PROPOSED FAMILY LAW REFORM BILL

      During the week of March 25, 2013, the Florida Senate will discuss and vote on a bill to change alimony and timesharing in Florida. This so called "alimony reform bill" has been amended from its original form. Here are a few of the key components in the current bill. Please keep in mind that this is a bill and not a law. Please also note that there may be more changes, so nothing in this post represents the final form of the proposed law.

Equal timesharing: There is a presumption that equal timesharing is in the best interest of the minor children, unless there are extenuating circumstances, such as domestic violence, incarceration of a parent or the distance between parental residences makes the equal timesharing impracticable. These amendments cannot be used to modify existing parenting plans or court orders.

Permanent Alimony: The new law would no longer provide for permanent alimony. Alimony, if awarded, would consist of bridge the gap, rehabilitative or durational alimony. An award of durational alimony cannot exceed 50% of the length of the marriage, unless a party proves, by a preponderance of the evidence, that there are circumstances to justify a longer award of alimony. There is nothing in the current bill to define what circumstances would justify extending alimony, which means that this would be left for a judge to decide. The main change here is that, instead of permanent alimony, which continues until the person paying alimony (the payor or obligor) proves that it should end, alimony will be awarded for a specific period of time, and the person receiving alimony (the recipient or oblige) will have to prove that it should continue.

Alimony guidelines: There are no set guidelines like those used for child support. If a judge awards durational alimony, the amount awarded cannot be more than 20% of the payors' monthly income for "short term marriages" (12 years or less- a change from the current law, which defines short term marriages as 7 years or less), no more than 30% of the payors' monthly income for "mid term marriages" (more than 12 years and less than 20 years- under the current law, 7-17 year marriages are mid-term marriages) and no more than 33% of the payors' monthly income for "long term marriages" (more than 20 years- currently 17 years). But these monthly income limits can be exceeded if a judge determines there is a need for additional alimony. For example, if a couple is married for 13 years and the payor earns $150,000 per year, the recipient can receive no more than 45,000 per year in alimony, unless a judge finds that this amount is not enough.

Imputing Income: There are guidelines for imputing income to a spouse who is unemployed and married less than 20 years. Income will be imputed based on a percentage of the unemployed spouses prior work history. For example, if the unemployed spouse has not worked for 4 years and, at the time of last employment, was earning a net income (after taxes) of $2,000 per month, the judge will impute net income of $1,000 per month. A judge will reduce the amount of imputed income if the obligee proves, by a preponderance of the evidence, that he/she cannot earn the amount imputed. Under the current law, a payor is required to prove that the recipient can earn income. The new law seems to create a presumption that the recipient can earn income, and the recipient is required to prove that this is not the case.

Retirement: An obligor's retirement, or reaching normal retirement age for his/her line of work, is considered grounds for terminating or modifying alimony. An obligor may file a motion to modify or terminate alimony in advance of retirement. A judge will terminate or modify alimony at the time of retirement, unless a judge finds that termination or modification is not warranted. There are no standards for the judge's decision, except that the judge must make written findings.

Second spouses' income: One of the burning questions (in my inbox, at least) is whether a new spouse's income or assets are a factor in alimony modification. The answer seems to be no, most of the time. The bill states that "The income and assets of the obligor's subsequent spouse or person with whom the obligor resides is not relevant in a modification action except under exceptional circumstances". Once again, there is no definition for exceptional circumstances.

Retroactivity: One of the most controversial elements of the bill is whether it would apply to those who are already paying alimony. For any of those cases that went to trial, or, for the 95% of the people whose cases settled out of court and the parties to the settlement were married 15 years or less and the amount of alimony awarded is longer than the marriage, the answer is as follows: alimony payors in these circumstances can seek modification of the amount or duration of alimony, unless your agreement is non modifiable. There are exceptions for those with settlement agreements who don't meet the less than 15 year requirements, and those exceptions generally seem to involving fraud or duress. Modification actions can be filed according to a schedule: alimony awards of 15 years or more can be filed when the law goes into effect on July 1, 2013, alimony awards of 8 years but less than 15 years can be filed one year later and alimony awards of less than 8 years can be filed two years after the law goes into effect. Keep in mind that this schedule if for anyone seeking to use the new law as a basis for modification. This does not prevent anyone from filing a modification if required by circumstances.

      This is only a summary of some of the key points of the proposed law. These are subject to change. Even if this bill were to become law, there is still room for interpretation and judicial discretion in the length and amount of an alimony award and in the modification of alimony. Please do not use this information as legal advice or interpretation of the law. Please seek the advice of a family law attorney to determine how any of these provisions relate to your specific situation.