Is there a cap on how much child support a man pays?

[dfunk]

Can a woman take more than 60% of a mans pay for child support?

[m_t]

I believe that's the maximum that can be garnished, but that's way high and usually only comes into play in one of two circumstances.

1. The NCP has significant arrearages that s/he is also paying on.
2. The NCP has become voluntarily un/underemployed and is making significantly less money - by choice - than the income on which the original order was based on.

[Lee Borden]

Here are the federal limits on withhilding for child support:

• Remarried, with no arrearage greater than three months: 50% of disposable income
• Remarried, with an arrearage of three months or more: 55% of disposable income
• Single, with no arrearage greater than three months: 60% of disposable income
• Single, with an arrearage of three months or more: 65% of disposable income.

"Disposable income" is the earnings remaining after deduction of federal, state, and local withholding taxes and social security taxes. Deductions for non-mandatory retirement, health insurance, etc. do not reduce the disposable earnings.

[Dallas]

Here are the federal limits on withhilding for child support:

• Remarried, with no arrearage greater than three months: 50% of disposable income
• Remarried, with an arrearage of three months or more: 55% of disposable income
• Single, with no arrearage greater than three months: 60% of disposable income
• Single, with an arrearage of three months or more: 65% of disposable income.

"Disposable income" is the earnings remaining after deduction of federal, state, and local withholding taxes and social security taxes. Deductions for non-mandatory retirement, health insurance, etc. do not reduce the disposable earnings.

That answers the question about maximum garnishment.  It does not, however, seem to answer the question of what the maximum amount of child support and/or alimony that can be awarded.  I'm not a lawyer, but seems to me that the Consumer Credit Protection Act (15 U.S.C. § 1673) is strictly about garnishment and applies to what a third party (the employer) may by law take from the debtor and give to a plaintiff.  I don't see any language that says that a defendant is not ultimately responsible for whatever he or she has been ordered to pay even if that's in excess of 65%.  I could be reading this wrong or not looking at the correct law or correct place in the law, so corrections are most definitely welcome.

Dallas

[Lee Borden]

You're right. I know of no limitations as such on what a judge can order a person to pay for all support obligations combined.