If a material change of circumstances is established, the court then reviews the specific facts, financial resources, and guidelines to calculate the appropriate modified support amount Bauckman v. McLeod, 429 S.C. 229, Miller v. Miller, 299 S.C. 307.
The Threshold Showing of Changed Circumstances
The family court has the statutory authority to modify a child support order upon a showing of changed circumstances Bauckman v. McLeod, 429 S.C. 229, S.C. Code Ann. § 63-17-310. The burden of proof rests on the party seeking the modification Upchurch v. Upchurch, 367 S.C. 16, Bauckman v. McLeod, 429 S.C. 229. This threshold standard is governed by several key principles:
- Avenues of Change: A substantial or material change of circumstances generally arises from changes in the child's needs or changes in the supporting parent's financial ability to pay Upchurch v. Upchurch, 367 S.C. 16, Bauckman v. McLeod, 429 S.C. 229.
- Contemplation of the Parties: Changes that were within the contemplation of the parties at the time the initial decree was entered do not provide a valid basis for a child support modification Upchurch v. Upchurch, 367 S.C. 16, Hawkins v. Hawkins, 403 S.C. 228.
- Heightened Burden for Agreements: If the existing child support award was based on a settlement agreement, the party requesting a modification faces an increased, heavier burden of proof Upchurch v. Upchurch, 367 S.C. 16, Townsend v. Townsend, 356 S.C. 70.
- Sufficiency of Evidence: General testimony regarding increased expenses, without specific supporting evidence, is legally insufficient to establish changed circumstances Upchurch v. Upchurch, 367 S.C. 16.
- Income Reductions: A reduction in child support cannot be granted based on a decrease in the noncustodial parent's income unless that parent makes a strong showing that they can no longer make the required payments Townsend v. Townsend, 356 S.C. 70, Floyd v. Morgan, 383 S.C. 469. A reduction in earning capacity or a voluntary change in employment does not automatically require or justify a downward modification Townsend v. Townsend, 356 S.C. 70.
- Application of Guidelines: Applying the child support guidelines to an existing child support order does not, in and of itself, constitute a change in circumstances, except in a Title IV-D case S.C. Code Ann. § 63-17-470.
Determining the Amount of Modified Child Support
Once a substantial and material change in circumstances is proven, the court determines the appropriate amount of modified child support Bauckman v. McLeod, 429 S.C. 229, Miller v. Miller, 299 S.C. 307. The court is guided by the same principles used in making an initial child support award, evaluating both parents' income, ability to pay, education, expenses, and assets, alongside the specific facts of the case Miller v. Miller, 299 S.C. 307.
The court aims to award an amount sufficient to meet the child's needs and maintain the standard of living they would have enjoyed but for the divorce, balanced against what the paying parent can reasonably pay while still meeting their own basic needs Miller v. Miller, 299 S.C. 307.
Application of and Deviation from the Child Support Guidelines
The family court must consider the Child Support Guidelines, which carry a rebuttable presumption of being the correct amount of support to be awarded S.C. Code Ann. § 63-17-470, Jackson v. Jackson, 432 S.C. 415. A court may award a different amount only upon a showing that applying the guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate S.C. Code Ann. § 63-17-470. If the court deviates from the guidelines, it must make specific, written findings stating the amount required under the guidelines and a justification for the variation S.C. Code Ann. § 63-17-470, Jackson v. Jackson, 432 S.C. 415.
By statute and regulation, the court may consider the following factors as potential reasons to deviate from the guidelines or as indicators of a change in circumstances:
- Educational expenses: Tuition and related costs for the child or spouse at private, parochial, trade, secondary, or post-secondary schools S.C. Code Ann. § 63-17-470, 114-4710. Use of the Guidelines..
- Equitable distribution of property S.C. Code Ann. § 63-17-470, 114-4710. Use of the Guidelines..
- Consumer debts S.C. Code Ann. § 63-17-470, 114-4710. Use of the Guidelines..
- Large families: Families with more than six children S.C. Code Ann. § 63-17-470, 114-4710. Use of the Guidelines..
- Extraordinary expenses: Unreimbursed extraordinary medical or dental expenses for either parent, or extraordinary travel expenses for court-ordered visitation S.C. Code Ann. § 63-17-470, 114-4710. Use of the Guidelines..
- Mandatory deductions: Mandatory retirement pension deductions and union fees S.C. Code Ann. § 63-17-470, 114-4710. Use of the Guidelines..
- Other support obligations: Support obligations for other dependents living with the noncustodial parent, or non-court-ordered child support from another relationship S.C. Code Ann. § 63-17-470.
- Child-related medical expenses: Unreimbursed extraordinary medical expenses for the child S.C. Code Ann. § 63-17-470, 114-4710. Use of the Guidelines..
- Legal financial obligations: Monthly fixed payments imposed by a court or by operation of law S.C. Code Ann. § 63-17-470, 114-4710. Use of the Guidelines..
- Child's income: Significant available income of the child or children S.C. Code Ann. § 63-17-470, 114-4710. Use of the Guidelines..
- Income disparity: A substantial disparity of income where the noncustodial parent's income is significantly less than the custodial parent's, making the guideline amount financially impracticable S.C. Code Ann. § 63-17-470.
- Alimony: Alimony awards, including lump sum, rehabilitative, or reimbursement alimony S.C. Code Ann. § 63-17-470, 114-4710. Use of the Guidelines..
- Agreements between parties: Agreements reached by the parties, provided both are represented by counsel, or the court thoroughly examines an unrepresented party to ensure they fully understand the agreement S.C. Code Ann. § 63-17-470, 114-4710. Use of the Guidelines.. The court retains independent discretion to ensure the agreed amount is reasonable and serves the best interest of the child S.C. Code Ann. § 63-17-470, 114-4710. Use of the Guidelines..
Effective Date and Retroactivity Limitations
Under South Carolina law, a modification of child support is generally not effective as to any installment that accrued prior to the filing and service of the action for modification S.C. Code Ann. § 63-17-310, Harris v. Harris, 307 S.C. 351. However, the family court retains the authority to hold any child support arrearages in abeyance S.C. Code Ann. § 63-17-310, Harris v. Harris, 307 S.C. 351. Retroactive increases prior to the filing of the action may be permitted in special circumstances—such as a parent's failure to disclose increased earnings—where denying the retroactive modification would result in a serious injustice Harris v. Harris, 307 S.C. 351.
When evaluating a child support modification, the family court first determines whether the moving party has met their burden of proving a substantial, uncontemplated change in circumstances regarding the child's needs or the parents' financial abilities. If this threshold is met, the court applies the Child Support Guidelines to calculate the modification, while retaining the authority to deviate based on specific statutory factors, provided the court issues written findings demonstrating that a deviation is in the best interest of the child and does not jeopardize the obligor's basic subsistence.
At Seibert Law and Mediation, we believe families thrive when they are empowered to build solutions, not forced into conflict. If you’re facing a difficult chapter, we’re here to help you move forward with clarity, compassion, and dignity. The most important step you can take is to speak with an experienced family court attorney immediately.
Divorces, Separate Maintenance and Support, and custody and visitation matters in South Carolina can be highly technical, and small factual details often make the biggest difference. If you or someone in your family is faced with family court, don’t assume the case is open-and-shut. At Seibert Law and Mediation, we examine every angle to fight for the best possible outcome.
Contact Seibert Law and Mediation for a confidential consultation. If you need help, reach out to speak to us at (843) 554-0686 or via text at (843) 594-2101. Your defense starts today with understanding how your case begins. You don’t have to face a family court matter alone.
Seibert Law and Mediation serves lowcountry South Carolina in: Charleston, Johns Island, West Ashley, James Island, Daniel Island, Mount Pleasant, Summerville, Goose Creek, Moncks Corner, and surrounding communities as well as upstate South Carolina in Spartanburg and Greenville, and surrounding communities.