# Ohio Child Support Law-New or Old and Recycled

- Link: https://thechildsupporthustle.com/ohio-child-support-law-new-or-old-and-recycled/
- Published: 2024-07-21T22:09:35+00:00
- Author: MsRockMon

![\"\"](\"/.https://thechildsupporthustle.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/IMG_1174-
2.jpegwp-content/uploads/2025/08/IMG_1174-2-1.jpegwp-content/uploads/2024/04/two-
housholds-child-support.jpg.com/wp-content/uploads56262431_1101888289984221_8417253095402110976_n-
1.jpg\")

Kenya N. Rahmaan

Ohio was one of the first states to implement the changes to the child support system
after former President Bill Clinton passed legislation to change the welfare system
laws. Discovering that the Buckey state was a pioneer may surprise some; however,
it doesn’t surprise those aware that Ohio was the pilot state to implement the child
support system for low-income welfare recipients in the late 1990s. Both the welfare
and child support systems changed significantly after the 1990s. According to the
National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) (2017), Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families (TANF) recipients must assign their rights to child support payments
to the state. During the implementation, the government mandated TANF recipients
who were custodial parents (primarily mothers) to sign up for child support or risk
losing their public benefits.

States have the option of allowing some of the child support payments to be passed-
through to the parent and child (NCSL, 2017). During the initial rollout, signing
up for child support meant an extra $50 added to the monthly welfare checks in Ohio.
Most parents didn’t know they were signing up to sue the non-custodial parent for
child support. Currently, the pass-through amount, or the portion of child support
paid to TANF families, varies from state to state.

Currently, 28 states, including Ohio, pay $0 since the government refuses to pay
any portion of the child support payment received on behalf of TANF families to 
receive public benefits. The lack of payments to families is due to the child support
system being a welfare recovery program. However, the reasons for this require a
more detailed explanation than what is detailed in this article. Find out more about
child support being a welfare recovery program by visiting:  [https://youtu.be/sE5EnetBlnk](https://thechildsupporthustle.com/ohio-child-support-law-new-or-old-and-recycled/\"https://youtu.be/sE5EnetBlnk\")

Ohio did not mention the pass-through regulation recently passed in Ohio. However,
considering that Ohio children could have benefited from every penny of their child
support money (as is the case with every child around the nation), it most certainly
should have been included. According to Jim Siegel of The Columbus Dispatch (2018),
House Bill 366:

 * Updates tables used to calculate payments,
 * Creates a standard deduction when a parent has multiple orders,
 * Caps the allowable credit for shared childcare expenses at the statewide average
   and,
 * Better takes into account time that the child spends with the non-custodial parent.

As the country begins to embrace the inevitability of child support reform, we must
understand what reformations the state that piloted the child support system plans
on implementing all these years later. Based on history, the other states will follow
suit.

First, the updates to the tables used to calculate payments could mean that parents
could possibly pay less support. As the staff at WTOL of Toledo, Ohio (2018) explained,
the reasoning behind these possible decreased payments is that the Ohio Department
of Jobs and Family Services (ODJFS) is rewriting the starting point for payments.
Ohio is offering a reduction in payments so that low-income and poor parents have
money left over to cover basic needs after making child support payments.  Currently,
too many parents are left with next to nothing (if anything) to meet their basic
living expenses after child support deductions and garnishments.

According to The Ohio Bar Association or the OSBA (2016), under the previous law,
the total of this adjusted gross income (combined mother and father’s income minus
certain allowable deductions from their gross income) of both parents is then applied
to a chart, which identifies the amount of support required to raise children in
their parents’ income category. Child support is calculated today in Ohio and every
other state because the non-custodial parent pays child support. The state should
base the order amount on income, which is not always the case, especially with default
judgments.

A default judgment occurs when the defendant fails to appear at the child support
hearing, the child support case is established, and the income is estimated based
on employment demographics (and other criteria) specific to that area. As it stands,
even if the non-custodial parent earns significantly less money than the custodial
parent, they would still be required to pay child support. For example, if a father
earns $10,000 annually and the mother earns $30,000 (with no deductions for either
parent), the father or the non-custodial parent would still be required to pay $
139.34 monthly or $1,639.33 annually in child support. The amount is based on the
father paying for health insurance and 2% extra for processing.

The annual amount increases to $201.77 monthly and $2,373.75 annually (including
the 2% processing fee) for two children. The new child support law would only be
beneficial if both parents were equally responsible for providing for their children
despite what parent claims primary custody.
 The new law claims that spending more
time with a child may decrease the amount of monthly child support that the government
orders the paying parent to pay. Reducing child support based on time spent is a
significant change as the demand for shared parenting steadily increases across 
the nation. According to the NCSL (2016), approximately 36 states and Washington
D.C. have an adjustment in the child support guidelines for parenting time. The 
current guidelines in Ohio have received a grade of ‘C- ‘by the National Parents
Organization (NPO) in its 2014 shared parenting report card.

When considering parental rights and responsibilities for the care of children, 
shared parenting, according to Ohio Revised Code §3109.04, one provision is:

> contingent on whether either parent has failed to make all child support payments,
> including arrears that are required, pursuant to the child support order where
> the non-custodial parent has been named the obligor

The new law is unclear if delinquency with child support payments will still affect
the shared parenting clause and possible decreases in monthly payments. However,
that should have certainly been one of the main changes included in the new guidelines.
One of the most consistent arguments against the child support and child custody
systems is the separation of the two when parents come before a family court judge.
By separating custody and child support cases, the government can generate more 
money for the state and attorneys.

However, since Ohio attempts to leave the non-custodial parent with a financial ‘
cushion’ after child support is paid while simultaneously reducing payments when
a parent spends time with their child, late payments seem irrelevant to the shared-
parenting conversation. Ideally, the law will separate child support and shared 
parenting now so that it benefits non-custodial parents, just as it has been separated
for decades to financially help custodial parents, attorneys, and government agencies
before this new law. In examining these ‘new’ laws, some could say that by calling
this concept of child support, payments decreased based on time spent at the least
misleading, if not downright deceptive. The Ohio Revised Code §3119.24 (2001) states,
in part, that:

> in shared-parenting orders, judges may order an amount of child support to be 
> paid under the child support order that is calculated in accordance with the worksheet
> set forth in Section 3119.022 of the revised code through the line establishing
> the actual obligation, except that, if that amount would be unjust or inappropriate
> to the children or either parent.

Of course, people in Ohio and across the nation are either party to or know of a
parent with an inappropriate child support order that has left them without money
to provide for their basic needs. Unfortunately, local caseworkers have ignored 
this guideline, as the policy states that the Ohio court may deviate from the child
support amount under extraordinary circumstances. The guidelines list four specific
events that meet this criterion, and number one on this list is ‘the amount of time
the children spend with parent’ (Ohio Revised Code, 2001). Implementing this law
is unnecessary as it is already law and lends some deceit by the government to parents
eagerly fighting for significant child support reform.

All officials need to enforce the shared-parenting law already enacted. As we fight
for meaningful and comprehensive child support reform, it is critical that we, The
People, hold legislators accountable for their actions. If they propose and pass
bills, these bills must benefit the children and the parents and not just regurgitate
laws already on the books that the child support program enforcers ignore. Ohio 
Child Support Bill 366 addresses the need for parents to ensure that each child 
has medical insurance while there is court-ordered child support judgment in place.
In most cases, Jack’s Law Office reported that the court would order both parents
to carry health insurance for the child.

As with every state, if the custodial parent is considered low-income and meets 
the criteria to qualify for state-funded insurance, the child(ren) will receive 
Medicaid, free of charge, to the custodial parent. Again, in every state, unless
the government grants a ‘good cause’ waiver, the custodial parent must sue the non-
custodial parent for the costs to recover monies spent on Medicaid for the children.
One of the biggest problems with this, argues child support reform advocates, is
that public benefits are grants and not loans. These benefits have already been 
paid for by tax dollars and do not require repayment. However, that is another subject.
[https://bit.ly/2P5orfi](https://thechildsupporthustle.com/ohio-child-support-law-new-or-old-and-recycled/\"https://bit.ly/2P5orfi\")

If the non-custodial parent is employed, they may be required to carry medical insurance
through their employer for their child(ren). Even though according to ODJFS, the
non-custodial parent could deduct the cost from their annual income when calculating
their child support. Unless the parent receives state-funded medical insurance, 
both parents are generally responsible for equally paying for medical insurance.
According to OSBA, uncovered medical costs are usually ordered to be paid in pro-
rated shares of the parent’s income after the residential parent pays the first 
$100 per year.

In addition to medical insurance, parents are responsible for any costs not covered
by medical insurance. Current law holds both parents responsible for medical insurance.
However, the ODJFS states that the parent ‘must file with the court and ask them
to issue a judgment for the other parent to pay the exact amount owed for the medical
bills. Nothing in the new law addresses if this procedure will change or if more
court proceedings will be necessary for the non-custodial parent to recover money
spent.

In Ohio, a section of the law concerning additional medical payments when a child
support order is in place. A couple of scenarios pertain to medical support payments
under the current law, both of which require the obligor or non-custodial parent
to pay money to the custodial parent or the welfare department for reimbursement
for medical expenses. However, both parents should pay a certain percentage of the
child’s remaining medical costs. Cash medical support is the amount ordered toward
the cost of health insurance provided by a public entity, another parent, or a person
with whom the child resides, through employment or otherwise, or for other medical
costs not covered by insurance (ODJFS).

As made clear through the different regulations, medical insurance and cost recovery
are very complicated issues. Still, through each of the current laws, both parents
are, in some instances, responsible for covering the child’s medical insurance and
costs. Even if the non-custodial parent covers the child on their medical insurance
in full, ODJFS states that the parent ‘must file with the court to ask them to issue
a judgment for the other parent to pay the exact amount owed for the medical bills.
It never seems to matter if the government made a mistake in the form of an overpayment
or in the case of seeking reimbursement for medical insurance. The only remedy ever
offered to the non-custodial parent seems to involve facing a judge’s bench.

This single ‘suggested’ solution can be costly, time-consuming, and may yield an
unfavorable outcome for the non-custodial parent. Of course, this is typical when
the overseers force non-custodial parents to deal with the child support/family 
court systems. With the ‘new’ law, several questions need to be asked and answered
by the legislators concerning medical insurance and cash medical support. Firstly,
will the child support orders be modified to exclude the language referring to medical
insurance and cash payments since the parent receiving child support is now responsible
for medical insurance? Secondly, will the custodial parent face any penalties if
they fail to provide medical insurance or cash payments?

Though Federal tax law provides the custodial parent, state courts have the power
to allocate the exemption to the non-custodial parent through a dependent exemption
if it will result in net tax savings that will benefit the child. Very rarely are
non-custodial parents granted exemptions regarding children residing outside of 
their homes. Exemptions happen even though many pay at least 65% (sometimes more)
of their income in weekly or biweekly child support payments. When cash medical 
support is affected, the child support order has a sum due to the custodial parent
and a separate sum (the cash medical support order) designed to contribute to medical
expenses (ODJFS).

The contribution is not benefiting the non-custodial parent if they are at all, 
responsible for any portion of medical insurance or cash payments. And, of course,
if the case is a Title IV-D/welfare case, the cash payments will be retained by 
the government for welfare’ reimbursement.’ It cannot be mentioned too many times
that this money has already been paid for tax dollars. Moving on to a much-discussed
and highly controversial topic in America is the issue of child care and the associated
costs.

Child support will pay for daycare with the new law, but a cap will be put in place
when calculating child support payments. As of August 2018, the child support guidelines
in Ohio state that credit is provided for the child care expenses for the child 
in the child support order to the parent that is paying for the child care (ODJFS).
Unfortunately, the non-custodial parent cannot claim the childcare credit on their
taxes for several different reasons. The first reason is that for a person to claim
any tax credits, the child must reside with that parent for at least half of a year
to meet that requirement.

The non-custodial parent cannot treat the child as a qualifying person even if that
parent is entitled to claim the child as a dependent under the special rule indicated
in the IRS specifications for a child of divorced or separated parents. The second
reason a non-custodial parent could not claim a child care credit for their child
on their taxes would be if their child spends equal time with the custodial parent
and the custodial parent has a higher adjusted income. More than likely, the custodial
parent is the mother, and if there are other children, there may be other Earned
Tax Credits (ETC) for those children and possibly other low-income credits. The 
breakdown of the ETC means that the non-custodial parent, usually the father, will
be ineligible to claim these childcare credits.

There is almost nothing more concerning than finding and affording child care for
working-class parents with young children. This cap (depending on the amount) may
be more detrimental to the childcare industry and may be an attempt to lessen rising
childcare costs. This proposed cap does nothing to ensure that non-custodial parents
can utilize the opportunity to claim childcare expenses and receive credit on their
taxes. It could take several years to measure any beneficial results to the ‘reform’
of the current child support guidelines and, more importantly, to the non-custodial
parent’s pockets.

Finally, the new child support law states that in cases of multiple child support
orders, non-custodial parents may see higher payments. Increased payments, of course,
are of no benefit to the non-custodial parent and may be of no use to the children.
Currently and traditionally, the child named on the first child support order is
the child that receives the most money. Any child support orders filed after are
usually lower because agencies base amounts on incomes calculated minus the initial
child support order amount. According to The WTOL Staff (2018), under the new law,
each child would receive a standard amount, rather than the current system that 
gives a larger amount to the first child whose parent files for support.

While it does mention that the non-custodial parent may pay more, the new guideline
says nothing about the cap on income garnishments that are federal law. According
to the Department of Labor (DOL) (2016), the garnishment law allows up to 50 percent
of a worker’s disposable earnings to be garnished. The high allowable garnishment
percentage hardly leaves a non-custodial parent making minimum wage (or close to
minimum wage) anywhere close to a livable income. In many instances, that amount
could increase to 65% or more in garnishments that could be deducted from the non-
custodial parents’ disposable income leaving even less to live on from paycheck 
to paycheck.

The garnishment laws create a new class of ‘working poor. It is excellent news to
the child support reform movement when any state passes reforms to the unconstitutional
child support system. However, organizations must investigate each claim of reform
so that parents know if they are benefiting from the changes or being handed the
same, only recycled, laws for the sake of silencing the outcries of injustice. After
reviewing the ‘new’ rule, a reviewer can quickly determine that at least two of 
the changes implemented may differ from what is on record.

Still, the other two changes are already guidelines in Ohio. If we get significant
and comprehensive child support reform, the legislators must admit that there is
a need for such reform. The legislators must then realize that substantial reform
will mean significantly fewer Title IV-D incentives and other monies for the government.
Only then will real legislative reform be introduced, passed, and implemented that
will genuinely benefit the parents, the country, and most importantly, the children.

References:

129th General Assembly. (2001). Child support guideline advisory council to review
basic schedule and worksheet._Title [31] XXX1 Domestic Relations-Children- Chapter
3119_, _024_(1). Retrieved from [http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/3119.024v1](https://thechildsupporthustle.com/ohio-child-support-law-new-or-old-and-recycled/\"http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/3119.024v1\")

Department of Labor. (n.d.). Fact sheet – Wage and hour division (WHD) – U.S. department
of labor. Retrieved from [https://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/compliance/whdfs30.htm](https://thechildsupporthustle.com/ohio-child-support-law-new-or-old-and-recycled/\"https://www.dol.gov/whd/regs/compliance/whdfs30.htm\")

Jack’s Law Office. (n.d.). Child support in Ohio and what you need to know. Retrieved
from[https://ohioexecutivedivorce.com/blog/child-support-ohio-and-what-you-need-to-know/](https://thechildsupporthustle.com/ohio-child-support-law-new-or-old-and-recycled/\"https://ohioexecutivedivorce.com/blog/child-support-ohio-and-what-you-need-to-know/\")

National Conference of State Legislatures. (2018, July 18). Child support pass-through
and disregard policies for public assistance recipients. Retrieved from[www.ncsl.org/research/humanservices/state-policy-pass-through-disregard-child-support.aspx](https://thechildsupporthustle.com/ohio-child-support-law-new-or-old-and-recycled/\"http://www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/state-policy-pass-through-disregard-child-support.aspx\")

National Parents Organization. (2014, December 3). _2014 Shared parenting report
card_. Retrieved from

Ohio State Bar Association. (2016, June 25). OSBA | How do courts determine child
support? Retrieved from[https://www.ohiobar.org/forpublic/resources/lawyoucanuse/pages/lawyoucanuse-45.aspx](https://thechildsupporthustle.com/ohio-child-support-law-new-or-old-and-recycled/\"https://www.ohiobar.org/forpublic/resources/lawyoucanuse/pages/lawyoucanuse-45.aspx\")

Siegel, J. (2018, June 7). After a two-month hiatus, Ohio House votes on a whopping
28 bills. _The Columbus Dispatch_. Retrieved from[http://www.dispatch.com/news/20180607/after-two-month-hiatus-ohio-house-votes-on-whopping-28-bills://](https://thechildsupporthustle.com/ohio-child-support-law-new-or-old-and-recycled/\"http://www.dispatch.com/news/20180607/after-two-month-hiatus-ohio-house-votes-on-whopping-28-bills:/\")

WTOL Staff. (2018, July 5). Ohio parents: Major changes coming to child support 
laws. Retrieved from