selling my bussines and csa

nickolas198714

hi im new to this forum am considering selling my business. Im currently paying the csa 15% out my net wage but if was to sell my company how much would they take off me. and what happens with regular payments. is there a limit on how much they can actually take off me. I only have the one son.

any comment would e helpful thanks Nickolas

kevin137

Technically you could be classed as diversion of income, however, any assets over £65,000 are assessable if you do sell, so i guess you have to decide what your options are as to if you could keep paying, as that is what they will try and make you do as to what the actual worth of the business is...

If you have a wage of £30,000 and the business sells for say £300,000 then they could not call this diversion of income, but you would be liable for % of interest earned...

Best thing is for you to work out the value as against work and what the money is to be used for, if you sold it to pay off a mortgage and buy a new car and was working for someone else, you will get no problem, anything else could cause you grief...

shoe*diva79

Surely with the profit of sale you would continue to be a responsible parent and contribute an appropriate % towards the costs of your child's upbringing?

DUTR

shoe*diva79 wrote: »

Surely with the profit of sale you would continue to be a responsible parent and contribute an appropriate % towards the costs of your child's upbringing?

There may not be any profit, sometimes business's change hands for just £1, I think it's a bit harsh to assume the OP is not a reasonable parent. I know my CS contribution goes towards a horse :eek: , then there is moaning about no money for this or that or can I contribute to this or that.

Alpine

shoe*diva79 wrote: »

Surely with the profit of sale you would continue to be a responsible parent and contribute an appropriate % towards the costs of your child's upbringing?

Raising a child is a fixed cost, not a percentage. Just because the NRP earns more, does not mean it costs more for someone else to raise their child.

Being a responsible parent is about contributing to the actual costs of raising the child and where possible nurturing them as they grow up.

shoe*diva79

Alpine wrote: »

Raising a child is a fixed cost, not a percentage. Just because the NRP earns more, does not mean it costs more for someone else to raise their child.

Being a responsible parent is about contributing to the actual costs of raising the child and where possible nurturing them as they grow up.

The CSA currently use a fixed % of income to work work CM liabilities. Unless the OP can liaise with the PWC about fixed cost as you call it.

To be fair, the whole reason that a % is used is so the child can continue to live (as much as possible) the standard of living they previously had whilst the parents were together. Otherwise we could have a huge heap of broken home children where the mother has a low income and is topped up with Tax Credits whilst the father earns a very decent wage and is living the life of riley. Hardly fair on the child if there was just a fixed payment.

Given the OP is currently paying 15% of his net salary, I can assume his business is doing fairly well, especially if he is looking to sell it.

OP - if you sell your business, what will you be doing to earn a living after that? Become employed?

Cally_Smart

Alpine wrote: »

Raising a child is a fixed cost, not a percentage. Just because the NRP earns more, does not mean it costs more for someone else to raise their child.

Being a responsible parent is about contributing to the actual costs of raising the child and where possible nurturing them as they grow up.

That is exactly like it should be and the NRP can spend what they like on the child themselves when they see them as any good parent would in the way of gifts,holidays & clothes & actually get some enjoyment from doing it.

Alpine

shoe*diva79 wrote: »

The CSA currently use a fixed % of income to work work CM liabilities. Unless the OP can liaise with the PWC about fixed cost as you call it.

To be fair, the whole reason that a % is used is so the child can continue to live (as much as possible) the standard of living they previously had whilst the parents were together. Otherwise we could have a huge heap of broken home children where the mother has a low income and is topped up with Tax Credits whilst the father earns a very decent wage and is living the life of riley. Hardly fair on the child if there was just a fixed payment.

Given the OP is currently paying 15% of his net salary, I can assume his business is doing fairly well, especially if he is looking to sell it.

OP - if you sell your business, what will you be doing to earn a living after that? Become employed?

I don't agree that the fixed % is used to maintain a standard of living. Many NRPs play the game of hiding income or leaving employment so they don't have to pay much if anything. You only have to read these boards to see that in many cases, that fixed % won't even cover half the actual cost of raising a child. I'm sure there are also many other cases where NRPs are paying a lot more than it actually costs and are effectively supporting ex-partners and their new families. Both situations are unfair and no doubt are contributory factors in the continued break down in relationships between the NRP and PWC.

shoe*diva79

Well a fixed amount will never work will it? Say a fixed amount of £50 per week. NRP 1 has a net take home of £200 per week and NRP 2 has a net income of £400 per week. NRP 2 will be able to afford to do things with the child in addition to CM beingpaid whereas NRP 1 wont be able to afford much at all after household bills are paid.

Paying a % on your earnings gives a true reflection on affordability. And as for those NRP who divert income, quit their jobs etc to get out of supporting their children should be ashamed of themselves.

The % of NRP supporting the PWC I would hazard a guess at being very very very small. Maybe those paying in excess of £500 a month for one child with no arrears. The average NRP is paying a rather nominal amount and those that complain are generally also paying arrears they have accured.

Hopefully the OP will let us know what he intends to do re selling the business. Assuming the business is worth a fair amount of money that he will be living off, or will they be getting a new job because this business is no longer profitable.

kevin137

shoe*diva79 wrote: »

Paying a % on your earnings gives a true reflection on affordability. And as for those NRP who divert income, quit their jobs etc to get out of supporting their children should be ashamed of themselves.

Which is very true if you are not splitting assets, but the minute assets and the courts become involved it is very very biased.

You know i am all for NRP's paying, but for it to be a fair system, then it either needs to be dealt with by the courts and stay with the courts, or the courts need to butt out and tell the pWC that only assets can be dealt with and CS needs to be addressed by the CSA.

There are far too many NRP's that are hit twice by the courts for future maintenance and then again 1 year later by the CSA with no relief given for teh court settlement which could of been a lump sum in leu of years of maintenance...

DUTR

shoe*diva79 wrote: »

Well a fixed amount will never work will it? Say a fixed amount of £50 per week. NRP 1 has a net take home of £200 per week and NRP 2 has a net income of £400 per week. NRP 2 will be able to afford to do things with the child in addition to CM beingpaid whereas NRP 1 wont be able to afford much at all after household bills are paid.

Paying a % on your earnings gives a true reflection on affordability. And as for those NRP who divert income, quit their jobs etc to get out of supporting their children should be ashamed of themselves.

The % of NRP supporting the PWC I would hazard a guess at being very very very small. Maybe those paying in excess of £500 a month for one child with no arrears. The average NRP is paying a rather nominal amount and those that complain are generally also paying arrears they have accured.

Hopefully the OP will let us know what he intends to do re selling the business. Assuming the business is worth a fair amount of money that he will be living off, or will they be getting a new job because this business is no longer profitable.

It is the same in both arguments, only thing common is that NRP2 is left with more disposable income, after a % or fixed deduction, all other expenses are 'constant' eg energy fuel, grocery etc.