House of Representatives

Explanatory Memorandum

(Circulated by authority of the Minister for Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, the Hon Mal Brough MP)

Schedule 1 - Main amendments

Summary

This Schedule makes minor consolidating refinements to the child support scheme, comprised of the Child Support Assessment Act and Child Support Registration and Collection Act, and some minor consequential amendments to the Family Assistance Act to clarify and refine the operation of amendments made to the scheme by the New Formula Act, and in one minor regard, an amendment made by the Child Support Legislation Amendment (Reform of the Child Support Scheme - Initial Measures) Act 2006 . It also clarifies a small number of pre-existing issues or anomalies with the operation of the child support scheme.

Background

The broad thrust of policy intent behind the amendments is outlined below under various headings. Detail of what each individual item is achieving is outlined in relation to each item number at 'explanation of the changes' below.

Administrative review

Exchange of information during internal review

A parent may currently seek a review by the Child Support Registrar (Registrar) if they are dissatisfied with an original decision of the Registrar. They do this by lodging an objection, which must fully set out the grounds upon which the parent argues the decision is wrong. The Registrar is then required to serve a copy of the grounds of objection on the other parent, to enable them to provide any response they wish to be considered. It is not clear from the current legislative formulation that the entire document constituting the objection must be served, along with any accompanying documents, to comply with procedural fairness requirements for the internal review. Amendments are made to achieve this.

Attendance before the SSAT

SSAT review of child support decisions has now been available since 1 January 2007. The Executive Director of the SSAT has the power to obtain information for the purposes of a review by requiring a person to attend before him or her, or an officer authorised for the purpose. In practice, people attend before members of the SSAT, rather than the Executive Director or authorised officers. The requirement is being amended to reflect this reality.

Decisions on out of time applications

If a parent wishes to apply to the SSAT for review of a child support decision, they must do so within the required time, or seek an extension of time. Currently, the Executive Director of the SSAT has 60 days within which to make such a decision, and if a decision is not made within this time, is deemed to have refused the application. It is proposed to remove this deemed refusal, leaving ensuring decisions are made in a timely way to other mechanisms, such as the SSAT's reporting requirements.

The heading to the section relating to consideration of extension of time applications by the SSAT currently erroneously refers to 'objections'. This is being corrected, to refer to applying for review.

Return of documents by the SSAT

If the SSAT makes a decision on a review, the SSAT must return to the Registrar any document that the Registrar has provided to the SSAT in connection with the review. However, as a matter of administrative ease, the Registrar does not need all documents to be returned. Amendments are being made to provide that, at the conclusion of the proceedings, the SSAT only has to return to the Registrar any original documents that the Registrar has provided at the special request of the SSAT (see below - provision of documents by the Registrar to the SSAT).

Allowing a parent to withdraw an application to the SSAT

An SSAT review for child support purposes usually involves at least three parties, namely the applicant, the Registrar, and the other party in the child support case. As a result, the jurisdiction of the SSAT does not include an automatic dismissal of the application to it, despite the fact the applicant may not wish to proceed with their application. This is because one of the other parties to the case may wish to proceed, and if the application were dismissed, they may be out of time to initiate their own proceedings. The dismissal arrangements will allow the SSAT to dismiss an application if the applicant wishes it, with notice of the dismissal sent to each of the parties. If a party wishes the application to remain on foot, they have 28 days after service of the dismissal notice to request that the SSAT reinstate the application. If the SSAT thinks it appropriate to do so, it may reinstate the application, and give such directions as appear to it to be appropriate in the circumstances. This may include removing the original applicant as a party to the review if the applicant prefers to take no further part in the review.

Provision of documents by the Registrar to the SSAT

A number of refinements to the interaction between the SSAT and the Registrar are required to ensure reviews can take place as fairly as possible. These include: requiring the Registrar to send the statement of reasons for decision to the SSAT to allow the SSAT to consider fully a parent's request to be permitted to lodge a review application outside the required timeframe; making it clear only copies of documents in the possession of the Registrar that are relevant to the decision need be provided to the SSAT unless the SSAT uses its specifically requests provision of the original document; making it clearer that the Child Support Agency (CSA) need not send a document to the other parties to the review while the SSAT is considering the CSA's application for a direction about this requirement for the document and ensuring any direction made as the result of such an application is then served on any party to the SSAT review entitled to receive documents as part of the review.

Reporting proceedings - identifying the Registrar

The reporting of child support proceedings before the SSAT or a court is restricted to reporting that does not identify the parties to the proceeding. However, the Registrar is a party to all such proceedings. It is being clarified that the restrictions upon the identification of parties does not apply to the Registrar.

Jurisdiction of courts

Jurisdiction of Magistrates courts to hear appeals on questions of law

Once a review is finalised by the SSAT, a parent who remains dissatisfied may appeal to a court on a question of law. Although not express, the provisions may be interpreted as confining the jurisdiction of such courts to courts constituted by Judges. It is intended that such appeals may be heard by the Federal Magistrates Court, and, where this is convenient, by courts of summary jurisdiction. Amendments are made to make it clear that Federal Magistrates and magistrates generally have jurisdiction to hear such matters.

Formulation of appeal bench

The Court hearing an appeal on a question of law is given a discretion to determine the constitution of the bench for consideration of the appeal. For superior courts, a full court may be constituted, or the appeal may be heard by a single Judge. For the Federal Magistrates Court or courts of summary jurisdiction, a full bench is not an option, and a single magistrate will hear the appeal. Amendments make these factors clear.

Provision of documents

A court hearing such an appeal must currently be provided the SSAT's full file on the matter. However, not all documents that had been before the SSAT may be relevant to the question of law raised, and may be unnecessary for the court to receive. An approach involving selecting only relevant documents and providing these to the court is being substituted.

Access to court where a matter is too complex to determine administratively

Amendments made by the New Formula Act changed the arrangements for review of child support decisions, including review by the SSAT. However, some decisions in relation to an application to depart from a formula assessment, have been found by the Registrar to be too complex for administrative determination. In this case, the parent may apply to a court for an order departing from the formula assessment, rather than to the SSAT. The original decision of the Registrar may have been that the matter was too complex, and this decision has not been changed on lodgement of an objection. Alternatively, it may only have been on objection that the Registrar substituted a decision that the matter is too complex for administrative determination. Amendments are made to clarify that, in both cases, the parent has a right to apply to a court.

Frivolous or vexatious applications

Neither the Child Support Assessment Act nor the Child Support Registration and Collection Act currently contain provisions allowing courts to dismiss proceedings that are frivolous and vexatious. Such powers should be available to courts hearing child support matters, and are included in both Acts by these amendments.

Retrospective determinations

Amendments made by the New Formula Act limited the retrospective effect of departure determinations either made administratively or by court order to 18 months except where a court has granted leave. Amendments clarify that, where the court grants leave, it is not limited by the determination sought by the application, and can grant leave either for the Registrar to make the determination or for a court to make an order regardless as to the determination applied for.

Grounds for departure from the formula

Amendments made by the Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) Act 2006

Under the family law reforms made in 2006, the terminology to describe arrangements between separated parents and their children was changed. The term 'contact' was removed from the Child Support Assessment Act, and generally replaced by the concept of 'care' for a child. Among other provisions, this substitution was made in the description of a particular ground upon which a departure from a formula assessment of child support can be made: that the parent has high costs of 'contact' with a child. However, the substitution does not reflect the original effect of the provision. The ground is not intended to include in high costs the everyday costs of providing care for the child. To make the longstanding policy intent clear, the words 'to spend time with or communicate with' are being substituted for the word 'care.

Reflecting a parent's care for a step-child

From 1 July 2008, the moral obligation of a parent to support a step-child may form a basis for a departure from the child support formula. The circumstances in which this can occur remain limited, to avoid undermining the principle object of the child support scheme, that parents support their own children. One of the requirements is that the actual parents of the step-child are unable to support the child, for a range of reasons, including the responsibility to care for a child.

Changes were made in 2006 to narrow the ground generally known as 'capacity to earn'. In such cases, a parent's decision not to work or to reduce their work may be justified on the basis they have caring responsibilities. This is a broader concept than just care for children. For consistency, the same terminology is being used in the ground about departures for step-children, so that if the biological parents of the step-child are unable to work and support the child because they have caring responsibilities, the ground may be established. Caring responsibilities may include care for the child in question, or for another child or other person.

If a family includes a step-child, and the family satisfies the circumstances in which the step-child may be considered as a basis for departure from the formula, any consideration about whether any departure from the formula should occur on any ground should consider the effect of any proposed order on the step-child. Currently, the effect of any proposed order on the parents, the child support children, and any other person that a parent has a duty to support must be considered. However, the effect of any proposed order on the step-child should also be considered. The current formulation of the provisions in this regard may not be effective in that they appear to require a reconsideration of the departure ground, rather than considering the effect on the particular child who fits the criteria set out in the step-children departure ground. This refinement is being made.

Clarifying misleading headings about capacity to earn

From 1 July 2006, the ground of departure based upon a parent's capacity to earn was narrowed and clarified. Amendments were made to make it clear that a capacity to earn decision could only be made where certain circumstances were established. In practice, the amendments have proven unclear as to where in the reasoning process, when considering an application, the particular criteria apply, because the headings appear to narrow the otherwise broad operation of the provisions. Amendments to the headings of the sections make it clear that the limiting factors apply in all stages of considering a departure, including the establishment of a ground for departure, and considering whether a change would be just and equitable and otherwise proper.

Payee private enforcement

Orders for payment

Since 1 January 2007, payees have been able to take private enforcement action against the payer for debt, while leaving their ongoing entitlement registered for collection by the Registrar. The provisions allow courts a choice to order payment either to the Registrar or directly to the payee. It is more practical for the payment to be made to the Registrar, to allow the Registrar to maintain accurate records of amounts outstanding, and minimise disputes between the payee and payer about what payments have been made. Amendments are made to require the court to order payment to the Registrar, for disbursement to the payee. Amendments are also being made to require the payee to keep the Registrar informed of all such orders made, including details of costs orders (which are not then collectable by the Registrar). The payee must also inform the Registrar of any payments made directly to them when they have taken private enforcement action.

Apportionment

In cases in which a child support payer owes child support to a number of payees, the Registrar is required to apportion any payment received from the payer between the payees. In some circumstances, payers make payments intended to be child support directly to the payee, or to a third party on their account. This may be because the child support liability is to be collected privately, rather than by the Registrar. This may also be because the payee agrees to the crediting of such a payment against the payer's liability for child support, despite the liability generally being payable to the Registrar. However, in these cases, it is not appropriate to apportion such a payment between all payees owed child support by the particular payer, because they are payments made directly to a particular payee, or on their account. Amendments are made to make it clear that apportionment is only required in situations where the liability is collected by the Registrar, and the payment is made to the Registrar.

Interaction between the Child Support Acts

Allowing amendment of assessments

The New Formula Act made some structural alterations to the two child support Acts, including generally transferring internal review (objection) and external review (SSAT and courts) provisions into the Registration and Collection Act. This enables an objection officer or the SSAT or court to make a decision affecting an assessment. Amendments are made to allow the Registrar to reflect such decisions by making appropriate amendments to the child support assessment.

Effect of terminating events

The changes effected by the New Formula Act may enable a court hearing a matter under the Registration and Collection Act to make an order varying the child support assessment for a particular child. Currently, if an order of this type is made under the Child Support Assessment Act, the order ceases to be in force if a terminating event happens in relation to the child, for example, the child dies, or becomes a member of a couple. Amendments are being made to the Child Support Registration and Collection Act to maintain consistency between the two Acts in this regard.

Coverage of stay orders

Amendments made by the New Formula Act moved the internal review (objection) provisions from the Child Support Assessment Act to the Child Support Registration and Collection Act. Provisions relating to further review following internal review, to the SSAT and then to courts on questions of law, are similarly now located in the Child Support Registration and Collection Act. The provisions empowering courts to issue stay orders pending the finalisation of proceedings were not altered, so that a separate stay power existed in each Acts for the purposes of that Act. This has left some situations in which no stay may be ordered. These amendments ensure the complete coverage of stay powers by relocating the powers into the Child Support Registration and Collection Act.

Consistent information gathering powers

An information gathering power for the purposes of preparation for the implementation of the new formula was introduced by the New Formula Act. However, unlike the other information gathering powers already in the child support Acts, the power did not include a penalty for failure to comply. A penalty of the maximum fine (60 penalty units) is being included.

The power under the Child Support Assessment Act is currently limited to financial information where the requirement is made of a person who is not a party to a child support assessment. This is inconsistent with the broader information gathering power available to an objections officer conducting an internal review of a Child support Assessment Act decision, who is not subject to this limitation due to acting under the Child Support Registration and Collection Act. The restriction is being removed from the Child Support Assessment Act power.

Recognition of over 18 relevant dependent children

Changed commencement

The New Formula Act allowed for continuing the recognition of relevant dependent children who have reached the age of 18, in circumstances in which child support children can continue to be recognised for the purposes of a child support assessment. A child who remains in full time secondary education may continue to be recognised as though they remain 17 for the whole school year. Because the changes apply for particular school years, the previous commencement date of 1 July 2008 is impractical. This date is being brought back to commence from 1 January 2008, allowing recognition of such children for the full 2008 calendar year. While this commencement date is earlier than previously enacted, and involves a retrospective amendment of the commencement provision in the New Formula Act, it is not a retrospective change in practice because the commencement date remains in the future, so there is no practical disadvantage caused to any parent.

The dates from which and to which the child is considered

A parent's care of a relevant dependent child may be considered, generally from the date on which the child becomes a relevant dependent child, or the date upon which the Registrar is notified that the child is being cared for, if this notification occurs more than 28 days after the child becomes a relevant dependent child. Amendments are made to ensure that, where a parent's level of care for a relevant dependent child changes, these changes may also be reflected in the assessment. Similarly, if such a child aged over 18 ceases attending full-time secondary schooling in the year in which they turn 18, they will no longer be considered a relevant dependent child from that date.

Setting aside binding agreements

As currently drafted, courts could set aside binding child support agreements (made with legal advice) in a range of circumstances, including circumstances that may have been contemplated and dealt with in the agreement. It is not intended that binding agreements should be set aside lightly. This amendment restricts the scope for the setting aside of binding child support agreements, by specifying that exceptional circumstances relating to one of the children or parties to the agreement must have arisen since the making of the agreement, and that the child or party would suffer hardship if the agreement were not altered or set aside.

Notional assessments

The New Formula Act changed the approach to the calculation of FTB for parents who enter into a child support agreement from 1 July 2008. For these parents, a formula assessment of child support is calculated as though the agreement had not been made, called a 'notional' assessment. The notional assessment is used to calculate these parents' entitlement to FTB. A provisional notional assessment is made as though a standard formula assessment were being made under Part V of the Child Support Assessment Act. The resulting notional assessment is not an 'administrative assessment' for any purposes under either the Child Support Assessment Act or the Child Support Registration and Collection Act.

The provisional notional assessment may be affected by pre-existing determinations varying a standard administrative assessment, which would have continued to apply but for the fact the parents have entered into an agreement. This may include court ordered variations, or administrative variations by the Registrar as the result of a change of assessment.

Once notified of the new provisional notional assessment, the parents then have 14 days during which they may seek to update the provisional notional assessment, before it becomes a notional assessment. Parents may take advantage of any provision that is available in relation to a standard formula assessment, including recognition of post-separation costs, reduction of a fixed rate or minimum rate assessment, or other variations including changes of care, or inclusion of relevant dependent children. Variations such as lodging an estimate of income or applying for a change of assessment remain available. However, unlike a standard formula assessment, once the provisional notional assessment becomes a notional assessment, it will not be varied, unless and until a further provisional notional assessment is made. Changes such as changes in care arrangements for children, lodgement of tax returns by either parent, changes to Male Total Average Weekly Earnings (MTAWE) or the commencement of a new child support period will not vary the notional assessment. Depending upon the nature of their agreement, a parent may be able to seek a new provisional notional assessment in these circumstances. A parent with a limited agreement (made without legal advice) may seek a new provisional notional assessment at any time. A parent with a binding agreement (made with legal advice) will have a new provisional notional assessment made if the amount payable under the agreement varies by more than 15 per cent, or at the expiry of three years from the acceptance of the agreement.

One exception to the general rule that a notional assessment is not varied applies where parents have child support children who are not covered by their agreement, and each of the parents has some care of the children. In a standard formula assessment, the liability of each parent for care of children provided by the other is offset in this situation. In a situation in which some of the children are covered by an agreement, and some not, this offsetting will initially occur under Part V in the same way when the provisional notional assessment is made. However, the standard (non-notional) formula assessment for children not covered by the agreement is likely to vary during the application of the notional assessment. If this happens, the offsetting will need to be redone to calculate the correct notional assessment and actual assessment. This may result in the Registrar amending the notional assessment to reflect the change in the actual assessment for some of the parents' children. The notional assessment will remain as though made in the circumstances applying at the date when it was made. However, the offset outcome will change. This will not of itself result in the making of a new provisional notional assessment. A parent dissatisfied with the outcome of the changed offsetting has the option of objecting to the particulars of the actual assessment made for the non-agreement child or children.

If a new provisional notional assessment is made, changes that may have occurred during the application of the previous notional assessment may be reflected in the new notional assessment. These would take effect from the day the Registrar makes the new provisional notional assessment.

A minor amendment is made to the formulation of elections of income for the purposes of notional assessments, in relation to income amount orders. An income amount order may have been in force in relation to particular parents and children, but may have been overridden by the making of the agreement. In this case, such income amount order is not 'in force'. It is intended that the notional assessment be made subject to such income amount order, and amendments are made to achieve this.

Costs of children and parents with multiple cases

The new formula applying from 1 July 2008 does not deal appropriately with situations where one or other of the parents has more than one child support case, and the children are of different ages. Presently, the New Formula Act provides that in these cases the child support payable is simply divided by the number of children. This works appropriately in situations in which the children are all living in one household. However, where children are living in a number of households, it does not sufficiently recognise the fundamental principle that older children cost more to raise than younger children, and child support should be divided accordingly. Amendments are made to provide for a different method to calculate child support payable in this situation.

This changed method does not change the formula for calculating an administrative assessment as a whole. It only applies from Division 6 - The costs of the child. In particular, the new method will be used for multiple-case, mixed-age children situations instead of the more general, 'averaged' costs of children approach. The changed approach to the formula for parents with multiple cases becomes:

Step 1

Calculate each parent's Child Support Income by deducting the self-support amount from their adjusted taxable income, as well as any Relevant Dependant or Multicase Allowance.

Step 2

Calculate the parents' Combined Child Support Income by adding the parents' Child Support Incomes.

Step 3

Determine whether the first child is a younger child or an older child.

Step 4

Calculate the cost of this child by

i.

determining what the costs of all the child support children would be if they were all in the same age bracket as this child

ii.

dividing this total cost by the number of child support children.

That is, the cost of each child X is:

Cost of a child X = ((cost of the total number of children if all children were the same age as X) / (total number of children))


Step 5

Repeat steps 3 and 4 for each of the child support children.

Step 6

Determine the child support payable for each child according to the cost of the child as determined in steps 3 to 5 and according to the incomes and care arrangements of the parents.

Step 7

Apply the Multicase Cap to the child support payable for each child.

Step 8

Determine each parent's total amount of child support payable to the other parent by adding the child support payable by that parent for each child.

Step 9

Determine the net child support payable by one parent to the other by offsetting the amounts resulting from step 8.

As for the general formula, where there are more than three such multi-case children, the figure for three children is used. However, this is divided by the total number of such children to obtain the cost per child.

The changed method will be relevant to Formulas 3 and 4 under the New Formula Act. It may also affect Formulas 5 and 6 if the parent involved has a number of child support cases.

This method will not apply in relation to relevant dependent children. The costs of relevant dependent children will continue to be worked out using the existing averaging non-age specific method, even if the costs of the child support children are to be calculated using the 'multi-case' method.

The multi-case allowance is an allowance to recognise a parent's responsibility to children in another child support case. The allowance will now be calculated by adding the costs of all children in other child support cases, with the costs calculated using the multi-case cost method.

The multi-case cap, which limits the child support which may be paid for a particular child to ensure a parent with multiple cases does not pay more child support than they would pay if all the children were in the same case, will be based upon the cost of the individual child for whom the child support is being capped. The cost of this child, however, will be calculated using the multi-case cost method, by assuming that all the child support children of the parent are the same age, calculating the costs from the costs of children table for that number of children of that age, and then dividing this cost by the number of such children to obtain the cost for one child.

Example

Jack has two child support cases: one with Anita, with whom he has a 15 year old son, Tim, and one with Sue, with whom he has a 13 year old daughter, Fiona, and a 9 year old son, Fred. Jack has less than 14 per cent contact with Tim, and has 50 per cent care of Fiona and Fred. None of the parents has a relevant dependant. Jack has an income of $40,000, Anita receives parenting payment single, so has no income above the self-support amount, and Sue has an income of $30,000.

To calculate child support for Tim:

Step 1

After deduction of the self support amount, Jack has a child support income of $23,117. Jack's multi-case allowance when calculating child support for Tim is equal to the total of the multi-case costs for Fiona and Fred. The multi-case cost for Fiona is calculated according to what her cost would be if all of Jack's three child support children were the same age as her (that is, older) children, and based on Jack's income alone. The cost of three older children in a case with a combined child support income of $23,117 is $7,397, so Fiona's multi-case cost is $2,466. The multi-case cost for Fred is calculated according to what his cost would be if all of Jack's three child support children were the same age as his (that is, younger) children, and based on Jack's income alone. The cost of three younger children in a case with a combined child support income of $23,117 is $6,242, so Fred's multi-case cost is $2,081.

Therefore, Jack's multi-case allowance when calculating child support for Tim is $2,466 plus $2,081, which is $4,547. His child support income is therefore $40,000 minus the self-support amount of $16,883 minus $4,547, which is $18,570. Anita's child support income is $0, as she has no income above the self-support amount.

Step 2

Jack and Anita's combined child support Income is $18,570 plus $0, which is $18,570.

Step 3

There is only one child in the case. Tim is an older child.

Step 4

The cost for one older child in a case with a combined child support income of $18,570 is $4,271. This means that Tim's cost is $4,271.

Step 5

There are no other children in the case.

Step 6

Jack has 100 per cent of the combined child support income, so must meet 100 per cent of Tim's cost. He doesn't meet any of the cost through care, so would need to transfer 100 per cent of the cost, or $4,271, to Anita.

Step 7

Jack should not pay more in child support than the cost of having all the children living with him. The cost of having all the children live with him would be the same as the multi-case costs for the children. The multi-case cost for Tim is calculated according to what his cost would be if all of Jack's three child support children were the same age as his (that is, older) children, and based on Jack's income alone. The cost of three older children in a case with a combined Child support income of $23,117 is $7,397 so Tim's multi-case cost is $2,466.

The multi-case cap also takes account of any costs that the parents meet through care. Jack doesn't meet any of Tim's cost through care, so the multi-case cap for Tim is 100 per cent of $2,466. This cap amount is lower than the amount worked out in Step 6, so the child support payable for Tim is set by the cap.

Step 8

Jack is liable to pay $2,466 to Anita. Anita is not liable to pay any child support to Jack.

Step 9

Jack pays $2,466 to Anita.

To calculate child support for Fiona and Fred:

Step 1

After deduction of the self support amount, Jack has a child support income of $23,117. Jack's multi-case allowance when calculating child support for Fiona and Fred is equal to the total of the multi-case costs for Tim. The multi-case cost for Tim is calculated according to what his cost would be if all of Jack's three child support children were the same age as his (that is, older) children, and based on Jack's income alone. The cost of three older children in a case with a combined child support income of $23,117 is $7,397 so Tim's multi-case cost is $2,466. Therefore, Jack's multi-case allowance when calculating child support for Fiona and Fred is $2,466. His child support income is therefore $23,117 minus $2,466, which is $20,651.

Sue's child support income is $30,000 minus the self-support amount of $16,883, as she has no other child support cases. Therefore, her child support income is $13,117.

Step 2

Jack and Sue's combined child support income is $20,651 plus $13,117, which is $33,768.

Step 3

Fiona is an older child.

Step 4

The cost for two older children in a case with a combined child support income of $33,768 is $9,708. This means that Fiona's cost is $4,854.

Step 5

Fred is a younger child. The cost for two younger children in a case with a combined child support income of $33,768 is $8,020. This means that Fred's cost is $4,010.

Step 6

Jack has 61.16 per cent of the combined child support income, so must meet 61.16 per cent of the cost of Fiona and Fred. He meets 50 per cent of their cost through care, so would need to transfer 11.16 per cent of the cost to Sue. 11.16 per cent of Fiona's cost is $541 and 11.16 per cent of Fred's cost is $448. Therefore, Fred would need to transfer $989 to Sue.

Step 7

Jack should not pay more in child support than the cost of having all the children living with him. The cost of having all the children live with him would be the same as the multi-case costs for the children. The multi-case cost for Fiona is calculated according to what her cost would be if all of Jack's three child support children were the same age as her (that is, older) children, and based on Jack's income alone. The cost of three older children in a case with a combined child support income of $23,117 is $7,397 so Fiona's multi-case cost is $2,466.

The multi-case cost for Fred is calculated according to what his cost would be if all of Jack's three child support children were the same age as his (that is, younger) children, and based on Jack's income alone. The cost of three younger children in a case with a combined child support income of $23,117 is $6,242, so Fred's multi-case cost is $2,081.

The multi-case cap also takes account of any costs that the parents meet through care. Jack meets 50 per cent of the costs of Fiona and Fred through care, so the multi-case cap for Fiona is 50 per cent of $2,466 and the multi-case cap for Fred is 50 per cent of $2,081. These cap amounts are higher than the amounts worked out in Step 6, so the cap does not apply.

Step 8

Jack is liable to pay $989 to Sue. Sue is not liable to pay any child support to Jack.

Step 9

Jack pays $989 to Sue.

A correction is also being made to the calculations outlined at the costs of children table in the New Formula Act, to make it clear that the costs of a particular child are calculated by applying the percentages set out only to the income between the upper and lower incomes of each band.

Children's costs will similarly be calculated for a day in a child support period, both for multi-case children and for the ordinary situation. In practice, this will allow the Registrar to reflect anticipated changes in the costs of children, particularly flowing from children turning 13 during a child support period, in the assessment made at the beginning of the child support period. Parents will be notified at the beginning of the child support period that the assessment will increase on the birthday of the relevant child that results in an increase in the costs of children.

Reflecting care changes in the assessment

Changes not affecting the assessment

For the purposes of the new formula, the Registrar must amend the assessment when notified of various changes in a parent's caring arrangements for a child. Various changes may not actually result in a change of the parent's level of care of the child for the purposes of their child support assessment, although the change might otherwise qualify as requiring an amendment to the assessment, that is, is greater than 7.1 per cent. These changes include changes where a parent is providing regular care of a child, and the change, although exceeding 7.1 per cent, still results in the parent being taken to provide regular care of the child. In this case, the Registrar should not make any amendment to the assessment.

Amendment of assessments

The Registrar has broad powers to amend assessments, where required for the purposes of the Child Support Assessment Act. If a decision is made affecting an assessment under the Child Support Registration and Collection Act, for example, on an objection to a decision under the Child Support Assessment Act, the assessment should be amended. Amendments to allow implementation of decisions of the SSAT are also being included.

The Registrar's powers to amend are subject to some limitations. In particular, amendments to a parent's level of care can only occur where various conditions are met. In order to implement the changes outlined above, amendments are made to give operative effect to the removal of the requirement on the Registrar to amend a care level for a child where the change will not have any effect.

Amendments are also made to allow the Registrar to amend an assessment when he or she becomes aware of a relevant dependent child not taken into account for the purposes of the assessment. Amendments to assessments to implement changes such as terminating events may be made without further amendment to the provisions. This is because such amendments are not expressly prohibited by any existing provisions.

In general, such amendments to an assessment to reflect a changed care level for a child must be made with prospective effect only. One exception applies where the Registrar considers the care arrangements on the application of a parent during or at the end of the child support period, and determines that a parent should be considered to have less than 14 per cent care of the child for the purposes of the child support period. Such a determination is made with effect from the date the parent ceased to have at least 14 per cent care of the child, which will generally be a date in the past. In this case, the Registrar may amend the assessment retrospectively to take account of this change.

Amendments are also made to allow the Registrar to amend an assessment when he or she becomes aware of a relevant dependent child not taken into account for the purposes of the assessment, which may otherwise have been restricted by restrictions applying to amendments of changed care levels. By contrast, amendments to reflect a terminating event in relation to a relevant dependent child may be made without further modification, because such changes are not changes to the care level of the child.

Incomes where no tax return lodged

Making a determination

Where a parent has not lodged a tax return for the last financial year prior to the start of a child support period when a new child support assessment must be made, the Registrar must determine an income to use in the assessment for the parent. This income may be based upon information provided by the parent, or upon other reliable income, such as information about the parent's employment history, or information held by Centrelink about Centrelink payments received by the parent. Amendments make it clear that the Registrar can use such information to determine the parent's adjusted taxable income, and therefore a minimum determination of 2/3 MTAWE does not apply.

In some cases, the parent may have lodged a tax return for the year prior to the last relevant year of income. If so, it is being made clear that the Registrar may use the information from the tax assessment for this year, inflated by an appropriate figure, as the income for the parent. The inflation figure to be used will be prescribed in regulations. The provisions are being clarified to make it clear that these are not situations in which the Registrar is unable to ascertain the parent's income, such that the Registrar should seek further information from the parent themselves.

Minimum level to be 2/3 MTAWE

If the Registrar has no current income information, and the parent has not lodged a tax return for the two years prior to the start of the child support period, the Registrar is currently obliged to determine an income of 2/3 MTAWE. For some parents, this level of income is likely to be too low, particularly where the Registrar has information about previous financial years which consistently indicates a higher level of income. In these cases, the Registrar should be able to determine an income which is higher than 2/3 MTAWE.

Exception to no retrospective use of income where parent could not communicate

The New Formula Act limited the circumstances in which the Registrar could replace an income that he has determined with a more accurate income, where the income is lower than that used in the assessment. The limitation is based upon the time at which the parent gives the more accurate income to the Registrar, and whether the parent could have lodged their tax return on time for tax purposes at that time. However, this may operate harshly where parents are genuinely unable to provide the Registrar with timely information. This may be because of ill-health, natural disaster or remote location. An exception to the general rule that the income cannot be used to adjust past portions of the assessment is being introduced, in circumstances prescribed. Regulations will be enacted, prescribing circumstances in which the exception will apply.

Parental estimates of income

Income amount orders

Currently, a parent may elect to have their child support assessment based upon their estimate of their current income, where their income has reduced since their last relevant year of income. Various conditions restrict the situations in which a parent may estimate, including where an 'income amount order' affects the child support assessment. Income amount orders are determinations of the Registrar or the SSAT, or orders of a court, that vary the child support assessment in a way that is inconsistent with allowing the parent to estimate a lower income. The determination or order may set a particular rate of child support, or set the taxable income of the parent. However, the definition is currently broad enough to include circumstances in which an estimate of income should legitimately be available, such as where the determination increases the taxable income of the parent by an amount to reflect the availability to the parent of income or assets which are not reflected in their taxable income. This amendment limits income amount orders to situations in which the determination or order either varies to a fixed rate the child support payable by a parent, or varies the child support income amount of the parent to a fixed figure.

Requirement that the Registrar be given an accurate taxable income for the last year

Parents may choose to have their child support assessment based upon their estimate of their child support income amount for the next 12 months, where their income has gone down compared to their last relevant year of income. The Registrar must compare the estimated income with the parent's last taxable year of income when deciding whether to accept the estimate. However, in many cases, parents have not lodged the tax return for the last relevant year of income at the time they wish to estimate their current income. The Registrar may have made their child support assessment based upon a determination of their income for child support purposes. Amendments will require that the parent provide a declaration of their last relevant year of income when seeking to lodge an estimate. If the Registrar is satisfied that this is correct, then the Registrar may proceed to consider whether to accept the estimate.

Reconciliation of estimates only if no review

Checking of the accuracy of parental estimates of income can occur in a number of ways. The parent may update their estimate themselves when it becomes inaccurate. The Registrar may review the estimate during its application, where the estimate has become inaccurate. The Registrar may also be required to reconcile an estimate at the end of the child support period. Amendments are made so that the Registrar is required to either review or reconcile an estimate, but not both.

Minimum assessments

Removal of automatic reduction to the minimum

A mechanism to place payers receiving full income support automatically on the minimum rate was enacted in the New Formula Act. Subsequent exploration of service delivery implications has shown that the aim of improving processes for parents who commence receiving income support can be better achieved through other mechanisms. Amendments remove the provision requiring the automatic mechanism. Parents remain able to estimate their income, resulting in a minimum assessment applying.

Reversal of reduction to the minimum payment or reduction of minimum to nil

The Registrar may currently allow a parent an exemption from paying the minimum rate of child support in certain circumstances. The circumstances are that the parent demonstrates that they have less available money during the child support period than the minimum rate. The Registrar may similarly exempt a parent from payment of the higher rate, initially of $20 per child, applying to parents with a low taxable income not on income support, where the parent demonstrates that they have a genuinely low income. In some circumstances, it may only subsequently become clear that the reduction should not have been made. Provisions are inserted allowing the Registrar to reverse the determination in these cases, by amending the assessment to raise it to either the minimum rate, or the higher rate for parents with low taxable income who are not on income support. If the Registrar amends the assessment in order to reverse a previous determination, notice must be given to the parents of this reversal, and the parents advised of their objection rights.

Information about carer's pension or benefit receipt in assessment notices

Prior to the changes commencing 1 July 2008, information about whether a carer received an income tested pension, allowance or benefit was relevant to the other parent. This was because, if the parents entered into an agreement that child support would be paid in a single, non-periodic amount, provisions previously allowed the carer to ask for the reinstatement of periodic payments in some circumstances. This ability will be removed by the New Formula Act, and there will then be no consequence for either parent directly based upon whether or not the carer receives such Centrelink payments. Consequently, there is no need for the other parent to be informed of payment receipt, and the requirement to give notification of this is being removed.

Lump sums and non-periodic payments

Terminology about how payments affect a liability

Detailed provisions introducing the ability for parents to agree that child support would be paid in a lump sum have been introduced with effect from 1 July 2008. The provisions set out how the lump sum payment affects the periodic child support liability, providing that the payment satisfies the liability under the assessment, rather than affect the amount of the assessment directly. However, the option remains for parents to agree that their lump sum will directly affect their assessment. Terminology changes are being made to make it clear that, if this is not the case, the lump sum affects only the amount payable under the liable party's liability under the administrative assessment, to distinguish the two types of lump sum. Terminology changes more broadly throughout the Act to reflect the concept that amounts are credited against amounts payable under the liability, rather than against the liability, are also being made.

Similar terminology changes are being made to references to such crediting in the Family Assistance Act.

Variations to crediting orders

Currently, a court may order that child support be paid in a non-periodic manner, and that such payment be credited against the assessment in a particular way. The manner of such crediting is set out in a statement made by the court. If the court considers modifying the statement, it must first consider whether it is just and equitable to the child, the carer and liable parent concerned, and otherwise proper to do so. Amendments are made to ensure that the decision about whether to modify the level of credit of a lump sum against the amount payable under a liability is subject to the same reasoning process.

Crediting period

Lump sums are credited against the assessment both in respect of an initial period, and then annually. In relation to the initial period, the crediting is to occur on a daily basis, given that it cannot be known how many days will apply until the next year commencement is reached.

Subsequent credits will occur in relation to financial years, as this works more conveniently with reflection of the value of the credit for Family Tax Benefit purposes. A definition of 'year of income', linking it to definitions under Taxation legislation is being inserted for this purpose. Indexing of the lump sum amount will also occur just prior to the financial year start, by reference to the indexation factor for the March quarter.

Payment options

Where parents have an arrangement for payment of a lump sum, the carer will be receiving a reduced rate of periodic child support to take account of the lump sum payment. In the ordinary case, a payer may choose to pay their child support by making various prescribed payments (non-agency payments), and asking for these to be credited against the amounts payable under their liability. However, this may have the effect of overly reducing the ongoing periodic support available to the carer where a lump sum is also in effect. Amendments are made so that prescribed non-agency payments are not available as a means of satisfying the ongoing liability in these cases.

Issues in parentage proceedings

Knowledge considered

The New Formula Act set out factors that a court should have regard to when considering whether an order for repayment of child support should be made, when it finds that child support has been paid by a person who is not the parent of the child. One of these factors concerns the likely knowledge of both parents about the issue of parentage. Amendments are being made to make it clear that a mere suspicion on the part of either parent that the payer was not the parent of the child is a factor relevant for the court to consider, even when this falls short of a reasonable doubt about parentage.

Determining when a decision of the Registrar becomes final

The New Formula Act made amendments to ensure that disbursement of child support ceased while a parent challenged the making of the assessment on the basis they were not the parent of the child. The Registrar still retains a discretion to suspend disbursement of child support payments while a parent challenges the making of the child support assessment for some other reason, for example, that the child was not an eligible child. This Schedule expands the situations in which such a determination may be made to include all challenges to the assessment under Part VII, VIIA or VII of the Child Support Registration and Collection Act. If the Registrar makes a suspension determination, the Registrar must make a determination to resume payments of child support (a 'resumption determination') once the decision-maker has made a decision, and no further review or appeal of that decision has been lodged. Amendments are made to ensure the resumption determination is made when appropriate.

Payment options

The Registrar may use most collection methods to enforce payment of repayment orders, as required. However, for an ongoing liability, a parent may make payments of a prescribed nature, and ask for these to be credited against the liability against the wishes of the payee of the liability (prescribed payments). The payments prescribed are generally those that directly assist with the maintenance for the child. It is inappropriate for a parent liable for a repayment amount to pay in this way. Such crediting is being excluded.

Exclusion of costs from recovery of overpaid amounts in paternity cases

The New Formula Act introduced Registrar collection of orders for repayment of overpaid amounts as the result of a court finding that a particular person was not a parent of a child. The provision is broad enough to allow the Registrar collection of an order for costs made as part of the proceedings to recover the overpaid child support. The provisions intended to place the former payer of the liability in as close a position as possible to that of the payee of the liability. A payee cannot have any costs orders incurred in establishing or varying a registrable maintenance liability collected. Accordingly, these amendments make it clear that costs are excluded from collection.

Ongoing collections

From contractors

Child support debts (which have not been paid when due) and ongoing child support are collected differently. Current liabilities can only be collected from regular salary and wage earning payers, or from Centrelink recipients. The Registrar gives a notice to the payer's employer requiring the employer to calculate the required amount to be deducted, and to forward deducted amounts to the Registrar each month. A balance of at least the protected earnings amount must remain to be paid to the payer, to ensure the parent has sufficient money to support themselves.

The Registrar will have power to attach regular periodic payments to child support payers under contract for service arrangements, where these payments are effectively substituting for wages. The same notice and penalty provisions will apply.

Ongoing garnishee notices to third parties

The Registrar currently has power to give a garnishee notice to a person or institution who owes an amount of money to a child support debtor, to pay that money to the Registrar instead, in satisfaction of that parent's child support debt. The power applies in situations where the person has money, or will subsequently hold money for the child support debtor. It also applies whether the amount is greater or less than the child support debt. If the amount is greater, only the child support debt amount must be paid to the Registrar. However, if the amount is less, that amount must be paid. In some situations, the person or institution has or will subsequently have an amount of money that is less than the child support debt, but is aware that they will subsequently have further money. It is not entirely clear that this situation is covered by the existing notice powers. Amendments are made to make it clear that the person or institution receiving such notice, who will hold further money on behalf of the child support debtor, must continue to remit amounts to the Registrar until the child support debt amount claimed in the notice is reached.

From 1 January 2008, reference to the amount claimed in the notice will be by reference to the 'maximum notified deduction total' to reflect changes made by Schedule 4 to this bill.

Payment periods

Particulars the Registrar must enter into the Register on registration of a liability include an initial and an ongoing payment period. The payment period currently defaults to a period of one month where the liability is not to be collected by withholding from the payer's salary or wages, and the payer does not make an election to have a different period apply. Instead, it is proposed that payers may still make an election, but this may be refused by the Registrar where he or she is not satisfied that the payment period elected will be a convenient payment period for the payer to accrue debts. In such cases, or cases where no election is made, the Registrar may enter a payment period which the Registrar determines to be convenient for the payer to accrue debts.

Reconciliation - effect of suspension determinations

The effect of suspension is intended to end the effect of the child support assessment for all purposes. This will allow any child living with the reconciled couple to be treated as a relevant dependent child if either of the parents is involved in another child support case. Amendments are made so that the child or children in the reconciled family is treated as though they have not been assessed in respect of the costs of the child for child support, to allow this to occur.

Post-separation costs

The provisions under which higher costs to a parent after a separation may be taken into account in the child support assessment need to be clarified to deal with multiple reconciliations and re-separations. If a separated couple were to reconcile, break up again after at least six months together, then reconcile for a shorter period and break up again, the provisions at present may apply to take the costs into account from the date of the last separation. However, the policy is that they should in fact apply from the date of the last separation following six months of being together. This is being clarified.

For consistency, this Schedule also extends the availability of exclusion of post-separation costs to situations in which a parent has lodged an estimate of their current income for the purposes of the assessment. While the first such estimate is for an amount lower than their last relevant year of income, and will not include any post-separation cost component, subsequent estimate may be for higher amounts as the parents' income changes. In this case, the estimate of income will be able to exclude post-separation costs if the other criteria are met.

Terminology changes for new formula

The current formula uses the concepts of a person applying for child support from a particular person. The new formula replaces this concept with the concept of a person applying for a parent or parents to be assessed in respect of the costs of a child. Child support becomes payable as a result of this assessment. Amendments are made to update the old terminology from 1 July 2008.

Transitional arrangements

Many current child support assessments are formula assessments varied by court orders. Most such court orders will continue to apply unaffected by the change to the new formula. However, some will not. To protect the outcome probably intended by the court in originally making the order, the assessments for such parents will be adjusted in a way that as closely as possible approximates the prior effect of the order in the context of the new formula. Regulations will be made, setting out rules for this purpose. If dissatisfied by the resulting assessment, parents will have the option of approaching a court for a fresh order.

A similar approach will apply to parents who, on 1 July 2008, will have a formula assessment affected by a prior change of assessment determination. However, such parents may seek a fresh change of assessment if dissatisfied by the outcome.

In both cases, parents will have the right to seek a fresh order or determination, despite their circumstances being unchanged from those applying when the order or determination was originally made.

Explanation of the changes

Item 1 makes the commencement change described above at 'Recognition of over 18 relevant dependent children - changed commencement'.

Items 2, 3 & 4 make amendments consequential to the measure described above at 'Interaction between the Child Support Acts - coverage of stay orders'.

Item 5 makes amendments described above at 'Jurisdiction of courts - retrospective determinations'.

Item 6 makes amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Interaction between the Child Support Acts - coverage of stay orders'.

Item 7 makes amendments described above at 'Jurisdiction of courts - access to court where a matter is too complex to determine administratively'.

Items 8 and 9 make the amendments described above at 'Grounds for departure from the formula - amendments made by the Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) Act 2006'.

Items 10 and 11 make technical amendments, correcting references to sub-subparagraphs that do not exist.

Items 12, 13 and 14 make amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Interaction between the Child Support Acts - coverage of stay orders'.

Item 15 makes the amendments described above at 'Interaction between the Child Support Acts - coverage of stay orders', relating to removing the stay power from the Assessment Act.

Item 16 makes the amendment described above in the measure 'Issues in parentage proceedings - knowledge considered'.

Items 17 and 18 make amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Jurisdiction of courts - frivolous or vexatious applications'.

Item 19 makes amendments described above at 'Interaction between the Child Support Acts - Consistent information gathering powers'.

Item 20 makes amendments described above at 'Interaction between the Child Support Acts - consistent information gathering powers' in relation to the information gathering power for the New Formula Act.

Item 21 makes the amendments described above at 'Transitional arrangements'.

Item 22 makes amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Issues in parentage proceedings - determining when a decision of the Registrar becomes final.

Items 23 and 24 make amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Issues in parentage proceedings - exclusion of costs for recovery of overpaid amounts'.

Items 25, 26 and 27 make amendments described above at 'Ongoing collections - payment periods' in relation to the particulars in the Register.

Item 28 makes amendments described above at 'Ongoing collections - from contractors'.

Item 29 makes amendments described above at 'Payee private enforcement - apportionment'.

Item 30 makes amendments described above at 'Ongoing collections - ongoing garnishee notices to third parties'.

Items 31 and 32 make amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Issues in parentage proceedings - determining when a decision of the Registrar becomes final'.

Items 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38 and 39 make amendments described above at 'Administrative review - exchange of information during internal review'.

Item 40 makes amendments described above at 'Jurisdiction of courts - access to court where a matter is too complex to determine administratively'.

Item 41 make amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Administrative review - exchange of information during internal review'.

Item 42 makes amendments described above at 'Administrative review - decisions on out of time applications'.

Items 43, 44 and 45 make amendments described above at 'Administrative review - provision of documents by the Registrar to the SSAT.

Item 46 makes a technical amendment, replacing an incorrect section reference.

Item 47 clarifies the term 'application' so that it covers the original application for review, not the document seeking the extension of time by the SSAT.

Items 48, 49, 50 and 51 make amendments described above at 'Administrative review - provision of documents by the Registrar to the SSAT'.

Items 52, 53, 54 and 55 make amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Administrative review - allowing a parent to withdrawn an application to the SSAT'.

Item 56 makes amendments described above at 'Administrative review - Attendance before the SSAT'.

Item 57 makes amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Administrative review - return of documents by the SSAT'.

Item 58 makes amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Interaction between the Child Support Acts - coverage of stay orders'.

Items 59, 60, 61, 62 and 63 make amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Jurisdiction of courts - formulation of appeal bench'.

Item 64 makes amendments described above at 'Jurisdiction of courts - provision of documents'.

Item 65 makes amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Issues in parentage proceedings - determining when a decision of the Registrar becomes final'.

Items 66, 67 and 68 make amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Reporting proceedings - identifying the Registrar'.

Item 69 makes amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Interaction between the Child Support Acts - coverage of stay orders'.

Item 70 makes amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Interaction between the child support Acts - effect of terminating events'.

Item 71 makes amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Interaction between the child support Acts - coverage of stay orders'.

Item 72 makes amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Issues in parentage proceedings - determining when a decision of the Registrar becomes final'.

Item 73 makes amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Jurisdiction of courts - frivolous or vexatious applications'.

Item 74 makes amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Payee private enforcement - orders for payment'.

Item 75 makes amendments described above at 'Interaction between the child support Acts - effect of terminating events'.

Items 76 & 77 make amendments described above at 'Payee private enforcement - orders for payment'.

Item 78 prescribes the application for the amendments described above at 'Jurisdiction of courts - access to court where a matter is too complex to determine administratively' as decisions that a matter is too complex made before or after commencement.

Item 79 prescribes the application for the amendments at 'issues in parentage proceedings - knowledge considered' to decisions after commencement.

Item 80 prescribes the application for amendments described above at 'Interaction between the Child Support Acts - consistent information gathering powers' in relation to the information gathering power for the New Formula Act for requirements made after the item commences.

Item 81 prescribes the application for amendments described above at 'Issues in parentage proceedings - exclusion of costs from recovery of overpaid amounts' in relation to liabilities that are registered after the item commences.

Item 82 prescribes the application for amendments described above at 'Ongoing collections - payment periods' in relation to liabilities that are registered or whose particulars are varied after the item commences.

Item 83 prescribes the application for amendments described above at 'Payee private enforcement - apportionment' in respect of payments made to the Registrar after the item commences.

Item 84 prescribes the application for amendments described above at 'issues in parentage proceedings - determining when a decision of the Registrar becomes final' in respect of suspension determinations made before or after the item commences.

Item 85 prescribes the application for amendments described above at 'Administrative review - exchange of information during internal review' in respect of objections lodged after the item commences.

Item 86 prescribes the application for amendments described generally above at 'Administrative review' in respect of applications to the SSAT after the item commences.

Item 87 prescribes the application for amendments described generally above at 'Administrative review' in respect of withdrawal of applications to the SSAT, requirements made by the SSAT Executive Director and appeals against SSAT decisions after the item commences, whether the application to the SSAT was made before or after the item commences.

Item 88 prescribes the application for amendments described generally above at 'Jurisdiction of courts - provision of documents' in respect appeals against SSAT decisions, whether the appeal was made before or after the item commences.

Item 89 prescribes the application for amendments described generally above at 'Interaction between the child support Acts - coverage of stay orders' in respect of proceedings instituted either before or after the item commences.

Item 90 prescribes the application for amendments described generally above at 'Payee private enforcement - orders for payment' in respect of orders made after the item commences, whether the proceedings were instituted before or after the item commences.

Item 91 prescribes the application for amendments described generally above at 'Interaction between the child support Acts - effect of terminating events' in respect of terminating events that happen after the item commences, whether the court order was made before or after the item commences.

Items 92, 93, 94, 95, 96 and 97 make the amendments described above at 'Parental estimates of income - income amount orders'.

Item 98 applies the amendments made by the items above to all elections made after the item commences.

Items 99 and 100 make amendments described above at 'Recognition of over 18 relevant dependent children - changed commencement'.

Item 101 makes the amendments described above at 'Ongoing collections - ongoing garnishee notices to third parties' for the amendments commencing on 1 January 2008.

Item 102 makes amendments to the Family Assistance Act that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Lump sums and non-periodic payments - terminology about how payments affect a liability'.

Item 103 makes amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at Notional assessments'.

Item 104 makes amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Costs of children and parents with multiple cases'.

Items 105 and 106 make amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Parental estimates of income - income amount orders', narrowing the definition.

Item 107 makes amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Recognition of over 18 relevant dependent children - the dates from which and to which the child is considered'.

Items 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 13, 114, 115, 116 and 117 make amendments described above at 'Costs of children and parents with multiple cases'.

Items 118, 119 and 120 make amendments described above at 'Post-separation costs'

Items 121 and 122 make amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Costs of children and parents with multiple cases'.

Item 123 makes amendments described above at 'Reflecting care changes in the assessment - changes not affecting the assessment'.

Item 124 makes amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Reflecting care changes in the assessment - amendment of assessments' in relation to relevant dependent children.

Items 125, 126, 127, 128 and 129 make amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Costs of children and parents with multiple cases'.

Item 130 makes amendments described above at 'Incomes where no tax return lodged - minimum level to be 2/3 MTAWE'.

Items 131 and 132 make amendments described above at 'Incomes where no tax return lodged - making a determination'.

Item 133 makes amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Incomes where no tax return lodged - exception to no retrospective use of income where parent could not communicate'.

Item 134 makes amendments described above at 'parental estimates of income - requirement that the registrar be given an accurate taxable income for the last year'.

Items 135 and 136 make amendments described above at 'parental estimates of income - Reconciliation of estimates only if no review'.

Item 137 makes a technical amendment, renumbering a second subsection 65B(3) as subsection 65B(5).

Items 138, 139 and 140 make amendments described above at 'Minimum assessments - removal of automatic reduction to the minimum'.

Items 141, 142 and 143 make amendments described above at 'Minimum assessments - Reversal of reduction to the minimum payment or reduction of minimum to nil'.

Item 144 makes amendments described above at 'Reflecting care changes in the assessment - changes not affecting the assessment'.

Item 145 makes amendments described above at 'Reflecting care changes in the assessment - amendment of assessments' with regard to retrospective amendments.

Items 146 and 147 make amendments described above at 'Reflecting care changes in the assessment - amendment of assessments' in relation to relevant dependent children.

Item 148 makes amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Interaction between the child support Acts - allowing amendment of assessments'.

Item 149 makes amendments described above at 'reflecting care changes in the assessment - changes not affecting the assessment'.

Item 150 makes amendments described above at 'reflecting care changes in the assessment - amendment of assessments' regarding relevant dependent children'.

Items 151, 152, 153, 154, 155 and 156 make amendments described above at 'Interaction between the child support Acts - allowing amendment of assessments'.

Item 157 makes the amendments described above at 'Information about carer's pension or benefit receipt in assessment notices'.

Items 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, and 163 make amendments described above at 'Lump sums and non-periodic payments - terminology about how payments affect a liability'.

Items 164 and 165 make amendments described above at 'Grounds for departure from the formula - reflecting a parent's care for a step-child'.

Item 166 makes amendments described above at 'Grounds for departure from the formula - amendments made by the Family Law Amendment (Shared parental responsibility Act) 2006.

Items 167 and 168 make amendments described above at 'Grounds for departure from the formula - reflecting a parent's care for a step-child'.

Items 169, 170, 171 and 172 make amendments described above at 'Lump sums and non-periodic payments - terminology about how payments affect a liability'.

Items 173, 174 and 175 make amendments described above at 'Lump sums and non-periodic payments - variations to crediting orders'.

Item 176 makes an amendment consequential to the amendment described above at 'Setting aside binding agreements'

Item 177 makes the amendment described above at 'Setting aside binding agreements'.

Items 178, 179, 180, 181, and 182 make amendments described above at 'Notional assessments'.

Item 183 makes the amendment described above at 'Notional assessments' in relation to the exception.

Item 184 makes amendments described above at 'Notional assessments' in relation to estimate of income, and income amount orders.

Item 185 makes amendments described above at 'Reconciliation - effect of suspension determinations' regarding the effect of suspension.

Item 186 makes amendments described above at 'Terminology changes for new formula'.

Items 187, 188, 189, 190, 191 and 192 make amendments that are described above at 'Costs of children and parents with multiple cases'.

Item 193 makes amendments described above at 'lump sums and non-periodic payments - terminology about how payments affect a liability'.

Item 194 makes amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Notional assessments'.

Item 195 makes amendments described above at 'Lump sums and non-periodic payments - crediting period'.

Items 196 and 197 make amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'lump sums and non-periodic payments - terminology about how payments affect a liability'.

Items 198 and 199 make amendments described above at 'lump sums and non-periodic payments - terminology about how payments affect a liability' regarding reflecting lump sums.

Items 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, and 206 make amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Lump sums and non-periodic payments - terminology about how payments affect a liability'.

Item 207 makes amendments described above at both 'Issues in parentage proceedings' for prescribed payments and 'Lump sums and non-periodic payments - payment options'.

Items 208 and 209 make amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Lump sums and non-periodic payments - terminology about how payments affect a liability'.

Item 210 makes amendments described above at 'Terminology changes for new formula'.

Item 211 makes amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Lump sums and non-periodic payments - terminology about how payments affect a liability'.

Item 212 makes a technical amendment, amending item 104 of the New Formula Act in order to ensure that the amendment will be operative as originally intended from 1 July 2008 despite amendments made to section 85 of the Child Support Registration and Collection Act by item 27 of Schedule 3 of this bill.

Items 213 and 214 make amendments that are consequential to the measure described above at 'Grounds for departure from the formula - reflecting a parent's care for a step-child'.

Child support offence provisions

A number of these policy clarifications are to provisions containing offences. None of these measures affects the underlying rationale for the offence and its level. Affected items are set out below.

Item 76 creates an offence for failure to notify orders or payments made in a payee private enforcement action. This is necessary to enable the Registrar to keep accurate records of the liability outstanding, and avoid taking action to collect amounts which have already been paid. The penalty of 10 penalty units is similar to that applying to other failures to notify orders already existing in the Child Support Registration and Collection Act, for example, section 23.

A new offence of strict liability is created by item 20 , inserting a penalty into the New Formula Act as a consequence of failure to comply with an information gathering requirement made by the Registrar. The offence is one of strict liability, and is similar to that already applying to a similar provision allowing the Registrar to seek information, at section 120 of the Child Support Registration and Collection Act. The maximum fine allowable is greater, to give a court more options when dealing with a breach of the provision. The existing information gathering power of the Registrar under the Child Support Assessment Act is expanded slightly by item 19 , which removes the restriction applying to requirements made of third parties: that the information sought may not relate to the non-financial affairs of another person. This is needed for the purposes of administering child support, and provides consistency with the similar provision in the Child Support Registration and Collection Act.

The expansion of the existing employer withholding provisions to cover independent contractors by item 28 will expand the scope of the offences within Part IV of the Child Support Registration and Collection Act to persons or organisations engaging independent contractors. However, the underlying rationale for the offences and their level remain unchanged.

Items 66, 67 and 68 narrow the scope of an offence, by providing that publication of proceedings identifying the Registrar or a person associated with the Registrar is no longer prohibited.

Commencements

The items in this Schedule commence in three separate groupings. Items 1 to 91 commence the day after Royal Assent. Items 92 to 101 commence prospectively on 1 January 2008, generally in order to allow necessary service delivery preparations to occur. Items 102 to 214 commence on 1 July 2008 because they are related to the new child support formula, which commences on this date under the New Formula Act.