An article published in The Wall Street Journal on October 31, 2009 garnered over emotionally charged 170 online comments over the weekend. The tenor of the article is set at the beginning: "Long viewed as payment for life, divorce settlements are facing strict new limits as some ex-spouses—primarily men—protest the endless support of a former partner. For richer, for poorer, forever?"
The WSJ article gives many examples of modifications of alimony many years following a divorce and cites the hardships imposed upon the payor. In many instances, the payee looks like a scheming, undeserving individual -- often, but not always a female. Many of the comments warn about getting married and thus risking assumption of liability for the support of another.
The WSJ notes that several states have pending legislation that would drastically alter how, if, when, and for how long spousal support (alimony) might be ordered in a divorce case. See for example the following examples:
Massachusetts House Bill 1785: Alimony typically one-half the length of the marriage and no longer than 12 years, except when the supported party has minor children. Boston lawyer Steven Ballard discusses these two competing bills on his blog Massachusetts Divorce and Family Law Blog here. Another blogger has written here: Massachusetts Alimony Virus – Still No Vaccine Available - Stephen McDonough on October 3, 2009
Pennsylvania Senate Bill 953: Alimony can be terminated if the recipient cohabits with another adult in a romantic relationship.
Oklahoma House Bill 1053: The bill makes it more difficult for one spouse to tap another's military retirement pay in a divorce settlement. Currently, military retirement pay is divided like marital property. Under the bill, if the former spouse remarries, he or she would no longer be entitled to any portion of military retirement pay, thus making it similar to alimony.
Ohio State Bar Association proposal: Alimony would be temporary for a marriage of 25 years or less, with a suggestion that for a marriage of 15 years the alimony last no longer than seven years.
I view the pending legislation in Oklahoma as somewhat draconian. Military retirement pay, like any other retirement program, is simply deferred income. In other words, retirement pay represents income that could have been accrued during the marriage and used to invest in marital property that would be divided during a divorce. Many employers use retirement plans as incentive to attract new employees who compare the benefits package of one potential employer against that offered by another employer. If the company did not offer retirement plans as a carrot to potential new employees, it would likely have to offer higher salaries. Inconclusion, retirement packages should be viewed as property, not income -- despite.
The WSJ article "The New Art of Alimony" may be read here. A one-time registration may be required. The Comments are found here.
Other posts on this Blog about Alimony may be read here.
Call me if you have a question about alimony or modification of a prior alimony provision.
As a retired military member I would have to disagree with your definition of retired/retainer pay. Military members do not make any monetary contribution to retired pay nor does the government. A military member must serve 20 years to be eligible to recieve pay, one day less 20 years, not eligible for retired/retainer pay. A military member is subject to recall, UCMJ, employment restrictions, citizenship, free from criminal convictions to remain eligible for retired /retainer pay. The former spouse is not legally or morally obligated to any of these restrictions to recieve a portion of the military members retired pay for life. A former spouse can remarry multiple military members for multiple "lifetime" retired pay awards regardless of lenghth of marriage, merit or circumstance. Former spouses can be incarcerated and still recieve payments. Military retired/retainer pay is reduced pay for continued reduced services. No Qualified Domestic Relations Order is required because it is a federal entitlement and NOT a qualified pension plan as per DFAS. Military retired pay cannot be passed on to heirs like property, disposed of, bartered, traded, sold. When a former spouse dies, payments revert back to the military member. How is that property? When the military member dies all payments cease. Morally and legally I can not understand why a military member should support a former spouse and their new spouse and family for life. It's just wrong. I invite you to visit www.ulsg.org .
Posted by: Frank | December 01, 2009 at 08:13 PM