Including Overtime Hours When Calculating Child Support in Arizona

Sat 17th Dec, 2016 Arizona Child Support Laws

When determining child support, one of the most important factors is each parent’s gross income. But what happens when a parent regularly works well beyond a traditional 40-hour workweek? Can those additional earnings be included when calculating child support? And if a parent voluntarily reduces their work hours, can the court still calculate child support based on a higher income?

The Arizona Court of Appeals addressed these important questions in McNutt v. McNutt, providing valuable guidance on how trial courts should interpret full-time employment under the Arizona Child Support Guidelines and determine a parent’s income for child support purposes.

Understanding this decision can help parents better understand how Arizona courts evaluate income when calculating child support obligations.

Background of McNutt v. McNutt

The parties began living together before marrying in 1996 and had a daughter in 1995.

Beginning in 1993 or 1994, the father regularly worked approximately 80 hours per week to help the family purchase a home. After the parties separated, he voluntarily reduced his schedule to 64 hours per week. At trial, he testified that he hoped to reduce his hours even further so he could spend more quality time with his daughter but had delayed doing so because he needed to comply with the temporary family support order.

The trial court ultimately ordered the father to pay $484 per month in child support.

The father appealed, arguing the trial court improperly calculated his income.

How Arizona Calculates Gross Income for Child Support

The Arizona Child Support Guidelines define gross income broadly. Income from virtually any source may be included when determining child support, and fluctuating income is generally annualized to reflect a parent’s actual earning capacity.

However, not every source of income must be included. Income that is not recurring or continuing may be excluded depending on the circumstances.

The central question in McNutt was whether earnings from working more than 40 hours per week should automatically be treated as overtime and excluded from a parent’s gross income.

Does Arizona Consider 40 Hours Per Week Full-Time Employment?

The father argued that Arizona should recognize a 40-hour workweek as the standard definition of full-time employment.

He contended that any income earned beyond 40 hours should be classified as overtime and generally excluded when calculating child support.

The Arizona Court of Appeals rejected that argument.

The court explained that the Arizona Child Support Guidelines do not define full-time employment as a fixed 40-hour workweek. Instead, courts should examine the parent’s actual employment schedule.

In this case, the father’s regular work schedule at the time of trial was 64 hours each week, not 40. Because those hours represented his normal work schedule rather than occasional overtime, the court found no basis for automatically excluding those earnings from his gross income.

Regular Overtime May Be Included in Child Support Calculations

The Court of Appeals also clarified how overtime income should be treated under the Arizona Child Support Guidelines.

The Guidelines permit courts to disregard income earned through overtime or a second job under certain circumstances. However, the court concluded this provision was intended to protect parents who voluntarily choose to work extra hours beyond their normal employment.

The court distinguished between:

Regular earnings from a parent’s normal work schedule, which generally should be included in gross income.
Voluntary or non-mandatory overtime, which courts may exclude to avoid discouraging parents from working additional hours.

This interpretation prevents what the court described as the “treadmill effect,” where every extra hour worked permanently increases a parent’s child support obligation and discourages additional employment.

Why the Court Rejected a Strict 40-Hour Rule

The Court of Appeals also recognized that many occupations do not fit neatly into a traditional 40-hour workweek.

If Arizona adopted a strict hourly limitation, parents earning similar incomes could receive dramatically different child support obligations simply because their professions required different work schedules.

The court concluded that such a result would be unfair to both parents and children because child support should reflect a parent’s actual ability to pay—not an arbitrary definition of full-time employment.

Can a Court Attribute Income Based on Previous Work Hours?

Although the Court of Appeals agreed that the father’s regular 64-hour schedule could properly be considered when calculating child support, it disagreed with the trial court’s decision to calculate his income based on the 80-hour schedule he had worked before reducing his hours.

Approximately sixteen months before trial, the father voluntarily reduced his schedule from 80 hours to 64 hours each week.

Nevertheless, the trial court calculated child support as though he continued working the longer schedule.

The Court of Appeals found this was an abuse of discretion.

Arizona Courts Must Have a Reasonable Basis for Attributing Income

When deciding whether to calculate child support using a parent’s earning capacity instead of actual income, Arizona courts rely on principles established in Little v. Little.

Under that analysis, courts consider several factors, including:

The financial impact on the child.
Whether the parent’s decision to reduce income was reasonable.
Whether the decision was made in good faith.

Although these factors still apply when a parent reduces work hours rather than leaving employment entirely, the Court of Appeals emphasized that trial courts generally should not attribute income requiring an extraordinary work schedule.

The court also found guidance in California’s decision in the case of Marriage of Simpson, which concluded that earning capacity should be measured by an objectively reasonable work regimen—not one requiring excessive or unreasonable hours.

Applying those principles, the Arizona Court of Appeals determined there was no reasonable explanation for requiring the father to continue working an additional 16 hours each week when he had already maintained the reduced schedule for more than a year before trial.

Without evidence supporting the higher earning capacity, the trial court improperly attributed additional income.

What McNutt v. McNutt Means for Arizona Parents

McNutt v. McNutt provides several important lessons for parents involved in Arizona child support cases:

Arizona law does not define full-time employment as a 40-hour workweek.
A parent’s regular work schedule—even if it exceeds 40 hours per week—may be used when calculating gross income.
Courts may distinguish between regular earnings and voluntary overtime when determining child support.
A parent who voluntarily reduces work hours is not automatically entitled to a lower child support obligation.
Likewise, courts cannot simply attribute income based on a prior work schedule without evidence showing the parent is voluntarily underemployed or capable of maintaining the higher schedule under an objectively reasonable work regimen.

Each child support case depends on its unique facts, and courts must carefully evaluate the evidence before deciding whether to calculate support based on actual income or earning capacity.

Experienced Arizona Child Support Attorneys

Determining a parent’s gross income is often one of the most contested issues in an Arizona child support case. Whether the dispute involves overtime, multiple jobs, self-employment income, or allegations of voluntary underemployment, proper application of the Arizona Child Support Guidelines can significantly affect the amount of child support ordered.

At Hildebrand Law, P.C., our experienced Arizona family law attorneys have helped clients resolve complex child support disputes. If you have questions about calculating child support, modifying an existing order, or how your income may be treated under Arizona law, we are ready to help.

Contact Hildebrand Law today to schedule a consultation and learn how we can protect your rights and your child’s best interests.

Our family law firm has earned numerous awards such as US News and World Reports Best Arizona Family Law Firm, US News and World Report Best Divorce Attorneys, “Best of the Valley” by Arizona Foothills readers, and “Best Arizona Divorce Law Firms” by North Scottsdale Magazine.

Call us today at (480)305-8300 or reach out to us through our appointment scheduling form to schedule your personalized consultation and turn your Arizona child support or family law case around today.

Categories