Navigating Arkansas’s New Child Support Guidelines, Part 2: Obtaining or Opposing Modification

Our previous post on this topic discussed the operation of the New Guidelines. Now, we’ll look at some bases for modifying existing child support orders.

We closed our previous post by comparing support obligations under the New Guidelines where the Payor made more than the Payee vs. where the Payor and Payee make the same amount. As a refresher, the presumed child support obligation of the sample Payor making $2,000/month while the Payee made $1,000/month was $412.67, and when both made $2,000/month that amount dropped to $356. However, for many parents currently paying child support, the more important comparison is between a support order under the Old Guidelines and what an order under the New Guidelines would be.

All cases present their own facts. But let’s assume a child support order was entered in 2017. Assuming that the Payor’s income is roughly the same (and in many cases, it will be at least a bit higher now) as it was when the child support amount was set, many noncustodial parents are likely to pay more under the New Guidelines. Unfortunately, on the other hand, due to the coronavirus and its effect on the economy, many noncustodial parents make less money than they used to and will actually pay less under a new order. In either event, many parents will likely want to modify existing child support orders in the coming months.

So, what determines whether a court may enter a new order with a new amount?

Modifying a Child Support Order

Parents either seeking or resisting modification will need to keep in mind that a modification requires a material change in circumstances since the entry of the order that a party wants modified. For most cases, the implementation of the New Guidelines will qualify. Per the New Guidelines:

Pursuant to Act 904 of 2019, codified at Arkansas Code Annotated § 9-14-107(c)(2), “an inconsistency between the existing child-support award and the amount of child support that results from application of the Family Support Chart shall constitute a material change of circumstances sufficient to petition the court for modification of child support according to the Family Support Chart after appropriate deductions unless:

a. The inconsistency does not meet a reasonable quantitative standard established by the State of Arkansas in accordance with subsection (a) of this section;

b. The inconsistency is due to the fact that the amount of the current child support award resulted from a rebuttal of the guideline amount and there has not been a change of circumstances that resulted in the rebuttal of the guidelines amount; or

c. The inconsistency is due solely to a promulgation to a revision of the Family Support Chart.

New Guidelines at 4 (footnote omitted).

Moreover, as previous Arkansas law in this area appears to remain in effect, judges in Arkansas child support cases have a host of factors they can consider in deciding whether there has been a material change in circumstances. For instance, “remarriage of the parties, a minor reaching majority, change in the income and financial conditions of the parties, relocation, change in custody, debts of the parties, financial conditions of the parties and families, ability to meet current and future obligations, and the child-support chart” are all factors that assist in making this determination. Morgan v. Morgan, 2018 Ark. App. 316, at 9 (2018) (citing Hall v. Hall, 2013 Ark. 330).

Other factors include “the passage of time” and “the children’s ages”. Johnson v. Young, 2017 Ark. App. 132, at 7 (2017) (citations omitted). This is not an exhaustive list, and circumstances that do not appear to fall neatly within these factors may also qualify. Reynolds v. Reynolds, 299 Ark. 200, 202 (1989) (“There is no hard and fast rule concerning the specific nature of the changed circumstances.”).

Accordingly, parents who want a new Arkansas child support order entered will need to make sure they can demonstrate a material change in circumstances. And parents who would prefer that the obligation previously set in their case remains in place will need to show that no material change justifying reopening the issue has occurred.

The impact of the New Guidelines, especially in combination with recent economic issues, will be interesting to see develop, and consulting with an Arkansas Family Law Attorney can be crucial to navigating the way forward in these cases.