Am I Being Fair?

I wouldn't have a problem splitting 50/50 for 2012 but after that, he's on his own, I wouldn't allow him to claim a child either since he really isn't supporting them in any way financially.

50/50 for 2012
0/100 for 2013 and beyond

Alternating years (or each claiming a vhild when there are 2 or more) is pretty standard if there is ANY split custody. Regardless of income level.

i think you have to put your pride and ego to the side a moment. for the sake of the kids, and cordiality. is this really about the money? i doubt it. i would try (even if it's hard) to be objective. you're talking about your tax refund. this isn't money you should be depending on to survive right? unless you really NEED the money, i would give in on this and just get it over with. 50/50 isn't that much to give up. it's just money, there are more important things. pick your battles. it sounds like the "cordial" divorce is tenuous and if it was me, i would do what i could to keep it intact.

We were divorced in December 2006, I gave him all four kids, I gave him all the deductions because to my name I only earned 6,000 dollars and I knew that was all coming back. So I would say your married jointly, 80/20 or 70/30 sounds fair.

Now for the life of me I can't understand any logical thought that would mean you giving him part of your tax refund. Why the hell would you share money you earned. Ya know what, if he wants to be irrational go to your payroll department, figure out your exact tax liability and lower your withholding. A win win, for one you won't be lending money to the government interest free and he is more than welcome to half of nothing.

I point this out because if your husband is asking for part of your refund I get the feeling he doesn't understand what a refund is, you OVERPAID!!

About the only thing I see you maybe being unfair about is the dependent claim. We split them down the middle and I was fair. The dependents should be spelled out in your decree and it doesn't matter who has what custody or income. Take the younger one if you are so inclined but give him one, that is fair since I am sure he will be paying support.
______________________________________
Just noticed the no support until. What I would say is until he is on his feet and paying you claim both. When he is on his feet you guys go back to court and get a fair support order issued and then give him one dependent.
_____________________________________
Oh just wanted to throw this out there, I went back to school after our divorce. I capped my spousal support at four years the minimum required to get my degree. After that I took nothing but child support which was set with my spousal support in the calculation. In other words I could get more child support but ya know, I am on my feet so all good. I just wanted you to know I had the hand your soon to be ex is holding, there is no excuse for his greed.
_______________________________
Oh, this is the accountant in me, yeah, I got a masters in four years, what can I say I like to support myself. S'anyway, what you need to consider for the split next year is how each scenario impacts your tax liability. What I mean is grab a turbo tax from last year, plug it all in, and see what happens. The numbers won't be perfect but they will give you a good idea without getting an accountant. If the difference between filing jointly and single is greater than 10% of the refund then split that difference. If the difference gives him 50% then give him the 50%. I guess I am saying be smart about all of this. Giving him one child to deduct if he earns something, will give him the EIC, plug that in too. :)

Please make the child support in the divorce decree and get it adjusted when he gets a job. My friend tried it your way believing he would even things up and pay for her kids college or emergencies. He went on to make triple the salary and never paid more than a few minor bills. She screwed herself over and her kids may not get to go away to college.
The ex has a new family and is spending on them.

I would always keep the tax deduction and not budge on this.

I agree with Jo W. it is technically money *you* over paid so you should keep all the money before the dependants are added, then split those two (I think that is more than fair).

LISTEN TO YOUR LAWYER, OTHERWISE, WHY DID YOU EVEN BOTHER HIRING THEM?

I cringe when I see woman turn away child support. I have seen so many close friends and family members get royally screwed when they don't get child support. It is just not a smart thing in my book. My mom agreed to (alot) less child support and if I could just go back in time and slap some sense into that woman I love, I would. Trying to keep things "amicable"? By screwing yourself and your children over? Not a good thing. You are seeing the now, I don't think you are seeing the later. When he gets a nice job, after years of not having an income/going to school, he is going to have a vice grip on his pay check and will not be willing at all to pay child support then. And why should he? You will have already proven you don't even need his support by denying CS now. I would seriously reconsider your decision (if possible).

No you are not being unfair. If I were in your situation I would agree to the 50/50 split for this year and thereafter I would claim both children until such a time that he is providing half of their support.

Year 1 - since you both lived together and took care of the children even though you earned the money, amicably speaking I would lean toward the 50/50 split in my head but my heart would be more like I was the one that overpaid since I was the one that worked and then perhaps an 80-20 would be more appropriate.

Post divorce finalized - the kids are mine and with me so I get all the deductions.

As for the child support, I'm just of the mind that the children have a right to be supported financially by both the parents. They didn't get here on their own but it took two to tango. You have no idea what the future holds and it would be better for the children to be financially supported by both of their parents over just 1 of you.

I'm a child of divorce from the days where you couldn't press and get child support. My mother struggled often and frequently with money and finances. My father refused to pay anything (he's a vet) and the person in charge of his finances made certain we got nothing more than the allotted social security.

It was very tough on my mother and by default tough on us. Someone should have thought more about how stressed out she was and provided more financially for us.

I totally agree with your logic and think that you are being more than fair. With that said, as much as it would hurt, I would agree to the 50/50 split in 2012 ONLY to have some closure to that (and it would be a very sore topic if it was me). As far as moving forward, you will be the one with primary custody, you will not be gaining any child support and he will contribute when he can - what he can, therefore, you should gain any tax benefits of the children beyond 2012. Once he is back on his feet and contributing more to the childrens well being, then maybe you can consider each of you claiming a child....but until then, I would stand firm in your decision. Now... if you suggested to him he paid child support (even though it's your decision not too) and in return he could claim a child - maybe he will agree with your original request. It's playing a game - but maybe he will realize how he is getting a pretty good deal right now and not be so greedy. Good Luck!!

You are being more than fair. I am a female Vet & it makes me extreemly angry to see how some male vets handle their lives. They can put in for disablity money & money for you & your children. Don't you dare let him off the hook for child support. I raised my children in the Navy without child support & it was hell.

While I think it would be fair to do the 80/20 or 70/30 split, I would go with 50/50 just to prevent arguments and I wouldn't let him claim either of the children in the future if you're going to have primary physical custody.

I would also get something in writing about his paying child support once he is working again. Just as he thinks 50/50 is fair as far as the taxes, you may not agree about what is fair child support once he's working again and it will be more of a hassle and probably more expensive to go through the courts at a later date should it come to that.

I think 50/50 for 2012 is fair. After that, nope he's on his own. If you are working and supporting the kids 100%, you get the deductions.

This year, I think I would do 50/50 just b/c you were a 'family' this year...but for 2013 and beyond until he starts paying CS you should claim them both BUT once he starts paying CS you can compromise and each claim 1 child.

~My DH and his EX each claim 1 kid (DH pays CS and has them 40% of the time but do to finances being what they are he pays 64% of their expenses) but the EX got the youngest kid to claim so she gets 3 extra years to claim on taxes.

So if you do split up the kids, I would take the youngest since you are essentially paying more than your fair share.
Hope this helps. You are being MORE than fair, IMO.
I know you said you guys are being cordial but if I were you I would get as mush as possible put in writing.

Get future tax filing info in that divorce decree. He could pull a fast one and claim both kids. Without a court decree you are kind of out of luck.

My experience....i have a daughter that her dad claims her every year on taxes and pays very little child support. These two things were the two things holding up the divorce....so a judge decided for us.

I think you are not being unfair with expecting to claim both children...you have custody, they are your dependants. 2013 and beyond, you should claim them both especially if he isn't supporting them at all let alone 50/50. For this year, I could see filing joint and splitting the refund. If his allowances had been going towards the household and not exclusively for him alone, I would split the refund 50/50. If he pocketed the money and didn't use if for the common good then I would split it 80/20. If he didn't assist with anything at home (at least helping with housework or childcare), I wouldn't split it at all.

I have a modified decree and here's what I did with both CS and taxes.

1) my ex pays extremely reduced child support IF AND ONLY IF he maintains 50/50 physical custody. it's well defined on how that works and the decree is written to revert back to the normal amount if he doesn't hold up his end of the bargain. that being said, I know another friend who did a stair step CS b/c her ex was in school. so he was exempt for a few months then it ramped up after that.

2) I was a bit conflicted for taxes and claiming my son when it came time to write the decree. The advice I was given is that I should maintain 100% right to claim my son (since I'm the custodial parent) and IF I choose to allow my ex to claim my son, I can. there's nothing I have to do legally, I just have to not claim him (so there's no duplication of SS nbr). The thinking is that IF my ex is maintaining the agreement, isn't late on CS or medical bills, then I don't mind allowing my ex to claim my son every other year, but if for ANY reason he's not, then I maintain legal right to claim him every year. Make it a verbal agreement with your ex. ;)

That's what I would advise you to do as well. Standard wording is that you get to claim your children. It doesn't sound like he's contributing even half of anything financial, so not sure why he should get any part of any tax return.

I agree with you that after this year if you have primary custody and he is only paying support when he can, you should claim both children. This years taxes though I have a couple of questions about. If you file separate, since all the school exemptions will be his, will you end up owing since you will be unable to claim him? If so, I think I would agree to the 50/50 split, since most of the deductions that will give you the large refund (his school, VA, and the fact you can claim him as dependent on you) to me would make that fair. BUT, if filing separate will still give you a refund then that might be easier then fighting with him over the amount of a split, and in that case I am not sure what would be the fairest thing to do with claiming the children. He was there all this year to help care for them, even if his contribution was not finical, so it may be fair just this one year to let him claim one. I would make sure that who gets to claim them in the future is spelled out in the paperwork.

at least for 2012 you need to split it 50/50. while yes you were the breadwinner you say you paid the mortgage but you also say that he received a tax free living/housing allowance. did he pocket that and you never saw it? or was it part of the living money? Most marriages are not equitable in the money department.

if you look at this from the other point of view, if you were the one who went to school all year with those allowances but made no money and you were getting a divorce would you expect him to take the entire tax refund? you should be splitting it.

in my opinion your not being fair.

I dont think you are being unfair at all. I wouldnt split it 50/50 because you get half for you AND the kids and he gets half for just himself....that doesnt sound right. also since you have the kids you should claim BOTH.

I hope that you reconsider requiring him to pay child support in the divorce decree. Your lawyer knows what he's talking about. Your husband's attitude right now is to take advantage of every penny he can and while your attitude is to be as generous as possible, his is to be as selfish as possible. You're not even divorced yet. I can't imagine that his attitude will improve or that he won't fight you on financial issues later.

I would file married/joint and split the refund 80/20. After the divorce is official, I wouldn't allow him to claim any of the children since you'll have primary physical custody and he'll likely (in your own words) not pay you reliable child support. You've been supporting him and been incredibly generous and kind, as a should be, even during a divorce. I think that's amazing. Unfortunately he doesn't seem to be very grateful. He wants more more more. There needs to come a time when you say "enough."

Remember, tax returns are simply when we get back money that we loaned to the government at 0% interest from our own paychecks. That's money that you can put into your childrens' college accounts and maybe even consider it "down payments" for your soon-to-be-former husband's child support.

It looks like you have thought this out very well. I think that you should listen to your lawyer, though. They see it play out every day and tend to have a broader perspective than you could. Maybe you set the support amount very low for now and revisit it later, but not setting anything at all is setting this up for failure. Also, consider this: As a rule, men tend to place more value on what they have to work and pay for. They tend to value themselves based on how well they are able to fend for themselves. You've probably heard before that a man needs to work himself and not have things handed to him. Well, a man needs to pay rent somewhere, a man needs to eat, and a man needs feed his children. His children need to see him actively doing for them, even though they won't know the details. Even if it's only $10 a week, he should be expected to go through the motions. I actually think this about each parent, so this is not about sticking it to him, but biologically men tend to thrive on this expectation. You are doing his children and him a disservice if you don't hold him accountable for paying his debts. Faith is a good thing, but this is not a faith issue. Divorce is a legal issue.