Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is no state that will award alimony to someone who makes more than their spouse, regardless of their "hit on the earning potential", unless the lower earner maliciously quit their job to avoid alimony.
You just touched on another ridiculous aspect of alimony: people always try to use as justification for alimony that someone stayed home to care for their children, and thus lost some kind of earning potential. If this is the justification, what about the situation where someone was making $100K, quit to stay home with kids, then took a job for $75K when they went back to work, all while the other spouse earned $20,000 a year as a musician? Should the musician be forced to pay alimony? Should the spouse earning $75K be forced to pay alimony? Why or why not?
The bottom line is that there is massive gender bias in alimony awards. Ask *any* divorce lawyer in an alimony state whether a situation where the wife makes $100K and the husband makes $30K will result in alimony, then reverse the genders. There is no lawyer in any court in any state who would assert that alimony awards are gender-blind. The gender *always* matters.
In your quest to prove a point, you've gone to extremes that are not only unrealistic, but not applicable. It's not the standard of living (ie, how fancy a lifestyle) that's in question. It's the ability to support oneself in the most basic way of putting food on the table, paying rent, and keeping the lights on. No one can say that someone who makes $75K is incapable of doing that.
In your quest to prove a point, you've gone to extremes that are not only unrealistic, but not applicable. It's not the standard of living (ie, how fancy a lifestyle) that's in question. It's the ability to support oneself in the most basic way of putting food on the table, paying rent, and keeping the lights on. No one can say that someone who makes $75K is incapable of doing that.
You just proved my point. In Colorado, whether you can support yourself doesn't mean a thing. Alimony is awarded only on the basis of income differential. I know a guy paying $36,000 a year (he makes about $130K) to his ex who makes $40K on her own, and who got over $600,000 in assets in the divorce. One of the factors the judge uses to award alimony, and in many cases the MOST important, is "the standard of living to which the alimony recipient has become accustomed". It is right in the statutes.
If the new bill being debated, HB 13-1058 passes, it will be even worse.
Under the new bill, alimony is automatic and by formula. In a marriage where one spouse makes $150,000 and the other makes $75,000, the lower earner will be awarded $22,500 a year in alimony. If the marriage is for over 20 years, the alimony will be FOR LIFE. No negotiation. Strictly by formula.
People always extrapolate the situation in their state to other states. Alimony varies widely from state to state.
The wife who lives in the house, regardless of if she works. You know just like the man is supposed to fix things around the house and take care of the lawn and do "man stuff".
I just got home from work...nothing needs fixing and we don't have a lawn. So dh gets to sit on his a@@ and I need to get in the kitchen? Yeah right.
Really? $280 a MONTH? That's all? What kind of kids are involved here? Dogs? Because human kids cost more than that unless you live in the sticks of Appalachia, home-school, and your kid doesn't partake of any activities, get cavities, need braces, get sick, get injured, need to go anywhere, bathe, sleep in a bed, grow and therefore require new clothes and shoes, or actually eat anything other than ramen, McDonald's, and Ho-Hos.
$280 a month. Astounding. I think my sister may have gotten that from her ex back in the 80s, and even then, she took him to court. The guy made $80K a year in 1984 and was pleading poverty, while she had to move back home with the family because her minimum-wage job in a cosmetics factory wasn't enough to pay the rent. Yes, they did marry young, and she did forgo her education and plans to be a nurse to raise his kids, yet she got no alimony. She only wanted him to support his children, not her. Of course, the court didn't see him in a very good light, and he had to increase his payments, but even so, it was a battle until his own parents stepped in and leaned on him to do right by his kids.
$280 a month. Wow.
Thats what the internet says. This is an average. It is about what my son pays for one, with an income of about $30,000. Approx. 30% of his income. Of course he is expected to pay that if his income drops by half.
There is no state that will award alimony to someone who makes more than their spouse, regardless of their "hit on the earning potential", unless the lower earner maliciously quit their job to avoid alimony.
You just touched on another ridiculous aspect of alimony: people always try to use as justification for alimony that someone stayed home to care for their children, and thus lost some kind of earning potential. If this is the justification, what about the situation where someone was making $100K, quit to stay home with kids, then took a job for $75K when they went back to work, all while the other spouse earned $20,000 a year as a musician? Should the musician be forced to pay alimony? Should the spouse earning $75K be forced to pay alimony? Why or why not?
The bottom line is that there is massive gender bias in alimony awards. Ask *any* divorce lawyer in an alimony state whether a situation where the wife makes $100K and the husband makes $30K will result in alimony, then reverse the genders. There is no lawyer in any court in any state who would assert that alimony awards are gender-blind. The gender *always* matters.
I could have sworn you said in your state one spouse could get alimony just because their earnings were lower than their spouse. I guess I need to re read it.
I cant say about your state but in mine that is not true tha alimony is awarded if the ex wife is working.
I could have sworn you said in your state one spouse could get alimony just because their earnings were lower than their spouse. I guess I need to re read it.
I cant say about your state but in mine that is not true tha alimony is awarded if the ex wife is working.
A working spouse WILL be awarded alimony. In Colorado, currently, if one spouse makes less than another, alimony *can* be awarded regardless of any other factors, and often is...but usually when the recipient is female.
If the currently being debated passes, HB 13-1058, the alimony will be by formula, period. Many more women will end up paying alimony if the bill passes, because the judge will not be able to fudge the other factors to prevent a man from receiving alimony.
I predict that within two years of this bill passing (if it does) there will be a huge controversy over the number of women being forced to pay alimony in Colorado. You will see hard working women paying $40,000 a year to guys sitting around playing video games. That will raise some eyebrows.
A working spouse WILL be awarded alimony. In Colorado, currently, if one spouse makes less than another, alimony *can* be awarded regardless of any other factors, and often is...but usually when the recipient is female.
If the currently being debated passes, HB 13-1058, the alimony will be by formula, period. Many more women will end up paying alimony if the bill passes, because the judge will not be able to fudge the other factors to prevent a man from receiving alimony.
I predict that within two years of this bill passing (if it does) there will be a huge controversy over the number of women being forced to pay alimony in Colorado. You will see hard working women paying $40,000 a year to guys sitting around playing video games. That will raise some eyebrows.
For as progressive as Colorado supposedly is, it's not a community property state, most of which are in the West. In the other (non community property) states, the pendulum in a divorce settlement can swing unpredictably. Regardless, in all states, a person should be able to walk away with what they brought in, if not commingled. In many cases, things are commingled. Pre-nup, baby.
One of the factors the judge uses to award alimony, and in many cases the MOST important, is "the standard of living to which the alimony recipient has become accustomed". It is right in the statutes.
One of the most disgusting things in the divorce conundrum. Essentially, it legislates rewarding someone for marrying well and which they may not have contributed to (i.e. waiting on the sidelines while he is in med school is the typical example). I believe in "reasonable and ordinary person" rule of thumb. If you divorce a rich man, you lose your entitlement to that lifestyle, unless HE wants to "subsidize" you. I'm thinking nice garden apartment in Littleton or Highlands Ranch instead.
For as progressive as Colorado supposedly is, it's not a community property state, most of which are in the West. In the other (non community property) states, the pendulum in a divorce settlement can swing unpredictably. Regardless, in all states, a person should be able to walk away with what they brought in, if not commingled. In many cases, things are commingled. Pre-nup, baby.
Here is a point I try to get everyone to understand: If you are married, you have a pre-nup. Either you drew one up and signed it with your partner, or you are just letting the state you live in shove one down your throat. The one the state "provides" you in Colorado is WAY, WAY worse than ANYTHING you would actually agree to sign.
Weigh in on whether you would actually sign a pre-nup that says this:
1) Regardless of what you brought to the marriage or what you contributed to the marriage, any split of property at the end of the marriage will be at the whim of an overworked judge, and will not be subject to review or appeal. (This is what is called "equitable distribution".)
2) There can be no fault assigned to either party whatsoever. Period. (All divorce in Colorado is no fault and it is specifically prohibited by statute for the judge to consider marital conduct in any way. There have been several cases of men being forced to pay alimony to their ex-wives who killed their kids!)
3) You can be ordered to pay up to 40% of your gross income in alimony.
4) You can be ordered to pay alimony for life.
5) If you are ordered to pay alimony, you will also be ordered to pay for a life insurance policy on yourself, payable to your ex, regardless of the cost to you. (If you are unhealthy or aged, this can be $1000's per month. Too bad for you.)
6) Even though all retirement assets are split "equitably" at the time of divorce, you can be ordered use your share of the retirement, including social security payments, disability payments and the like, to pay alimony until you die, even if you live to be 100. (This is called "double-dipping".)
7) You can be ordered to pay 100% of your spouse's legal bill for the divorce, even if they are the one filing for divorce. Even if you have no cash and have to represent yourself, you can still be forced to pay your spouse's legal fees.
8) Failure to pay alimony for even one month, for any reason, can result in a contempt of court charge. Contempt is a special corner of the law where you can be jailed without a trial, without a court appointed lawyer, for as long as the judge wants. (This is an incredible fact. Everyone reading this should look this up and understand this.)
9) The length of the marriage has a direct impact on the length and amount of alimony, but the length of the marriage is calculated from the day the marriage license is signed, to the day of the final court hearing. Your spouse may be able to get more alimony by dragging out legal proceedings for years. (And you will pay their lawyer, see 7 above.)
10) The spouse receiving alimony has no obligations to fulfill whatsoever to continue receiving the payments. There is no requirement to get a job, become self supporting, or do anything other than not sign a marriage license with someone else. They can live with whomever they want, in whatever kind of relationship they want, with no fear of losing the alimony payments. (Colorado does not allow termination of alimony for any reason other than end of the term, death, or remarriage. Period. You can shack with anyone you want, in any manner you want, and alimony still flows.)
OK everyone, are you ready to sign this pre-nup?
Guess what? If you live in Colorado, and are married, YOU HAVE SIGNED THIS PRE-NUP! These are the alimony laws in Colorado.
My youngest son recently got divorced. He and his ex have joint custody. My son has my granddaughter during the week in even months and on the weekends in odd months. There are exceptions for holidays and birthdays. I don't know the exact details. He said that his ex gets roughly five more days. He does pay $380 in child support.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
