The support order arrives, you scan the monthly number, then look back at your actual paycheck. The math does not add up. You know what you bring home in Colorado Springs, and you know what your kids realistically need, yet this order seems built on someone else’s income, not yours or your co parent’s.
Many people in your position assume there was nothing to be done, that the court “ran the guidelines” and the number must be correct. In reality, child support and spousal maintenance orders are only as accurate as the income figures that went into the calculation. If the court used outdated, incomplete, or incorrectly attributed income, the guidelines can produce an order that is far out of step with your financial reality.
At Law Office of Greg Quimby, P.C., we have focused on family law in Colorado Springs since 1998, and our team regularly reviews support orders where the income attribution went off track. We see how small gaps in financial disclosures or rushed assumptions at temporary hearings turn into years of overpayment or underpayment. In this article, we walk through how income attribution actually works, where it fails, and what you can do if you suspect your order is based on the wrong numbers.
How Income Attribution Drives Colorado Support Orders
Support in Colorado is largely formula driven. For child support and for most spousal maintenance awards, the court uses standardized worksheets that plug in each party’s gross monthly income, along with other factors such as overnights with the children and certain expenses. The software or worksheet does the math, and the final number can look very official, which is one reason many people assume it must be fair.
The crucial point is that the worksheet only knows what someone types into the income boxes. Colorado courts can use two different concepts, actual income and attributed (or imputed) income. Actual income is what a person is truly earning, including wages, overtime, bonuses, commissions, and certain benefits. Attributed income is what the court decides someone could and should be earning, even if their current paychecks do not match that level, often because of unemployment, underemployment, or disputed earnings.
Income attribution comes into play when a judge believes someone is not working to their reasonable capacity, is hiding earnings, or when the documentation is confusing or incomplete. The court might decide that a parent who worked full time at $28 per hour before separation but is now working part time should still be treated as if they earn full time wages. That attributed figure then goes into the worksheet. If the court attributes $4,800 per month instead of the $2,500 this person actually brings home, the child support result can be hundreds of dollars higher each month.
Because we work with Colorado support worksheets regularly at Law Office of Greg Quimby, P.C., we see the same pattern repeatedly. The guidelines themselves are not the problem. The failure is in the income inputs, especially when no one has slowed the process down long enough to test whether the attributed income is realistic and properly documented. Understanding how those numbers were chosen is the first step to knowing whether your order may be based on a flawed foundation.
Where Income Numbers Go Wrong Before They Reach The Judge
Most income attribution problems start long before a judge takes the bench. They begin in the financial disclosures and supporting documents each party is supposed to exchange. Colorado family law cases typically require a sworn financial statement along with pay stubs, tax returns, and other records. On paper, this sounds thorough. In practice, those forms are often incomplete, inconsistent, or missing key categories of income.
We routinely see sworn financial statements in Colorado Springs that list base wages but leave out bonuses, commissions, second jobs, or cash based side work. The supporting pay stubs may only cover one or two pay periods, often not enough to show an accurate pattern of overtime or variable pay. Without several months of records or full tax returns, it is easy for both the court and the other side to underestimate or overestimate what someone actually earns over a year.
Self employment and gig work create even more room for distortion. A self employed parent in El Paso County might report a very low net business income after expenses, but the tax return may reveal that the claimed expenses include items that the court would not treat as necessary for support purposes. Likewise, ride share work, freelance contracts, or seasonal construction jobs often show up as scattered 1099 income that is easy to gloss over. If no one connects those dots, the worksheet may be filled using only wage income, leaving significant earnings off the table.
These are not always cases of someone deliberately hiding money, although that does happen. Often, the forms are confusing, the instructions are rushed, and no one on the other side questions what is missing. At Law Office of Greg Quimby, P.C., our attorneys, paralegals, and legal assistants review disclosures together, so multiple people are looking for gaps between the sworn statement, the pay records, and the tax returns. That kind of coordinated review frequently exposes income attribution problems that began as simple omissions.
Common Attribution Errors That Skew Support Amounts
Once the court is working with imperfect income data, it becomes much easier for specific attribution errors to creep in. One of the most common problems we see in Colorado Springs support orders is the use of outdated income. For example, a parent who earned $6,000 per month before a layoff or health issue might now only be earning $4,200 in a new position. If the court attributes income based on the old job, either because those are the only records in the file or because the change is viewed with suspicion, the support amount can be set at a level that the parent cannot realistically meet over time.
The opposite scenario can be just as damaging for the receiving parent and children. Some parents have a stretch of significant overtime, hazard pay, or deployment related income in military families in Colorado Springs. That higher income appears in a few pay stubs, but it was never intended to be permanent. If the court treats that temporary spike as the ongoing baseline and attributes it forward, child support or maintenance may be calculated on income that no longer exists.
Courts sometimes attribute full time income to someone who is currently working part time, on the theory that they should be able to find or return to full time work. Colorado law allows this in some circumstances, but the details matter. Child care responsibilities, health limitations, and military training obligations can all be legitimate reasons for reduced hours. When those reasons are not properly documented and explained, the court may simply enter an earning capacity figure that ignores the practical reality of that parent’s week.
Self employed and military families in Colorado Springs face extra risk. Business owners can be attributed income based on gross receipts minus only reasonable expenses, not necessarily what the tax return shows after aggressive deductions. Military pay often includes base pay, housing allowance, and other benefits that have to be understood in context. If a judge or the other party misreads a Leave and Earnings Statement or does not grasp how allowances change with deployment, they may attribute a higher or lower income than is appropriate.
In our practice at Law Office of Greg Quimby, P.C., we regularly work with these complex income structures for Colorado families. We have seen support worksheets where military allowances were left out entirely and others where temporary deployment pay was treated as permanent. The same goes for small business returns where personal expenses were mixed in with business costs. Untangling those errors and presenting a clear picture of sustainable income is often the key to correcting skewed support.
How Temporary Orders Lock In Flawed Income Figures
Many families in Colorado Springs first encounter income attribution issues at the temporary orders stage. Temporary orders are designed to put a basic framework in place quickly, including support, while the rest of the case moves forward. Because these hearings often happen early, the financial picture is rarely complete. People may still be moving out, changing jobs, or figuring out child care, and the paperwork may not yet tell a full story.
Under that time pressure, judges frequently make income decisions based on the limited information in front of them. A few recent pay stubs, an unpolished sworn financial statement, or rough testimony about hours worked can all lead to a best guess income figure. The goal is to avoid leaving children or a lower earning spouse without support while the case continues, not to conduct a detailed financial audit at that moment.
The problem is that temporary income figures have a way of sticking. Once a number has been plugged into a worksheet and an order has been in place for several months, that figure can quietly become the starting point for settlement talks or for the permanent orders hearing. Even when more accurate records are available later, everyone, including the court, may be anchored to the original attribution, especially if no one forcefully challenges it.
We often see this pattern with income changes related to deployment, injury, or job loss. A temporary order might be based on a soldier’s pre deployment stateside income, then by the time of permanent orders, deployment allowances or new assignments have changed the pay structure entirely. If no one revisits the underlying numbers, the final order may simply extend the old assumptions for years to come.
Because we know how “sticky” temporary income findings can be, our team at Law Office of Greg Quimby, P.C. pays close attention at that early stage. When we represent clients in Colorado Springs, we work to get the best financial snapshot possible in front of the court, even at temporary orders, and we make a point of revisiting those figures as the case develops. That way, the numbers used in permanent support orders are based on updated, realistic income, not on rushed estimates.
The Real Cost Of Incorrect Income Attribution Over Time
On paper, a $150 or $200 monthly difference in support may not look enormous. Lived out over years, it can reshape a family’s finances. If an order is set $200 too high because the court attributed an income you do not actually earn, that is $2,400 each year you have to cover somehow. Over three years, you are looking at $7,200. If you fall behind because that amount is simply not sustainable, arrears and interest can push the real cost even higher.
For paying parents in Colorado Springs, unsustainably high support can mean constantly juggling which bills get paid, relying on credit cards, and risking enforcement actions when arrears develop. Wage garnishments, driver’s license issues, and damage to credit can all ripple out from an order that never matched the real paycheck. Emotionally, this creates a sense of failure and frustration, even when the root cause is a misattributed income, not a lack of effort.
On the receiving side, understated income attribution can be just as damaging. If the other parent’s bonuses, self employment earnings, or military allowances were not fully counted, the support ordered may fall far short of what is needed to cover housing, food, and activities for the children. The custodial parent may quietly absorb the shortfall through longer work hours, extra debt, or cutting back on the very things that could benefit the children most, such as tutoring or sports.
Over time, these imbalances erode trust between co parents and increase conflict. The parent who is overpaying may resent every request for additional contributions, and the parent who is under receiving may see every missed payment as bad faith. At Law Office of Greg Quimby, P.C., we view support orders through a long term, family values lens. Fair, realistic income attribution is not about one parent winning. It is about creating a support structure that both sides can live with and that genuinely meets the children’s needs over time.
Who Or What Is Really Responsible For Bad Income Numbers
People understandably look for someone to blame when a support order feels unfair. It is easy to point the finger at the other parent, especially if you suspect they have not been fully forthcoming about their income. In some cases, that suspicion is justified. However, in many Colorado Springs cases we review, the income attribution problems come from a more complicated mix of process failures, time pressure, and incomplete advocacy.
Judges in El Paso County and surrounding courts handle heavy dockets. They do not have the luxury of conducting their own financial investigations in every case. They generally rely on the documents and testimony each side presents. If one sworn financial statement is detailed and supported by months of pay stubs and tax returns, and the other side’s file is thin and disorganized, it is not surprising that the more complete picture often carries the day, even if it contains quiet errors of its own.
When no one challenges obvious gaps, such as missing bonus history or unexplained drops in hours, those issues may never be fully explored. Many self represented parties do not realize they can question the other side’s disclosures or that they can ask the court to consider a different way of looking at income. Even represented parties can be hurt if their attorney does not focus closely on the financial evidence or assumes the guidelines software will get it right on its own.
In our experience at Law Office of Greg Quimby, P.C., the problem is usually less bad luck with a judge and more a lack of clear, organized financial storytelling. Judges tend to be receptive when someone comes to court with a well supported explanation for why attributed income should be higher or lower than the rough estimate currently being used. That means the real solution is often better documentation and sharper advocacy around the income numbers, not simply hoping for a different decision maker.
How We Uncover & Challenge Incorrect Income Attribution
Correcting a skewed support order starts with understanding exactly how the current numbers were reached. When someone in Colorado Springs comes to us concerned about income attribution, we begin by collecting the existing child support or spousal maintenance order, any attached worksheets, the sworn financial statements, and the pay records or tax returns that were originally filed. This gives us a snapshot of the financial story the court saw at the time of the decision.
We then compare those documents to the client’s current reality. Our team of attorneys, paralegals, and legal assistants looks for discrepancies between the income shown on the worksheet and the income reflected in more complete records. That might include several months of recent pay stubs, full federal and state tax returns, W 2s or 1099s, and, for business owners, detailed profit and loss information. For military clients in Colorado Springs, we pay close attention to Leave and Earnings Statements and any recent changes in duty station or deployment.
Once we have a more accurate picture, we can identify where attribution went wrong. Perhaps a temporary spike in overtime was treated as permanent. Perhaps self employment expenses were misunderstood, or military allowances were counted twice or not at all. In some cases, it becomes clear that a party’s current income has changed substantially since the order due to job loss, promotion, or health issues. Each of those scenarios calls for a different approach.
Legally, the most common tool for correction is often a motion to modify support based on a substantial and continuing change in circumstances. In that motion, we can present updated financial statements, attach supporting documents, and explain, in plain language, why the attributed income should be adjusted. In cases where imputed income was never supported by enough evidence in the first place, we can argue that the original attribution was unrealistic and should be recalculated based on firmer numbers.
We approach this process with a cost effective mindset. A thorough income review and court motion take time and resources, so we talk candidly with clients about the potential financial upside. If correcting an income attribution error is likely to change support by only a few dollars per month, it may not be worth it. If the difference is significant and will continue for years, investing in a focused challenge can make financial and emotional sense.
When To Get A Colorado Springs Family Law Attorney Involved
You do not need to be certain that your support order is wrong before talking with a lawyer. Many people in Colorado Springs come to us simply because something feels off. Common warning signs include a support amount that seems impossibly high compared to your take home pay, an order that does not appear to reflect your recent job loss or health change, or a strong sense that the other parent’s overtime, bonuses, or self employment income were never fully counted.
Timing matters. The longer an incorrect income attribution remains in place, the greater the financial and emotional impact. Acting sooner can prevent large arrears from building up if you are overpaying, or help ensure your children receive a level of support that better reflects the other parent’s true earnings. That said, even older orders can sometimes be revisited if there has been a meaningful change in circumstances or if new information has become available.
Before meeting with a family law attorney, it helps to gather some basic documents. These typically include your current support order, any child support or maintenance worksheets you have, several months of recent pay stubs, your most recent tax return, and any paperwork showing major income changes, such as layoff notices or new employment contracts. If you have copies of the other party’s disclosures or pay information from the original case, bring those as well.
At Law Office of Greg Quimby, P.C., we view that first conversation as a chance to evaluate whether challenging or modifying your order is likely to be worth the effort and cost. Our family centered, cost conscious approach means we focus on what will make a meaningful difference for your household, not on litigating every possible issue. Sometimes, the best guidance is reassurance that your order is reasonably accurate. Other times, a closer look at the income attribution reveals real opportunities for change.
Find Out Whether Incorrect Income Attribution Is Costing Your Family
Incorrect income attribution is not just a technical glitch in a worksheet. It is a mistake that can shape your family’s finances for years, affecting everything from rent and groceries to your ability to keep up with other obligations. Once you understand that support orders in Colorado are only as fair as the income numbers behind them, it becomes clear why taking a fresh look at those numbers can be so valuable.
If you are living with a child support or spousal maintenance order that does not match your financial reality in Colorado Springs, you do not have to guess whether income attribution is part of the problem. Our team at Law Office of Greg Quimby, P.C. can review your existing orders and financial records, help you understand how the court reached its numbers, and talk through whether a targeted challenge or modification makes sense in your situation.
Call (719) 212-4227 to schedule a time to discuss your support order and the income attribution behind it.