California Family Code § 4053: Child Support Guiding Principles

Plain-Language Summary

Family Code § 4053 lists the core policies courts must follow when setting child support under California’s statewide uniform guideline. In short: the child’s interests are the state’s top priority; both parents share responsibility; support is tied to each parent’s actual income, time-share, and ability to pay; children should share in the standard of living of both parents (including high earners); two-household costs should be recognized; the guideline is presumptively correct and departures are limited; and orders should ensure fair, timely, and sufficient support.

Real-World Examples

• High earner downward deviation: A court may award below-guideline support if the paying parent has extraordinarily high income and guideline would exceed the child’s needs—but only with required findings and consistency with § 4053’s principles (child’s interests first; needs measured against parents’ station in life).
• Measuring “needs” for wealthy parents: The child’s needs aren’t limited to a bare-expenses budget; they’re assessed in light of the standard of living made possible by the payor’s income, consistent with § 4053(f).
• Two homes, comparable standards: When both parents have substantial time with the child, orders should reflect the added costs of two households and minimize major disparities in living standards between homes.
• No earmarking required: Courts generally don’t micromanage how support is spent; § 4053’s focus is on ensuring fair, timely, and sufficient support, not itemized reimbursements, absent special findings.
• Imputing income/earning capacity: When appropriate and in the child’s best interests, courts may consider earning capacity to align with § 4053(d)’s “pay according to ability” principle.

Published Case Law on § 4053

• In re Marriage of Cheriton (Cal. Ct. App. 2001) 92 Cal.App.4th 269 – Often quoted for § 4053’s policies: child’s interests are the state’s top priority; children share in both parents’ standard of living; guideline adherence is mandatory except as statutes allow. Frames “needs” by parents’ circumstances and station in life.
• In re Marriage of Hubner (Cal. Ct. App. 2001) 94 Cal.App.4th 175 – In high-income cases, the child’s “needs” must be assessed by the standard of living attainable with the payor’s income, consistent with § 4053(f); the record must show enough information about actual income to set support.
• In re Marriage of Macilwaine (Cal. Ct. App. 2018) 26 Cal.App.5th 514 – Reiterates that deviations from guideline must be consistent with § 4053; confirms vested, mature stock options are income for support; clarifies use of the “extraordinarily high income earner” exception and required § 4056 findings.
• In re Marriage of Cryer (Cal. Ct. App. 2011) 198 Cal.App.4th 1039 – Cites § 4053’s principles; explains that support generally shouldn’t be earmarked to specific line items and that any deviation must be justified within the statutory framework.
• S.P. v. F.G. (Cal. Ct. App. 2016) 4 Cal.App.5th 921 – High-income case discussing downward deviation. Court assessed “needs” in light of the payor’s wealth and § 4053’s policies, and evaluated whether the below-guideline award remained consistent with the child’s best interests and statutory findings.

Full Text of California Family Code § 4053

In implementing the statewide uniform guideline, the courts shall adhere to the following principles:

1. A parent’s first and principal obligation is to support the parent’s minor children according to the parent’s circumstances and station in life.
2. Both parents are mutually responsible for the support of their children.
3. The guideline takes into account each parent’s actual income and level of responsibility for the children.
4. Each parent should pay for the support of the children according to the parent’s ability.
5. The guideline seeks to place the interests of children as the state’s top priority.
6. Children should share in the standard of living of both parents. Child support may therefore appropriately improve the standard of living of the custodial household to improve the lives of the children.
7. Child support orders in cases in which both parents have high levels of responsibility for the children should reflect the increased costs of raising the children in two homes and should minimize significant disparities in the children’s living standards in the two homes.
8. The financial needs of the children should be met through private financial resources as much as possible.
9. It is presumed that a parent having primary physical responsibility for the children contributes a significant portion of available resources for the support of the children.
10. The guideline seeks to encourage fair and efficient settlements of conflicts between parents and seeks to minimize the need for litigation.
11. The guideline is intended to be presumptively correct in all cases, and only under special circumstances should child support orders fall below the child support mandated by the guideline formula.
12. Child support orders shall ensure that children actually receive fair, timely, and sufficient support reflecting the state’s high standard of living and high costs of raising children compared to other states.

(Amended by Stats. 2019, Ch. 115, Sec. 44. (AB 1817) Effective January 1, 2020.)

*Nothing on this page should be considered legal advice. This is simply a summary of information found on the Internet. Use at your own risk. This information has not been evaluated by an attorney, and it may be incorrect or obsolete due to changes in the law.