Why IRD will continue to punish fathers over child support
IRD rejects call to review child support payments
A top Government adviser says child support payments should be paid directly to sole-parent beneficiaries, not kept by Inland Revenue to offset the costs of the benefits. Carl Davidson, who was named the new head of the Families Commission in July, said the move would encourage more absent parents to pay, and reduce child poverty in sole-parent families. But the idea, which would cost $185 million a year, was discussed and rejected in an Inland Revenue discussion paper on reforming child support this month.
The reason IRD will continue to punish solo fathers with their sexist, draconian, 10% penalty rates is because child support is revenue gathering for IRD. Of the $1.8 billion in outstanding Child Support only $560 million is actually owing, the rest, a staggering $1.2 billion is in bloody late fees! This is revenue gathering and the fury so many fathers feel in being forced to pay money to IRD, money that NEVER goes to the child if the Mother is on welfare is real and well summed up by Gordon Campbell...
What such situations reveal is the highly charged social climate in which child support operates – and the lack of consideration to these issues when the child support mechanisms were rammed into place 18 years ago, mainly as a way of cutting the cost of welfare. (One of the complaints commonly made about the system is that non-custodial parents are not paying child support to their children – they are paying the IRD to offset the cost of the DPB.)
Watching 18% of their income sucked away to the Government without one cent going to the child being supported is the main reason many solo Fathers simply don't comply and is the reason IRD will point blank refuse to lose a billion dollar revenue gathering scam.
As Carl Davidson points out, allowing solo Fathers to pay the money directly to the Mother rather than to IRD would make the situation fairer and more likely to comply with and reduce the problem Campbell points out with solo Fathers moving on with their lives to create a new family...
given the extent of marital breakdown, a more common reality is that the non-custodial parent can be rendered financially unable to start a new life, because of the level of payments required to be paid to the previous family. In such cases, a two tier system of first and second class children can be created – where the children of the first relationship have prior call on any resources, and the children of the subsequent relationship must make do with what is left over.
...it is clear that the current child support system simply creates resentment by those solo Fathers forced to comply with revenue gathering by IRD while causing tensions within the separated family units, allowing IRD to simply deny any possible changes means their incentive to revenue gather won't be blunted.