Texas Child Support Calculator

Texas follows the Percentage of Income model under Chapter 154 of the Texas Family Code, one of the most straightforward child support systems in the country. The court assigns a fixed percentage of the obligor's monthly net resources based solely on the number of children being supported. Unlike income shares states, Texas does not require the obligee's income in the basic calculation. The percentages are: 20% for one child, 25% for two children, 30% for three children, 35% for four children, and 40% for five or more children. For parents supporting children from multiple relationships, the percentages are adjusted downward using an additional table to account for the children not before the court. This percentage-based formula makes it relatively simple for parents to estimate their obligation before going to court, and it reduces litigation over income discovery in the initial proceeding.

The percentage applies to monthly net resources, not gross income, which means the starting point already reflects realistic take-home amounts after mandatory deductions. Net resources under Texas law include wages, salaries, self-employment income, overtime, commissions, tips, rental income, severance pay, retirement income, and virtually all other financial resources received regularly. Military pay — including base pay and certain allowances — is also included. The statute is deliberately broad because the Legislature intended courts to have a complete financial picture of what the obligor actually has available. Importantly, Texas does not permit a general deduction for living expenses, new family expenses, or discretionary costs. Only the specific mandatory deductions specified in the statute reduce gross income to net resources. This prevents obligors from artificially reducing their apparent income by claiming discretionary expenses as offsets against their child support obligation.

Texas courts apply the guideline percentages to combined net resources up to $9,200 per month. For obligors earning above that threshold, the court uses the cap as the base for guideline calculation, resulting in a floor obligation of $1,840 per month for one child at the cap. Courts can order additional support above the cap if the child's needs — education, medical, extracurricular — genuinely require more than the guideline amount would provide, and the court must make written findings explaining why above-cap support is appropriate. This two-tier approach balances predictability at ordinary income levels with judicial flexibility for high-income families. A parent earning $20,000 per month in net resources will not automatically pay child support on the full $20,000; the guideline stops at $9,200 unless the court makes specific written findings about the child's demonstrated financial needs.

Texas Family Code § 154.062 provides the detailed definition of net resources. The calculation begins with all income from all sources, which is deliberately comprehensive. Wages and salary are the most common components, but the statute also captures self-employment income after reasonable business expenses, business ownership distributions, rental income, royalties, interest, dividends, trust income, and workers' compensation or disability benefits. The broad definition reflects the Legislature's intent that every dollar of financial capacity available to the obligor should be considered when determining what they can contribute to their child's support. Income from a new spouse or partner is generally excluded from the obligor's net resources calculation, however, because the support obligation is personal to the paying parent and the new household's income is not legally responsible for children from a prior relationship.

After identifying gross income, Texas law requires specific deductions to arrive at net resources. The statute allows subtraction of federal income tax withholding computed as if the obligor were a single filer with one personal exemption — regardless of their actual filing status or number of dependents — Social Security tax contributions at 6.2% up to the annual wage base, and Medicare tax contributions at 1.45%. Health and dental insurance premiums paid specifically to cover the child being supported are also deducted. Notably, state income tax is not deducted because Texas has no state income tax. Non-mandatory expenses, credit card payments, rent, and other personal costs are not permitted deductions. The result of these subtractions is the monthly net resources figure to which the guideline percentages are applied, giving the obligor a transparent calculation they can verify against their own pay stubs.

Texas uses a self-employment adjustment for parents who work for themselves. Self-employed obligors deduct reasonable and necessary business expenses from gross business income to arrive at self-employment income, then subtract the employer's share of FICA taxes as an allowable deduction, because self-employed individuals pay both the employee and employer halves of FICA. This prevents double-counting the tax burden on self-employed parents. Courts are watchful for inflated expense claims, and they can impute income when they believe the obligor's reported self-employment income understates actual financial capacity. A pattern of personal expenses run through the business, unusually high write-offs, or a lifestyle inconsistent with reported income can all lead a court to adjust the net resources figure upward to reflect what the obligor truly has available to support their child.

Texas child support is based primarily on the number of children, not the custody schedule. However, custody arrangements do affect support in important practical ways. The Standard Possession Order (SPO) defines default visitation for non-custodial parents, typically providing first, third, and fifth weekends of each month plus certain holidays and a portion of summer. The Expanded Standard Possession Order (ESPO) gives the non-custodial parent more time, including school pickup on Fridays and longer summer periods. Texas law presumes the SPO or ESPO is in the child's best interest for parents living within 100 miles of each other. While neither the SPO nor the ESPO automatically changes the support percentage applied to net resources, they establish the framework within which parents share parenting responsibilities and direct daily care costs.

For true joint physical custody situations where parenting time is relatively equal, Texas courts retain discretion to adjust support, but there is no automatic reduction formula as exists in some income shares states. If parents agree to a 50/50 split, the court can order a deviation from the guideline amount — potentially reducing or eliminating support — but must make written findings explaining why the deviation serves the child's best interest. Some courts will calculate what each parent would owe the other under the guideline percentages and order the parent with higher income to pay the difference, an approach sometimes called offset. This informal offset approach is not mandated by Texas statute but is commonly applied in practice when custody is genuinely shared equally and both parents are actively bearing direct day-to-day costs for the child.

Texas treats primary conservatorship — the parent who has the child more than 50% of the time — as the basis for the support order. When parents have children together and also separately with other partners, the calculating court uses the multiple-family worksheet to adjust the applicable percentage downward. The worksheet accounts for other children the obligor is legally supporting, whether through existing court orders or natural and legitimate children living with the obligor. This prevents the support obligation for any single child from consuming an unfair share of the obligor's net resources when they have multiple children across different households. Texas courts apply the worksheet automatically whenever the obligor has other legal support obligations, ensuring that all children are treated equitably in the distribution of the obligor's available net resources.

Texas courts may deviate from the guideline amount when they find that applying the standard percentage would be unjust or inappropriate in a given case. Family Code § 154.123 provides a non-exhaustive list of factors courts must consider when evaluating whether a deviation is warranted. These include the age and needs of the child, the ability of each parent to contribute to the child's support, the financial resources available for the support of the child, the amount of time each parent spends with the child, the net resources of the obligee, travel expenses related to extended visitation, and any special or extraordinary educational, medical, or other expenses of the child. When ordering a deviation, the court must make written findings explaining the basis for departing from the guideline amount and specifying what the guideline amount would have been without the deviation.

Common situations that prompt Texas courts to deviate downward from guideline support include shared equal parenting time, a child with primary custodial care provided by the obligor for extended periods, or cases where the obligor pays significant health insurance premiums for the child that greatly exceed the standard deduction. Courts may also deviate when the child has access to substantial independent financial resources — such as a trust fund — that reduces actual need. Conversely, courts may deviate upward from the guideline amount when the child has exceptional medical needs, attends private school due to an established pattern or medical necessity, or requires specialized therapies or care whose cost exceeds what standard guideline support would cover. Above-cap deviations for high-income obligors must be tied specifically to demonstrated financial needs of the child rather than general lifestyle considerations.

Retroactive support in Texas is a form of deviation that applies to periods before the support order was established. A court can order retroactive child support going back as far as four years from the filing date of the case, though judges have discretion to limit retroactive orders based on equitable factors. If the obligor was not aware of the child or was actively misled about paternity, the court may further limit or eliminate retroactive support. For modifications, either parent can return to court to seek a change in the support order if a material and substantial change in circumstances has occurred — such as a significant income change, a change in custody, or a change in the child's medical needs — since the most recent order was entered. Texas courts also recognize a modification as appropriate if the obligor's monthly net resources have changed by 20% or $100 per month, whichever is greater, since the existing order.

Texas has one of the most active child support enforcement systems in the country, administered primarily by the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) Child Support Division. When a parent falls behind on court-ordered support — creating arrears — the OAG has a broad toolkit of enforcement mechanisms available. Income withholding orders are the most common enforcement tool. Under both Texas and federal law, child support must be withheld from the obligor's paycheck if both parents do not agree to an alternative payment arrangement. The employer receives an income withholding order directly from the court or OAG and is legally required to deduct the support amount from each paycheck and forward it to the state disbursement unit for disbursement to the receiving parent, maintaining a clear payment record.

Beyond income withholding, Texas uses several additional enforcement mechanisms for parents who fall significantly behind. License suspension is one of the most effective tools: Texas can suspend a delinquent obligor's driver's license, occupational licenses, and recreational licenses when they are six months or more behind on payments. Federal and state tax refund intercepts redirect refunds to satisfy arrears. Passport denial through the federal Office of Child Support Enforcement prevents international travel for parents who owe $2,500 or more in arrears. Credit reporting agencies receive reports of past-due support orders, affecting the obligor's credit score and ability to obtain financing. Financial institution data matching programs regularly compare bank account information against the child support database to identify accounts that can be levied to satisfy outstanding arrears.

Contempt of court is the most serious enforcement tool available to Texas courts. When an obligor willfully fails to pay court-ordered child support, they can be held in civil or criminal contempt. Civil contempt can result in incarceration until the delinquent parent pays a specified purge amount or makes a good-faith payment arrangement. Criminal nonsupport is a state jail felony under Texas Penal Code § 25.05 when an obligor intentionally or knowingly fails to pay support for six months or more, or owes $5,000 or more in arrears. A state jail felony conviction carries a sentence of 180 days to two years in state jail and a fine of up to $10,000. The threat of these serious consequences drives many obligors into compliance before enforcement proceedings advance to this level, making the credible threat of enforcement itself a powerful collection mechanism.