# Jury of TAM: Right to audit ex-spouse?



## Scannerguard

Okay, I was going to kind of put this up for a vote to see what you think.

I am divorced for 8 months. I am partially self-employed and a per diem employee for a hospital. I pay child support. I worked a lot of hours last year but honestly, becuase of some outlay at my business, I actually showed less money.

That being said, I decided to just keep my child support where it is becuase I will probably make more this year.

My ex-wife keeps asking to see my tax return. I am pretty straight and narrow when it comes to filing my tax return. That is, I don't play any funny games but I do take deductions when they are available to me. I am a little sloppy in record keeping but that's my biggest crime. For the year 2010, I had the choice of writing off an expensive software purchase ala Obamacare and I took it (about $7600). So, I actually showed less money to repeat myself.

Her reasoning for entitlement to this are as follows, and I'll try to be as unbiased as possible:

A. She feels if you wait 3 years, she is in the dark for 3 years and I could be raking it in and then the kids are being "duped" out of money that is rightfully theirs.

B. During mediation, which actually kind of failed in the end, I did say a few times that in good faith, I would produce tax returns if she was worried I was hiding money. Now. . .when the mediator generated a Memorandum of Understanding, this was never put in there. A lot of things are said over the 4-5 hours of mediation we engaged in. But I'll admit, I *did *say that I don't mind fostering an atmosphere of openness.

She is saying I am going back on my word and a liar for this.

Mediation broke down when I kinda realized I was giving the store away especially with my work time. It was actually a waste of time and I think our mediator was marginal.

My attorney's legal secretary didn't even ask my attorney when I called the office. . .she said there's nothing in the Judgment obligating me to. and didn't think it warranted telling my attorney and us having a 10 minute phone consult.

She now wrote me an email that if I am going to make her go to all of the trouble of filing a motion, she's going to ask for other things. What those other things are, I have no idea (changed parenting time?). She's being vague and threatening.

So (and thanks for listening thusfar). . .my question is. . .

Should I just placate her?

The main reason I am uncomfortable is I feel it sets precedent. . .that she feels entitled to "audit me on demand", which I don't think *IS *a right of an ex-wife. I also think it's "sensitive" information and she could and would blab around town what I make. Without a gag clause, I am also uncomfortable.

I think finances should be private, confidential and in the case of my business, proprietary.

Finally, I am just kinda sad. . .no "Howya doing? Hope you are well". . .it's a typical ex-wife's view that you aren't a father that's struggling to find his way, sad at times of the lost life, that you didn't have 15 years together. . .you are just a wallet and a babysitter for when I need a break - let me audit you when I ask.

I'll admit I am resentful and that's fuel behind my tight fistedness.

That being said, again, I am not opposed to placating her. If it avoids all the trouble and expense of court. . .

What's the jury say?

I'm interested in the raging feminists as well as the angry chauvinists


----------



## magnoliagal

My vote is unless it's court mandated somewhere I'd say it's none of her business.


----------



## golfergirl

Scannerguard said:


> Okay, I was going to kind of put this up for a vote to see what you think.
> 
> I am divorced for 8 months. I am partially self-employed and a per diem employee for a hospital. I pay child support. I worked a lot of hours last year but honestly, becuase of some outlay at my business, I actually showed less money.
> 
> That being said, I decided to just keep my child support where it is becuase I will probably make more this year.
> 
> My ex-wife keeps asking to see my tax return. I am pretty straight and narrow when it comes to filing my tax return. That is, I don't play any funny games but I do take deductions when they are available to me. I am a little sloppy in record keeping but that's my biggest crime. For the year 2010, I had the choice of writing off an expensive software purchase ala Obamacare and I took it (about $7600). So, I actually showed less money to repeat myself.
> 
> Her reasoning for entitlement to this are as follows, and I'll try to be as unbiased as possible:
> 
> A. She feels if you wait 3 years, she is in the dark for 3 years and I could be raking it in and then the kids are being "duped" out of money that is rightfully theirs.
> 
> B. During mediation, which actually kind of failed in the end, I did say a few times that in good faith, I would produce tax returns if she was worried I was hiding money. Now. . .when the mediator generated a Memorandum of Understanding, this was never put in there. A lot of things are said over the 4-5 hours of mediation we engaged in. But I'll admit, I *did *say that I don't mind fostering an atmosphere of openness.
> 
> She is saying I am going back on my word and a liar for this.
> 
> Mediation broke down when I kinda realized I was giving the store away especially with my work time. It was actually a waste of time and I think our mediator was marginal.
> 
> My attorney's legal secretary didn't even ask my attorney when I called the office. . .she said there's nothing in the Judgment obligating me to. and didn't think it warranted telling my attorney and us having a 10 minute phone consult.
> 
> She now wrote me an email that if I am going to make her go to all of the trouble of filing a motion, she's going to ask for other things. What those other things are, I have no idea (changed parenting time?). She's being vague and threatening.
> 
> So (and thanks for listening thusfar). . .my question is. . .
> 
> Should I just placate her?
> 
> The main reason I am uncomfortable is I feel it sets precedent. . .that she feels entitled to "audit me on demand", which I don't think *IS *a right of an ex-wife. I also think it's "sensitive" information and she could and would blab around town what I make. Without a gag clause, I am also uncomfortable.
> 
> I think finances should be private, confidential and in the case of my business, proprietary.
> 
> Finally, I am just kinda sad. . .no "Howya doing? Hope you are well". . .it's a typical ex-wife's view that you aren't a father that's struggling to find his way, sad at times of the lost life, that you didn't have 15 years together. . .you are just a wallet and a babysitter for when I need a break - let me audit you when I ask.
> 
> I'll admit I am resentful and that's fuel behind my tight fistedness.
> 
> That being said, again, I am not opposed to placating her. If it avoids all the trouble and expense of court. . .
> 
> What's the jury say?
> 
> I'm interested in the raging feminists as well as the angry chauvinists


Where I live (Canada), you are obligated to turn it over and she is too. If that is the case where you are, save yourself the expense and hassle and just do it. It's not written in our agreement just no option. 
Move where I am, my ex voluntarily quit his job and got his child support reduced to 197 a month from 800. Hey if he was honestly down on his luck, we all work together, but he just came back from 7 day Mexico cruise with wife and her 5 children and is planning Vegas holiday in few months.
I've done things just out of principle and divorce is so full of fights etc., I've just fought the big battles now. Don't have the energy!
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Runs like Dog

I would throw obstacles in her way because even though judges are pretty forgiving she still needs some plausible reason to dig this up. And even if she wins and you give her the info what's to stop her from simply demanding more money anyway? I would also prepare a counter motion to have her tax information examined as well. This might help to void her argument


----------



## ClipClop

You said you would do it.

Plus, child support is always renegotiable so she is going to see the numbers one way or another.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## golfergirl

Runs like Dog said:


> I would throw obstacles in her way because even though judges are pretty forgiving she still needs some plausible reason to dig this up. And even if she wins and you give her the info what's to stop her from simply demanding more money anyway? I would also prepare a counter motion to have her tax information examined as well. This might help to void her argument


I do agree I'll show mine if you show yours does apply! It bothers me too for sure, but I don't have option. It's every year here and not even requested. Do taxes - print 2 copies - efile, one hard copy me - other to ex.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Mom6547

Scannerguard said:


> She is saying I am going back on my word and a liar for this.


She is your EX. What do you care what she says?

AFIC, anything you say during mediation is up in the air until the final agreement is done. You owe her NOTHING in this regard.



> Mediation broke down when I kinda realized I was giving the store away especially with my work time. It was actually a waste of time and I think our mediator was marginal.
> 
> My attorney's legal secretary didn't even ask my attorney when I called the office. . .she said there's nothing in the Judgment obligating me to. and didn't think it warranted telling my attorney and us having a 10 minute phone consult.
> 
> She now wrote me an email that if I am going to make her go to all of the trouble of filing a motion, she's going to ask for other things. What those other things are, I have no idea (changed parenting time?). She's being vague and threatening.


She is taking a big risk here. 



> So (and thanks for listening thusfar). . .my question is. . .
> 
> Should I just placate her?


No. Dangerous precedent. Any time she wants a new car, feels blue, she can whine at you and you say OK? Follow what your agreement says. Follow the law. 

My lawyer advises against. Period. Even though that may be a stretch, your lawyer advises you don't HAVE to so roll with it.



> The main reason I am uncomfortable is I feel it sets precedent. . .that she feels entitled to "audit me on demand", which I don't think *IS *a right of an ex-wife. I also think it's "sensitive" information and she could and would blab around town what I make. Without a gag clause, I am also uncomfortable.


Well I, personally, would not care if the whole world knew how much I made. But it IS dangerous precedent. It does not matter WHY you don't want to share it. You don't. That's it.



> I think finances should be private, confidential and in the case of my business, proprietary.
> 
> Finally, I am just kinda sad. . .no "Howya doing? Hope you are well". . .it's a typical ex-wife's view that you aren't a father that's struggling to find his way, sad at times of the lost life, that you didn't have 15 years together. . .you are just a wallet and a babysitter for when I need a break - let me audit you when I ask.


She is your EX. Seems she is your EX for a reason. The 15 years together, someday you will be able to let that go.



> I'll admit I am resentful and that's fuel behind my tight fistedness.
> 
> That being said, again, I am not opposed to placating her. If it avoids all the trouble and expense of court. . .
> 
> What's the jury say?
> 
> I'm interested in the raging feminists as well as the angry chauvinists


This raging feminist says, she has a court order. Let her live with it. Sounds like the court is more than likely to think she is wasting their time and give her a solid slap.


----------



## WhereAmI

Being in the dark about YOUR finances is part of the divorce. The court has it set for every three years for a reason, whatever that may be. She's trying to threaten you to achieve her goal. If you give in you're asking her to repeat this behavior.


----------



## Scannerguard

Thank you. . .so so far we have a 3:4 vote of turning it over/not turning it over.

Here's the thing, I kinda think the "3 year rule" makes sense.

Let's say I go into divorce with a 50K salary and it's based off of that.

The next year, I make 40K. . .but the following year I make 60K. . .then in year 3 I make 80K.

Well, then at year 3, you take the averages (I would hope) and it averages out to 60K (I don't know though, maybe they just take the last year).

I think that's fair because what if the next year I make 80K, I make 50K?

I mean, my income is up and down month to month and year to year. It is what it is. I don't purposely have a case of "Divorcitis" and not working. My income is affected by the economy like any other business.

But okay, I don't want to plead my case too hard. . .I'll let the forum continue.


----------



## ClipClop

When your income declines you can file for an adjustment, too. It goes both ways.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Scannerguard

ClipClop:

I know. . .that is the risk that Mom speaks of she is taking. If she goes to blows on this. . .I'll probably go to court, with an hour of advice with my attorney and represent myself.

If the court sees things her ways and forces me to produce 2010's tax return, I will be filing a cross motion to reduce child support. If this actually goes to blows, I may be filing a cross motion for attorney's fees anyway becuase I feel she is being frivolous in using the court system this way.

She is really opening up Pandora's Box.  I kinda feel guilty for not just telling her but it's a card I am holding. I'm kind of afraid she'll sic a forensic accountant on me though. . .her anger knows no bounds.


----------



## Scannerguard

Another broader legal-ethical issue here. . .let's just say for theoretical sake I made 100K last year, way over what the Judgment guidelines based child support on. I didn't but roll with me here.

Is a father morally or legally obligated to share that with the spouse before the 3 year time frame expires and child support automatically adjusts?

You see, this is where I am not sure and I'll admit, it's fuzzy from the seat I sit in because I have a biased perspective.

Who says that she is the rightful fidicuiary of all monies? Because I bring home an extra $100.00 one week, I am supposed to hand $30.00 over to her because "mom knows best?"

Why can't a father have some latitude to spend it on the kids directly? Put some away for college? Go to 6 Flags?

Again, I guess I am not sure where the courts stand philosophically on this issue.


----------



## Mom6547

Scannerguard said:


> Another broader legal-ethical issue here. . .let's just say for theoretical sake I made 100K last year, way over what the Judgment guidelines based child support on. I didn't but roll with me here.
> 
> Is a father morally or legally obligated to share that with the spouse before the 3 year time frame expires and child support automatically adjusts?


Your lawyer will know the law. But the 3 year limit seems to say no.

Morally, **** no you are morally obligated to support your child YOURSELF. But you don't need to give it to HER to do.




> You see, this is where I am not sure and I'll admit, it's fuzzy from the seat I sit in because I have a biased perspective.
> 
> Who says that she is the rightful fidicuiary of all monies?


The law. That's IT.



> Because I bring home an extra $100.00 one week, I am supposed to hand $30.00 over to her because "mom knows best?"
> 
> Why can't a father have some latitude to spend it on the kids directly? Put some away for college? Go to 6 Flags?


You can and should, IMO, so long as you are right with the law, you have every ethical right to decide FOR YOURSELF how the money best meets the needs of the kids. Fun times with Dad? Perfect bonding. More fruits and veggies, great.





> Again, I guess I am not sure where the courts stand philosophically on this issue.


Who cares what their philosophy is. Your philosophy probably is better for your children anyway. All that matters is whether or not you are following the law as written.


----------



## Scannerguard

MOM,

Well, I guess you are getting into my psychology. I personally believe the law is instructive but not necessarily an absolute.

That is, the law is kind of the last resort kind of ruling on any matter and it's a good reference point but I am interested in more than just prevailing and "being right". . .I am interested in good relations with my ex-wife. . .which eludes me.

So, even if the law favored me in this regard, I am willing to go outside the law again. . . if it favored good relations.

Maybe I would agree to an arbitrator to save a lot of hassle and fighting and see what an arbitrator would rule since she seems set on her position and I am not necessarily dead-set on mine.

Sometimes I do wonder though - if that isn't my dysfunction.

SimplyAmorous talks about how opposites attract and I don't know if this is just the continual case of a reasonable person attempting to interact with an unreasonable person and I keep falling into this dysfunction with my ex-wife.

As I did in marriage. . .so it seems I do in divorce.

The more things change. . .the more things stay the same.


----------



## Jellybeans

magnoliagal said:


> My vote is unless it's court mandated somewhere I'd say it's none of her business.


THIS! If she files a motion, file a counter-motion asking to see her tax returns as well. It's calling flipping the script!

I wonder if legally you have a right to your privacy on such matters. If she does file, get a lawyer.


----------



## PBear

First off, I'm in Canada as well, so we have our own funky set of laws to deal with. Secondly, I'm separated, and still have this process to go through so my opinion may change. And finally, I still likely have a fair amount of guilt to work through with regards to being the one to pull the plug on the marriage...

Since I have no choice but to turn over my tax returns yearly, it's kind of a no-brainer. And my child support is simply table driven based on my income. So there's no sense in me trying to avoid my obligations regardless, and since I'd prefer not to get into a 4 or 5 digit back-pay situation, it's in my best interest to keep things current. I believe that if my income drops (I'm a software contractor), I'd keep my payments the same as much as possible, just to try to provide some stability for the kids. I made about 90% of the money, between my stbxw and myself. And if my income rose over the period of a year (new contract, perhaps), I'd likely keep my payments the same until the end of the tax year, but then adjust as required. Likely to my new income level, rather than the blended previous year. But my contracts are usually fixed in duration and value ($xx per hour, yy hours per week, for zz months). 

But what are you talking about with your 3 year thing? Is this something written in your agreement, something legally required, or what? If it's something you have to face eventually, you should maybe get the details now, rather than waiting to get hit with a big hammer in 2 years.

This probably didn't help much... I guess it comes down to trying to do what's right for both you AND your kids, as this money is for them. My wife hasn't been exactly reasonable in our separation, like quitting her job and not bothering to find a new one in the last 6 months. And by that, i mean applying for one job a month. If I went with what my legal requirements are, I would be paying her about half what I'm currently kicking over to her. But that would leave the kids in a very uncomfortable situation simply because their primary caregiver doesn't have money for many of the things they're used to, possibly including groceries, gas for the car, etc...

I think in your situation, I'd first get the details on that 3 year thing so you're not making any assumptions about how it will impact you. After that, I'd probably tell her that according to your signed agreement, here's your obligations, and how you're meeting them. If she decides to attempt to reopen things in court, you will follow your lawyer's advice on a counter claim against her. Making an offer (in writing, so you could prove it) of talking to an arbitrator to settle before going to court would strengthen your counter claim suit, as it demonstrates your willingness to be reasonable. But find out what your obligations are legally before doing that.

With regards to your question about whether you should be able to spend any extra money on the kids instead of handing it over to her... My initial thought is that your share of discretionary kid spending comes out of the $70 you have left (in your example). But that $30 goes to her, presumably to increase their quality of life. Unfortunately, you get no say in how that money is spent, the same as any other child support payment. 

C
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Homemaker_Numero_Uno

I don't think support should go up based on one good year.
And I'm a receiver of support.
I wouldn't question a $7500 software expense at all.
If it's allowable by law, it's allowable by law.
Why walk on eggshells about it?
You're good with the IRS, why lose sleep over it.
You're definitely not a cheat, and you're compliant with a court order.
Stick to your position, the kids aren't going to starve because you won't let them starve, court order or not.


----------



## Mom6547

Scannerguard said:


> MOM,
> 
> Well, I guess you are getting into my psychology. I personally believe the law is instructive but not necessarily an absolute.


It is absolute in so far as failure to comply lands you with unacceptable consequence.

What it isn't is a very good MORAL or ETHICAL guide. YOU need to do that yourself.

(I, for one, object to the law having ANYTHING to do with moral guidance. I think it should be only about protecting base civil rights. But that is another long conversation about how I am areligious and have a problem with people telling me how to live my life based on their religion.)



> That is, the law is kind of the last resort kind of ruling on any matter and it's a good reference point but I am interested in more than just prevailing and "being right". . .I am interested in good relations with my ex-wife. . .which eludes me.


You know what I would do, if I were you? Read some books on parenting, limit setting. You would have to modify the techniques to not piss her off with the idea that you are treating her like a child. But there is a lot of similarity between how you might speak to a child, who is after all a PERSON, and a grown up person when setting limits. 

There are ways I have been taught to talk to solicit cooperation, or at least avoid barriers to cooperation.

It would be helpful if...

I am concerned that...

is the tip of the iceberg.

How could anyone argue with your concerns, especially if they are about the well being of your child?

You also need limit setting to contain her anger and direct her where you are willing to go.



> So, even if the law favored me in this regard, I am willing to go outside the law again. . . if it favored good relations.


MMMM. Aren't you a proponent of the Man Up theory? Rolling over and being a pxssy is not going to favor good relations. It is going to get her to do it over, and over and over and over all the while thinking what an unreasonable dirt bag you are. If you are smart, calm, collected and firm, you can have equitable (you are never going to have GOOD) relations with her AND keep your tax returns.




> Maybe I would agree to an arbitrator to save a lot of hassle and fighting and see what an arbitrator would rule since she seems set on her position and I am not necessarily dead-set on mine.
> 
> Sometimes I do wonder though - if that isn't my dysfunction.
> 
> SimplyAmorous talks about how opposites attract and I don't know if this is just the continual case of a reasonable person attempting to interact with an unreasonable person and I keep falling into this dysfunction with my ex-wife.


Frame it like that if you wish. To be completely honest, scan man, you don't seem to be being reasonable to me. You seem to be emotive. I don't blame you. But you are operating based on processing a dissolving relationship. Reason would lead you in a different direction. 



> As I did in marriage. . .so it seems I do in divorce.
> 
> The more things change. . .the more things stay the same.


Well I wish you well. ****ty situation.


----------



## Homemaker_Numero_Uno

"You know what I would do, if I were you? Read some books on parenting, limit setting. You would have to modify the techniques to not piss her off with the idea that you are treating her like a child. But there is a lot of similarity between how you might speak to a child, who is after all a PERSON, and a grown up person when setting limits. "

I agree. The best 'marriage' book I've come across so far to deal with my H is 'Children: The Challenge'. It's been on my shelf for years since I have kids 20, 10 and 7. One day I was looking at it while tidying up and culling my books, thought that since the youngest is 7 I could just about retire the book...then I had a 'lightbulb moment' about what was in the book, and how it can be used. The nice thing is, unlike the Verbally Abusive Relationship book, I can leave it out in plain sight.  

Good observation Mom.


----------



## TotoWeRNotInKansasAnymore

I have no desire to suck my ex-husband dry. Since our divorce, he has received two promotions which have also come with a substantial increase in pay. I have been able to make ends meet with the original set amount of child support and alimony he pays me. The clock continues to tick on the time frame which I was awarded alimony. Unless I find myself in dire straights, my own pride would not allow me to take my ex-husband back to court.

I need to live my life and he needs to live his. I would not badger him regarding finances unless the security and safety of our son greatly depending on it. My ex-husband busts his a$$ in his career and deserves to enjoy the benefits from it as well.

And for the record, I have made several sacrifices based on a financial standpoint which I probably would not have had to if I’d taken him back to court for more money. It isn’t always about big *$* in the end. After all, it’s just money and can go as quickly as it comes.


----------



## Runs like Dog

And it's not about money either. It's about revenge.


----------



## Scannerguard

Thanks for all the replies.

The 3 year thing? You know. . .unless I am wrong, I thought the way it works in NJ was they take your next 3 tax returns and then average the adjusted gross income and then reset it at the 3 year mark.

However. . .honestly. . .I don't know for sure.

You know. . .my attorney never educated me.

It's kind of funny. . .both attorneys seemed to be like once the settlement and Judgmetn was finished - it's Over. . .her office really doesn't want to deal with her from what I have heard and they are less than thrilled when I call it seems (they were always a disorganized office, although they were competent and ethical).

I thought about this some more. . .would it be yearly? Well, then, why didn't it automatically reset lower? I know they looked at my last 3 years statements during mediation.

Like the one scenario I ran.

Scenario 1

2010: 40K
2011: 50K
2012: 60K

I would think they would average it to 50K. Maybe they just take the last year though - 2012 and base it on 60K.

Let's make it interesting though.

Scenario 2:

2010: 40K
2011: 100K
2011: 10K

(as you can see both Scenario's = 150K over 3 years)

Would you base child support on 10K? I don't think so. . .that doesn't seem fair to me either.

Again, I am just wondering myself. . .all I know is my attorney said not to and didn't indicate when it would be time to readjust.


----------



## Scannerguard

As far as being a "Manning Up" devotee, I wouldn't say I am religious about it like some here, but yes, I do subscribe to the theory.

I don't know. . .just trying to avoid legal conflict for the kid's sake. . .there is a rule when fighting women in divorce.

Tie goes the woman.

She could decide to fight dirty and then we are in court and I am a disadvantage being a man. . .yeah, that's not as much so as in years past. . .but I really try to avoid "the mat" (the mat = court) when it comes to dealilng with my ex-wife.


----------

