Header Right

Alternative Dispute Resolution

Divorce: Savings & Retirement- Alimony Considerations

by

At some point in the difficult divorce process you will be asked to fill out a CIS (Case Information Statement).

Divorce-Savings Consideration

The CIS is a financial disclosure document which, among other things, establishes your standard of living while married.

Schedule C of the CIS has a line where you put your historical savings/investments. Although the CIS shows monthly expenses (assuming 4.3 week/mo.), simply take your annual savings and divide by 52 and multiply by 4.3. Many people fund their retirement plans once a year, so it’s easy to forget this when filling out the form.

This includes all savings, not only what you may be contributing to your 401K or another pension plan. It also includes IRAs, Sec. 529 Plans, and non-retirement related investments.

Although this has been a long-established principle, it recently grabbed the attention of the legal community and the forensic CPAs who assist them. On September 12, 2016, the N.J. Appellate Division issued a ruling in the matter of Lombardi v. Lombardi.

The Court ruled:

It is well-established that the accumulation of reasonable savings should be included in alimony to protect the supported spouse against the loss of alimony…

We disagree with the court’s decision and hold that regular savings must be considered in a determination of alimony (emphasis added), even when there is no need to create savings to protect the future payment of alimony.

The decision is a good reminder that when meeting with your attorney it’s imperative to tell him/her about the pattern of savings you enjoyed during the marriage. If you have access to monthly or year-end statements from financial institutions holding your money, make sure you give them to your attorney.

Urbach & Avraham has almost a thirty-year history of providing attorneys and their clients tax, forensic, and other advice in current or post-divorce matters. Feel free to call or email if you have any questions.

Improved Lifestyle After Your Breakup? It Could Cost You in Alimony

by

When it comes to the modification or termination of alimony as a result of cohabitation, financial assistance received from the new cohabiter is not the only factor taken into consideration. The New Jersey Appellate Court recently upheld its ruling that indirect economic benefits may be considered as well.

In Reese v. Weis, Defendant Rebecca Weis was receiving $100k annually in alimony from her ex-husband Ronald Reese since their divorce in 1996. In 1998 she began cohabiting with William Stein and his two children. Ronald filed a motion in 2008 to terminate his obligation to pay alimony citing the defendant’s cohabitation. The trial judge determined that defendant’s 10-year cohabitation afforded her significant benefit such as that alimony was no longer warranted. Defendant cross-appealed the ruling, claiming that her monthly contribution to a joint account she held with Stein, in an amount equal to what she received as support from Plaintiff, coupled with proof of annual expenses exceeding the provided support proved she paid her way without Stein’s economic assistance. She also argued that the luxuries and gifts that accompanied her new lifestyle with William should not be considered an economic benefit to terminate her alimony.

The Court however upheld its ruling, rejecting her claim that her enhanced lifestyle should not be a part of the alimony equation. The panel stated to the contrary, that economic benefits, such as when the cohabitant pays for housing costs, as well as more subtle economic benefits, may legitimately be taken into consideration.