Rieben and Rieben (Child support)

This matter concerned an application by the father for a change of assessment of child support. The dispute centred on the calculation of the father's adjusted taxable income and whether the resulting child support liability was unjust and inequitable. The decision was made by Senior Member K Dordevic of the Tribunal.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were twofold: first, whether the father's adjusted taxable income had been correctly calculated under the *Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988* (the Act), and second, whether the assessed child support liability resulted in an unjust and inequitable determination of financial support, considering the father's income, property, and financial resources.

The Tribunal reasoned that the Act clearly defines a parent's child support income by reference to their adjusted taxable income, which includes specific components such as taxable income, reportable fringe benefits, target foreign income, total net investment loss, tax-free pensions or benefits, and reportable superannuation contributions. The Tribunal found that the father's adjusted taxable income for 2023 was correctly calculated at $94,666, including reportable superannuation and interest. Applying the relevant formula, this resulted in a child support liability of $16,696 per annum. The Tribunal then considered the father's claim of hardship, noting his assertion that the child support payments prevented him from purchasing a home and caused him financial distress. However, after reviewing his financial circumstances, including his stated expenses which appeared to exceed his income, and noting that some of these expenses were shared with his partner and related to her children, the Tribunal determined that the father had approximately $70 remaining each week after meeting his necessary expenses and child support obligations. The Tribunal concluded that even if reportable superannuation contributions and interest were excluded from his adjusted taxable income, the reduction in child support would be minimal ($29.61 per week), and this would not render the assessment unjust or inequitable.

Consequently, the Tribunal was not persuaded that there were grounds for departing from the administrative assessment. The father's application was refused, and the decision under review was affirmed.