Comparing the revised Guidelines to the October 4, 2021 edition, which was effective through November 30, 2025, the following key changes should be noted:
A. INCOME:
The revised Guidelines increase the maximum combined available gross income of the parents to be used in the child support calculation from $400,000 to $450,000. In cases where the gross combined income exceeds the sum of $450,000, the award of child support, at the $450,000 level, shall constitute the minimum presumptive order with the court having discretion to increase the assigned support sum.
In addition, the Guidelines makes a specific reference to the Cavanagh v. Cavanagh ruling. The Cavanagh ruling pertains to calculation of support based on two versions. One version uses alimony first and child support second; whereas the second version uses child support first and alimony second. The decision as to which calculation shall be used in cases where alimony is awarded is based on a comparison analysis of the net impact of support paid/received in each version as it affects both parties.
The guidelines are based on the understanding that child support is for the children’s support and alimony is for the support of a spouse. Contingency terms for each “kind” of support are different and need to be clearly defined in the parties’ agreement.
B. PARENTING TIME:
The Guidelines worksheet continues to be based on three alternative parenting schedules:
(1) Parents share financial responsibility and parenting time approximately equally (shared custody)
(2) The children reside primarily with one parent for approximately 2/3 of the time
(3) There is more than one child covered by the order and each parent provides a primary residence for at least one child (split custody).
However, the revised Guidelines introduce the possibility of “deviation” support orders, presenting two variations from the parenting time used in the Guidelines worksheet.
(1) The residential parent may receive increased support when the payor parent spends substantially less than one-third of the time with the child(ren)
(2) Reduced support may be ordered for the payor when parenting time for the nonresidential parent (payor) is substantially more than one-third but less than one-half time
The court does not provide guidance as to how the presented deviations for support would be calculated. However, it is clear that the court may well entertain adjustments to the standard versions presented in the worksheet, encouraging parents to conceptualize child-focused schedules based on children’s needs and parental availability rather than on the court’s time- restricted formulas.
C. Child Care Costs:
Deductions in the worksheet for child care costs are included up to a cost of $430 per week, per child as is necessary for the parent(s) employment. Responsibility for payment is shared in proportion to parental gross income. The revised guidelines also open up the discussion of what costs qualify for classification as child care expenses, including camp and extracurricular activities.
D. Parental Contribution to Postsecondary Education:
With respect to parental contributions for postsecondary education, the revised Guidelines are similar to the previous guidelines, stating that the court has the discretion to order parental contributions to children’s postsecondary education, limited to costs for University of Massachusetts at Amherst for a full-time, in-state boarding student. An order for postsecondary funding will be considered with child support orders for children after high school graduation based on parental ability to pay.
E. Health Care Coverage:
The Guidelines address responsibility for uninsured health care expenses in excess of $250/per annum to be paid by the parent receiving child support. Here the revised Guidelines state that the Court may consider each parent’s percentage of the total combined income in devising responsibility for uninsured medical expenses, rather than relying on equal sharing of costs. The Guidelines do not base proportional contributions on income ratios after support is paid/received. Perhaps the parties may elect to propose to the Court a more analytical contribution ratio.
F. Expanded Definition of Legal Parents:
The Massachusetts Parentage Act (MPA) became effective on January 1, 2025, explicitly embracing an expanded definition of parenthood. As such an award of child support may also be more expansive and therefore pertain to more than two parents having responsibility for child support. However, the worksheet does not include provisions for calculating support when the child has more than two parents. As such without the submission of a worksheet computation of support, the judge will determine each parent’s liability for child support based on the court’s assessment of each parent’s time with the child and financial resources. In these circumstances, there is no reason why the parents cannot present the court with their own assessment of support to be paid by each of the parents.
The December 1, 2025 Child Support Guidelines appear to highlight a conscientious effort to embrace different versions of support and expanded notions of parent-child scheduling. However, the inclusion of new parental time variations and definitions of parenthood does not include adjustment to the standard formulas. As such the court has great discretion on how to apply their newly presented changes. The parties, however, should make a major effort to analyze the actual economic impact of their agreement on meeting each one’s and the children’s needs, demonstrating to the court that their proposed agreement reflects careful and thoughtful deliberation of its implications for the family.
