New Illinois Child Support Law: Closing Loopholes on Voluntary Unemployment

Joseph A. Olszowka • February 27, 2025


The Illinois legislature has recently taken a significant step in closing a longstanding loophole in child support. This amendment represents a pivotal change in how courts assess and calculate child support obligations, providing greater protections against those who attempt to evade their financial responsibilities.


Previous Challenges in Child Support Enforcement


Historically, Illinois law lacked a clear statutory directive for handling cases where a parent deliberately chose not to work or earned significantly below their capacity to reduce child support obligations. Courts could consider voluntary unemployment or underemployment on a case-by-case basis, but there was no uniform rule requiring the imputation of income. This led to inconsistencies in how courts addressed parents who manipulated their employment status to avoid paying fair child support.


The lack of clear statutory language often resulted in protracted litigation, as custodial parents sought to prove that the other parent was intentionally earning less than they were capable of. The burden of proof on custodial parents was significant, and many payors were able to successfully argue that their lower income was legitimate, despite evidence suggesting otherwise. This loophole created financial hardships for children who depended on child support for their well-being.


New Statutory Provisions on Potential Income


The recent amendment to the Illinois child support statute introduces Section (3.2a) Unemployment or Underemployment, which explicitly empowers courts to calculate child support based on a parent’s potential income rather than just their reported earnings. The statute provides a structured approach to determine a parent's earning capacity by considering multiple factors, including but not limited to:


  • The parent's assets and substantial non-income producing assets;
  • Their residence and standard of living;
  • Employment and earning history;
  • Job skills and educational background;
  • Literacy, age, and health;
  • Criminal records and employment barriers;
  • Record of seeking work;
  • The availability of local jobs and prevailing earning levels.


Additionally, if a parent has insufficient work history to determine their probable earnings, courts will apply a rebuttable presumption that their potential income is 75% of the Federal Poverty Guidelines for a single-person household. This ensures that even in cases where past employment records are lacking, courts have a baseline for calculating child support.


Key Implications of the Amendment


With this new provision, Illinois courts now have statutory authority to address bad faith attempts to evade child support by remaining unemployed or underemployed. This amendment:


  1. Reduces Legal Ambiguity – Courts now have a clear mandate to assess potential income, leading to more consistent rulings.
  2. Protects Children’s Financial Interests – By imputing income based on ability rather than actual earnings, courts can ensure that children receive the support they need.
  3. Discourages Bad Faith Employment Decisions – Parents can no longer manipulate the system by choosing not to work or taking significantly lower-paying jobs to reduce their obligations.
  4. Establishes a Fair Standard – The consideration of multiple factors ensures that the determination of potential income is equitable and based on realistic earning potential.


It is also important to note that incarceration is explicitly excluded from being considered voluntary unemployment when establishing or modifying child support obligations. This clarification prevents undue hardship on individuals who are unable to work due to incarceration.


What This Means for Parents


For custodial parents seeking child support, this change provides stronger legal footing to argue for a fair assessment of support obligations. For paying parents, it reinforces the importance of making genuine efforts to maintain employment and fulfill financial responsibilities toward their children.


If you have questions about how this change might impact you or your child support case please contact Joseph Olszowka at jolszowka@lavellelaw.com or 847-241-1783.

More News & Resources

Lavelle Law News and Events

Don’t record a conversation without knowing the law in Illinois!
By Nataly Kaiser July 29, 2025
Do you know it’s a felony in Illinois if you record a conversation without consent? The Illinois Eavesdropping Statute prohibits the secret recording of private conversations without the consent of all parties involved. Protect yourself – Get consent before you hit record! Nataly Kaiser explains.
Now through 10-1-25, Lavelle Law is offering a special discounted rate on powers of attorney for col
By Jackie R. Luthringshausen July 24, 2025
Summer Special! - Now through 10-1-25, Lavelle Law is offering a special discounted rate on powers of attorney for college-bound students and young adults. Don't send your child to college without POA docs in place! Contact Attorney Luthringshausen to start the process. jluthringshausen@lavellelaw.com or 847-705-7555
A summary of The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) and its tax implications.
By Steven A. Migala July 22, 2025
The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), enacted on July 4, 2025, as Pub. L. No. 119-21, permanently extends and modifies key provisions from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) while introducing new tax benefits and limitations. The law affects individuals, seniors, children, businesses, and charitable organizations.
An in-depth discussion of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act and its tax implications.
By Steven A. Migala and guest Ed Brooks July 21, 2025
Lavelle Law Shareholder Steven Migala and DHJJ Financial Principal Ed Brooks join host Jim Mitchell for an in-depth look at the new U.S. tax legislation, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, and discuss how it will impact both businesses and individuals.
An in-depth discussion of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act and its tax implications.
By Steven A. Migala and guest Ed Brooks July 21, 2025
Lavelle Law Shareholder Steven Migala and DHJJ Financial Principal Ed Brooks join host Jim Mitchell for an in-depth look at the new U.S. tax legislation, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, and discuss how it will impact both businesses and individuals.
What is a fee-shifting provision?
By Sarah J. Reusché July 15, 2025
In the United States, the "American Rule" generally requires each party in a legal dispute to cover their own attorney's fees, regardless of the case's outcome. However, exceptions exist where a judge may order one party to pay the other's attorney’s fees in specific circumstances. Sarah Reusché explains.
The reconciliation process and the financial relationship between landlords and tenants.
By Theodore M. McGinn July 14, 2025
In commercial leases, particularly those involving retail or office spaces, tenants typically pay not only base rent but also a share of additional operating expenses. These include Common Area Maintenance (CAM) charges, property taxes, and insurance premiums. The reconciliation of these expenses is a key process.
Delaware Supreme Court’s Analysis of Indemnification Notices in Merger and Escrow Agreements
By Steven A. Migala July 11, 2025
Attorneys drafting or reviewing indemnification clauses and notice provisions in a sale or acquisition governed by Delaware law should be aware of the recent Delaware Supreme Court decision in Thompson Street Capital Partners IV L.P. v. Sonova U.S. Hearing Instruments, LLC.
Update on Illinois Tax Changes
By Timothy M. Hughes July 10, 2025
Beginning July 1, Illinois residents will face a series of tax increases related to the Fiscal Year 2026 budget, which takes effect from July 1, 2025, to June 30, 2026. These increases are from the $55+B state budget that is supposed to generate $700+M of new taxes ranging from gasoline, short-term rentals, and more.
Contaminated Cilantro and the Need to Provide Notice to a Seller of a Breach of the Implied Warranty
By Steven A. Migala June 30, 2025
Restaurant patrons allegedly became ill from eating contaminated cilantro and filed personal injury lawsuits against two Chicago restaurants. As part of the litigation, the distributor who sold the cilantro to the restaurants, Martin Produce, Inc., filed a third-party complaint for contribution against the wholesalers.
More Posts