 2126 2228 4.8% 2272 2422 6.6%7450.00 895 1090 21.7% 1386 1560 12.6% 1734 1818 4.8% 1956 2031 3.8% 2135 2234 4.6% 2281 2428 6.4% 7500.00 899 1092 21.4% 1391 1563 12.3% 1741 1820 4.6% 1964 2033 3.5% 2144 2237 4.3% 2291 2431 6.1%7550.00 903 1094 21.1% 1397 1565 12.0% 1748 1823 4.3% 1972 2036 3.3% 2153 2240 4.0% 2300 2435 5.9%7600.00 906 1096 20.9% 1402 1568 11.8% 1755 1826 4.0% 1979 2039 3.0% 2161 2243 3.8% 2309 2438 5.6%7650.00 909 1097 20.7% 1407 1570 11.6% 1761 1828 3.8% 1986 2042 2.8% 2168 2247 3.6% 2317 2442 5.4% 7700.00 912 1099 20.6% 1412 1573 11.4% 1768 1831 3.6% 1993 2045 2.6% 2175 2250 3.4% 2325 2445 5.2%7750.00 915 1101 20.4% 1417 1575 11.2% 1774 1834 3.4% 1999 2048 2.5% 2182 2253 3.3% 2333 2449 5.0% 7800.00 918 1103 20.2% 1422 1578 11.0% 1780 1836 3.2% 2006 2051 2.2% 2190 2256 3.0% 2340 2453 4.8%7850.00 921 1105 20.0% 1427 1580 10.8% 1786 1839 3.0% 2012 2054 2.1% 2197 2259 2.8% 2348 2456 4.6%7900.00 923 1107 20.0% 1431 1583 10.6% 1792 1842 2.8% 2019 2057 1.9% 2204 2263 2.7% 2356 2460 4.4%7950.00 926 1109 19.8% 1436 1586 10.4% 1798 1844 2.6% 2026 2060 1.7% 2211 2266 2.5% 2364 2463 4.2% 8000.00 929 1111 19.6% 1441 1588 10.2% 1804 1847 2.4% 2032 2063 1.5% 2219 2269 2.3% 2372 2467 4.0%8050.00 932 1113 19.4% 1446 1591 10.0% 1810 1849 2.2% 2039 2066 1.3% 2226 2272 2.1% 2380 2470 3.8% 8100.00 935 1115 19.3% 1451 1593 9.8% 1817 1852 1.9% 2045 2069 1.2% 2233 2276 1.9% 2388 2474 3.6%8150.00 938 1117 19.1% 1456 1596 9.6% 1823 1855 1.7% 2052 2072 1.0% 2240 2279 1.7% 2396 2477 3.4% 8200.00 941 1119 18.9% 1461 1598 9.4% 1829 1857 1.5% 2059 2075 0.8% 2248 2282 1.5% 2404 2481 3.2%8250.00 944 1121 18.7% 1465 1601 9.3% 1835 1860 1.4% 2065 2078 0.6% 2255 2285 1.3% 2412 2484 3.0% 8300.00 947 1123 18.6% 1470 1603 9.1% 1841 1863 1.2% 2072 2081 0.4% 2262 2289 1.2% 2420 2488 2.8%8350.00 949 1125 18.5% 1475 1606 8.9% 1847 1865 1.0% 2078 2084 0.3% 2270 2292 1.0% 2428 2491 2.6% 8400.00 952 1127 18.4% 1480 1609 8.7% 1853 1868 0.8% 2085 2087 0.1% 2277 2296 0.8% 2436 2495 2.4%8450.00 955 1129 18.3% 1485 1612 8.5% 1860 1871 0.6% 2092 2090 -0.1% 2284 2299 0.7% 2444 2499 2.3% 8500.00 958 1132 18.1% 1490 1614 8.3% 1866 1874 0.4% 2098 2093 -0.2% 2291 2303 0.5% 2452 2503 2.1%8550.00 961 1134 18.0% 1494 1617 8.2% 1872 1877 0.3% 2105 2097 -0.4% 2299 2306 0.3% 2460 2507 1.9%8600.00 964 1136 17.8% 1499 1620 8.1% 1878 1880 0.1% 2111 2100 -0.5% 2306 2310 0.2% 2468 2511 1.7%8650.00 967 1141 18.0% 1504 1628 8.2% 1884 1889 0.3% 2118 2110 -0.4% 2313 2321 0.4% 2476 2523 1.9% 8700.00 970 1147 18.3% 1509 1636 8.4% 1890 1898 0.4% 2125 2120 -0.2% 2320 2332 0.5% 2484 2535 2.1%8750.00 973 1153 18.5% 1514 1644 8.6% 1896 1908 0.6% 2131 2131 0.0% 2328 2344 0.7% 2492 2548 2.2% Appendix A: Page 3/12 Shaded (blue) area indicates amounts adjusted for low incomes Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existin g Proposed % ChangeCombined Adjusted Gross IncomeComparison of Existing and Updated Child Support Schedules Five Children One Child Two ChildrenAppendix A Three Children Six Children Four Children 8800.00 975 1159 18.8% 1518 1652 8.8% 1901 1917 0.8% 2137 2141 0.2% 2334 2355 0.9% 2498 2560 2.5% 8850.00 978 1164 19.0% 1521 1660 9.1% 1906 1926 1.1% 2142 2151 0.4% 2340 2367 1.1% 2504 2572 2.7%8900.00 980 1170 19.4% 1525 1668 9.4% 1910 1935 1.3% 2147 2162 0.7% 2345 2378 1.4% 2510 2585 3.0%8950.00 982 1176 19.7% 1528 1676 9.7% 1915 1945 1.5% 2152 2172 0.9% 2351 2389 1.6% 2516 2597 3.2%9000.00 989 1181 19.5% 1539 1684 9.4% 1928 1954 1.3% 2168 2182 0.7% 2367 2401 1.4% 2534 2609 3.0%9050.00 992 1187 19.7% 1543 1692 9.7% 1933 1963 1.6% 2173 2193 0.9% 2373 2412 1.6% 2540 2622 3.2% 9100.00 994 1193 20.0% 1547 1700 9.9% 1938 1972 1.8% 2179 2203 1.1% 2379 2423 1.9% 2546 2634 3.5%9150.00 997 1199 20.2% 1551 1708 10.1% 1943 1982 2.0% 2184 2213 1.3% 2385 2435 2.1% 2552 2647 3.7% 9200.00 999 1204 20.5% 1554 1716 10.4% 1948 1991 2.2% 2190 2224 1.5% 2391 2446 2.3% 2559 2659 3.9%9250.00 1002 1210 20.7% 1558 1724 10.7% 1953 2000 2.4% 2195 2234 1.8% 2397 2457 2.5% 2565 2671 4.1% 9300.00 1004 1216 21.1% 1562 1732 10.9% 1958 2009 2.6% 2201 2244 2.0% 2403 2469 2.7% 2571 2684 4.4%9350.00 1007 1220 21.2% 1566 1739 11.0% 1963 2017 2.7% 2206 2253 2.1% 2409 2478 2.9% 2578 2694 4.5% 9400.00 1009 1224 21.3% 1570 1744 11.1% 1967 2023 2.9% 2212 2260 2.2% 2415 2486 2.9% 2584 2702 4.6%9450.00 1012 1228 21.3% 1574 1750 11.2% 1972 2030 2.9% 2217 2267 2.3% 2421 2494 3.0% 2590 2711 4.7% 9500.00 1014 1232 21.5% 1577 1756 11.3% 1977 2036 3.0% 2223 2275 2.3% 2427 2502 3.1% 2596 2720 4.8%9550.00 1017 1236 21.5% 1581 1761 11.4% 1982 2043 3.1% 2228 2282 2.4% 2433 2510 3.2% 2603 2728 4.8%9600.00 1020 1240 21.5% 1585 1767 11.5% 1987 2049 3.1% 2234 2289 2.5% 2439 2518 3.2% 2609 2737 4.9%9650.00 1022 1244 21.7% 1589 1772 11.5% 1992 2056 3.2% 2239 2296 2.6% 2445 2526 3.3% 2615 2746 5.0% 9700.00 1025 1248 21.7% 1593 1778 11.6% 1997 2062 3.3% 2245 2304 2.6% 2451 2534 3.4% 2622 2754 5.0%9750.00 1027 1252 21.9% 1597 1784 11.7% 2001 2069 3.4% 2250 2311 2.7% 2457 2542 3.5% 2628 2763 5.1% 9800.00 1030 1255 21.9% 1601 1789 11.7% 2006 2075 3.5% 2256 2318 2.8% 2463 2550 3.5% 2634 2772 5.2%9850.00 1032 1259 22.0% 1604 1795 11.9% 2011 2082 3.5% 2261 2325 2.8% 2469 2558 3.6% 2640 2780 5.3%9900.00 1035 1263 22.1% 1608 1800 12.0% 2016 2088 3.6% 2267 2333 2.9% 2475 2566 3.7% 2647 2789 5.4%9950.00 1037 1267 22.2% 1612 1806 12.0% 2021 2095 3.7% 2272 2340 3.0% 2481 2574 3.7% 2653 2798 5.5% 10000.00 1040 1271 22.2% 1616 1811 12.1% 2026 2101 3.7% 2278 2347 3.0% 2487 2582 3.8% 2659 2806 5.5% 10050.00 1045 1301 24.5% 1624 1836 13.1% 2036 2126 4.4% 2289 2372 3.6% 2499 2607 4.3% 2672 2831 6.0% 10100.00 1050 1308 24.5% 1632 1861 14.0% 2046 2151 5.1% 2301 2397 4.2% 2512 2632 4.8% 2686 2856 6.4%10150.00 1056 1314 24.5% 1640 1886 15.0% 2056 2176 5.8% 2312 2422 4.8% 2524 2657 5.3% 2699 2881 6.8% 10200.00 1061 1321 24.5% 1648 1911 16.0% 2067 2201 6.5% 2324 2447 5.3% 2537 2682 5.7% 2712 2906 7.2%10250.00 1066 1327 24.5% 1656 1936 16.9% 2077 2226 7.2% 2335 2472 5.9% 2549 2707 6.2% 2725 2931 7.6% 10300.00 1071 1334 24.5% 1664 1955 17.5% 2087 2251 7.9% 2346 2497 6.4% 2562 2732 6.6% 2739 2956 7.9%10350.00 1076 1340 24.5% 1673 1965 17.5% 2097 2276 8.6% 2358 2522 7.0% 2574 2757 7.1% 2752 2981 8.3% 10400.00 1082 1347 24.5% 1681 1974 17.5% 2107 2301 9.2% 2369 2547 7.5% 2586 2782 7.6% 2765 3006 8.7%10450.00 1087 1353 24.5% 1689 1984 17.5% 2117 2326 9.9% 2381 2572 8.0% 2599 2807 8.0% 2779 3031 9.1% 10500.00 1092 1359 24.5% 1697 1993 17.5% 2127 2351 10.5% 2392 2597 8.6% 2611 2832 8.4% 2792 3056 9.5%10550.00 1097 1366 24.5% 1705 2003 17.5% 2137 2376 11.2% 2403 2622 9.1% 2624 2857 8.9% 2805 3081 9.8%10600.00 1102 1372 24.5% 1713 2012 17.5% 2148 2388 11.2% 2415 2647 9.6% 2636 2882 9.3% 2819 3106 10.2%10650.00 1108 1379 24.5% 1721 2022 17.5% 2158 2399 11.2% 2426 2672 10.1% 2649 2907 9.7% 2832 3131 10.6% 10700.00 1113 1385 24.5% 1729 2031 17.5% 2168 2410 11.2% 2437 2697 10.7% 2661 2932 10.2% 2845 3156 10.9%10750.00 1118 1392 24.5% 1737 2041 17.5% 2178 2422 11.2% 2449 2712 10.7% 2674 2957 10.6% 2858 3181 11.3% 10800.00 1123 1398 24.5% 1745 2050 17.5% 2188 2433 11.2% 2460 2725 10.7% 2686 2982 11.0% 2872 3206 11.7%10850.00 1128 1405 24.5% 1753 2060 17.5% 2198 2444 11.2% 2472 2737 10.7% 2698 3007 11.4% 2885 3231 12.0%10900.00 1134 1411 24.5% 1761 2069 17.5% 2208 2455 11.2% 2483 2750 10.7% 2711 3032 11.8% 2898 3256 12.4%10950.00 1139 1418 24.5% 1770 2079 17.5% 2218 2467 11.2% 2494 2762 10.7% 2723 3056 12.2% 2912 3281 12.7% 11000.00 1144 1424 24.5% 1778 2088 17.5% 2229 2478 11.2% 2506 2775 10.7% 2736 3070 12.2% 2925 3306 13.0%11050.00 1149 1431 24.5% 1786 2097 17.5% 2239 2489 11.2% 2517 2788 10.7% 2748 3083 12.2% 2938 3331 13.4% 11100.00 1154 1437 24.5% 1794 2107 17.5% 2249 2501 11.2% 2529 2800 10.7% 2761 3097 12.2% 2951 3356 13.7%11150.00 1160 1444 24.5% 1802 2116 17.5% 2259 2512 11.2% 2540 2813 10.7% 2773 3111 12.2% 2965 3381 14.1% 11200.00 1165 1450 24.5% 1810 2126 17.5% 2269 2523 11.2% 2551 2825 10.7% 2785 3125 12.2% 2978 3406 14.4%11250.00 1170 1457 24.5% 1818 2135 17.5% 2279 2534 11.2% 2563 2838 10.7% 2798 3139 12.2% 2991 3427 14.5% 11300.00 1175 1463 24.5% 1826 2145 17.5% 2289 2546 11.2% 2574 2851 10.7% 2810 3153 12.2% 3005 3442 14.5%The existing schedule stops at $10,000. The existing amounts above $10,000 per month are extrapolations. The extrapolation fo r incomes above $10,000 is 10.4% for 1 Child ($1,040/$10,000); 16.16% for 2 Children ($1,616/$10,000); 20.26% for 3 Children ($2,060/$10,000); 22.8% for 4 Children ($2,278/$10,000); 24.9% for 5 Children ($2,487/ $10,000); and, 26.6% for 6 Children ($2,659/$10,000). Appendix A: Page 4/12 Shaded (blue) area indicates amounts adjusted for low incomes Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existin g Proposed % ChangeCombined Adjusted Gross IncomeComparison of Existing and Updated Child Support Schedules Five Children One Child Two ChildrenAppendix A Three Children Six Children Four Children 11350.00 1180 1470 24.5% 1834 2154 17.5% 2300 2557 11.2% 2586 2863 10.7% 2823 3167 12.2% 3018 3457 14.5% 11400.00 1186 1476 24.5% 1842 2164 17.5% 2310 2568 11.2% 2597 2876 10.7% 2835 3181 12.2% 3031 3472 14.5%11450.00 1191 1482 24.5% 1850 2173 17.5% 2320 2579 11.2% 2608 2889 10.7% 2848 3195 12.2% 3045 3488 14.5% 11500.00 1196 1489 24.5% 1858 2183 17.5% 2330 2591 11.2% 2620 2901 10.7% 2860 3209 12.2% 3058 3503 14.5%11550.00 1201 1495 24.5% 1866 2192 17.5% 2340 2602 11.2% 2631 2914 10.7% 2872 3223 12.2% 3071 3518 14.5%11600.00 1206 1502 24.5% 1875 2202 17.5% 2350 2613 11.2% 2642 2926 10.7% 2885 3237 12.2% 3084 3533 14.5%11650.00 1212 1508 24.5% 1883 2211 17.5% 2360 2624 11.2% 2654 2939 10.7% 2897 3251 12.2% 3098 3548 14.5% 11700.00 1217 1515 24.5% 1891 2221 17.5% 2370 2636 11.2% 2665 2952 10.7% 2910 3265 12.2% 3111 3564 14.5%11750.00 1222 1521 24.5% 1899 2230 17.5% 2381 2647 11.2% 2677 2964 10.7% 2922 3279 12.2% 3124 3579 14.5% 11800.00 1227 1528 24.5% 1907 2240 17.5% 2391 2658 11.2% 2688 2977 10.7% 2935 3293 12.2% 3138 3594 14.5%11850.00 1232 1534 24.5% 1915 2249 17.5% 2401 2669 11.2% 2699 2989 10.7% 2947 3307 12.2% 3151 3609 14.5%11900.00 1238 1541 24.5% 1923 2259 17.5% 2411 2681 11.2% 2711 3002 10.7% 2960 3321 12.2% 3164 3625 14.5%11950.00 1243 1547 24.5% 1931 2268 17.5% 2421 2692 11.2% 2722 3015 10.7% 2972 3335 12.2% 3178 3640 14.5% 12000.00 1248 1554 24.5% 1939 2278 17.5% 2431 2703 11.2% 2734 3027 10.7% 2984 3349 12.2% 3191 3655 14.5%12050.00 1253 1560 24.5% 1947 2287 17.5% 2441 2715 11.2% 2745 3040 10.7% 2997 3363 12.2% 3204 3670 14.5% 12100.00 1258 1567 24.5% 1955 2297 17.5% 2451 2726 11.2% 2756 3053 10.7% 3009 3376 12.2% 3217 3685 14.5%12150.00 1264 1573 24.5% 1963 2306 17.5% 2462 2737 11.2% 2768 3065 10.7% 3022 3390 12.2% 3231 3701 14.5% 12200.00 1269 1580 24.5% 1972 2316 17.5% 2472 2748 11.2% 2779 3078 10.7% 3034 3404 12.2% 3244 3716 14.5%12250.00 1274 1586 24.5% 1980 2325 17.5% 2482 2760 11.2% 2791 3090 10.7% 3047 3418 12.2% 3257 3731 14.5% 12300.00 1279 1593 24.5% 1988 2335 17.5% 2492 2771 11.2% 2802 3103 10.7% 3059 3432 12.2% 3271 3746 14.5%12350.00 1284 1599 24.5% 1996 2344 17.5% 2502 2782 11.2% 2813 3116 10.7% 3071 3446 12.2% 3284 3762 14.5% 12400.00 1290 1605 24.5% 2004 2354 17.5% 2512 2793 11.2% 2825 3128 10.7% 3084 3460 12.2% 3297 3777 14.5%12450.00 1295 1612 24.5% 2012 2363 17.5% 2522 2805 11.2% 2836 3141 10.7% 3096 3474 12.2% 3310 3792 14.5% 12500.00 1300 1618 24.5% 2020 2373 17.5% 2533 2816 11.2% 2848 3153 10.7% 3109 3488 12.2% 3324 3807 14.5%12550.00 1305 1625 24.5% 2028 2382 17.5% 2543 2827 11.2% 2859 3166 10.7% 3121 3502 12.2% 3337 3823 14.5%12600.00 1310 1631 24.5% 2036 2392 17.5% 2553 2838 11.2% 2870 3179 10.7% 3134 3516 12.2% 3350 3838 14.5%12650.00 1316 1638 24.5% 2044 2401 17.5% 2563 2850 11.2% 2882 3191 10.7% 3146 3530 12.2% 3364 3853 14.5% 12700.00 1321 1644 24.5% 2052 2411 17.5% 2573 2861 11.2% 2893 3204 10.7% 3158 3544 12.2% 3377 3868 14.5%12750.00 1326 1651 24.5% 2060 2420 17.5% 2583 2872 11.2% 2904 3217 10.7% 3171 3558 12.2% 3390 3883 14.5% 12800.00 1331 1657 24.5% 2068 2430 17.5% 2593 2883 11.2% 2916 3229 10.7% 3183 3572 12.2% 3404 3899 14.5%12850.00 1336 1664 24.5% 2077 2439 17.5% 2603 2895 11.2% 2927 3242 10.7% 3196 3586 12.2% 3417 3914 14.5%12900.00 1342 1670 24.5% 2085 2449 17.5% 2614 2906 11.2% 2939 3254 10.7% 3208 3600 12.2% 3430 3929 14.5%12950.00 1347 1677 24.5% 2093 2458 17.5% 2624 2917 11.2% 2950 3267 10.7% 3221 3614 12.2% 3443 3944 14.5% 13000.00 1352 1683 24.5% 2101 2468 17.5% 2634 2929 11.2% 2961 3280 10.7% 3233 3628 12.2% 3457 3960 14.5%13050.00 1357 1690 24.5% 2109 2477 17.5% 2644 2940 11.2% 2973 3292 10.7% 3246 3642 12.2% 3470 3975 14.5% 13100.00 1362 1696 24.5% 2117 2487 17.5% 2654 2951 11.2% 2984 3305 10.7% 3258 3655 12.2% 3483 3990 14.5%13150.00 1368 1703 24.5% 2125 2496 17.5% 2664 2962 11.2% 2996 3317 10.7% 3270 3669 12.2% 3497 4005 14.5% 13200.00 1373 1709 24.5% 2133 2506 17.5% 2674 2974 11.2% 3007 3330 10.7% 3283 3683 12.2% 3510 4021 14.5%13250.00 1378 1716 24.5% 2141 2515 17.5% 2684 2985 11.2% 3018 3343 10.7% 3295 3697 12.2% 3523 4036 14.5% 13300.00 1383 1722 24.5% 2149 2525 17.5% 2695 2996 11.2% 3030 3355 10.7% 3308 3711 12.2% 3536 4051 14.5%13350.00 1388 1728 24.5% 2157 2534 17.5% 2705 3007 11.2% 3041 3368 10.7% 3320 3725 12.2% 3550 4066 14.5% 13400.00 1394 1735 24.5% 2165 2544 17.5% 2715 3019 11.2% 3053 3380 10.7% 3333 3739 12.2% 3563 4081 14.5%13450.00 1399 1741 24.5% 2174 2553 17.5% 2725 3030 11.2% 3064 3393 10.7% 3345 3753 12.2% 3576 4097 14.5% 13500.00 1404 1748 24.5% 2182 2563 17.5% 2735 3041 11.2% 3075 3406 10.7% 3357 3767 12.2% 3590 4112 14.5%13550.00 1409 1754 24.5% 2190 2572 17.5% 2745 3052 11.2% 3087 3418 10.7% 3370 3781 12.2% 3603 4127 14.5%13600.00 1414 1761 24.5% 2198 2582 17.5% 2755 3064 11.2% 3098 3431 10.7% 3382 3795 12.2% 3616 4142 14.5%13650.00 1420 1767 24.5% 2206 2591 17.5% 2765 3075 11.2% 3109 3444 10.7% 3395 3809 12.2% 3630 4158 14.5% 13700.00 1425 1774 24.5% 2214 2601 17.5% 2776 3086 11.2% 3121 3456 10.7% 3407 3823 12.2% 3643 4173 14.5%13750.00 1430 1780 24.5% 2222 2610 17.5% 2786 3098 11.2% 3132 3469 10.7% 3420 3837 12.2% 3656 4188 14.5% 13800.00 1435 1787 24.5% 2230 2619 17.5% 2796 3109 11.2% 3144 3481 10.7% 3432 3851 12.2% 3669 4203 14.5%13850.00 1440 1793 24.5% 2238 2629 17.5% 2806 3120 11.2% 3155 3494 10.7% 3444 3865 12.2% 3683 4219 14.5%13900.00 1446 1800 24.5% 2246 2638 17.5% 2816 3131 11.2% 3166 3507 10.7% 3457 3879 12.2% 3696 4234 14.5%13950.00 1451 1806 24.5% 2254 2648 17.5% 2826 3143 11.2% 3178 3519 10.7% 3469 3893 12.2% 3709 4249 14.5% Appendix A: Page 5/12 Shaded (blue) area indicates amounts adjusted for low incomes Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existin g Proposed % ChangeCombined Adjusted Gross IncomeComparison of Existing and Updated Child Support Schedules Five Children One Child Two ChildrenAppendix A Three Children Six Children Four Children 14000.00 1456 1813 24.5% 2262 2657 17.5% 2836 3154 11.2% 3189 3532 10.7% 3482 3907 12.2% 3723 4264 14.5% 14050.00 1461 1819 24.5% 2270 2667 17.5% 2847 3165 11.2% 3201 3544 10.7% 3494 3921 12.2% 3736 4279 14.5% 14100.00 1466 1826 24.5% 2279 2676 17.5% 2857 3176 11.2% 3212 3557 10.7% 3507 3935 12.2% 3749 4295 14.5%14150.00 1472 1832 24.5% 2287 2686 17.5% 2867 3188 11.2% 3223 3570 10.7% 3519 3948 12.2% 3762 4310 14.5% 14200.00 1477 1839 24.5% 2295 2695 17.5% 2877 3199 11.2% 3235 3582 10.7% 3532 3962 12.2% 3776 4325 14.5%14250.00 1482 1845 24.5% 2303 2705 17.5% 2887 3210 11.2% 3246 3595 10.7% 3544 3976 12.2% 3789 4340 14.5% 14300.00 1487 1851 24.5% 2311 2714 17.5% 2897 3221 11.2% 3258 3608 10.7% 3556 3990 12.2% 3802 4356 14.5%14350.00 1492 1858 24.5% 2319 2724 17.5% 2907 3233 11.2% 3269 3620 10.7% 3569 4004 12.2% 3816 4371 14.5% 14400.00 1498 1864 24.5% 2327 2733 17.5% 2917 3244 11.2% 3280 3633 10.7% 3581 4018 12.2% 3829 4386 14.5%14450.00 1503 1871 24.5% 2335 2743 17.5% 2928 3255 11.2% 3292 3645 10.7% 3594 4032 12.2% 3842 4401 14.5% 14500.00 1508 1877 24.5% 2343 2752 17.5% 2938 3266 11.2% 3303 3658 10.7% 3606 4046 12.2% 3856 4416 14.5%14550.00 1513 1884 24.5% 2351 2762 17.5% 2948 3278 11.2% 3314 3671 10.7% 3619 4060 12.2% 3869 4432 14.5%14600.00 1518 1890 24.5% 2359 2771 17.5% 2958 3289 11.2% 3326 3683 10.7% 3631 4074 12.2% 3882 4447 14.5%14650.00 1524 1897 24.5% 2367 2781 17.5% 2968 3300 11.2% 3337 3696 10.7% 3643 4088 12.2% 3895 4462 14.5% 14700.00 1529 1903 24.5% 2376 2790 17.5% 2978 3312 11.2% 3349 3708 10.7% 3656 4102 12.2% 3909 4477 14.5%14750.00 1534 1910 24.5% 2384 2800 17.5% 2988 3323 11.2% 3360 3721 10.7% 3668 4116 12.2% 3922 4493 14.5% 14800.00 1539 1916 24.5% 2392 2809 17.5% 2998 3334 11.2% 3371 3734 10.7% 3681 4130 12.2% 3935 4508 14.5%14850.00 1544 1923 24.5% 2400 2819 17.5% 3009 3345 11.2% 3383 3746 10.7% 3693 4144 12.2% 3949 4523 14.5%14900.00 1550 1929 24.5% 2408 2828 17.5% 3019 3357 11.2% 3394 3759 10.7% 3706 4158 12.2% 3962 4538 14.5%14950.00 1555 1936 24.5% 2416 2838 17.5% 3029 3368 11.2% 3406 3772 10.7% 3718 4172 12.2% 3975 4554 14.5% 15000.00 1560 1942 24.5% 2424 2847 17.5% 3039 3379 11.2% 3417 3784 10.7% 3731 4186 12.2% 3989 4569 14.5%15050.00 1565 1949 24.5% 2432 2857 17.5% 3049 3390 11.2% 3428 3797 10.7% 3743 4200 12.2% 4002 4584 14.5% 15100.00 1570 1955 24.5% 2440 2866 17.5% 3059 3402 11.2% 3440 3809 10.7% 3755 4214 12.2% 4015 4599 14.5%15150.00 1576 1962 24.5% 2448 2876 17.5% 3069 3413 11.2% 3451 3822 10.7% 3768 4228 12.2% 4028 4614 14.5% 15200.00 1581 1968 24.5% 2456 2885 17.5% 3080 3424 11.2% 3463 3835 10.7% 3780 4241 12.2% 4042 4630 14.5%15250.00 1586 1974 24.5% 2464 2895 17.5% 3090 3435 11.2% 3474 3847 10.7% 3793 4255 12.2% 4055 4645 14.5% 15300.00 1591 1981 24.5% 2472 2904 17.5% 3100 3447 11.2% 3485 3860 10.7% 3805 4269 12.2% 4068 4660 14.5%15350.00 1596 1987 24.5% 2481 2914 17.5% 3110 3458 11.2% 3497 3872 10.7% 3818 4283 12.2% 4082 4675 14.5% 15400.00 1602 1994 24.5% 2489 2923 17.5% 3120 3469 11.2% 3508 3885 10.7% 3830 4297 12.2% 4095 4691 14.5%15450.00 1607 2000 24.5% 2497 2933 17.5% 3130 3480 11.2% 3520 3898 10.7% 3842 4311 12.2% 4108 4706 14.5% 15500.00 1612 2007 24.5% 2505 2942 17.5% 3140 3492 11.2% 3531 3910 10.7% 3855 4325 12.2% 4121 4721 14.5%15550.00 1617 2013 24.5% 2513 2952 17.5% 3150 3503 11.2% 3542 3923 10.7% 3867 4339 12.2% 4135 4736 14.5%15600.00 1622 2020 24.5% 2521 2961 17.5% 3161 3514 11.2% 3554 3935 10.7% 3880 4353 12.2% 4148 4752 14.5%15650.00 1628 2026 24.5% 2529 2971 17.5% 3171 3526 11.2% 3565 3948 10.7% 3892 4367 12.2% 4161 4767 14.5% 15700.00 1633 2033 24.5% 2537 2980 17.5% 3181 3537 11.2% 3576 3961 10.7% 3905 4381 12.2% 4175 4782 14.5%15750.00 1638 2039 24.5% 2545 2990 17.5% 3191 3548 11.2% 3588 3973 10.7% 3917 4395 12.2% 4188 4797 14.5% 15800.00 1643 2046 24.5% 2553 2999 17.5% 3201 3559 11.2% 3599 3986 10.7% 3929 4409 12.2% 4201 4812 14.5%15850.00 1648 2052 24.5% 2561 3009 17.5% 3211 3571 11.2% 3611 3999 10.7% 3942 4423 12.2% 4215 4828 14.5%15900.00 1654 2059 24.5% 2569 3018 17.5% 3221 3582 11.2% 3622 4011 10.7% 3954 4437 12.2% 4228 4843 14.5%15950.00 1659 2065 24.5% 2578 3028 17.5% 3231 3593 11.2% 3633 4024 10.7% 3967 4451 12.2% 4241 4858 14.5%16000.00 1664 2072 24.5% 2586 3037 17.5% 3242 3604 11.2% 3645 4036 10.7% 3979 4465 12.2% 4254 4873 14.5%16050.00 1669 2078 24.5% 2594 3047 17.5% 3252 3616 11.2% 3656 4049 10.7% 3992 4479 12.2% 4268 4889 14.5% 16100.00 1674 2085 24.5% 2602 3056 17.5% 3262 3627 11.2% 3668 4062 10.7% 4004 4493 12.2% 4281 4904 14.5%16150.00 1680 2091 24.5% 2610 3066 17.5% 3272 3638 11.2% 3679 4074 10.7% 4017 4507 12.2% 4294 4919 14.5% 16200.00 1685 2097 24.5% 2618 3075 17.5% 3282 3649 11.2% 3690 4087 10.7% 4029 4521 12.2% 4308 4934 14.5%16250.00 1690 2104 24.5% 2626 3085 17.5% 3292 3661 11.2% 3702 4099 10.7% 4041 4534 12.2% 4321 4950 14.5% 16300.00 1695 2110 24.5% 2634 3094 17.5% 3302 3672 11.2% 3713 4112 10.7% 4054 4548 12.2% 4334 4965 14.5%16350.00 1700 2117 24.5% 2642 3104 17.5% 3313 3683 11.2% 3725 4125 10.7% 4066 4562 12.2% 4347 4980 14.5% 16400.00 1706 2123 24.5% 2650 3113 17.5% 3323 3694 11.2% 3736 4137 10.7% 4079 4576 12.2% 4361 4995 14.5%16450.00 1711 2130 24.5% 2658 3123 17.5% 3333 3706 11.2% 3747 4150 10.7% 4091 4590 12.2% 4374 5010 14.5% 16500.00 1716 2136 24.5% 2666 3132 17.5% 3343 3717 11.2% 3759 4163 10.7% 4104 4604 12.2% 4387 5026 14.5%16550.00 1721 2143 24.5% 2674 3141 17.5% 3353 3728 11.2% 3770 4175 10.7% 4116 4618 12.2% 4401 5041 14.5%16600.00 1726 2149 24.5% 2683 3151 17.5% 3363 3740 11.2% 3781 4188 10.7% 4128 4632 12.2% 4414 5056 14.5% Appendix A: Page 6/12 Shaded (blue) area indicates amounts adjusted for low incomes Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existin g Proposed % ChangeCombined Adjusted Gross IncomeComparison of Existing and Updated Child Support Schedules Five Children One Child Two ChildrenAppendix A Three Children Six Children Four Children 16650.00 1732 2156 24.5% 2691 3160 17.5% 3373 3751 11.2% 3793 4200 10.7% 4141 4646 12.2% 4427 5071 14.5% 16700.00 1737 2162 24.5% 2699 3170 17.5% 3383 3762 11.2% 3804 4213 10.7% 4153 4660 12.2% 4441 5087 14.5%16750.00 1742 2169 24.5% 2707 3179 17.5% 3394 3773 11.2% 3816 4226 10.7% 4166 4674 12.2% 4454 5102 14.5% 16800.00 1747 2175 24.5% 2715 3189 17.5% 3404 3785 11.2% 3827 4238 10.7% 4178 4688 12.2% 4467 5117 14.5%16850.00 1752 2182 24.5% 2723 3198 17.5% 3414 3796 11.2% 3838 4251 10.7% 4191 4702 12.2% 4480 5132 14.5%16900.00 1758 2188 24.5% 2731 3208 17.5% 3424 3807 11.2% 3850 4263 10.7% 4203 4716 12.2% 4494 5148 14.5%16950.00 1763 2195 24.5% 2739 3217 17.5% 3434 3818 11.2% 3861 4276 10.7% 4215 4730 12.2% 4507 5163 14.5% 17000.00 1768 2201 24.5% 2747 3227 17.5% 3444 3830 11.2% 3873 4289 10.7% 4228 4744 12.2% 4520 5178 14.5%17050.00 1773 2208 24.5% 2755 3236 17.5% 3454 3841 11.2% 3884 4301 10.7% 4240 4758 12.2% 4534 5193 14.5% 17100.00 1778 2214 24.5% 2763 3246 17.5% 3464 3852 11.2% 3895 4314 10.7% 4253 4772 12.2% 4547 5208 14.5%17150.00 1784 2220 24.5% 2771 3255 17.5% 3475 3863 11.2% 3907 4327 10.7% 4265 4786 12.2% 4560 5224 14.5% 17200.00 1789 2227 24.5% 2780 3265 17.5% 3485 3875 11.2% 3918 4339 10.7% 4278 4800 12.2% 4573 5239 14.5%17250.00 1794 2233 24.5% 2788 3274 17.5% 3495 3886 11.2% 3930 4352 10.7% 4290 4814 12.2% 4587 5254 14.5% 17300.00 1799 2240 24.5% 2796 3284 17.5% 3505 3897 11.2% 3941 4364 10.7% 4303 4827 12.2% 4600 5269 14.5%17350.00 1804 2246 24.5% 2804 3293 17.5% 3515 3908 11.2% 3952 4377 10.7% 4315 4841 12.2% 4613 5285 14.5% 17400.00 1810 2253 24.5% 2812 3303 17.5% 3525 3920 11.2% 3964 4390 10.7% 4327 4855 12.2% 4627 5300 14.5%17450.00 1815 2259 24.5% 2820 3312 17.5% 3535 3931 11.2% 3975 4402 10.7% 4340 4869 12.2% 4640 5315 14.5% 17500.00 1820 2266 24.5% 2828 3322 17.5% 3546 3942 11.2% 3987 4415 10.7% 4352 4883 12.2% 4653 5330 14.5%17550.00 1825 2272 24.5% 2836 3331 17.5% 3556 3954 11.2% 3998 4427 10.7% 4365 4897 12.2% 4667 5345 14.5%17600.00 1830 2279 24.5% 2844 3341 17.5% 3566 3965 11.2% 4009 4440 10.7% 4377 4911 12.2% 4680 5361 14.5%17650.00 1836 2285 24.5% 2852 3350 17.5% 3576 3976 11.2% 4021 4453 10.7% 4390 4925 12.2% 4693 5376 14.5% 17700.00 1841 2292 24.5% 2860 3360 17.5% 3586 3987 11.2% 4032 4465 10.7% 4402 4939 12.2% 4706 5391 14.5%17750.00 1846 2298 24.5% 2868 3369 17.5% 3596 3999 11.2% 4043 4478 10.7% 4414 4953 12.2% 4720 5406 14.5% 17800.00 1851 2305 24.5% 2876 3379 17.5% 3606 4010 11.2% 4055 4490 10.7% 4427 4967 12.2% 4733 5422 14.5%17850.00 1856 2311 24.5% 2885 3388 17.5% 3616 4021 11.2% 4066 4503 10.7% 4439 4981 12.2% 4746 5437 14.5%17900.00 1862 2318 24.5% 2893 3398 17.5% 3627 4032 11.2% 4078 4516 10.7% 4452 4995 12.2% 4760 5452 14.5%17950.00 1867 2324 24.5% 2901 3407 17.5% 3637 4044 11.2% 4089 4528 10.7% 4464 5009 12.2% 4773 5467 14.5% 18000.00 1872 2331 24.5% 2909 3417 17.5% 3647 4055 11.2% 4100 4541 10.7% 4477 5023 12.2% 4786 5483 14.5%18050.00 1877 2337 24.5% 2917 3426 17.5% 3657 4066 11.2% 4112 4554 10.7% 4489 5037 12.2% 4799 5498 14.5% 18100.00 1882 2344 24.5% 2925 3436 17.5% 3667 4077 11.2% 4123 4566 10.7% 4501 5051 12.2% 4813 5513 14.5%18150.00 1888 2350 24.5% 2933 3445 17.5% 3677 4089 11.2% 4135 4579 10.7% 4514 5065 12.2% 4826 5528 14.5% 18200.00 1893 2356 24.5% 2941 3455 17.5% 3687 4100 11.2% 4146 4591 10.7% 4526 5079 12.2% 4839 5543 14.5%18250.00 1898 2363 24.5% 2949 3464 17.5% 3697 4111 11.2% 4157 4604 10.7% 4539 5093 12.2% 4853 5559 14.5% 18300.00 1903 2369 24.5% 2957 3474 17.5% 3708 4122 11.2% 4169 4617 10.7% 4551 5107 12.2% 4866 5574 14.5%18350.00 1908 2376 24.5% 2965 3483 17.5% 3718 4134 11.2% 4180 4629 10.7% 4564 5120 12.2% 4879 5589 14.5% 18400.00 1914 2382 24.5% 2973 3493 17.5% 3728 4145 11.2% 4192 4642 10.7% 4576 5134 12.2% 4893 5604 14.5%18450.00 1919 2389 24.5% 2982 3502 17.5% 3738 4156 11.2% 4203 4654 10.7% 4589 5148 12.2% 4906 5620 14.5% 18500.00 1924 2395 24.5% 2990 3512 17.5% 3748 4168 11.2% 4214 4667 10.7% 4601 5162 12.2% 4919 5635 14.5%18550.00 1929 2402 24.5% 2998 3521 17.5% 3758 4179 11.2% 4226 4680 10.7% 4613 5176 12.2% 4932 5650 14.5%18600.00 1934 2408 24.5% 3006 3531 17.5% 3768 4190 11.2% 4237 4692 10.7% 4626 5190 12.2% 4946 5665 14.5%18650.00 1940 2415 24.5% 3014 3540 17.5% 3778 4201 11.2% 4248 4705 10.7% 4638 5204 12.2% 4959 5681 14.5% 18700.00 1945 2421 24.5% 3022 3550 17.5% 3789 4213 11.2% 4260 4718 10.7% 4651 5218 12.2% 4972 5696 14.5%18750.00 1950 2428 24.5% 3030 3559 17.5% 3799 4224 11.2% 4271 4730 10.7% 4663 5232 12.2% 4986 5711 14.5% 18800.00 1955 2434 24.5% 3038 3569 17.5% 3809 4235 11.2% 4283 4743 10.7% 4676 5246 12.2% 4999 5726 14.5%18850.00 1960 2441 24.5% 3046 3578 17.5% 3819 4246 11.2% 4294 4755 10.7% 4688 5260 12.2% 5012 5741 14.5%18900.00 1966 2447 24.5% 3054 3588 17.5% 3829 4258 11.2% 4305 4768 10.7% 4700 5274 12.2% 5026 5757 14.5%18950.00 1971 2454 24.5% 3062 3597 17.5% 3839 4269 11.2% 4317 4781 10.7% 4713 5288 12.2% 5039 5772 14.5%19000.00 1976 2460 24.5% 3070 3607 17.5% 3849 4280 11.2% 4328 4793 10.7% 4725 5302 12.2% 5052 5787 14.5%19050.00 1981 2467 24.5% 3078 3616 17.5% 3860 4291 11.2% 4340 4806 10.7% 4738 5316 12.2% 5065 5802 14.5% 19100.00 1986 2473 24.5% 3087 3626 17.5% 3870 4303 11.2% 4351 4818 10.7% 4750 5330 12.2% 5079 5818 14.5%19150.00 1992 2479 24.5% 3095 3635 17.5% 3880 4314 11.2% 4362 4831 10.7% 4763 5344 12.2% 5092 5833 14.5% 19200.00 1997 2486 24.5% 3103 3645 17.5% 3890 4325 11.2% 4374 4844 10.7% 4775 5358 12.2% 5105 5848 14.5%19250.00 2002 2492 24.5% 3111 3654 17.5% 3900 4337 11.2% 4385 4856 10.7% 4787 5372 12.2% 5119 5863 14.5% Appendix A: Page 7/12 Shaded (blue) area indicates amounts adjusted for low incomes Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existin g Proposed % ChangeCombined Adjusted Gross IncomeComparison of Existing and Updated Child Support Schedules Five Children One Child Two ChildrenAppendix A Three Children Six Children Four Children 19300.00 2007 2499 24.5% 3119 3663 17.5% 3910 4348 11.2% 4397 4869 10.7% 4800 5386 12.2% 5132 5879 14.5% 19350.00 2012 2505 24.5% 3127 3673 17.5% 3920 4359 11.2% 4408 4882 10.7% 4812 5400 12.2% 5145 5894 14.5% 19400.00 2018 2512 24.5% 3135 3682 17.5% 3930 4370 11.2% 4419 4894 10.7% 4825 5413 12.2% 5158 5909 14.5%19450.00 2023 2518 24.5% 3143 3692 17.5% 3941 4382 11.2% 4431 4907 10.7% 4837 5427 12.2% 5172 5924 14.5% 19500.00 2028 2525 24.5% 3151 3701 17.5% 3951 4393 11.2% 4442 4919 10.7% 4850 5441 12.2% 5185 5939 14.5%19550.00 2033 2531 24.5% 3159 3711 17.5% 3961 4404 11.2% 4453 4932 10.7% 4862 5455 12.2% 5198 5955 14.5%19600.00 2038 2538 24.5% 3167 3720 17.5% 3971 4415 11.2% 4465 4945 10.7% 4875 5469 12.2% 5212 5970 14.5%19650.00 2044 2544 24.5% 3175 3730 17.5% 3981 4427 11.2% 4476 4957 10.7% 4887 5483 12.2% 5225 5985 14.5% 19700.00 2049 2551 24.5% 3184 3739 17.5% 3991 4438 11.2% 4488 4970 10.7% 4899 5497 12.2% 5238 6000 14.5%19750.00 2054 2557 24.5% 3192 3749 17.5% 4001 4449 11.2% 4499 4982 10.7% 4912 5511 12.2% 5252 6016 14.5% 19800.00 2059 2564 24.5% 3200 3758 17.5% 4011 4460 11.2% 4510 4995 10.7% 4924 5525 12.2% 5265 6031 14.5%19850.00 2064 2570 24.5% 3208 3768 17.5% 4022 4472 11.2% 4522 5008 10.7% 4937 5539 12.2% 5278 6046 14.5%19900.00 2070 2577 24.5% 3216 3777 17.5% 4032 4483 11.2% 4533 5020 10.7% 4949 5553 12.2% 5291 6061 14.5%19950.00 2075 2583 24.5% 3224 3787 17.5% 4042 4494 11.2% 4545 5033 10.7% 4962 5567 12.2% 5305 6076 14.5% 20000.00 2080 2590 24.5% 3232 3796 17.5% 4052 4505 11.2% 4556 5045 10.7% 4974 5581 12.2% 5318 6092 14.5%20050.00 2085 2596 24.5% 3240 3806 17.5% 4062 4517 11.2% 4567 5058 10.7% 4986 5595 12.2% 5331 6107 14.5% 20100.00 2090 2602 24.5% 3248 3815 17.5% 4072 4528 11.2% 4579 5071 10.7% 4999 5609 12.2% 5345 6122 14.5%20150.00 2096 2609 24.5% 3256 3825 17.5% 4082 4539 11.2% 4590 5083 10.7% 5011 5623 12.2% 5358 6137 14.5% 20200.00 2101 2615 24.5% 3264 3834 17.5% 4093 4551 11.2% 4602 5096 10.7% 5024 5637 12.2% 5371 6153 14.5%20250.00 2106 2622 24.5% 3272 3844 17.5% 4103 4562 11.2% 4613 5109 10.7% 5036 5651 12.2% 5384 6168 14.5% 20300.00 2111 2628 24.5% 3280 3853 17.5% 4113 4573 11.2% 4624 5121 10.7% 5049 5665 12.2% 5398 6183 14.5%20350.00 2116 2635 24.5% 3289 3863 17.5% 4123 4584 11.2% 4636 5134 10.7% 5061 5679 12.2% 5411 6198 14.5% 20400.00 2122 2641 24.5% 3297 3872 17.5% 4133 4596 11.2% 4647 5146 10.7% 5073 5693 12.2% 5424 6214 14.5%20450.00 2127 2648 24.5% 3305 3882 17.5% 4143 4607 11.2% 4659 5159 10.7% 5086 5706 12.2% 5438 6229 14.5% 20500.00 2132 2654 24.5% 3313 3891 17.5% 4153 4618 11.2% 4670 5172 10.7% 5098 5720 12.2% 5451 6244 14.5%20550.00 2137 2661 24.5% 3321 3901 17.5% 4163 4629 11.2% 4681 5184 10.7% 5111 5734 12.2% 5464 6259 14.5%20600.00 2142 2667 24.5% 3329 3910 17.5% 4174 4641 11.2% 4693 5197 10.7% 5123 5748 12.2% 5478 6274 14.5%20650.00 2148 2674 24.5% 3337 3920 17.5% 4184 4652 11.2% 4704 5209 10.7% 5136 5762 12.2% 5491 6290 14.5% 20700.00 2153 2680 24.5% 3345 3929 17.5% 4194 4663 11.2% 4715 5222 10.7% 5148 5776 12.2% 5504 6305 14.5%20750.00 2158 2687 24.5% 3353 3939 17.5% 4204 4674 11.2% 4727 5235 10.7% 5161 5790 12.2% 5517 6320 14.5% 20800.00 2163 2693 24.5% 3361 3948 17.5% 4214 4686 11.2% 4738 5247 10.7% 5173 5804 12.2% 5531 6335 14.5%20850.00 2168 2700 24.5% 3369 3958 17.5% 4224 4697 11.2% 4750 5260 10.7% 5185 5818 12.2% 5544 6351 14.5%20900.00 2174 2706 24.5% 3377 3967 17.5% 4234 4708 11.2% 4761 5273 10.7% 5198 5832 12.2% 5557 6366 14.5%20950.00 2179 2713 24.5% 3386 3977 17.5% 4244 4719 11.2% 4772 5285 10.7% 5210 5846 12.2% 5571 6381 14.5% 21000.00 2184 2719 24.5% 3394 3986 17.5% 4255 4731 11.2% 4784 5298 10.7% 5223 5860 12.2% 5584 6396 14.5%21050.00 2189 2725 24.5% 3402 3996 17.5% 4265 4742 11.2% 4795 5310 10.7% 5235 5874 12.2% 5597 6412 14.5% 21100.00 2194 2732 24.5% 3410 4005 17.5% 4275 4753 11.2% 4807 5323 10.7% 5248 5888 12.2% 5610 6427 14.5%21150.00 2200 2738 24.5% 3418 4015 17.5% 4285 4765 11.2% 4818 5336 10.7% 5260 5902 12.2% 5624 6442 14.5% 21200.00 2205 2745 24.5% 3426 4024 17.5% 4295 4776 11.2% 4829 5348 10.7% 5272 5916 12.2% 5637 6457 14.5%21250.00 2210 2751 24.5% 3434 4034 17.5% 4305 4787 11.2% 4841 5361 10.7% 5285 5930 12.2% 5650 6472 14.5% 21300.00 2215 2758 24.5% 3442 4043 17.5% 4315 4798 11.2% 4852 5373 10.7% 5297 5944 12.2% 5664 6488 14.5%21350.00 2220 2764 24.5% 3450 4053 17.5% 4326 4810 11.2% 4864 5386 10.7% 5310 5958 12.2% 5677 6503 14.5% 21400.00 2226 2771 24.5% 3458 4062 17.5% 4336 4821 11.2% 4875 5399 10.7% 5322 5972 12.2% 5690 6518 14.5%21450.00 2231 2777 24.5% 3466 4072 17.5% 4346 4832 11.2% 4886 5411 10.7% 5335 5986 12.2% 5704 6533 14.5% 21500.00 2236 2784 24.5% 3474 4081 17.5% 4356 4843 11.2% 4898 5424 10.7% 5347 5999 12.2% 5717 6549 14.5%21550.00 2241 2790 24.5% 3482 4091 17.5% 4366 4855 11.2% 4909 5437 10.7% 5359 6013 12.2% 5730 6564 14.5%21600.00 2246 2797 24.5% 3491 4100 17.5% 4376 4866 11.2% 4920 5449 10.7% 5372 6027 12.2% 5743 6579 14.5%21650.00 2252 2803 24.5% 3499 4110 17.5% 4386 4877 11.2% 4932 5462 10.7% 5384 6041 12.2% 5757 6594 14.5% 21700.00 2257 2810 24.5% 3507 4119 17.5% 4396 4888 11.2% 4943 5474 10.7% 5397 6055 12.2% 5770 6610 14.5%21750.00 2262 2816 24.5% 3515 4129 17.5% 4407 4900 11.2% 4955 5487 10.7% 5409 6069 12.2% 5783 6625 14.5% 21800.00 2267 2823 24.5% 3523 4138 17.5% 4417 4911 11.2% 4966 5500 10.7% 5422 6083 12.2% 5797 6640 14.5%21850.00 2272 2829 24.5% 3531 4148 17.5% 4427 4922 11.2% 4977 5512 10.7% 5434 6097 12.2% 5810 6655 14.5%21900.00 2278 2836 24.5% 3539 4157 17.5% 4437 4933 11.2% 4989 5525 10.7% 5447 6111 12.2% 5823 6670 14.5% Appendix A: Page 8/12 Shaded (blue) area indicates amounts adjusted for low incomes Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existin g Proposed % ChangeCombined Adjusted Gross IncomeComparison of Existing and Updated Child Support Schedules Five Children One Child Two ChildrenAppendix A Three Children Six Children Four Children 21950.00 2283 2842 24.5% 3547 4167 17.5% 4447 4945 11.2% 5000 5537 10.7% 5459 6125 12.2% 5837 6686 14.5% 22000.00 2288 2848 24.5% 3555 4176 17.5% 4457 4956 11.2% 5012 5550 10.7% 5471 6139 12.2% 5850 6701 14.5%22050.00 2293 2855 24.5% 3563 4185 17.5% 4467 4967 11.2% 5023 5563 10.7% 5484 6153 12.2% 5863 6716 14.5% 22100.00 2298 2861 24.5% 3571 4195 17.5% 4477 4979 11.2% 5034 5575 10.7% 5496 6167 12.2% 5876 6731 14.5%22150.00 2304 2868 24.5% 3579 4204 17.5% 4488 4990 11.2% 5046 5588 10.7% 5509 6181 12.2% 5890 6747 14.5% 22200.00 2309 2874 24.5% 3588 4214 17.5% 4498 5001 11.2% 5057 5601 10.7% 5521 6195 12.2% 5903 6762 14.5%22250.00 2314 2881 24.5% 3596 4223 17.5% 4508 5012 11.2% 5069 5613 10.7% 5534 6209 12.2% 5916 6777 14.5% 22300.00 2319 2887 24.5% 3604 4233 17.5% 4518 5024 11.2% 5080 5626 10.7% 5546 6223 12.2% 5930 6792 14.5%22350.00 2324 2894 24.5% 3612 4242 17.5% 4528 5035 11.2% 5091 5638 10.7% 5558 6237 12.2% 5943 6807 14.5% 22400.00 2330 2900 24.5% 3620 4252 17.5% 4538 5046 11.2% 5103 5651 10.7% 5571 6251 12.2% 5956 6823 14.5%22450.00 2335 2907 24.5% 3628 4261 17.5% 4548 5057 11.2% 5114 5664 10.7% 5583 6265 12.2% 5969 6838 14.5% 22500.00 2340 2913 24.5% 3636 4271 17.5% 4559 5069 11.2% 5126 5676 10.7% 5596 6279 12.2% 5983 6853 14.5%22550.00 2345 2920 24.5% 3644 4280 17.5% 4569 5080 11.2% 5137 5689 10.7% 5608 6292 12.2% 5996 6868 14.5%22600.00 2350 2926 24.5% 3652 4290 17.5% 4579 5091 11.2% 5148 5701 10.7% 5621 6306 12.2% 6009 6884 14.5%22650.00 2356 2933 24.5% 3660 4299 17.5% 4589 5102 11.2% 5160 5714 10.7% 5633 6320 12.2% 6023 6899 14.5% 22700.00 2361 2939 24.5% 3668 4309 17.5% 4599 5114 11.2% 5171 5727 10.7% 5645 6334 12.2% 6036 6914 14.5%22750.00 2366 2946 24.5% 3676 4318 17.5% 4609 5125 11.2% 5182 5739 10.7% 5658 6348 12.2% 6049 6929 14.5% 22800.00 2371 2952 24.5% 3684 4328 17.5% 4619 5136 11.2% 5194 5752 10.7% 5670 6362 12.2% 6063 6945 14.5%22850.00 2376 2959 24.5% 3693 4337 17.5% 4629 5147 11.2% 5205 5764 10.7% 5683 6376 12.2% 6076 6960 14.5%22900.00 2382 2965 24.5% 3701 4347 17.5% 4640 5159 11.2% 5217 5777 10.7% 5695 6390 12.2% 6089 6975 14.5%22950.00 2387 2971 24.5% 3709 4356 17.5% 4650 5170 11.2% 5228 5790 10.7% 5708 6404 12.2% 6102 6990 14.5% 23000.00 2392 2978 24.5% 3717 4366 17.5% 4660 5181 11.2% 5239 5802 10.7% 5720 6418 12.2% 6116 7005 14.5%23050.00 2397 2984 24.5% 3725 4375 17.5% 4670 5193 11.2% 5251 5815 10.7% 5733 6432 12.2% 6129 7021 14.5% 23100.00 2402 2991 24.5% 3733 4385 17.5% 4680 5204 11.2% 5262 5828 10.7% 5745 6446 12.2% 6142 7036 14.5%23150.00 2408 2997 24.5% 3741 4394 17.5% 4690 5215 11.2% 5274 5840 10.7% 5757 6460 12.2% 6156 7051 14.5% 23200.00 2413 3004 24.5% 3749 4404 17.5% 4700 5226 11.2% 5285 5853 10.7% 5770 6474 12.2% 6169 7066 14.5%23250.00 2418 3010 24.5% 3757 4413 17.5% 4710 5238 11.2% 5296 5865 10.7% 5782 6488 12.2% 6182 7082 14.5% 23300.00 2423 3017 24.5% 3765 4423 17.5% 4721 5249 11.2% 5308 5878 10.7% 5795 6502 12.2% 6195 7097 14.5%23350.00 2428 3023 24.5% 3773 4432 17.5% 4731 5260 11.2% 5319 5891 10.7% 5807 6516 12.2% 6209 7112 14.5% 23400.00 2434 3030 24.5% 3781 4442 17.5% 4741 5271 11.2% 5331 5903 10.7% 5820 6530 12.2% 6222 7127 14.5%23450.00 2439 3036 24.5% 3790 4451 17.5% 4751 5283 11.2% 5342 5916 10.7% 5832 6544 12.2% 6235 7143 14.5% 23500.00 2444 3043 24.5% 3798 4461 17.5% 4761 5294 11.2% 5353 5928 10.7% 5844 6558 12.2% 6249 7158 14.5%23550.00 2449 3049 24.5% 3806 4470 17.5% 4771 5305 11.2% 5365 5941 10.7% 5857 6572 12.2% 6262 7173 14.5%23600.00 2454 3056 24.5% 3814 4480 17.5% 4781 5316 11.2% 5376 5954 10.7% 5869 6585 12.2% 6275 7188 14.5%23650.00 2460 3062 24.5% 3822 4489 17.5% 4791 5328 11.2% 5387 5966 10.7% 5882 6599 12.2% 6289 7203 14.5% 23700.00 2465 3069 24.5% 3830 4499 17.5% 4802 5339 11.2% 5399 5979 10.7% 5894 6613 12.2% 6302 7219 14.5%23750.00 2470 3075 24.5% 3838 4508 17.5% 4812 5350 11.2% 5410 5992 10.7% 5907 6627 12.2% 6315 7234 14.5% 23800.00 2475 3082 24.5% 3846 4518 17.5% 4822 5361 11.2% 5422 6004 10.7% 5919 6641 12.2% 6328 7249 14.5%23850.00 2480 3088 24.5% 3854 4527 17.5% 4832 5373 11.2% 5433 6017 10.7% 5931 6655 12.2% 6342 7264 14.5%23900.00 2486 3094 24.5% 3862 4537 17.5% 4842 5384 11.2% 5444 6029 10.7% 5944 6669 12.2% 6355 7280 14.5%23950.00 2491 3101 24.5% 3870 4546 17.5% 4852 5395 11.2% 5456 6042 10.7% 5956 6683 12.2% 6368 7295 14.5% 24000.00 2496 3107 24.5% 3878 4556 17.5% 4862 5407 11.2% 5467 6055 10.7% 5969 6697 12.2% 6382 7310 14.5%24050.00 2501 3114 24.5% 3886 4565 17.5% 4873 5418 11.2% 5479 6067 10.7% 5981 6711 12.2% 6395 7325 14.5% 24100.00 2506 3120 24.5% 3895 4575 17.5% 4883 5429 11.2% 5490 6080 10.7% 5994 6725 12.2% 6408 7341 14.5%24150.00 2512 3127 24.5% 3903 4584 17.5% 4893 5440 11.2% 5501 6092 10.7% 6006 6739 12.2% 6421 7356 14.5% 24200.00 2517 3133 24.5% 3911 4594 17.5% 4903 5452 11.2% 5513 6105 10.7% 6019 6753 12.2% 6435 7371 14.5%24250.00 2522 3140 24.5% 3919 4603 17.5% 4913 5463 11.2% 5524 6118 10.7% 6031 6767 12.2% 6448 7386 14.5% 24300.00 2527 3146 24.5% 3927 4613 17.5% 4923 5474 11.2% 5536 6130 10.7% 6043 6781 12.2% 6461 7401 14.5%24350.00 2532 3153 24.5% 3935 4622 17.5% 4933 5485 11.2% 5547 6143 10.7% 6056 6795 12.2% 6475 7417 14.5% 24400.00 2538 3159 24.5% 3943 4632 17.5% 4943 5497 11.2% 5558 6156 10.7% 6068 6809 12.2% 6488 7432 14.5%24450.00 2543 3166 24.5% 3951 4641 17.5% 4954 5508 11.2% 5570 6168 10.7% 6081 6823 12.2% 6501 7447 14.5% 24500.00 2548 3172 24.5% 3959 4651 17.5% 4964 5519 11.2% 5581 6181 10.7% 6093 6837 12.2% 6515 7462 14.5%24550.00 2553 3179 24.5% 3967 4660 17.5% 4974 5530 11.2% 5592 6193 10.7% 6106 6851 12.2% 6528 7478 14.5% Appendix A: Page 9/12 Shaded (blue) area indicates amounts adjusted for low incomes Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existin g Proposed % ChangeCombined Adjusted Gross IncomeComparison of Existing and Updated Child Support Schedules Five Children One Child Two ChildrenAppendix A Three Children Six Children Four Children 24600.00 2558 3185 24.5% 3975 4670 17.5% 4984 5542 11.2% 5604 6206 10.7% 6118 6865 12.2% 6541 7493 14.5% 24650.00 2564 3192 24.5% 3983 4679 17.5% 4994 5553 11.2% 5615 6219 10.7% 6130 6878 12.2% 6554 7508 14.5% 24700.00 2569 3198 24.5% 3992 4689 17.5% 5004 5564 11.2% 5627 6231 10.7% 6143 6892 12.2% 6568 7523 14.5%24750.00 2574 3205 24.5% 4000 4698 17.5% 5014 5576 11.2% 5638 6244 10.7% 6155 6906 12.2% 6581 7539 14.5% 24800.00 2579 3211 24.5% 4008 4707 17.5% 5024 5587 11.2% 5649 6256 10.7% 6168 6920 12.2% 6594 7554 14.5%24850.00 2584 3217 24.5% 4016 4717 17.5% 5035 5598 11.2% 5661 6269 10.7% 6180 6934 12.2% 6608 7569 14.5%24900.00 2590 3224 24.5% 4024 4726 17.5% 5045 5609 11.2% 5672 6282 10.7% 6193 6948 12.2% 6621 7584 14.5%24950.00 2595 3230 24.5% 4032 4736 17.5% 5055 5621 11.2% 5684 6294 10.7% 6205 6962 12.2% 6634 7599 14.5% 25000.00 2600 3237 24.5% 4040 4745 17.5% 5065 5632 11.2% 5695 6307 10.7% 6218 6976 12.2% 6648 7615 14.5%25050.00 2605 3243 24.5% 4048 4755 17.5% 5075 5643 11.2% 5706 6319 10.7% 6230 6990 12.2% 6661 7630 14.5% 25100.00 2610 3250 24.5% 4056 4764 17.5% 5085 5654 11.2% 5718 6332 10.7% 6242 7004 12.2% 6674 7645 14.5%25150.00 2616 3256 24.5% 4064 4774 17.5% 5095 5666 11.2% 5729 6345 10.7% 6255 7018 12.2% 6687 7660 14.5% 25200.00 2621 3263 24.5% 4072 4783 17.5% 5106 5677 11.2% 5741 6357 10.7% 6267 7032 12.2% 6701 7676 14.5%25250.00 2626 3269 24.5% 4080 4793 17.5% 5116 5688 11.2% 5752 6370 10.7% 6280 7046 12.2% 6714 7691 14.5% 25300.00 2631 3276 24.5% 4088 4802 17.5% 5126 5699 11.2% 5763 6383 10.7% 6292 7060 12.2% 6727 7706 14.5%25350.00 2636 3282 24.5% 4097 4812 17.5% 5136 5711 11.2% 5775 6395 10.7% 6305 7074 12.2% 6741 7721 14.5% 25400.00 2642 3289 24.5% 4105 4821 17.5% 5146 5722 11.2% 5786 6408 10.7% 6317 7088 12.2% 6754 7736 14.5%25450.00 2647 3295 24.5% 4113 4831 17.5% 5156 5733 11.2% 5798 6420 10.7% 6329 7102 12.2% 6767 7752 14.5% 25500.00 2652 3302 24.5% 4121 4840 17.5% 5166 5744 11.2% 5809 6433 10.7% 6342 7116 12.2% 6780 7767 14.5%25550.00 2657 3308 24.5% 4129 4850 17.5% 5176 5756 11.2% 5820 6446 10.7% 6354 7130 12.2% 6794 7782 14.5%25600.00 2662 3315 24.5% 4137 4859 17.5% 5187 5767 11.2% 5832 6458 10.7% 6367 7144 12.2% 6807 7797 14.5%25650.00 2668 3321 24.5% 4145 4869 17.5% 5197 5778 11.2% 5843 6471 10.7% 6379 7158 12.2% 6820 7813 14.5% 25700.00 2673 3328 24.5% 4153 4878 17.5% 5207 5790 11.2% 5854 6483 10.7% 6392 7171 12.2% 6834 7828 14.5%25750.00 2678 3334 24.5% 4161 4888 17.5% 5217 5801 11.2% 5866 6496 10.7% 6404 7185 12.2% 6847 7843 14.5% 25800.00 2683 3340 24.5% 4169 4897 17.5% 5227 5812 11.2% 5877 6509 10.7% 6416 7199 12.2% 6860 7858 14.5%25850.00 2688 3347 24.5% 4177 4907 17.5% 5237 5823 11.2% 5889 6521 10.7% 6429 7213 12.2% 6874 7874 14.5%25900.00 2694 3353 24.5% 4185 4916 17.5% 5247 5835 11.2% 5900 6534 10.7% 6441 7227 12.2% 6887 7889 14.5%25950.00 2699 3360 24.5% 4194 4926 17.5% 5257 5846 11.2% 5911 6547 10.7% 6454 7241 12.2% 6900 7904 14.5%26000.00 2704 3366 24.5% 4202 4935 17.5% 5268 5857 11.2% 5923 6559 10.7% 6466 7255 12.2% 6913 7919 14.5%26050.00 2709 3373 24.5% 4210 4945 17.5% 5278 5868 11.2% 5934 6572 10.7% 6479 7269 12.2% 6927 7934 14.5% 26100.00 2714 3379 24.5% 4218 4954 17.5% 5288 5880 11.2% 5946 6584 10.7% 6491 7283 12.2% 6940 7950 14.5%26150.00 2720 3386 24.5% 4226 4964 17.5% 5298 5891 11.2% 5957 6597 10.7% 6504 7297 12.2% 6953 7965 14.5% 26200.00 2725 3392 24.5% 4234 4973 17.5% 5308 5902 11.2% 5968 6610 10.7% 6516 7311 12.2% 6967 7980 14.5%26250.00 2730 3399 24.5% 4242 4983 17.5% 5318 5913 11.2% 5980 6622 10.7% 6528 7325 12.2% 6980 7995 14.5% 26300.00 2735 3405 24.5% 4250 4992 17.5% 5328 5925 11.2% 5991 6635 10.7% 6541 7339 12.2% 6993 8011 14.5%26350.00 2740 3412 24.5% 4258 5002 17.5% 5339 5936 11.2% 6003 6647 10.7% 6553 7353 12.2% 7006 8026 14.5% 26400.00 2746 3418 24.5% 4266 5011 17.5% 5349 5947 11.2% 6014 6660 10.7% 6566 7367 12.2% 7020 8041 14.5%26450.00 2751 3425 24.5% 4274 5021 17.5% 5359 5958 11.2% 6025 6673 10.7% 6578 7381 12.2% 7033 8056 14.5% 26500.00 2756 3431 24.5% 4282 5030 17.5% 5369 5970 11.2% 6037 6685 10.7% 6591 7395 12.2% 7046 8072 14.5%26550.00 2761 3438 24.5% 4290 5040 17.5% 5379 5981 11.2% 6048 6698 10.7% 6603 7409 12.2% 7060 8087 14.5%26600.00 2766 3444 24.5% 4299 5049 17.5% 5389 5992 11.2% 6059 6711 10.7% 6615 7423 12.2% 7073 8102 14.5%26650.00 2772 3451 24.5% 4307 5059 17.5% 5399 6004 11.2% 6071 6723 10.7% 6628 7437 12.2% 7086 8117 14.5% 26700.00 2777 3457 24.5% 4315 5068 17.5% 5409 6015 11.2% 6082 6736 10.7% 6640 7451 12.2% 7100 8132 14.5%26750.00 2782 3463 24.5% 4323 5078 17.5% 5420 6026 11.2% 6094 6748 10.7% 6653 7464 12.2% 7113 8148 14.5% 26800.00 2787 3470 24.5% 4331 5087 17.5% 5430 6037 11.2% 6105 6761 10.7% 6665 7478 12.2% 7126 8163 14.5%26850.00 2792 3476 24.5% 4339 5097 17.5% 5440 6049 11.2% 6116 6774 10.7% 6678 7492 12.2% 7139 8178 14.5%26900.00 2798 3483 24.5% 4347 5106 17.5% 5450 6060 11.2% 6128 6786 10.7% 6690 7506 12.2% 7153 8193 14.5%26950.00 2803 3489 24.5% 4355 5116 17.5% 5460 6071 11.2% 6139 6799 10.7% 6702 7520 12.2% 7166 8209 14.5% 27000.00 2808 3496 24.5% 4363 5125 17.5% 5470 6082 11.2% 6151 6811 10.7% 6715 7534 12.2% 7179 8224 14.5%27050.00 2813 3502 24.5% 4371 5135 17.5% 5480 6094 11.2% 6162 6824 10.7% 6727 7548 12.2% 7193 8239 14.5% 27100.00 2818 3509 24.5% 4379 5144 17.5% 5490 6105 11.2% 6173 6837 10.7% 6740 7562 12.2% 7206 8254 14.5%27150.00 2824 3515 24.5% 4387 5154 17.5% 5501 6116 11.2% 6185 6849 10.7% 6752 7576 12.2% 7219 8270 14.5% 27200.00 2829 3522 24.5% 4396 5163 17.5% 5511 6127 11.2% 6196 6862 10.7% 6765 7590 12.2% 7232 8285 14.5% Appendix A: Page 10/12 Shaded (blue) area indicates amounts adjusted for low incomes Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existin g Proposed % ChangeCombined Adjusted Gross IncomeComparison of Existing and Updated Child Support Schedules Five Children One Child Two ChildrenAppendix A Three Children Six Children Four Children 27250.00 2834 3528 24.5% 4404 5173 17.5% 5521 6139 11.2% 6208 6874 10.7% 6777 7604 12.2% 7246 8300 14.5% 27300.00 2839 3535 24.5% 4412 5182 17.5% 5531 6150 11.2% 6219 6887 10.7% 6790 7618 12.2% 7259 8315 14.5%27350.00 2844 3541 24.5% 4420 5192 17.5% 5541 6161 11.2% 6230 6900 10.7% 6802 7632 12.2% 7272 8330 14.5% 27400.00 2850 3548 24.5% 4428 5201 17.5% 5551 6172 11.2% 6242 6912 10.7% 6814 7646 12.2% 7286 8346 14.5%27450.00 2855 3554 24.5% 4436 5211 17.5% 5561 6184 11.2% 6253 6925 10.7% 6827 7660 12.2% 7299 8361 14.5% 27500.00 2860 3561 24.5% 4444 5220 17.5% 5572 6195 11.2% 6265 6938 10.7% 6839 7674 12.2% 7312 8376 14.5%27550.00 2865 3567 24.5% 4452 5229 17.5% 5582 6206 11.2% 6276 6950 10.7% 6852 7688 12.2% 7326 8391 14.5%27600.00 2870 3574 24.5% 4460 5239 17.5% 5592 6218 11.2% 6287 6963 10.7% 6864 7702 12.2% 7339 8407 14.5%27650.00 2876 3580 24.5% 4468 5248 17.5% 5602 6229 11.2% 6299 6975 10.7% 6877 7716 12.2% 7352 8422 14.5% 27700.00 2881 3586 24.5% 4476 5258 17.5% 5612 6240 11.2% 6310 6988 10.7% 6889 7730 12.2% 7365 8437 14.5%27750.00 2886 3593 24.5% 4484 5267 17.5% 5622 6251 11.2% 6321 7001 10.7% 6901 7744 12.2% 7379 8452 14.5% 27800.00 2891 3599 24.5% 4492 5277 17.5% 5632 6263 11.2% 6333 7013 10.7% 6914 7757 12.2% 7392 8467 14.5%27850.00 2896 3606 24.5% 4501 5286 17.5% 5642 6274 11.2% 6344 7026 10.7% 6926 7771 12.2% 7405 8483 14.5%27900.00 2902 3612 24.5% 4509 5296 17.5% 5653 6285 11.2% 6356 7038 10.7% 6939 7785 12.2% 7419 8498 14.5%27950.00 2907 3619 24.5% 4517 5305 17.5% 5663 6296 11.2% 6367 7051 10.7% 6951 7799 12.2% 7432 8513 14.5% 28000.00 2912 3625 24.5% 4525 5315 17.5% 5673 6308 11.2% 6378 7064 10.7% 6964 7813 12.2% 7445 8528 14.5%28050.00 2917 3632 24.5% 4533 5324 17.5% 5683 6319 11.2% 6390 7076 10.7% 6976 7827 12.2% 7458 8544 14.5% 28100.00 2922 3638 24.5% 4541 5334 17.5% 5693 6330 11.2% 6401 7089 10.7% 6988 7841 12.2% 7472 8559 14.5%28150.00 2928 3645 24.5% 4549 5343 17.5% 5703 6341 11.2% 6413 7102 10.7% 7001 7855 12.2% 7485 8574 14.5% 28200.00 2933 3651 24.5% 4557 5353 17.5% 5713 6353 11.2% 6424 7114 10.7% 7013 7869 12.2% 7498 8589 14.5%28250.00 2938 3658 24.5% 4565 5362 17.5% 5723 6364 11.2% 6435 7127 10.7% 7026 7883 12.2% 7512 8605 14.5% 28300.00 2943 3664 24.5% 4573 5372 17.5% 5734 6375 11.2% 6447 7139 10.7% 7038 7897 12.2% 7525 8620 14.5%28350.00 2948 3671 24.5% 4581 5381 17.5% 5744 6386 11.2% 6458 7152 10.7% 7051 7911 12.2% 7538 8635 14.5% 28400.00 2954 3677 24.5% 4589 5391 17.5% 5754 6398 11.2% 6470 7165 10.7% 7063 7925 12.2% 7552 8650 14.5%28450.00 2959 3684 24.5% 4598 5400 17.5% 5764 6409 11.2% 6481 7177 10.7% 7076 7939 12.2% 7565 8665 14.5% 28500.00 2964 3690 24.5% 4606 5410 17.5% 5774 6420 11.2% 6492 7190 10.7% 7088 7953 12.2% 7578 8681 14.5%28550.00 2969 3697 24.5% 4614 5419 17.5% 5784 6432 11.2% 6504 7202 10.7% 7100 7967 12.2% 7591 8696 14.5%28600.00 2974 3703 24.5% 4622 5429 17.5% 5794 6443 11.2% 6515 7215 10.7% 7113 7981 12.2% 7605 8711 14.5%28650.00 2980 3709 24.5% 4630 5438 17.5% 5804 6454 11.2% 6526 7228 10.7% 7125 7995 12.2% 7618 8726 14.5% 28700.00 2985 3716 24.5% 4638 5448 17.5% 5815 6465 11.2% 6538 7240 10.7% 7138 8009 12.2% 7631 8742 14.5%28750.00 2990 3722 24.5% 4646 5457 17.5% 5825 6477 11.2% 6549 7253 10.7% 7150 8023 12.2% 7645 8757 14.5% 28800.00 2995 3729 24.5% 4654 5467 17.5% 5835 6488 11.2% 6561 7266 10.7% 7163 8037 12.2% 7658 8772 14.5%28850.00 3000 3735 24.5% 4662 5476 17.5% 5845 6499 11.2% 6572 7278 10.7% 7175 8050 12.2% 7671 8787 14.5%28900.00 3006 3742 24.5% 4670 5486 17.5% 5855 6510 11.2% 6583 7291 10.7% 7187 8064 12.2% 7685 8803 14.5%28950.00 3011 3748 24.5% 4678 5495 17.5% 5865 6522 11.2% 6595 7303 10.7% 7200 8078 12.2% 7698 8818 14.5%29000.00 3016 3755 24.5% 4686 5505 17.5% 5875 6533 11.2% 6606 7316 10.7% 7212 8092 12.2% 7711 8833 14.5%29050.00 3021 3761 24.5% 4694 5514 17.5% 5886 6544 11.2% 6618 7329 10.7% 7225 8106 12.2% 7724 8848 14.5% 29100.00 3026 3768 24.5% 4703 5524 17.5% 5896 6555 11.2% 6629 7341 10.7% 7237 8120 12.2% 7738 8863 14.5%29150.00 3032 3774 24.5% 4711 5533 17.5% 5906 6567 11.2% 6640 7354 10.7% 7250 8134 12.2% 7751 8879 14.5% 29200.00 3037 3781 24.5% 4719 5543 17.5% 5916 6578 11.2% 6652 7366 10.7% 7262 8148 12.2% 7764 8894 14.5%29250.00 3042 3787 24.5% 4727 5552 17.5% 5926 6589 11.2% 6663 7379 10.7% 7274 8162 12.2% 7778 8909 14.5% 29300.00 3047 3794 24.5% 4735 5562 17.5% 5936 6600 11.2% 6675 7392 10.7% 7287 8176 12.2% 7791 8924 14.5%29350.00 3052 3800 24.5% 4743 5571 17.5% 5946 6612 11.2% 6686 7404 10.7% 7299 8190 12.2% 7804 8940 14.5% 29400.00 3058 3807 24.5% 4751 5581 17.5% 5956 6623 11.2% 6697 7417 10.7% 7312 8204 12.2% 7817 8955 14.5%29450.00 3063 3813 24.5% 4759 5590 17.5% 5967 6634 11.2% 6709 7429 10.7% 7324 8218 12.2% 7831 8970 14.5% 29500.00 3068 3820 24.5% 4767 5600 17.5% 5977 6646 11.2% 6720 7442 10.7% 7337 8232 12.2% 7844 8985 14.5%29550.00 3073 3826 24.5% 4775 5609 17.5% 5987 6657 11.2% 6731 7455 10.7% 7349 8246 12.2% 7857 9001 14.5%29600.00 3078 3832 24.5% 4783 5619 17.5% 5997 6668 11.2% 6743 7467 10.7% 7362 8260 12.2% 7871 9016 14.5%29650.00 3084 3839 24.5% 4791 5628 17.5% 6007 6679 11.2% 6754 7480 10.7% 7374 8274 12.2% 7884 9031 14.5% 29700.00 3089 3845 24.5% 4800 5638 17.5% 6017 6691 11.2% 6766 7493 10.7% 7386 8288 12.2% 7897 9046 14.5%29750.00 3094 3852 24.5% 4808 5647 17.5% 6027 6702 11.2% 6777 7505 10.7% 7399 8302 12.2% 7911 9061 14.5% 29800.00 3099 3858 24.5% 4816 5657 17.5% 6037 6713 11.2% 6788 7518 10.7% 7411 8316 12.2% 7924 9077 14.5%29850.00 3104 3865 24.5% 4824 5666 17.5% 6048 6724 11.2% 6800 7530 10.7% 7424 8330 12.2% 7937 9092 14.5% Appendix A: Page 11/12 Shaded (blue) area indicates amounts adjusted for low incomes Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existing Proposed % Change Existin g Proposed % ChangeCombined Adjusted Gross IncomeComparison of Existing and Updated Child Support Schedules Five Children One Child Two ChildrenAppendix A Three Children Six Children Four Children 29900.00 3110 3871 24.5% 4832 5676 17.5% 6058 6736 11.2% 6811 7543 10.7% 7436 8343 12.2% 7950 9107 14.5% 29950.00 3115 3878 24.5% 4840 5685 17.5% 6068 6747 11.2% 6823 7556 10.7% 7449 8357 12.2% 7964 9122 14.5% 30000.00 3120 3884 24.5% 4848 5695 17.5% 6078 6758 11.2% 6834 7568 10.7% 7461 8371 12.2% 7977 9138 14.5% Appendix A: Page 12/12 References American Bar Association Section of Family Law (1999). Family Law Quarterly, 1999 Child Support Symposium , Vol. 33, No. 1, Chicago, Illinois. American Law Institute. (2000). Principles of the Law and Family Dissolution: Analysis and Recommendations. The Executive Office, American Law Institute Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Beld, Jo Michelle and Len Biernat (2003). Federal Intent for State Child Support Guidelines, Income Shares, Cost Shares, and the Realities of Shared Parenting. 37 Family Law Quarterly 165. Barnow, Burt S. (1994). “The Economic Stud ies of Expenditures on Children and Their Relationship to Child Support Guidelines,” Child Support Guidelines: The Next Generation , U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administrative for Children and Families, Office of Child Support Enforcement, Washington, D.C. Betson, David M. (2006). “Appendix I: New Estimates of Child- Rearing Costs in State of Oregon Child Support Guidelines Review : Updated Obligation Scales and Other Considerations, Report to State of Oregon, Prepared by Policy Studies Inc., Denver Colorado. Available at http://www.dcs.state.or.us/ oregon_admin_rules/psi_guidelines_review_2007.pdf Betson, David M. (2001). “Chapter 5: Parental Ex penditures on Children.” in Judicial Council of California, Review of Statewide Uniform Child Support Guideline. San Francisco, California. Betson, David M. (1990). Alternative Estimates of the Cost of Children from the 1980-86 Consumer Expenditure Survey. Report to U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planni ng and Evaluation. University of Wisconsin Institute for Research on Poverty, Madison, Wisconsin. Blumberg Grace (1999), “The American Law Institute’s Treatment of Child Support,” Family Law Quarterly , vol. 33, no 1. (Spring). Bucks, Brian, et al. (2006) “Recent Changes in U.S. Family Finances: Evidence from the 2002 and 2004 Survey of Consumer Finances,” Federal Reserve Bulletin . Citro, Constance F. and Robert T. Michael, Editors (1995). Measuring Poverty: A New Approach. National Academy Press. Washington, D.C. Engel, Enrst (1857). “Die Productions and Co nsumtionsverhaltnisse des Konigsreichs Sachsen.” Zeitscrift des Statisticshen Bureaus des Koniglich Sachischen Ministeriums des Innern , 3. Espenshade, Thomas J. (1984). Investing in Children: New Estimates of Parental Expenditures. Urban Institute Press:Washington, D.C. Federal Register , Vol. 72, No. 15, January 24, 2008. pp. 3147-3148. Judicial Council of California (2006). Review of the Statewide Un iform Child Support Guidelines: 2006 , AdministrativeOffice of the Courts, San Francisco, California. Available at http://www. courtinfo.ca.gov/programs/cfcc/pdffiles/csguideline2005.pdf. Lewin/ICF (1990). Estimates of Expenditures on Child ren and Child Support Guidelines. Report to U.S. Department of Health and Huma n Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. Fairfax, Virginia. Lino, Mark (2007). Expenditures on Children by Families: 2006 Annual Report. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Center for Nutrition and Policy Promotion. Miscellaneous Publication No. 1528-2006, Washington, D.C. Maryland Revenue Administration Division, Maryland Employer Withholding Guide Annapolis, MD. (January, 2008) McCormick, M. et al.., “Annual Report on A ccess to and Utilization of Health Care for Children and Youth in the United States—2000 .” Ambulatory Pediatrics , 1(1):January- February 2001. (Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality 01-R036). National Center for State Courts (1987). Development of Guidelines for Child Support Orders, Final Report. Report to U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Child Support Enforcement, Williamsburg, Virginia. Rothbarth, Erwin (1943). “Appendix 4: Notes on a Method of Determining Equivalent Income for Families of Different Composition.” in Charles Madge (editor), War-Time Pattern of Spending and Saving. National Institute for Economic and Social Research, Cambridge University Press. Saunders, Correne, et al., Maryland Child Support Guidelin es Review: Case-Level Review, University of Maryland School of Social Wo rk, Baltimore, Maryland (November 2008). Report available at URL: http://www.familywelfare.umaryland.edu/reports/guidelines08.pdf Simpson, Lisa., et al. (2005) “Health Care fo r Children and Youth in the United States; Annual Report on Patterns of Coverage, Util ization, Quality, and Expenditures by Income.” Ambulatory Pediatrics 2005: 5 6-44. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2007). Consumer Expenditure Survey . Details available at: www.bls.gov/cex/home.html Van der Gaag, Jacques (1981). On Measuring the Cost of Children. Discussion Paper 663- 81. University of Wisconsin Institute for Research on Poverty, Madison, Wisconsin. Venohr, Jane C. and E. Tracy Griffith. (2005) “Child Support Guidelines: Issues and Reviews,” Family Court Review , vol 43, no. 3.