Ever think about what happens when your soon to be ex is about to get a big promotion right as you're getting divorced?
Host 2:Oh, yeah.
Host 1:Should that impact your alimony payments?
Host 2:Right. Or what if they decide to take some, like, risky new job and their income totally tanks?
Host 1:Yeah. Does that change things?
Host 2:I mean, that's where things get really interesting with these self adjusting alimony orders.
Host 1:Exactly. And that's what we're gonna be talking about today. Diving deep. We're diving deep into a blog post by a Massachusetts divorce lawyer named Mariah j King.
Host 2:Alright. She's
Host 1:from Lynch and Owens.
Host 2:Got it.
Host 1:And, she really gets into the nitty gritty of these self adjusting alimony orders.
Host 2:Yeah. These things are fascinating.
Host 1:They can be so complicated.
Host 2:Yeah. And there's this 2024 case that she talks about in her blog.
Host 1:Oh, really?
Host 2:Yeah. Telvidi versus Telvidi. It really shows you how messy these agreements can get.
Host 1:I mean, I think most people think alimony, you get a certain amount every month, that's it. Right?
Host 2:Yeah. I think so. Right? Like, with child support here in Massachusetts at least, it's usually a fixed amount.
Host 1:Yeah. You know, so you have some sense of, you know, financial stability.
Host 2:Right. You can budget. You can plan.
Host 1:The returning king explains that these self adjusting orders, they go up and down with the payer's income.
Host 2:Yeah. And sometimes even the recipients. They get really wild.
Host 1:So just to be clear, though, she does say that while judges here in Massachusetts can order self adjusting child support
Host 2:Mhmm.
Host 1:They don't really like to do it for alimony after a trial.
Host 2:No. They really don't. I mean, I think they wanna wrap things up cleanly. You know? Yeah.
Host 2:Avoid any future drama.
Host 1:Yeah. Keep it out of the courts.
Host 2:Exactly. Predictability. That's what they're going for.
Host 1:For. Predictability.
Host 2:Yeah.
Host 1:So fixed payments are definitely easier for the courts.
Host 2:For sure.
Host 1:But as attorney King points out, separating couples can actually agree to this self adjusting alimony.
Host 2:Yeah. They can put it right in their separation agreement.
Host 1:And that's when things get really interesting.
Host 2:Oh, yeah. That's where the fun begins.
Host 1:So let's talk about, like, the pros and cons here.
Host 2:Okay.
Host 1:I mean, on the one hand, self adjusting alimony is supposed to be fairer over time. Right?
Host 2:Right. In theory, at least, if the payer's income goes up, the alimony goes up too. Yeah. So the recipient doesn't lose out on their ex's success.
Host 1:And in theory, you don't have to go back to court all the time for modifications.
Host 2:Right. Because those can be expensive and time consuming.
Host 1:And emotionally draining.
Host 2:Oh, totally.
Host 1:But attorney King brings up a really good point.
Host 2:What's that?
Host 1:She mentions this 2017 case.
Host 2:Oh, I know the one Young v Young.
Host 1:Yep. And, basically, the court said that alimony recipients shouldn't automatically benefit from, like, a massive post divorce salary jump.
Host 2:Yeah. If it wasn't part of the original agreement.
Host 1:Right. Because that wasn't part of the lifestyle they had during the marriage.
Host 2:Yeah. The marital standard of living. That's what it's all about.
Host 1:Right. So, like, if someone suddenly becomes a millionaire after the divorce
Host 2:Right.
Host 1:The ex shouldn't necessarily get a cut of that.
Host 2:Unless, of course, they had a self adjusting order.
Host 1:Right. Because then they Yeah.
Host 2:It can get tricky.
Host 1:So it's kind of a double edged sword.
Host 2:For sure.
Host 1:It can protect the recipient if the payer makes more money, but it could also give them what some people might see as an unfair advantage.
Host 2:It all depends on how you define fairness in these situations.
Host 1:Right. Because what is fair in a divorce?
Host 2:That's the million dollar question.
Host 1:And then what happens if the payer's income goes down?
Host 2:Oh, yeah. The flip side.
Host 1:Like, they lose their job
Host 2:Uh-huh.
Host 1:Or their business fails?
Host 2:With a fixed order, the recipient at least knows they're getting something.
Host 1:Yeah.
Host 2:But with a self adjusting order, they could be left with very little.
Host 1:Exactly. And that's something attorney King really emphasizes.
Host 2:Yeah. She's big on making sure both sides understand the risks.
Host 1:And I imagine it could discourage payers from, like, taking a promotion or going for that higher paying job.
Host 2:Oh, absolutely. Why work harder if a big chunk of your income is going straight to your ex? Exactly. It's a tough situation.
Host 1:And then on top of all of that, attorney King points out that the formulas for these self adjusting orders
Host 2:Don't even get me started.
Host 1:They can be so complicated.
Host 2:It's not just about picking a percentage.
Host 1:Right.
Host 2:You have to define what counts as income.
Host 1:Oh, boy.
Host 2:And that can lead to a whole other set of problems.
Host 1:Especially when you start talking about bonuses and stock options and all those other financial things.
Host 2:Oh, yeah. One little ambiguity, one tiny comma out of place
Host 1:And boom.
Host 2:You're back in court.
Host 1:Which brings us back to that Telvidi case.
Host 2:Ah, yes. A classic example of what not to do.
Host 1:Attorney King uses it to show just how important it is to be super specific in these agreements.
Host 2:Especially when you're dealing with complex financial stuff.
Host 1:So tell me what happened in this Telvidi case.
Host 2:Well, it all came down to the definition of earned income from stock options.
Host 1:Stock options?
Host 2:Yes. Specifically, these things called RSUs and PSUs.
Host 1:What?
Host 2:They're basically ways for companies to give their employees stock that becomes available over time
Host 1:Okay.
Host 2:Often based on how well the company does.
Host 1:So I'm guessing the husband in this case, his income changed after the divorce.
Host 2:You got it.
Host 1:And there was a big fight over whether his stock options counted as earned income for the purposes of alimony. Alimony.
Host 2:Bingo.
Host 1:And what did the court decide?
Host 2:Well, the appeals court ended up saying that he did owe over $573,000
Host 1:Wow.
Host 2:In back alimony.
Host 1:All because of how they defined earned income.
Host 2:It just goes to show you every word matters in these agreements.
Host 1:It seems like attorney King is really stressing the importance of having a good lawyer.
Host 2:Oh, absolutely. Someone who really knows the stuff inside and out.
Host 1:Someone who can spot those potential problems before they blow up.
Host 2:Exactly.
Host 1:Alright. So we're starting to see just how complicated these self adjusting alimony orders can be.
Host 2:Yeah. They're definitely not for the faint of heart.
Host 1:But before we get too overwhelmed, let's take a quick break.
Host 2:Sounds good.
Host 1:We'll be right back to explore some potential solutions and see what attorney King has to say about navigating this tricky terrain.
Host 2:I'm ready when you are.
Host 1:We're back and still trying to wrap our heads around self adjusting alimony.
Host 2:It's a lot to take in, isn't it?
Host 1:Yeah. I mean, it seems like there are just so many potential problems.
Host 2:Right. And attorney King, she doesn't really give, like, specific solutions in her blog post, but I think what she does is even more helpful.
Host 1:How so?
Host 2:She highlights the areas where things can go wrong
Host 1:Oh, I see.
Host 2:Which makes you really think about how to approach these agreements in the first place.
Host 1:Yeah. Like, how do you protect both sides from those huge income swings?
Host 2:Right.
Host 1:Someone loses their job
Host 2:Yeah.
Host 1:Or wins the lottery
Host 2:Mhmm.
Host 1:A fixed percentage doesn't really seem fair in those situations.
Host 2:It's a tough one. And I think one thing that attorney King keeps coming back to is the definition of income.
Host 1:Yeah. We saw that in the Telviti case.
Host 2:Right. One little ambiguity, and it cost the guy a fortune.
Host 1:So you're saying be super specific about what counts as income in the agreement?
Host 2:Absolutely no room for interpretation when it comes to bonuses, stock options, all that stuff.
Host 1:Yes. Spell it out clearly.
Host 2:Avoid those nasty court battles later on.
Host 1:And maybe you could build in some safeguards too.
Host 2:Oh, yeah. Like caps and floors on the adjustment.
Host 1:Okay. So, like, if the payer's income suddenly drops, the alimony wouldn't go below a certain amount.
Host 2:Right. That would protect the recipient from being completely cut off.
Host 1:And on the flip side, if the payer suddenly becomes a millionaire Mhmm. Maybe there's a cap on how much the alimony can increase.
Host 2:Exactly. Something that's more in line with the lifestyle they had during the marriage.
Host 1:Yeah. That makes sense.
Host 2:Attorney King talks about this idea of the marital standard of living.
Host 1:Right.
Host 2:It's about recognizing that alimony should be based on what the couple had together, not on some future windfall.
Host 1:So it's like a balancing act.
Host 2:Yeah. You wanna acknowledge that income can change.
Host 1:Mhmm.
Host 2:But you also wanna keep things within the realm of what was established during the marriage.
Host 1:I see.
Host 2:It's a delicate balance.
Host 1:And maybe instead of a fixed percentage, you could have, like, a tiered system.
Host 2:Interesting.
Host 1:So as income changes, the alimony adjusts in smaller steps.
Host 2:Steps. Yeah. That would make the transition smoother.
Host 1:Yeah. Less of a shock to the system.
Host 2:That's a good point.
Host 1:But wouldn't that make these agreements even more complicated?
Host 2:It could. And that's the challenge. Right? Finding that sweet spot between flexibility and clarity.
Host 1:Yeah. Attorney King is really big on clarity.
Host 2:She says ambiguity is the enemy in these agreements.
Host 1:And the more complex the formula Uh-huh. The more room there is for arguments and misunderstandings.
Host 2:Exactly. So maybe it's not just about tweaking the formulas.
Host 1:Maybe we need to rethink the whole approach.
Host 2:What do you mean?
Host 1:Well, attorney King talks about shifting the focus from dividing assets to understanding the long term goals of both parties.
Host 2:Oh, yeah. I like that.
Host 1:So it's less about who gets what
Host 2:Uh-huh.
Host 1:And more about creating a sustainable financial plan for both people.
Host 2:Right. A plan that recognizes that life is unpredictable.
Host 1:People change jobs. Yeah. Markets crash.
Host 2:It happens.
Host 1:You never know what's gonna happen.
Host 2:So what are you suggesting?
Host 1:What if these agreements had, like, a mandatory review period?
Host 2:Okay.
Host 1:Every few years, the parties would come back to the table Mhmm. Reassess their situation, and make adjustments if needed.
Host 2:That's an interesting idea. It would keep the agreement flexible.
Host 1:Yeah. And it might help reduce some of the conflict.
Host 2:Because everyone would know that things can be adjusted down the line.
Host 1:Right. It wouldn't be this, like, one time battle.
Host 2:I like
Host 1:it. And this is where having a good lawyer is so important.
Host 2:Oh, yeah.
Host 1:Someone like attorney King who can help you think through all the possibilities.
Host 2:Someone who's not just there to draft the paperwork.
Host 1:Right. But to really guide you through the process.
Host 2:Because let's face it. Nobody has a crystal ball.
Host 1:Yeah.
Host 2:But a good attorney can at least help you prepare for the unexpected.
Host 1:And make sure you're protected no matter what happens.
Host 2:Exactly. And just to be clear, all of this is specific to Massachusetts. Right. Laws and precedents are different everywhere else.
Host 1:So if you're listening to this
Host 2:Mhmm.
Host 1:And you're not in Massachusetts
Host 2:Right.
Host 1:Definitely talk to a lawyer in your state.
Host 2:Good point.
Host 1:Before you make any decisions.
Host 2:For sure.
Host 1:So is there anything else about attorney King's blog post that really jumped out at you?
Host 2:I think her focus on the Telvita case was really smart.
Host 1:Yeah. It was a great example.
Host 2:It showed how something as simple as the definition of earned income income can have huge consequences.
Host 1:So the takeaway there is
Host 2:Be precise. Every word matters. Every comma, every clause.
Host 1:It can all come back to bite you.
Host 2:If it's not clear.
Host 1:Well said. I think that's a good place to pause for now.
Host 2:Okay.
Host 1:We'll be right back with our final thoughts and a question for our listeners to consider. Alright. So we're back.
Host 2:Back again.
Host 1:Still thinking about self adjusting alimony.
Host 2:It's a lot, isn't it?
Host 1:It really is. And we have attorney Mariah King to thank for all these insights.
Host 2:Yeah. She really knows her stuff.
Host 1:And I think the big takeaway here
Host 2:What's that?
Host 1:Is that if you're even thinking about a self adjusting alimony order Uh-huh. Talk to a lawyer.
Host 2:Oh, yeah. A good one.
Host 1:Someone who specializes in family law in your state.
Host 2:Absolutely. Because the laws are different everywhere.
Host 1:Exactly. Attorney King is in Massachusetts.
Host 2:Right.
Host 1:So everything she's talking about is specific to Massachusetts law.
Host 2:It's a good reminder for everyone listening.
Host 1:Yeah. Do your research.
Host 2:For sure.
Host 1:Know what you're getting into.
Host 2:And don't be afraid to ask questions.
Host 1:Oh, yeah. Lots of questions.
Host 2:Because like we've been saying, these self adjusting orders, they're not for everyone.
Host 1:Definitely not.
Host 2:They can be really complicated. Right. And if they're not done right
Host 1:Right.
Host 2:They can cause a lot of problems.
Host 1:So as we wrap up this deep dive Okay. I wanna leave you with this question.
Host 2:Alright. I'm listening.
Host 1:Do you think these self adjusting alimony orders Mhmm.
Host 2:Could
Host 1:they ever become, like, the standard way of doing things?
Host 2:Wow. Instead of the exception. Yeah. That's a good question. I mean, they do have the potential to be fairer Right.
Host 2:Over time.
Host 1:If both parties' incomes are constantly changing Uh-huh. It makes sense to have the alimony adjust too.
Host 2:But then there's that unpredictability factor.
Host 1:Alright. You never know what's gonna happen.
Host 2:Exactly. So maybe they'll always be a bit too risky for some people.
Host 1:Yeah.
Host 2:It's hard to say.
Host 1:Well, Attorney King's blog post has definitely given us a lot to think about.
Host 2:It has for sure.
Host 1:And I think it's a good reminder that the law is constantly evolving.
Host 2:Well, it's changing.
Host 1:So it's important to stay informed.
Host 2:And to have a good lawyer on your side.
Host 1:Absolutely. Well, that's it for this deep dive into the world of self adjusting alimony.
Host 2:Thanks for joining us.
Host 1:We'll see you next time.