Recommendations

Terms used in these recommendations

Child Support Income – a parent’s adjusted taxable income less their self-support amount

FTB – Family Tax Benefit

MTAWE – male total average weekly earnings, as reported by the Australian Bureau of Statistics

Non-resident parent – the parent who cares for the child for less time than the other parent

Payee – the person entitled to receive child support payments towards the cost of children in their care

Payer – the parent who is liable to make a child support payment towards the cost of their child

Regular contact – care of a child by a non-resident parent of 14 per cent or more, but less than 35 per cent of the time

Resident parent – the parent who cares for the child for more time than the other parent

Shared care – care of a child by each parent for at least 35 per cent of the time

Step-child – a child who is neither the biological nor the adoptive child of a person, where the person is either married to, or living in a de facto relationship with, the child’s resident parent
 

Recommendation 1

The existing formula for the assessment of child support should be replaced by a new formula based upon the principle of shared parental responsibility for the costs of children. The new basic formula should involve first working out the costs of children by reference to the combined incomes of the parents, and then distributing those costs in accordance with the parents’ respective capacities to meet those costs, taking into account their share of the care of the children.

The measurement of income

1.1 For the purposes of the formula, the current definition of adjusted taxable income should be broadened to include certain non-taxable payments such as certain forms of income support, currently exempt.

1.2 The definitions of income for child support and Family Tax Benefit should be consistent and the components should be the same.

1.3 Each parent should have a self-support amount set at the level equivalent to one-third of male total average weekly earnings (MTAWE). Their adjusted taxable income less the self-support amount should be their income for child support purposes (the ‘Child Support Income’). Their Child Support Income should be zero if their adjusted taxable income does not exceed the self-support amount.

The costs of children

1.4 The costs of children for the purposes of calculating child support should reflect the following:
 

• Expenditure on children rises with age.
• As income rises, expenditure on children rises in absolute terms, but declines in percentage terms.

1.5 The costs of children shall be expressed in a Costs of Children Table based upon the parents’ combined Child Support Income in two age bands, 0–12 and 13–17, and in combination between the age bands for up to three children. (See Table A: Costs of children.)

1.6 Where there are more than three child support children, the cost of the children shall be the cost of three children, and where the children are in both age brackets, the cost of children is based upon the ages of the three eldest children.

1.7 Where there is more than one child support child, and the arrangements concerning regular contact or shared care differ between the children, the cost of each individual child is the cost of the total number of children divided by the total number of such children.

1.8 Combined parental Child Support Income for the purpose of assessing the costs of children shall not exceed 2.5 times MTAWE.

Determining a parent’s contribution to the costs of children

1.9 The parents of the child should contribute to the relevant cost of the child (or children) in proportions equal to each parent’s proportion of the combined Child Support Income.

Regular contact and shared care

1.10 Regular face-to-face contact or shared care by a parent should result in the parent providing the contact or care being taken to satisfy some part of their obligation to support the child.

1.11 If a non-resident parent has a child in his or her care overnight for 14 per cent or more of the nights per year and less than 35 per cent of the nights per year, he or she should be taken to be incurring 24 per cent of the child’s total cost through that regular contact, and his or her child support liability should be reduced accordingly; but this should not result in any child support being paid by the resident parent to the non-resident parent.

1.12 Where the care provided by one parent is equivalent to 35 per cent or more, the parent with 35 per cent of the care of the child will be taken to be incurring 25 per cent of the cost, rising to equal incurring of costs when the care of the child is shared equally. The way in which the cost incurred by the parent with the fewer number of nights of care per year is calculated is set out in Table B: Shared care.

1.13 A parent may also be treated as having regular contact or shared care if either the Child Support Registrar is satisfied, after consultation with the other parent, or the parents agree, that the parent bears a level of expenditure for the child through daytime contact or a combination of daytime and overnight contact that is equivalent to the cost of the child allowed in the formula for regular contact or shared care.

1.14 FTB A and B should no longer be split where the non-resident parent is providing care for the child for less than 35 per cent of the nights per year. Where each parent has the child in their care for 35 per cent of the time or more, FTB should be split in accordance with the same methodology as in Table B.

1.15 Non-resident parents who have care of a child between 14 and 34 per cent of nights per year should continue to have access to Rent Assistance, the Health Care Card, and the Medicare Safety Net if they meet the other eligibility criteria for FTB A at the required rate. They should also be paid the ‘with child’ rate for the relevant income support payments, where they meet the relevant eligibility criteria. The Government should also consider the adequacy of the current level of this rate, in the light of the research on the costs of children conducted by the Taskforce.

1.16 Child support assessment based upon regular contact or shared care should apply if either the terms of a written parenting plan or court order filed with the Child Support Agency specify that the non-resident parent should have the requisite level of care of the child, or the parents agree about the level of contact or shared care occurring.

1.17 The resident parent may object to an assessment based upon the payer having regular contact if the level of actual contact usually occurring in the current child support period is significantly less than 14 per cent care of the child or children, although the payee is willing to make the child or children available for that contact.

1.18 A new assessment may be issued during a child support period if the parents agree that there has been a change in the regular care arrangements amounting to the equivalent of at least one night every fortnight, or there has been a similar degree of change as a result of a court order.

Variations on the basic formula

1.19 All biological and adoptive children of either parent should be treated as equally as possible. Where a parent has a new biological or adopted child living with him or her, other than the child support child or children, the following calculations should take place:

1. establish the amount of child support the parent would need to pay for the new dependent child if the child were living elsewhere, using that parent’s Child Support Income alone;
2. subtract that amount from the parent’s Child Support Income; and
3. calculate and allocate the cost of the child support child or children in accordance with the standard formula, using the parent’s reduced income.

1.20 Where parents each care for one or more of their children, each parent is assessed separately as liable to the other, and the liabilities offset.

1.21 Where a non-resident parent has child support children with more than one partner, his or her child support liability should be calculated on his or her income only and distributed equally between the children.

1.22 Where a resident parent cares for a number of children with different non-resident parents, each of the child support liabilities of the non-resident parents should be calculated separately, without regard to the existence of the other child or children.

1.23 Where a child is cared for by a person who is not the child’s parent, the combined Child Support Income of the parents should be used to assess their liabilities according to their respective capacities. Where a parent has regular contact or shared care of the child, that parent’s liability will be reduced in accordance with the normal operation of the formula.

Minimum payments

1.24 All payers should pay at least a minimum rate equivalent to $5 per week per child support case, indexed to changes in the CPI since 1999. The increased amount should be rounded to the nearest 10 cents.

1.25 A minimum payment should not be required if the payer has regular contact or shared care.

1.26 Payers on the minimum rate should be allowed to remain on that rate for one month after ceasing to be on income support payments or otherwise increasing their income to a level that justifies a child support payment above the minimum rate.

1.27 Parents who are not in receipt of income support payments but report an income lower than the Parenting Payment (Single) maximum annual rate should pay a fixed child support payment of $20 per child per week and this should not be reduced by regular contact.

1.28 The fixed payment of $20 per child per week should not apply if the Child Support Registrar is satisfied that the total financial resources available to support the parent are lower than the Parenting Payment (Single) maximum annual rate. In those cases, the minimum rate per child support case should apply.

1.29 The minimum rate and the fixed payment should be indexed to the CPI from the end of the 2004–05 financial year. The increased payment should be rounded to the nearest 10 cents.

1.30 Where a parent has failed to lodge a tax return for each of the last two financial years preceding the current child support period, and the Child Support Agency has no reliable means of determining the taxable income of the parent, the parent shall be deemed to have an income for child support purposes equivalent to two-thirds of MTAWE. That income may only be changed if the parent files a tax return for the last financial year prior to the child support period to which the deemed income relates, or taxable income information is obtained from a reliable source.

1.31 The Child Support Registrar may report debts arising out of child support obligations based upon a deemed income separately from other accrued debts, but may not reduce a deemed income based on the parent’s failure to meet the obligation.

Assessment and enforcement

Recommendation 2

The Child Support Agency should be given increased resources to investigate the capacity to pay of those who are self employed, or who otherwise reduce their taxable income by organising their financial affairs through companies or trusts, and those who operate partially or wholly by using cash payments to avoid taxation.

Recommendation 3

3.1 The Child Support Agency should be given increased enforcement powers to the extent necessary to be able to improve enforcement in relation to people who are self employed or who otherwise reduce their taxable income by organising their financial affairs through companies or trusts, in particular by:

1. broadening the powers available to the CSA to make ongoing deductions from bank accounts to align enforcement measures for non salary and wage earners with those for salary and wage earners;
2. aligning CSA powers with Centrelink powers to make additional deductions from Centrelink benefits to cover arrears; and
3. providing the power to garnishee other government payments such as Department of Veterans’ Affairs pensions.

3.2 Enforcement powers should not be extended to the cancellation of driving licences for failure to pay child support, as this might reduce parents’ capacity to earn income.

Recommendation 4

Payees should be given all the same powers of application to a court as the Child Support Registrar has for orders in relation to the enforcement of child support, provided either that the payee gives 14 days notice to the Registrar of the application or the notice requirement is otherwise reduced or varied by the court, and that any money recovered under a payee enforcement action be payable to the Commonwealth for distribution to the payee.

Recommendation 5

A court hearing an application for enforcement of child support by a payee parent should have the same powers to obtain information and evidence in relation to either parent as the Child Support Registrar has when enforcing a child support liability.

Recommendation 6

Pending the final outcomes of any application or appeal under Child Support legislation, whether in relation to assessment, registration or collection, the court should have a wide discretion to make orders staying any aspect of assessment, collection or enforcement, including:
 

1. implementing a departure from the formula on an interim basis;
2. excluding formula components or administrative changes which might otherwise be available;
3. suspending the accrual of debt, and/or late payment penalties, without necessarily having to substitute a different liability for a past period;
4. discharging or reducing debt without needing to specify the changes to the assessment to effect this result;
5. limiting the range of discretionary enforcement measures available to the Child Support Agency, or staying enforcement altogether; and
6. suspending or substituting a different amount of available disbursement to the payee.

Recommendation 7

Section 39(5) of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 should be amended to provide that a payee’s application to opt for agency collection after a period of private collection should not be refused unless it would be unjust to the payer because:

1. the payer has been in compliance with his or her child support obligations;
2. a failure in compliance has been satisfactorily explained and rectified; or
3. there are special circumstances that exist in relation to the liability that make it appropriate to refuse the application.

Overpayments

Recommendation 8

8.1 Where, as the result of administrative error, a payee has been paid an amount not paid by the payer, for example, as the result of the payer’s cheque not being met, or as the result of an incorrect allocation of employer garnishee amounts, the Registrar should not require repayment by the payee.

8.2 Where a payer lodges a late tax return for a child support period, and that return shows a taxable income lower than that used in the assessment, the Child Support Registrar shall vary that payer’s income from the date the return was lodged, but not for the intervening period unless the payer can show good reason for not providing income information at the time the assessment was made. In making a decision whether to vary the payer’s assessment, the Registrar will consider the effect on the payee of having to repay any overpayment thereby created.

8.3 Where a parent has made an application (under s.107 of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989) disputing an assessment on the basis that he is not the parent of the child, and informs the Agency of the application, the Child Support Registrar shall suspend payments of collected amounts to the payee until the application is finalised, unless the court orders otherwise.

8.4 Where a court has considered a s.107 application, and has made a declaration that the assessment should not have been made, it should immediately proceed to consider whether an order should be made for repayment of any amount under s.143 of the Child Support (Assessment) Act.

8.5 When considering how much of the balance of money paid under a child support assessment should be repaid to a payer who has successfully disputed paternity, the court should have regard to:

1. the knowledge of the parties about the issue of paternity;
2. any acquiescence or delay by the payer after he had reason to doubt his paternity;
3. the relationship between the payer and the child;
4. the present financial circumstances of both parties; and
5. the capacity of the biological father (if known) to provide child support in the future.

8.6 Where a court makes an order for repayment of an overpaid amount under s.143 of the Act, the amount of such payment may be registered with the Child Support Registrar as a registrable maintenance liability, for enforcement.
 

The Maintenance Income Test

Recommendation 9

9.1 The mechanisms of the Maintenance Income Test (MIT) should be changed to ensure that it applies only to the children in a family for whom child support is paid.

9.2 The names of the Maintenance Action Test and the MIT should be changed to the Child Support Action Test and the Child Support Income Test in order to better reflect their roles.

9.3 The MIT’s free area, taper rate and scope should be reviewed in order to ensure that the operation of the MIT does not claw back FTB A beyond the level paid to equivalent intact families.

9.4 There should be an extension on the moratorium on taking reasonable maintenance action for FTB purposes from 28 days to 13 weeks, in order to give separated parents more time to negotiate a parenting plan. Child support should continue to commence from the date an application is made to the Child Support Agency.

Change of assessment

Recommendation 10

10.1 Change of assessment applications should only be able to be made in relation to the immediately preceding and current child support periods, and future child support periods, unless the court gives leave.

10.2 The court may grant leave to the parent to make an application for change of assessment in accordance with the procedures of Part 6A of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 in relation to child support periods up to seven years prior to the current child support period.

10.3 In considering whether to grant leave, the court should have regard to:

1. the reason for the delay in bringing a change of assessment application;
2. the responsibility for that delay;
3. the hardship to the applicant if leave is refused; and
4. the hardship to the respondent if leave is granted.

10.4 If the court grants leave to the parent to make the application, it may proceed to hear the matter itself on the application of either parent.

 

Recommendation 11

Section 116 of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 should be simplified to provide that a court shall have jurisdiction to determine a child support application whenever the application is brought in conjunction with proceedings under the Family Law Act 1975 (without needing to be satisfied that the child support application should be heard ‘at the same time’ as the other proceedings), and that the court does not cease to have jurisdiction only because the other matters are resolved before the child support application is heard.

Recommendation 12

12.1 The current change of assessment ground in s.117 of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 based upon the high costs of contact should be replaced with a more limited ground in the light of the proposed recognition of the costs of regular contact in the formula. The ground should be that the capacity of either parent to provide financial support for the child is significantly reduced because of high travel costs borne by that parent in enabling him or her or the other parent to have contact with that child or any other child of the parent.

12.2 This ground should be available to a parent who is not currently exercising contact because he or she cannot afford to do so, and hence has not been able to incur the expenditure prior to making the application.

12.3 A change of assessment on this ground should be reversible upon application by the payee if the payer does not in fact exercise the expected level of contact, despite a reduction in his or her child support obligations.

Recommendation 13

13.1 The current ground for exclusion of an ‘additional amount’ of income (such as overtime or a second job) for a new child from the child support assessment should be expanded to allow payers and payees to apply for a change of assessment if the child support assessment is unfair, unjust or inequitable because they earn an ‘additional amount’ of income to assist them with re-establishment costs following separation, with a limit of up to five years from separation.

13.2 The ground is established when the parent can show that the parents lived in one household prior to separation, and that the parent commenced earning the additional amount after the separation.

13.3 If it has been established that, in the first five years since separation, the parent earned the additional amount to meet re-establishment costs, and if during that time the parent has a child in a new family, the additional income can be claimed as specifically for the benefit of the resident child, beyond the first five years.

13.4 The parent should be required to establish only that a major reason for their change in work arrangements resulting in the ‘additional amount’ was re-establishment costs or the support of a dependent child, in order to make out this ground.

Step-children

Recommendation 14

14.1 It should be a new ground for change of assessment that the parent has a responsibility, although not a legal duty, to support a step-child.

14.2 The ground to support a step-child is not taken to exist unless:
 

1. the parent has lived continuously for a period of not less than two years in a marriage or de facto relationship with the parent of the step-child;
2. neither parent of the step-child is able to support the step-child due to:
   1. death,
   2. ill health,
   3. caring responsibilities for a child aged under five, or
   4. caring responsibilities for a child aged over five with disabilities requiring additional assistance and care from the step-child’s parent;
3. the needs of the step-child for assistance can be established, taking into account any income- tested benefit, allowance or payment being paid for the benefit of that step-child.

Capacity to earn

Recommendation 15

15.1 A parent’s income for child support assessment purposes should only be able to be increased because he or she has a higher capacity to earn than he or she is currently exercising if the following conditions are satisfied:

1. the parent:
   1. is unwilling to work when ample opportunity to do so exists or
   2. has reduced his or her employment below the level of normal full-time work for the occupation or industry in which he or she is employed;
2. the parent’s decisions in relation to employment are not justified on the basis of:
   1. caring responsibilities or
   2. the parent’s state of health;
3. on the balance of probabilities, a major purpose for the parent’s decisions in relation to employment was to affect the child support assessment.

15.2 Where the Child Support Agency declines to make an administrative determination in a capacity to earn case because the complexity of the issues makes it more appropriate for the matter to be dealt with by a court, the Agency should exercise its statutory right to intervene in the case in order to lead evidence to assist the court in reaching its decision.

Recommendation 16

Section 117 of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989, which provides the legislative basis for changes of assessment, should be redrafted to:

1. take account of the new formula for child support proposed by the Taskforce;
2. take account of developments in the case law since 1989;
3. reflect the simplification adopted by the Child Support Agency in its ten reasons for change of assessment;
4. reduce the number of different categories, where reasons for a change of assessment could be combined and expressed at a higher level of generality; and
5. make clearer the different considerations that decision-makers must take into account.

Child Support Agreements

Recommendation 17

17.1 Agreements between the parents concerning child support should have effect on the condition that entitlement of the payee to FTB A will be assessed on the basis of the amount of child support that would be transferred if the agreement had not been made.

17.2 The Child Support Registrar should have a discretion to advise a parent to obtain legal advice about the agreement if the Registrar considers that the agreement provides for a level of child support that in all the circumstances, and taking account of the current financial circumstances of the payer and payee, is not proper or adequate. The Registrar may delay the registration of the agreement until the parent confirms in writing either that he or she has sought legal advice or that he or she wishes to have the agreement registered without seeking legal advice.

17.3 Parents should be able to make binding financial agreements under the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989, registrable with the Child Support Agency, under the same conditions and with the same effect as binding financial agreements under the Family Law Act 1975.

17.4 Child support agreements made where one or both parents do not have independent legal advice should:

1. Be terminable by either party on one month’s notice at any time after the first three years of the agreement.
2. Be able to be set aside by the court on the following grounds:
   1. fraud or non-disclosure
   2. undue influence, duress, unconscionable conduct or other behaviour in the making of the agreement that would make it unjust to maintain it
   3. that there has been a significant change of circumstances for the payee, the payer or the child that would make it unjust to maintain the agreement
   4. that the agreement provides for a level of child support that in all the circumstances, and taking account of the current financial circumstances of the payer and payee, is not proper or adequate.

Lump sum child support

Recommendation 18

18.1 Parents should be able to make agreements for lump sum child support payments only by means of a binding financial agreement or by consent orders if the payment of lump sum child support exceeds the total of the annual assessment of child support and is to be credited against payments for future child support years.

18.2 Agreements or orders for lump sum child support should have effect on the condition that entitlement of the payee to FTB A shall be assessed on the basis of the amount of child support that would be transferred if the agreement or order had not been made.

18.3 Section 128 of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989, permitting a carer parent in some circumstances to seek an assessment of child support for up to 75 per cent of the then formula liability, despite an agreement or order to the contrary, should be repealed.

18.4 Default rules for the treatment of lump sum child support payments that exceed the total of the annual assessment of child support and are to be credited against payments for future child support years should be included in the child support legislation and these default rules should apply in the absence of provisions of an agreement or court order to the contrary.

18.5 The default rules shall be as follows:

1. the parents should continue to have an annual assessment of periodic child support made based upon their then current income and circumstances;
2. the lump sum should be treated as providing the payer with a credit balance, to be credited against the periodic child support assessment as each annual assessment is made;
3. one hundred per cent of the annual assessed rate of child support should be credited annually from the balance of the lump sum, until the balance is exhausted;
4. the balance in the fund should be increased annually upon the anniversary of the creation of the fund, by a rate that is expressed in Regulations, to produce a value commensurate with the after-tax value if the money had been invested;
5. if there is a balance remaining to the payer after the child support liability has ended, then there should be no obligation to repay this amount unless the balance is registered as a statutory charge.

18.6 The balance of a lump sum child support payment should create a statutory charge that is registrable under the property legislation of the States and Territories.

18.7 Section 60 of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (concerning ‘income amount orders’) should be amended to allow payers to be able to provide estimates of their income in relation to a child support period when their obligations for that period are affected by an agreement for lump sum child support.
 

18.8 Section 71A and 71B of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 should be amended to allow in-kind payments to be credited by consent against less than 100 per cent of the liability in the child support period.

Role of Family Relationship Centres

Recommendation 19

19.1 The Family Relationship Centres should encourage voluntary agreements between parents on in-kind payments.

19.2 Information sessions and seminars conducted under the auspices of the Family Relationship Centres should provide information on the Child Support Scheme and draw attention to the flexibility provided in the Scheme through the change of assessment process, as well as the possibilities for private agreements and in-kind payments.

19.3 Family Relationship Centres and other organisations providing counselling and mediation services to parents who are negotiating parenting arrangements after separation should encourage parents to discuss child support issues including childcare costs and the future education of the children, especially where a private school education has been contemplated.

19.4 Planning for Family Relationship Centres should involve close collaboration with the Child Support Agency and Centrelink, particularly on ways of serving the needs of regional and rural Australia.

19.5 Organisations selected to run Family Relationship Centres should be encouraged to invite the Child Support Agency, Centrelink, Legal Aid and community legal centres to conduct regular advice and information sessions on the premises of the Centre.

19.6 The Child Support Agency should have a discretion to encourage parties to change of assessment applications to negotiate the issues through a Family Relationship Centre or other mediation or counselling organisation, prior to determining the application.

Designated payments

Recommendation 20

20.1 The limit on Prescribed Non-Agency Payments should be raised from 25 per cent to 30 per cent.

20.2 Prescribed Non-Agency Payments should not apply to parents whose child support liability reflects regular contact or shared care.

20.3 Section 71D of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 should be clarified so that the Registrar’s discretion not to credit a Non-Agency Payment or to reduce the level of credit should apply in circumstances where the payee would be left without sufficient funds to meet the reasonable needs of the child if the Non-Agency Payments were credited, or credited in the normal manner.

Interaction with other income support payments

Recommendation 21

21.1 The Government should consider the deduction of child support payments from assessable income for the purpose of the assessment of the income support payment rate (in line with deductible child support maintenance for FTB adjusted taxable income).

21.2 The Government should consider treating the eligibility for income support of each parent in a shared care arrangement (35 per cent to 65 per cent of nights each) more equally.

Reconciliation

Recommendation 22

22.1 Where parents reconcile, their child support assessment should be suspended during the reconciliation, such that no debt accrues for this period.

22.2 If the reconciliation continues beyond six months, the assessment should be terminated.

External review

Recommendation 23

The Government should consider the introduction of an external mechanism for reviewing all administrative decisions of the Child Support Agency, either by establishing a new tribunal or by conferring jurisdiction on an existing tribunal.

Legislation

Recommendation 24

The Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 and the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 should be replaced with new legislation written, as far as possible, in plain legal language.

Transition

Recommendation 25

The Government should recognise that full implementation of these recommendations will affect a range of existing child support clients, and should comprehensively consider the management of transitional issues, including the resources that the Child Support Agency will need to ensure an effective transition to the new Scheme.

Recommendation 26

26.1 There should be a public education campaign to explain the changes to existing clients of the Agency, and adequate resources to deal with inquiries about the new arrangements.

26.2 A public education campaign about changes to the Scheme should include information about the flexibility of the Child Support Scheme, especially in relation to the grounds for changes of assessment.

The courts and the costs of children and young adults

Recommendation 27

The Federal Magistrates Court and the Family Court of Australia should utilise the costs of children research of the Taskforce as the basis for decision-making on child support issues, and should have regard to the impact of government benefits in working out the costs of children.

Recommendation 28

28.1 The Federal Magistrates Court and the Family Court of Australia should have regard to the Taskforce research on the costs of raising adolescent children, and any applicable government benefits, in working out child support liabilities in respect of young people over the age of 18.

28.2 The Government should consider the development of a formula or guidelines for the assessment of maintenance for young people over the age of 18 in circumstances where maintenance may be ordered under s.66L of the Family Law Act 1975.

Research and monitoring

Recommendation 29

29.1 The Department of Family and Community Services should undertake or commission periodic updates to research on:

1. the costs of children;
2. the circumstances of payers and payees;
3. the interaction of the Scheme with related policy on tax, income support, family payments and family law;
4. the impact of the Child Support Scheme (in combination with effective marginal tax rates) on workforce participation;
5. compliance amongst CSA collect and private collect payers; and
6. community perceptions of the fairness and effectiveness of the Scheme, and of the way it is administered.

29.2 The Department of Family and Community Services should take such steps as are necessary to ensure that it has a continuing expertise in child support policy and is capable of providing advice to Government on the operation of the Scheme independently of the data provided by the Child Support Agency.

29.3 The Department of Family and Community Services should consider the establishment of an advisory body to provide advice on issues of child support policy and on the impact of the Scheme. Such a body should comprise recognised experts in all relevant fields, including family law, family relationships counselling, child development, social and economic research, and taxation.

29.4 The Department of Family and Community Services in collaboration with the Australian Institute of Family Studies should promote research on and discussion of child support policy by such means as the provision of research funding, the organisation of conferences, and the promotion of dialogue with child support experts from other countries.

Currency of the Scheme

Recommendation 30

The currency of the Scheme should be monitored, with reference to significant changes to child-related payments, and in the light of ongoing research on child support issues.

Table A: Costs of children 

1. Calculated by adding the two parents’ Child Support Incomes, that is, adding each parent’s adjusted taxable income minus their self-support amount of $16 883 (1/3 of MTAWE)
2. 0.5 times MTAWE
3. MTAWE
4. 1.5 times MTAWE
5. 2 times MTAWE
6. 2.5 times MTAWE. Costs of children do not increase above this cap. Note that this equates to a cap at a combined adjusted taxable income of $160 386.

Table B: Shared care 

The proportion of the costs of the child incurred by the parent with the fewer number of nights of care is established by reference to this table. The other parent incurs the remaining proportion of the costs of the child.