The CSA and Dividends – how does it work?

jetta_wales

PreludeForTimeFeelers wrote: »

There is a cap on assessments, the maximum child maintenance amount is £400 per week on CS2.

I didn't know that but wow £400 a week is huge could do with being a quarter of that in my opinion.

PreludeForTimeFeelers

It's all relative though, for net assessment purposes income is capped at £2000 per week, so someone on that sort of wage would be able to afford £400 easily.

jetta_wales

PreludeForTimeFeelers wrote: »

It's all relative though, for net assessment purposes income is capped at £2000 per week, so someone on that sort of wage would be able to afford £400 easily.

Doesn't mean the PWC should get it though as it's clearly far far more than is needed to contribute to even the neediest kids. It's the PWC benefitting from it a great deal then which is not what child support is supposed to be for.

Sure many will disagree but as a PWC myself that's how I feel about it. Can't blame some people from going to these lengths to keep their ex from getting rich of their efforts with no due cause to. There's spousal maintenance for that if they really feel they should deserve it.

millwall34

Kimitatsu wrote: »

If one of the trustees is a married partner can the recipient not be seen to have a beneficial interest and so it could be included at a tribunal?

Just curious

Many thanks

I cant give the definitive answer on CSA tribunals but HMRC would not seek revokation of trustee powers on the grounds they are related or co-habiting with a legatee or settlor.

I dont know your case specifics or the wording of the trust deeds but if the NRP is the settlor or the sole trustee then you might have a case at tribunal. This arrangement is called an interest in possession trust.

If the NRP is the legatee and the trust is discretionary then a tribunal cannot dismantle a trust because the assets only revert back to the settlor who can reform a new trust, albeit you will no doubt want to take your own confirmatory advice.

Fission

millwall34 wrote: »

I can see where you accountant is coming from.

He is mortgaging your property to raise your housing allowance ready for when you put in your change of circumstances. I suspect this is to align your liability so it is consistent with CS2 because CS1 payers are charged more money for the same liability.

It won't work. Money borrowed on a mortgage to buy shares is not counted as housing costs, because it isn't housing costs. Housing costs are counted only for buying or improving a home.

F

Trent1974

I must have been the lucky one then. The CSA never asked what the mortgage was being used for.

Just fit a new door or window for 250 grand. Problem solved and nobody needs to know.

Light_Speed_Cruiser

Fission wrote: »

Money borrowed on a mortgage to buy shares is not counted as housing costs,

Something not quite right there.

The OP is borrowing to further his career, that is a fundamental right of everyone living in Britain. If the CSA has other ideas then the NRP will go and do it under someone elses jurisdiction. The result?

NRP - won
the taxman - nil
CSA - nil.

I dont think the CSA would be so stupid.

Poraw

jetta_wales wrote: »

Doesn't mean the PWC should get it though as it's clearly far far more than is needed to contribute to even the neediest kids. It's the PWC benefitting from it a great deal then which is not what child support is supposed to be for.

Sure many will disagree but as a PWC myself that's how I feel about it. Can't blame some people from going to these lengths to keep their ex from getting rich of their efforts with no due cause to. There's spousal maintenance for that if they really feel they should deserve it.

I disagree Jetta. Yes, its a lot of money, but the child/children in question should be able to continue living the same standard as if their parents were still together. I hardly think its fair that whilst a NRP could afford luxury holidays, nice car, house, entertaining costs your saying that the children shouldnt be entitled to the same? If someone earning net £2k per week only needed to give say £100 a week to the PWC, personally I dont think that would go to far in keeping them in the lifestyle they are used to.

Poraw

I should add, and as a PWC then I am sure you will agree, but the cost of raising a child is enormous. Paying the rent/mortgage to keep a roof over their heads, food, clothing, school trips, after school clubs/activities (ie scouts etc), holidays, present for birthday parties they are invited to... the list can go on. If I was to tot up how much my 12 year old daughter costs per month I bet my ex's contribution wouldnt cover quarter of it!

Kimitatsu

millwall34 wrote: »

I cant give the definitive answer on CSA tribunals but HMRC would not seek revokation of trustee powers on the grounds they are related or co-habiting with a legatee or settlor.

I dont know your case specifics or the wording of the trust deeds but if the NRP is the settlor or the sole trustee then you might have a case at tribunal. This arrangement is called an interest in possession trust.

If the NRP is the legatee and the trust is discretionary then a tribunal cannot dismantle a trust because the assets only revert back to the settlor who can reform a new trust, albeit you will no doubt want to take your own confirmatory advice.

Thank you