New York Child Support Calculator

Calculate child support in New York from the state's own published guideline. The estimate adjusts for health insurance.

Last updated: New York filing fee checked ; other cost figures are our own estimates

New York divorces typically cost about the same as the national average of $12,900.

Child Support in New York

Formula
Income Shares Model
Where the percentages stop being mandatory
$193,000/yr combined
Equal parenting presumption, in our record
No
Property system, in our record
Equitable distribution

Child Support Calculator in New York: What You Should Know

New York uses the Income Shares Model, combining both parents' incomes to set the total support obligation up to a statutory threshold on combined parental income, currently $193,000 per year (about $16,083 per month). Each parent then covers a share of that obligation proportional to their share of the combined income, and the custodial parent's share is treated as paid in-kind through direct care. The $193,000 figure is worth reading carefully, because it is not a ceiling on what a court can order. New York's own Child Support Standards Chart, form LDSS-4515 (Rev. 03/26), puts it as the point above which the law permits, but does not require, the use of the child support percentages, so the threshold grants discretion rather than removing it. It is not where the chart runs out either: the printed table continues in $100 steps to $199,999, and the same chart sets the 2026 self-support reserve at $21,546. Our estimate stops at the threshold and calculates from there, which means that for a family above it, the figure on this page is what the guideline produces at the threshold and a New York court can order more on top. Above $193,000 of combined income, read our number as the low end of a realistic range rather than the likely award.

Key point: New York's $193,000 is a threshold for judicial discretion, not a cap on the award. Our estimate stops there, so for combined income above it read our figure as the low end of a realistic range rather than the likely award. Read it as the low end and not as a floor: unlike New Jersey and Pennsylvania, no New York instrument says an award may not come in below the amount at the threshold.

1
2

Tell us the basics

Locked to New York on this page.

Who is paying child support?

Use your gross (before-tax) monthly income. If you are paid annually, divide by 12.

Use their gross (before-tax) monthly income. If they are paid annually, divide by 12.

This helps us describe how income is treated. It does not change the estimate: we calculate on the income figures you entered and do not impute income to anyone.

This estimate is for planning purposes only and does not constitute legal or financial advice. Consult a licensed family law attorney in your state for guidance specific to your situation.

How New York calculates child support

New York sets child support with the Income Shares Model, and we have read the guideline that says so, which means both parents' incomes are combined, and each parent covers the share of the total obligation that matches their share of that combined income. Here is what that looks like in practice.

Calculated from the state's published guideline

New York is calculated from the state's own statute, and there is no schedule anywhere behind it. N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240(1-b) carries the guideline for a matrimonial action, which is where a divorcing couple's child support order comes from, and N.Y. Fam. Ct. Act § 413 is the Family Court counterpart that the state's own Child Support Standards Chart points readers at. We read both, and they agree: the percentages are byte-identical between them, the computation steps are byte-identical, and of 50 differences across the whole of paragraphs (a) to (l), 0 touch a figure, a percentage, a dollar amount, an income definition, a computation step or a floor. Nearly all of them are cross-references, each section pointing into its own court's statute.

The arithmetic is two operations in one sentence. § 413(1)(c)(2) multiplies the combined parental income, up to the combined parental income amount, by the child support percentage for the number of children, and then prorates the result "in the same proportion as each parent's income is to the combined parental income". The percentages are in § 413(1)(b)(3) and they are 17 percent for one child, 25 for two, 29 for three and 31 for four. The fifth is a different shape and it matters: "no less than 35 percent of the combined parental income for five or more children", which is a MINIMUM rather than a rate. The state's own printed chart cannot show you that, because a table has one number per cell, so its five-or-more column is exactly 35 percent at every row and a reader taking that column has the least the statute allows while it looks like the answer.

Run those two operations and something happens that no other income shares state on this site does. Below the combined parental income amount they cancel exactly: multiplying the combined income by a percentage and then taking the paying parent's share of it gives the percentage of that parent's own income, and the other parent's earnings drop out entirely. So a New York figure below the amount does not move when the other parent's income moves, which is the opposite of what "income shares" leads people to expect and is worth knowing before a negotiation. Above the amount it stops being true, and it stops in an unexpected direction: the multiplication is capped and the division is not, so the mandatory part of the obligation FALLS as the other parent earns more. That is the mandatory part alone. § 413(1)(c)(3) then hands the income above the line to the court, which runs the other way. We implement the statute's two steps rather than the shortcut they collapse to, so that what this page computes is the rule rather than a simplification that happens to agree with it for most families.

The largest limit on every figure here is which income the percentage runs on, and New York is the one verified state on this site where we will not tell you which way our answer errs. § 413(1)(b)(5) builds income from six clauses and then removes eight named items at clause (vii). The only taxes among the eight are New York City or Yonkers income or earnings taxes, and FICA. Neither federal income tax nor New York STATE income tax comes off, so § 413 income is not a net figure, and it is not untouched gross either: it is gross with a specific list removed. This calculator collects gross monthly pay and one item on that list, the support you already pay for a child not in this case, which clause (vii)(D) deducts. For a reader whose whole income is wages already on a federal return the other seven can only push § 413 income DOWN from what was typed, which would make our figure high. For a reader with benefits, investment income or income a court imputes under clauses (ii) to (vi), the additions can push it UP, which would make our figure low. Nothing on the form separates those two readers, so there is no single direction to disclose and we do not invent one. A smaller gap has no direction at all: clause (i) reads gross as it should have been reported on the most recent federal income tax return, which is last year's figure, where this form collects a current one.

Neither section contains a parenting-time or shared-custody adjustment to the basic obligation. We swept 22 different ways of saying it across the whole of both, and the only thing either of them says about time is § 413(1)(f)(9), which lets a court find the basic obligation unjust or inappropriate because of "extraordinary expenses incurred by the non-custodial parent in exercising visitation", or expenses of extended visitation that substantially reduce the other parent's. That turns on EXPENSES rather than on a count of nights, so it does not become an adjustment at any overnight number. Read that as what it is: a statement about the two sections we read, and not a statement about New York law. A shared-custody household's answer may sit in case law or in the discretion paragraph (f) confers, and we have not looked. This calculator still collects overnights, because the same form serves every state, and in New York they do not move the number.

Two low-income floors, and the difference between them is worth knowing because most summaries carry only one. § 413(1)(d) works on what the obligation would leave the paying parent with over a year. Where it would take that parent below the federal poverty income guideline for a single person, $15,960, the basic obligation is $25 a month. Between the guideline and the New York self-support reserve of $21,546, it is $50 a month or the difference between that parent's income and the reserve, whichever is GREATER, and the subsection says that figure stands "in addition to" anything a court orders for childcare, health insurance or education. Both figures move and they move on different dates: § 413(1)(b)(6) makes the reserve 135 percent of the guideline and revises it every March 1, and the guideline itself is reissued each January by the federal Department of Health and Human Services. The combined parental income amount moves on a third clock again, every 2 years under N.Y. Soc. Serv. Law § 111-i(2)(b), so on an odd-numbered year a fresh chart restates it unchanged while the reserve beside it has moved.

What this page computes is the BASIC obligation, which in New York's own structure is not the order. § 413(1)(c)(4) to (7) sit on top of it. Childcare is prorated by income share and added where the CUSTODIAL parent is working or studying and incurs it, which is a condition about a different parent from the one this form asks about, so we do not apply the childcare figure entered here and the result panel says so rather than quietly ignoring it. Health insurance under § 413(1)(c)(5)(ii) runs in two directions on one fact: the cost is prorated by income share, then ADDED where the custodial parent is ordered to provide the coverage and DEDUCTED where the non-custodial parent is. We can compute the deduction because the form asks who provides the coverage; we cannot compute the addition, because the form collects no premium in that case, and a zero on this page is not evidence there is no premium. Cash medical support at § 413(1)(c)(5)(iii) to (v) is a third component again, and every route to it turns on public coverage facts this form does not collect. Its ceiling is worth carrying away even so: five percent of gross income, or the difference between the paying parent's income and the self-support reserve, whichever is less.

New York publishes a Child Support Standards Chart, form LDSS-4515 (Rev. 03/26, released 2026-03-01), and if you look your family up in it below the combined parental income amount you should find the figure this page gives. The chart is the same arithmetic tabulated in $100 steps, read at the bottom of each step, and it says so itself while calling itself approximate and directing readers to the percentages for a precise figure, which is what we compute. Above the amount the chart and this page part company on purpose. Its printed table carries on to $199,999, applying the percentage to the whole income, which is the calculation a court MAY make under § 413(1)(c)(3) rather than the one it must. Our figure is the mandatory part, and the result panel says what a court can do above it.

Source: N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240(1-b)

The Income Shares Model starts from an estimate of what the children would have received had the household stayed intact, then splits that figure between the parents. The calculation runs in three steps. Both parents' monthly incomes are added together. A basic support obligation for that combined figure and that number of children is set by the state's own guideline. Each parent is then responsible for the percentage of the obligation that matches their percentage of the combined income.

Because the obligation is divided by income share rather than assigned to one side, the receiving parent's earnings matter as much as the paying parent's. A parent bringing in 70 percent of the combined income carries roughly 70 percent of the total obligation. The parent the children live with most is treated as already spending their share through daily care, so only the other parent's share is ordered as a payment. That is why closing the income gap between two parents lowers the payment even when neither parent's own income falls.

Four things are then layered on top of the base figure: health insurance premiums covering the children, work-related childcare, support already being paid under an earlier order for other children, and, in most states, the number of overnights each parent has.

The figure New York's own guideline works from is combined parental income, under N.Y. Fam. Ct. Act § 413(1)(b)(4) and (b)(5).

What moves the number in New York

  • Both parents' monthly incomes, and the gap between them
  • Number of children covered by the order
  • Health insurance premiums covering the children
  • Work-related childcare for the children, under a rule this estimate does not apply
  • Support already ordered for children from another relationship

Income limits and judicial discretion

New York sets $193,000 of combined parental income a year, about $16,083 a month, as the point where the child support percentages stop being required, and that is not a cap on what a court can order. The state's own chart puts it this way: above the amount "the law permits, but does not require, the use of the child support percentages in calculating the child support obligation on the income above $193,000". So the discretion runs UPWARD, out of the income above the line, on top of a figure the guideline has already worked out. It is not a minimum either, and that is the half most summaries get wrong in the other direction: no clause in either statute or in the chart says an award may not come in below the amount at the threshold, which is a clause Colorado, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Washington all do have. Two things to check before you compare the figure with another state. It is COMBINED income, so two parents each earning less than $16,083 a month can be over the line together. And it is not where the chart stops: the printed table carries on in $100 steps to a last row of $199,999, applying the percentage to the whole income, which is the permissive calculation rather than the required one. The amount itself moves on its own clock. N.Y. Soc. Serv. Law § 111-i(2)(b) indexes it to CPI-U every 2 years from a base of $141,000, where the self-support reserve beside it is revised every year. New York gives judges wide latitude on custody and parenting time. That latitude does not reach the guideline arithmetic, which has no parenting-time input, but it does shape the schedule the family lives under and the case a parent can make for departing from the guideline figure. Expect more variation between courtrooms here than in states that work from a fixed schedule. That is our own record rather than New York's own custody law.

New York child support examples

These three examples run through the same New York calculator on this page, so the figures match what the tool returns for the same entries. Each example changes one thing against the one before it, so you can see which lever moved the result. All three assume a standard schedule of 80 overnights a year with the paying parent, though the overnight count does not change the New York guideline figure either way.

Example 1: One child, standard schedule

The starting point: one child, a moderate income gap, and no insurance or childcare in the order yet.

Paying parent
$5,000/mo
Other parent
$3,000/mo
Children
1
Overnights
80/yr

Guideline result: $850 per month ($10,200 a year).

Step by step breakdown for example 1
StepAmount
Your gross monthly income$5,000
Other parent's gross monthly income$3,000
Combined parental income (§ 413(1)(b)(4))$8,000
Child support percentage for 1 child (17%)$1,360
Your 63% share of combined parental income (§ 413(1)(c)(2))$850
  • New York carries this guideline in two statutes and they agree. N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240(1-b) governs a matrimonial action, which is where a divorcing couple's child support order comes from, and N.Y. Fam. Ct. Act § 413 is the Family Court counterpart that the state's own Child Support Standards Chart points readers at. We read both. The percentages are byte-identical between them, the computation steps are byte-identical, and of 50 differences across the whole of paragraphs (a) to (l), 0 touch a figure, a percentage, a dollar amount, an income definition, a computation step or a floor. Almost all of them are cross-references, each section pointing into its own court's statute.
  • How the arithmetic runs, and it behaves unlike most income shares states. § 413(1)(c)(2) multiplies the combined parental income by the percentage for 1 child and then splits the result by each parent's share of that combined figure. Below the combined parental income amount, which is where your family sits, those two steps cancel exactly: the figure above is 17 percent of your own income, and the other parent's earnings do not change it. That is worth knowing before you negotiate, because in most income shares states closing the gap between two incomes moves the number and here it does not. It starts to matter again above $193,000 of combined parental income a year.
  • The largest limit on the figure above is which income the percentage runs on, and New York is the one state on this site where we cannot tell you which way our answer errs. § 413(1)(b)(5) builds income from six clauses and then takes eight named items off it at clause (vii). The only taxes among the eight are New York City or Yonkers income or earnings taxes and FICA, so neither federal income tax nor New York STATE income tax comes off: § 413 income is not a net figure, it is gross with eight specific things removed. This form collects gross monthly pay and one of those eight, the support you already pay for a child not in this case. For a reader whose whole income is wages already on a federal return, the other seven can only push § 413 income DOWN from what you typed, which would make our figure high. For a reader with benefits, investment income, or income a court imputes under clauses (ii) to (vi), the additions can push it UP, which would make our figure low. Nothing on this form distinguishes those two readers, so there is no single direction we can honestly state, and we are not going to pick one. There is a smaller gap with no direction at all: clause (i) reads gross as it should have been reported on the MOST RECENT federal income tax return, which is last year's figure, and this form collects a current one.
  • The 80 overnights you entered have not changed the figure above, and here is exactly what that does and does not mean. We read the whole of N.Y. Fam. Ct. Act § 413(1) and N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240(1-b) looking for a parenting-time or shared-custody adjustment to the basic obligation, sweeping 22 different ways of saying it, and neither section contains one. The only thing either section says about time is at § 413(1)(f)(9), which lets a court find the basic obligation unjust or inappropriate because of "extraordinary expenses incurred by the non-custodial parent in exercising visitation" or expenses of extended visitation that substantially reduce the other parent's. That turns on EXPENSES rather than on a count of nights, so it does not become an adjustment at any number of overnights. Two things to be careful with. That is a statement about the two sections we read, not a statement about New York law: a shared-custody household's answer may sit in case law or in the discretion paragraph (f) confers, and we have not looked. And this form carries one overnight figure, 80 with you and 285 with the other parent, which is not something either section asks for.
  • New York's two low-income floors did not reach your figures, and it is worth knowing there are two of them rather than one. § 413(1)(d) works on what the obligation would leave the paying parent with over a year. Below the federal poverty income guideline for a single person, $15,960, the obligation is twenty-five dollars a month. Between that and the New York self-support reserve of $21,546, it is fifty dollars a month or the difference between the parent's income and the reserve, whichever is greater. On your figures the percentage leaves about $49,800 a year, which is above both. Both figures move: § 413(1)(b)(6) fixes the reserve at 135 percent of the poverty guideline and revises it every March 1, and the guideline itself is reissued each January by the federal Department of Health and Human Services.
  • One thing this form cannot ask you that § 413(1)(c)(5)(ii) needs. The subsection prorates the cost of the children's health coverage by income share and then runs two ways: the non-custodial parent's share is ADDED to the obligation where the custodial parent is ordered to provide the coverage, and the custodial parent's share is DEDUCTED where the non-custodial parent is. We only collect a premium when the paying parent provides the coverage, so where the OTHER parent carries it we have no figure to prorate and the addition branch cannot run here. A zero on this page is not evidence there is no premium. If the other parent covers the children, expect the number above to go up by your share of what they pay.
  • A New York order can carry a medical component that is neither the figure above nor a health insurance premium, and we do not compute it. § 413(1)(c)(5)(iii) and (iv) put a cash medical obligation in place of coverage the court finds unavailable, routed by what the children actually have: medical assistance, or the state's child health insurance plan. Clause (v) is separate again and can sit on top of any of them, covering reasonable health care expenses no insurance or programme paid. Every one of those routes turns on a fact about public coverage that this form does not collect and could not sensibly ask for. What is worth carrying away is the ceiling all of them share, because it is the same self-support reserve the floors above use: the cash medical obligation "shall not exceed five percent of his or her gross income, or the difference between the non-custodial parent's income and the self-support reserve, whichever is less".
  • What the figure above is, in New York's own terms: the BASIC child support obligation, which is not the same thing as an order. § 413(1)(c)(4) to (7) sit on top of it, covering childcare while the custodial parent works or looks for work, health insurance and cash medical support, and educational expenses for post-secondary, private, special or enriched education. § 413(1)(e) reaches non-recurring payments from extraordinary sources separately. And paragraph (f) is the only route by which a court may vary from the basic obligation at all: ten factors on which it may find the amount unjust or inappropriate, with paragraph (g) requiring it to say so in writing and state what the guideline would have produced.
  • New York publishes a Child Support Standards Chart, form LDSS-4515 (Rev. 03/26), and if you look your family up in it you should find the figure above. The chart tabulates this same arithmetic in $100 steps and reads each interval at its lower bound, so an income part way up a step comes out slightly low; the chart says so itself, calls itself approximate, and directs readers to the percentages for a precise figure, which is what we compute. Every one of its printed cells reproduces from the six figures it states about itself, which is how we checked our reading of it.
  • The employment status you selected has not changed the estimate above. You had to answer to get here, and whichever answer you picked the figure is the same: we calculate on the income figures you entered and impute nothing to either parent. Courts can impute. Where a judge finds a parent voluntarily unemployed or under-employed, a court may set support on what that parent could earn rather than on what they currently bring in, and an imputed figure is set at or above actual earnings rather than below them. Which way that would move your case depends on whose income gets imputed, and that is the part we cannot answer for you: if it is the paying party's, the figure above tends to sit below what a court would order, and if it is the receiving party's it can move in either direction depending on the state and on the two incomes, so we do not put a direction on it. We have read the imputation provision in Illinois and in no other state, New York included, so nothing on this page is adjusted for one.

Example 2: Two children, same incomes

Identical to the first example except for a second child, which isolates what the second child is worth in this state.

Paying parent
$5,000/mo
Other parent
$3,000/mo
Children
2
Overnights
80/yr

Guideline result: $1,250 per month ($15,000 a year).

Step by step breakdown for example 2
StepAmount
Your gross monthly income$5,000
Other parent's gross monthly income$3,000
Combined parental income (§ 413(1)(b)(4))$8,000
Child support percentage for 2 children (25%)$2,000
Your 63% share of combined parental income (§ 413(1)(c)(2))$1,250
  • New York carries this guideline in two statutes and they agree. N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240(1-b) governs a matrimonial action, which is where a divorcing couple's child support order comes from, and N.Y. Fam. Ct. Act § 413 is the Family Court counterpart that the state's own Child Support Standards Chart points readers at. We read both. The percentages are byte-identical between them, the computation steps are byte-identical, and of 50 differences across the whole of paragraphs (a) to (l), 0 touch a figure, a percentage, a dollar amount, an income definition, a computation step or a floor. Almost all of them are cross-references, each section pointing into its own court's statute.
  • How the arithmetic runs, and it behaves unlike most income shares states. § 413(1)(c)(2) multiplies the combined parental income by the percentage for 2 children and then splits the result by each parent's share of that combined figure. Below the combined parental income amount, which is where your family sits, those two steps cancel exactly: the figure above is 25 percent of your own income, and the other parent's earnings do not change it. That is worth knowing before you negotiate, because in most income shares states closing the gap between two incomes moves the number and here it does not. It starts to matter again above $193,000 of combined parental income a year.
  • The largest limit on the figure above is which income the percentage runs on, and New York is the one state on this site where we cannot tell you which way our answer errs. § 413(1)(b)(5) builds income from six clauses and then takes eight named items off it at clause (vii). The only taxes among the eight are New York City or Yonkers income or earnings taxes and FICA, so neither federal income tax nor New York STATE income tax comes off: § 413 income is not a net figure, it is gross with eight specific things removed. This form collects gross monthly pay and one of those eight, the support you already pay for a child not in this case. For a reader whose whole income is wages already on a federal return, the other seven can only push § 413 income DOWN from what you typed, which would make our figure high. For a reader with benefits, investment income, or income a court imputes under clauses (ii) to (vi), the additions can push it UP, which would make our figure low. Nothing on this form distinguishes those two readers, so there is no single direction we can honestly state, and we are not going to pick one. There is a smaller gap with no direction at all: clause (i) reads gross as it should have been reported on the MOST RECENT federal income tax return, which is last year's figure, and this form collects a current one.
  • The 80 overnights you entered have not changed the figure above, and here is exactly what that does and does not mean. We read the whole of N.Y. Fam. Ct. Act § 413(1) and N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240(1-b) looking for a parenting-time or shared-custody adjustment to the basic obligation, sweeping 22 different ways of saying it, and neither section contains one. The only thing either section says about time is at § 413(1)(f)(9), which lets a court find the basic obligation unjust or inappropriate because of "extraordinary expenses incurred by the non-custodial parent in exercising visitation" or expenses of extended visitation that substantially reduce the other parent's. That turns on EXPENSES rather than on a count of nights, so it does not become an adjustment at any number of overnights. Two things to be careful with. That is a statement about the two sections we read, not a statement about New York law: a shared-custody household's answer may sit in case law or in the discretion paragraph (f) confers, and we have not looked. And this form carries one overnight figure, 80 with you and 285 with the other parent, which is not something either section asks for.
  • New York's two low-income floors did not reach your figures, and it is worth knowing there are two of them rather than one. § 413(1)(d) works on what the obligation would leave the paying parent with over a year. Below the federal poverty income guideline for a single person, $15,960, the obligation is twenty-five dollars a month. Between that and the New York self-support reserve of $21,546, it is fifty dollars a month or the difference between the parent's income and the reserve, whichever is greater. On your figures the percentage leaves about $45,000 a year, which is above both. Both figures move: § 413(1)(b)(6) fixes the reserve at 135 percent of the poverty guideline and revises it every March 1, and the guideline itself is reissued each January by the federal Department of Health and Human Services.
  • One thing this form cannot ask you that § 413(1)(c)(5)(ii) needs. The subsection prorates the cost of the children's health coverage by income share and then runs two ways: the non-custodial parent's share is ADDED to the obligation where the custodial parent is ordered to provide the coverage, and the custodial parent's share is DEDUCTED where the non-custodial parent is. We only collect a premium when the paying parent provides the coverage, so where the OTHER parent carries it we have no figure to prorate and the addition branch cannot run here. A zero on this page is not evidence there is no premium. If the other parent covers the children, expect the number above to go up by your share of what they pay.
  • A New York order can carry a medical component that is neither the figure above nor a health insurance premium, and we do not compute it. § 413(1)(c)(5)(iii) and (iv) put a cash medical obligation in place of coverage the court finds unavailable, routed by what the children actually have: medical assistance, or the state's child health insurance plan. Clause (v) is separate again and can sit on top of any of them, covering reasonable health care expenses no insurance or programme paid. Every one of those routes turns on a fact about public coverage that this form does not collect and could not sensibly ask for. What is worth carrying away is the ceiling all of them share, because it is the same self-support reserve the floors above use: the cash medical obligation "shall not exceed five percent of his or her gross income, or the difference between the non-custodial parent's income and the self-support reserve, whichever is less".
  • What the figure above is, in New York's own terms: the BASIC child support obligation, which is not the same thing as an order. § 413(1)(c)(4) to (7) sit on top of it, covering childcare while the custodial parent works or looks for work, health insurance and cash medical support, and educational expenses for post-secondary, private, special or enriched education. § 413(1)(e) reaches non-recurring payments from extraordinary sources separately. And paragraph (f) is the only route by which a court may vary from the basic obligation at all: ten factors on which it may find the amount unjust or inappropriate, with paragraph (g) requiring it to say so in writing and state what the guideline would have produced.
  • New York publishes a Child Support Standards Chart, form LDSS-4515 (Rev. 03/26), and if you look your family up in it you should find the figure above. The chart tabulates this same arithmetic in $100 steps and reads each interval at its lower bound, so an income part way up a step comes out slightly low; the chart says so itself, calls itself approximate, and directs readers to the percentages for a precise figure, which is what we compute. Every one of its printed cells reproduces from the six figures it states about itself, which is how we checked our reading of it.
  • The employment status you selected has not changed the estimate above. You had to answer to get here, and whichever answer you picked the figure is the same: we calculate on the income figures you entered and impute nothing to either parent. Courts can impute. Where a judge finds a parent voluntarily unemployed or under-employed, a court may set support on what that parent could earn rather than on what they currently bring in, and an imputed figure is set at or above actual earnings rather than below them. Which way that would move your case depends on whose income gets imputed, and that is the part we cannot answer for you: if it is the paying party's, the figure above tends to sit below what a court would order, and if it is the receiving party's it can move in either direction depending on the state and on the two incomes, so we do not put a direction on it. We have read the imputation provision in Illinois and in no other state, New York included, so nothing on this page is adjusted for one.

Example 3: Two children, higher-earning paying parent, insurance and childcare

The paying parent now earns considerably more, and carries the health insurance and work-related childcare, which are credited back against the obligation.

Paying parent
$12,000/mo
Other parent
$3,000/mo
Children
2
Overnights
80/yr

Guideline result: $2,944 per month ($35,328 a year).

Step by step breakdown for example 3
StepAmount
Your gross monthly income$12,000
Other parent's gross monthly income$3,000
Combined parental income (§ 413(1)(b)(4))$15,000
Child support percentage for 2 children (25%)$3,750
Your 80% share of combined parental income (§ 413(1)(c)(2))$3,000
Deduction: the other parent's 20% share of the children's health insurance (§ 413(1)(c)(5)(ii))-$56
  • New York carries this guideline in two statutes and they agree. N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240(1-b) governs a matrimonial action, which is where a divorcing couple's child support order comes from, and N.Y. Fam. Ct. Act § 413 is the Family Court counterpart that the state's own Child Support Standards Chart points readers at. We read both. The percentages are byte-identical between them, the computation steps are byte-identical, and of 50 differences across the whole of paragraphs (a) to (l), 0 touch a figure, a percentage, a dollar amount, an income definition, a computation step or a floor. Almost all of them are cross-references, each section pointing into its own court's statute.
  • How the arithmetic runs, and it behaves unlike most income shares states. § 413(1)(c)(2) multiplies the combined parental income by the percentage for 2 children and then splits the result by each parent's share of that combined figure. Below the combined parental income amount, which is where your family sits, those two steps cancel exactly: the figure above is 25 percent of your own income, and the other parent's earnings do not change it. That is worth knowing before you negotiate, because in most income shares states closing the gap between two incomes moves the number and here it does not. It starts to matter again above $193,000 of combined parental income a year.
  • The largest limit on the figure above is which income the percentage runs on, and New York is the one state on this site where we cannot tell you which way our answer errs. § 413(1)(b)(5) builds income from six clauses and then takes eight named items off it at clause (vii). The only taxes among the eight are New York City or Yonkers income or earnings taxes and FICA, so neither federal income tax nor New York STATE income tax comes off: § 413 income is not a net figure, it is gross with eight specific things removed. This form collects gross monthly pay and one of those eight, the support you already pay for a child not in this case. For a reader whose whole income is wages already on a federal return, the other seven can only push § 413 income DOWN from what you typed, which would make our figure high. For a reader with benefits, investment income, or income a court imputes under clauses (ii) to (vi), the additions can push it UP, which would make our figure low. Nothing on this form distinguishes those two readers, so there is no single direction we can honestly state, and we are not going to pick one. There is a smaller gap with no direction at all: clause (i) reads gross as it should have been reported on the MOST RECENT federal income tax return, which is last year's figure, and this form collects a current one.
  • The 80 overnights you entered have not changed the figure above, and here is exactly what that does and does not mean. We read the whole of N.Y. Fam. Ct. Act § 413(1) and N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240(1-b) looking for a parenting-time or shared-custody adjustment to the basic obligation, sweeping 22 different ways of saying it, and neither section contains one. The only thing either section says about time is at § 413(1)(f)(9), which lets a court find the basic obligation unjust or inappropriate because of "extraordinary expenses incurred by the non-custodial parent in exercising visitation" or expenses of extended visitation that substantially reduce the other parent's. That turns on EXPENSES rather than on a count of nights, so it does not become an adjustment at any number of overnights. Two things to be careful with. That is a statement about the two sections we read, not a statement about New York law: a shared-custody household's answer may sit in case law or in the discretion paragraph (f) confers, and we have not looked. And this form carries one overnight figure, 80 with you and 285 with the other parent, which is not something either section asks for.
  • New York's two low-income floors did not reach your figures, and it is worth knowing there are two of them rather than one. § 413(1)(d) works on what the obligation would leave the paying parent with over a year. Below the federal poverty income guideline for a single person, $15,960, the obligation is twenty-five dollars a month. Between that and the New York self-support reserve of $21,546, it is fifty dollars a month or the difference between the parent's income and the reserve, whichever is greater. On your figures the percentage leaves about $108,000 a year, which is above both. Both figures move: § 413(1)(b)(6) fixes the reserve at 135 percent of the poverty guideline and revises it every March 1, and the guideline itself is reissued each January by the federal Department of Health and Human Services.
  • The health insurance you entered has come off the figure above, and the reason it is a deduction rather than an addition is worth reading. § 413(1)(c)(5)(ii) prorates the cost of the children's coverage by income share and then goes two ways: if the CUSTODIAL parent is ordered to provide it, the other parent's share is ADDED to the obligation, and if the NON-CUSTODIAL parent is ordered to provide it, the custodial parent's share is DEDUCTED from it. You told us the paying parent provides the coverage, and the paying parent is the non-custodial one, so the other parent's 20% share of the $280 a month, about $56, comes off. What we have assumed is that the parent who provides the coverage now is the parent a court orders to provide it, because the subsection turns on the order rather than on today's arrangement. If a court orders the other parent to carry it instead, the same amount is added rather than subtracted, and the figure moves by the whole premium you entered.
  • The $650 a month of childcare you entered has not changed the figure above, and that is about which parent § 413(1)(c)(4) is written about rather than about whether New York counts childcare. The subparagraph opens by naming the CUSTODIAL parent, and the words are its own: "Where the custodial parent is working, or receiving elementary or secondary education, or higher education or vocational training which the court determines will lead to employment, and incurs child care expenses as a result thereof". It then prorates that expense by income share and ADDS each parent's share to the obligation. This form asks whether the PAYING parent pays for work-related childcare, which is a different question about a different person, and the answer to ours cannot establish the answer to the statute's. Applying it anyway would add your share of an expense you have told us you are already paying in full. If the other parent is the custodial parent and pays childcare because they work or study, the figure above goes UP by your income share of it, and this page has no field to tell us so. Separately, § 413(1)(c)(6) covers childcare while the custodial parent is SEEKING work, and puts the apportionment in the court's discretion rather than in a formula.
  • A New York order can carry a medical component that is neither the figure above nor a health insurance premium, and we do not compute it. § 413(1)(c)(5)(iii) and (iv) put a cash medical obligation in place of coverage the court finds unavailable, routed by what the children actually have: medical assistance, or the state's child health insurance plan. Clause (v) is separate again and can sit on top of any of them, covering reasonable health care expenses no insurance or programme paid. Every one of those routes turns on a fact about public coverage that this form does not collect and could not sensibly ask for. What is worth carrying away is the ceiling all of them share, because it is the same self-support reserve the floors above use: the cash medical obligation "shall not exceed five percent of his or her gross income, or the difference between the non-custodial parent's income and the self-support reserve, whichever is less".
  • What the figure above is, in New York's own terms: the BASIC child support obligation, which is not the same thing as an order. § 413(1)(c)(4) to (7) sit on top of it, covering childcare while the custodial parent works or looks for work, health insurance and cash medical support, and educational expenses for post-secondary, private, special or enriched education. § 413(1)(e) reaches non-recurring payments from extraordinary sources separately. And paragraph (f) is the only route by which a court may vary from the basic obligation at all: ten factors on which it may find the amount unjust or inappropriate, with paragraph (g) requiring it to say so in writing and state what the guideline would have produced.
  • New York publishes a Child Support Standards Chart, form LDSS-4515 (Rev. 03/26), and if you look your family up in it you should find the figure above. The chart tabulates this same arithmetic in $100 steps and reads each interval at its lower bound, so an income part way up a step comes out slightly low; the chart says so itself, calls itself approximate, and directs readers to the percentages for a precise figure, which is what we compute. Every one of its printed cells reproduces from the six figures it states about itself, which is how we checked our reading of it.
  • The employment status you selected has not changed the estimate above. You had to answer to get here, and whichever answer you picked the figure is the same: we calculate on the income figures you entered and impute nothing to either parent. Courts can impute. Where a judge finds a parent voluntarily unemployed or under-employed, a court may set support on what that parent could earn rather than on what they currently bring in, and an imputed figure is set at or above actual earnings rather than below them. Which way that would move your case depends on whose income gets imputed, and that is the part we cannot answer for you: if it is the paying party's, the figure above tends to sit below what a court would order, and if it is the receiving party's it can move in either direction depending on the state and on the two incomes, so we do not put a direction on it. We have read the imputation provision in Illinois and in no other state, New York included, so nothing on this page is adjusted for one.

Comparing the first two examples shows what a second child is worth in New York: the order moves from $850 to $1,250a month on identical incomes. The third example raises the paying parent's earnings and adds health insurance and childcare, which are credited back against the obligation rather than added on top of it.

Where parenting time fits in New York child support

New York is one of the states where the answer is: it does not. Guideline support here does not change with the number of overnights. Run the same family through the New York guideline at 52 nights a year and again at equal time, and the figure is identical, because overnights are not one of the guideline's inputs. The calculation runs on income, the number of children before the court, and other children a parent already supports. The controlling authority is N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240(1-b).

Time with the children still reaches support, just not inside the formula. It is one of the grounds on which a court may depart from the standard calculation, and where the guideline figure itself is not at stake a departure can move the order in either direction. That is a judgment made on the facts of a particular case, not a credit that switches on at a set number of nights. If you expect to have the children a substantial share of the year and you want that reflected in the order, it is an argument to make to the court, not an adjustment the guideline makes for you.

Where New York starts on parenting time

New York does not presume equal parenting time. That is our own record rather than New York's own custody law. Courts set the schedule on the best interests of the children, and that schedule governs where the children actually are, which nights each parent covers, and how holidays are split. What it does not do is feed the guideline calculation, which is why two New York families with identical incomes and very different schedules arrive at the same guideline figure.

Getting a child support order in New York

The guideline figure is only half the picture. When the order actually arrives, and what it costs to argue about it, vary quite a bit from state to state, and both shape what a family lives on in the meantime.

Residency required
one year
Waiting period
None
Typical uncontested
4 months
Typical contested
about 1.5 years

Support before the case is finished

You need one year of residency in New York before you can file, and no statutory waiting period applies before a judge can finalize the divorce. A contested case in New York runs about 1.5 years on average, against 4 months when the parents agree. That gap is why temporary support matters. A judge can enter a temporary order early in the case, calculated on the same guideline, so the children are covered while the rest of the case is worked out. If money is tight now, a temporary order is usually the fastest relief available, and waiting for the final judgment can mean months without support.

What it costs to contest the number

Family law attorneys in New York typically run $300 to $700 an hour, and mediation costs roughly $375a session. Worth doing the arithmetic before digging in: a handful of billable hours on each side can cost more than a full year of the amount being argued over. Where the disagreement is genuinely large, or where one parent's income is hard to pin down, representation earns its keep. Where the gap between the two positions is a few dozen dollars a month, mediation or a negotiated agreement almost always leaves both households better off. Our record carries collaborative divorce as available in all fifty states, so it says nothing specific about New York; whether trained collaborative attorneys practise near you is a local question. Where it is on offer, both parents commit in writing to settle without litigation and use shared financial experts rather than competing ones.

Changing or enforcing a New York order

Modifying an existing order

A child support order is not permanent, but it also does not adjust on its own. Either parent can ask the court to recalculate, and the general standard across states is a substantial and continuing change in circumstances since the last order. Job loss, a significant raise, a change in the parenting schedule, a new child support obligation for another child, and a change in the children's medical or childcare costs are the changes that most often qualify.

Two points catch parents out. The first is that a modification usually takes effect from the date the request is filed, not the date the circumstances changed, so waiting to file means absorbing the gap. The second is that the obligation continues in full until a judge signs a new order. An informal agreement between parents to pay less does not bind the court, and arrears can still accrue against the paying parent for the difference.

Enforcement

Enforcement runs through New York's child support agency as well as the courts. Federal law requires every state to run a child support enforcement program with a common set of tools, which is why the remedies look broadly similar from state to state: income withholding straight from wages, interception of federal and state tax refunds, reporting to credit bureaus, suspension of driver's and professional licenses, liens against property, and contempt proceedings for willful non-payment. Income withholding is the default for new orders in most cases rather than a penalty applied after a missed payment.

New York guideline authority and official worksheet

New York carries its child support guideline across more than one instrument, and all of them are in our data:

  • N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240(1-b)
  • N.Y. Fam. Ct. Act § 413

Those authorities control, and the worksheet published under them is the document a court works from. The estimate on this page models the guideline, it does not replace the worksheet.

New York carries the same guideline in two statutes. N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240(1-b) applies in matrimonial cases, and N.Y. Fam. Ct. Act § 413 is the Family Court counterpart. The state's own child support chart directs readers to the Family Court Act section, so which one you should be reading depends on which court your case is in. The calculation is the same under both.

The figures come from that chart, form LDSS-4515 (Rev. 03/26), released March 1, 2026 by the Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance: $193,000 of combined parental income and a 2026 self-support reserve of $21,546. Both are restated each year, so check the revision number on any copy you are working from. One thing the chart makes clearer than most summaries of it: the $193,000 line is where the percentages stop being mandatory, not where the table stops. The printed table runs on in $100 steps to $199,999.

Where to get the official worksheet

Every state publishes a child support worksheet or an official calculator, and that document is what a judge or the state agency works from. We do not yet have a verified direct link to New York's worksheet, so the starting points below are the state's own court site and the federal directory of state child support agencies rather than a deep link we cannot vouch for.

Child Support in New York - Frequently Asked Questions

How is child support calculated in New York?

New York uses the Income Shares Model to calculate child support, and we have read the guideline that says so. Both parents' incomes are combined, and each parent's share of the total obligation is proportional to their share of the combined income. The figure New York's own guideline works from is combined parental income, under N.Y. Fam. Ct. Act § 413(1)(b)(4) and (b)(5).

Does New York use the income shares model?

Yes. New York is an income shares state, which is the model used by the large majority of states. Both parents' incomes are combined, a total support obligation is set from that combined figure and the number of children, and each parent is responsible for the share that matches their portion of the combined income. The parent the children live with most is treated as spending their share directly, so only the other parent's share becomes a payment.

How do overnights affect child support in New York?

They do not change the guideline figure. The New York guideline calculation has no overnight or possession-time input, so the same family produces the same guideline amount at 52 nights a year and at equal time. Possession time is instead one of the factors a court may weigh in deciding whether to depart from the guideline amount at all, and a departure can move the order in either direction.

How much is child support for 2 children in New York?

It depends on the incomes involved, so there is no single figure. As a worked example, two children with the paying parent earning $5,000 gross a month, the other parent earning $3,000, and a standard 80-overnight schedule produces an estimate of $1,250 a month ($15,000 a year) under New York's guideline. Change the incomes and the number moves. Changing the overnights does not. Run your own figures in the calculator on this page.

Can child support be modified in New York?

Yes. Either parent can request a child support modification if there has been a substantial change in circumstances, such as a significant change in income, change in custody arrangements, or changes in the child's needs. Courts in New York typically require a change of at least 15-20% in the support amount to justify modification.

Does custody arrangement affect child support in New York?

Not inside the guideline calculation. The custody arrangement sets where the children live and which nights each parent covers, but it is not one of the inputs the New York guideline runs on, so the guideline figure comes out the same whatever the schedule. A court can still take possession time into account when deciding whether to order an amount other than the guideline figure, in either direction.

Is there an income cap for child support in New York?

No. That figure is not a cap on what a court can order, and the thing people quote as one is doing something else. New York's $193,000 of combined parental income a year, about $16,083 a month, is the point above which the child support percentages stop being mandatory. The chart's own words are that above it "the law permits, but does not require, the use of the child support percentages in calculating the child support obligation on the income above $193,000". A court can therefore order more out of the income above the line, and often does, which makes our estimate for a family over the threshold the lower end of a realistic range rather than the likely award. Be careful with the other direction too: unlike several states with a schedule top, New York has no clause making that figure a minimum, so nothing stops an award coming in below it either. Two things worth checking before you compare it with another state. It is a COMBINED figure, so two parents each under $16,083 a month can still be above it together. And it is not the end of the chart: the printed table runs on in $100 steps to $199,999, applying the percentage to the whole income, which is the calculation a court MAY make rather than the one it must.

How long does child support last in New York?

Child support in New York typically continues until the child turns 18 or graduates from high school, whichever is later. Support may continue longer if the child has a disability or if the parents agree to extend support for college expenses.

This estimate is for planning purposes only and does not constitute legal or financial advice. Consult a licensed family law attorney in your state for guidance specific to your situation.

How we calculate this estimate

We apply the guideline model your state actually uses, and the models differ more than most summaries suggest. Most states follow the Income Shares Model: both parents' monthly incomes are combined, a basic support obligation is drawn from that combined figure and the number of children, and each parent covers the share that matches their portion of the combined income. Which income figure gets combined is the state's own to define and it is not the same one everywhere, so this page names it for your state where the guideline has been read and does not guess at it where it has not. Percentage of Income states apply a set rate to the paying parent's income alone, and Nevada's tiered version steps that rate down across income brackets. The Melson Formula reserves a self-support amount for each parent before dividing what is left. Some states do neither: North Dakota reads a dollar figure off a table keyed to one parent's net income, and California publishes a single algebraic formula with no schedule behind it. Which one your state is on is named on its own page rather than inferred from a list here. Credits for health insurance and childcare are applied where the state's own guideline builds them into the order, along with any income cap the state sets, and the list of what moves the number on each state's page names the levers that actually move that state's figure. Parenting time is computed in the states whose own guideline we have read and implemented, and in no others.

What the estimate assumes for New York

  • Income figures are gross monthly, before taxes, counting the sources your state includes.
  • Parenting time moves the figure only where we have read and implemented the state's own rule. The parenting-time section further down this page says which case this state is in, and where no adjustment applies the estimate is the amount before one. We previously reduced support past 146 overnights on a coefficient of our own. 146 turned out to be a single state's statutory threshold applied to all fifty, the size of the reduction had no legal source anywhere, and the mechanisms states actually use are not variations on one rule. Among the ones we have now read: a worksheet that switches at a threshold both parents must clear, an offset applied continuously with no trigger, a threshold that does nothing below it and slides above it, a term written into the guideline formula itself so there is no unadjusted amount at all, no parenting-time term anywhere, and a formula prescribed by statute whose text we do not have. That list is what we have read rather than what exists, and it has grown with every state checked. We removed ours rather than defaulting it, and we publish each state's adjustment as that state's own rule is verified.
  • North Carolina is one of the verified threshold cases, at 123 overnights under the guidelines adopted pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. 50-13.4(c1). The threshold has to be cleared by both parents, which is why a parent well past an even split can fall outside shared care entirely.
  • Texas has no parenting-time adjustment at all, because its guideline has none. Tex. Fam. Code 154.125 runs on the obligor's net resources and the number of children, and the state's own calculator has no field for overnights. Possession time enters only as a discretionary deviation factor, Tex. Fam. Code 154.123(b)(4).
  • Georgia has a mandatory parenting-time adjustment whose formula we do not have. O.C.G.A. 19-6-15(g), effective January 1 2026, requires the court to adjust the noncustodial parent's basic obligation wherever there is a court-ordered parenting time schedule, with the result entered on Child Support Schedule C. Applying arithmetic of our own in place of a prescribed formula would be worse than applying none, so the Georgia estimate is the presumptive amount before that adjustment.
  • Where a state's own schedule has been transcribed, the basic obligation is read straight off it. Where it has not, the figure comes from a national approximation of the tables courts read from, and the source panel on that state's page says which of the two you are looking at. That approximation has been measured against the seven transcribed schedules keyed to the same thing it is, at 546 income and family-size combinations. It missed them by 32 to 86 percent on average, and it missed them in both directions at once: at every income from $1,500 to $6,000 of combined monthly income it came in under at least one of those schedules and over another, then above all seven from $8,000 up, reaching 69 to 240 percent above those states' own tables at $30,000. So a modeled figure at a high combined income is the least reliable number this calculator returns, and near $6,000 is where the approximation lands closest.
  • Where a state sets an income ceiling, we clamp income at it. That is a fair model of a real cap and a poor one of everything else, so two states are handled differently. New York's $193,000 of combined parental income is the point above which a court may consider the additional income, not a limit on what it can order, and our figure there is the amount the guideline produces at the threshold. New Jersey's Appendix IX-F schedule ends at $3,600 of combined weekly net income, and courts are instructed in capital letters not to extrapolate past it, so we read the obligation at the schedule's last row and treat the result as the minimum basic support award rather than as a guideline amount. Appendix IX-A requires a New Jersey court to add to that minimum from the income above the ceiling. Modeling what a court adds is not something we can do honestly, because it turns on statutory factors rather than on arithmetic. Above the New Jersey line our figure is therefore a floor, and above the New York line it is not one: the addition New Jersey requires is what makes its schedule figure a minimum, and no New York instrument says an award may not come in below the amount at the threshold. Both figures read as the low end of a realistic range and only one of them is a floor a reader can count on.
  • The same schedule can also stop short at the bottom. New Jersey publishes no award figure below $180 of combined weekly net income, where the court sets the amount from the paying parent's income and living expenses within a published range. Our estimate at that income is a modeled figure with nothing from the state to check it against, and it says so.
  • The result is a guideline number. Judges can deviate from it when the facts justify a different amount.

Where the estimate stops

Your state's official worksheet is the controlling document, and a court order can land somewhere other than any guideline estimate. Use this to prepare, then confirm the figure with a licensed family law attorney or your state's child support agency.

Read the full methodology for how every calculator on the site is built.

Sources

New York courts and statutes

  • nycourts.gov
  • DRL 236B maintenance formula
  • N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 240(1-b)
  • N.Y. Fam. Ct. Act § 413

Where to read more

Background reading, not where the figures above came from. No number on this page is taken from any of these.

About this page

Barron Hansen

Written by Barron Hansen

I am an app developer who is dedicated to building the highest-value, most accurate web apps possible, that people want to use every day.