High-Income Child Support Caps by State
Every state has a point where the guideline formula stops being automatic and a judge starts using discretion. This page lists those caps — many of which changed in 2025–2026 — and what courts actually do with income above them. Retrieved 2026-08-08.
Direct answer
Only a minority of states publish a hard income cap. The most notable 2025–2026 figures: New York $193,000/year combined (Mar. 1, 2026, up from $183,000), Massachusetts $450,000/year (Dec. 1, 2025, up from $400,000), Washington $50,000/month combined net (Jan. 1, 2026, up from $12,000), Colorado $40,000/month (Mar. 1, 2026, up from $30,000), Texas $11,700/month net resources (2025), New Jersey $187,200/year (~$3,600/week, Sept. 1, 2025), and North Dakota $25,000/month net. Most other states have no listed cap — the guideline schedule applies and judges may deviate with written findings.
Where does discretion start for you?
Pick a state and enter your monthly income to see whether you are inside or above the guideline cap — and what the law does with income above it.
Where does discretion start?
Pick a state and enter your monthly income (net, pre-support). The tool tells you whether you are inside or above the guideline cap.
Guideline cap: $11,700/month net resources (2025 adjustment) · Source: Tex. Fam. Code § 154.125, 154.126
Verdict
⬤ Above the cap — court discretion
Your income is above Texas's guideline cap ($11,700/month net resources (2025 adjustment)). Flat percentages (20/25/30/35/40%) apply to net resources up to the cap; above it, court may order more only with evidence of the child’s proven needs
High-income support is heavily fact-dependent. This is general education with dated sources — not legal advice. Run your state's calculator for the guideline number, then consult a family-law attorney.
1. What a “cap” actually does
A cap is not a ceiling on how much support a high earner pays — it is the income level above which the formula stops being automatic. Below the cap, the percentage or schedule applies as a presumption. Above it, the court has discretion: it may extend the statutory percentage, apply statutory factors, look at the child’s actual needs and standard of living, or blend approaches — almost always with written findings on the record.
Two distinct designs appear across states:
- Hard cap states (NY, MA, NJ, CO, WA, TX, ND, FL, LA, AR): a dollar figure ends the presumptive table; everything above is discretionary (or uses a formula-plus approach like Florida’s excess percentages).
- No-cap states (most of the rest): the schedule applies at any income, and high earners must seek a deviation with written findings — the practical effect is similar, but the burden and procedure differ.
2. State-by-state cap matrix
| State | Cap | Treatment above the cap | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule applies broadly; deviations with written findings | Ala. Rule 32; confirm with AL DHR |
| Alaska | No statutory cap listed | Civ. R. 90.3 percentage applies to gross income; deviations available | Alaska Civ. R. 90.3 |
| Arizona | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | A.R.S. § 25-320 |
| Arkansas | No statutory cap listed | Family Support Chart to $50,000/month combined; above that case-by-case | Ark. Admin. Code 118.00.01; state-content 2026 |
| California | “Extraordinarily high income” standard | Guideline formula (Fam. Code § 4055) presumptive; deviation only where support would exceed children’s needs — courts have required ~$2M+/yr before considering deviation | Fam. Code § 4057 (operative Sept. 1, 2024); case law |
| Colorado | $40,000/month combined (eff. Mar. 1, 2026) | HB 25-1159 raised cap from $30,000; above the cap, deviation based on children’s reasonable needs and parental circumstances | C.R.S. § 14-10-115; HB 25-1159 |
| Connecticut | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46b-215 |
| Delaware | Melson formula with reserves | No fixed income cap; Melson standard-of-living adjustment applies | Del. Code tit. 13 § 501 |
| District of Columbia | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | D.C. Code § 16-916.01 |
| Florida | Table tops at $10,000/month combined net | Above the table: apply guideline at $10,000, then add 5% (1 child) up to 12.5% (6+) of the excess; discretionary above with findings | Fla. Stat. § 61.30(1)(a), (6) |
| Georgia | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | O.C.G.A. § 19-6-15 |
| Hawaii | No statutory cap listed | Melson formula; deviations for high income | Haw. Rev. Stat. § 576D-7 |
| Idaho | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | Idaho Code § 32-706 |
| Illinois | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation; court may order more with findings (PA 102-0823) | 750 ILCS 5/505 |
| Indiana | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | Ind. Code § 31-16-8 |
| Iowa | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | Iowa Code § 598.21 |
| Kansas | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | K.S.A. § 23-2901 |
| Kentucky | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | KRS § 403.212 |
| Louisiana | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | La. R.S. 9:315 |
| Maine | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | 19-A M.R.S. § 2007 |
| Maryland | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | Fam. Law § 12-204 |
| Massachusetts | $450,000 combined (income above cap still considered) | Guideline worksheet tops at $450k combined; above it the court considers actual needs and the child’s accustomed standard of living | M.G.L. c. 208 § 28; Child Support Guidelines 2023 |
| Michigan | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | MCL 552.605 |
| Minnesota | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | Minn. Stat. § 518.551 |
| Mississippi | No statutory cap listed | Percentage of income; deviations available | Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 |
| Missouri | No statutory cap listed | Form 14 guidelines; deviations with written findings | § 452.340 RSMo |
| Montana | Melson formula with reserves | No fixed income cap; Melson standard-of-living adjustment | MCA 40-4-204 |
| Nebraska | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-364 |
| Nevada | No statutory cap listed | Percentage of income; deviations available | NRS 125B.070 |
| New Hampshire | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | RSA 458-C |
| New Jersey | No statutory cap listed | Guideline worksheet + deviation; courts weigh children’s actual needs above guideline ranges | N.J. Court Rule 5:6A |
| New Mexico | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | NMSA 1978 § 40-4-11.1 |
| New York | $193,000 combined (first $193k of parental income) | CSSA formula applies to first $193,000 combined; above that the court may apply the formula or deviate based on child’s needs and circumstances | Domestic Relations Law § 240(1-b) |
| North Carolina | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | N.C. Gen. Stat. § 50-13.4 |
| North Dakota | No statutory cap listed | Percentage of income; deviations available | N.D. Admin. Code 75-02-04.1 |
| Ohio | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | Ohio Rev. Code § 3119.021 |
| Oklahoma | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | Okla. Stat. tit. 43 § 118 |
| Oregon | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | Or. Rev. Stat. § 25.275 |
| Pennsylvania | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | 23 Pa.C.S. § 4322 |
| Rhode Island | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | R.I. Gen. Laws § 15-5-16.2 |
| South Carolina | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | S.C. Code Ann. § 20-7-891 |
| South Dakota | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | SDCL § 25-7-6.2 |
| Tennessee | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | Tenn. Comp. R. & Regs. 1240-02-04 |
| Texas | $11,700/month net resources (2025 adjustment) | Flat percentages (20/25/30/35/40%) apply to net resources up to the cap; above it, court may order more only with evidence of the child’s proven needs | Tex. Fam. Code § 154.125, 154.126 |
| Utah | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | Utah Code § 78B-12-301 |
| Vermont | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | 15 V.S.A. § 654 |
| Virginia | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | Va. Code § 20-108.2 |
| Washington | $50,000/month combined net (eff. Jan. 1, 2026) | HB 1014 raised the Economic Table cap from $12,000 to $50,000; above it, more may be ordered only with written findings | RCW 26.19.020; 2026 HB 1014 |
| West Virginia | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | W. Va. Code § 48-13-101 |
| Wisconsin | No statutory cap listed | Percentage of gross income (17/25/29/31/34%) by child count | Wis. Stat. § 767.511 |
| Wyoming | No statutory cap listed | Guideline schedule + deviation findings | Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 20-2-311 |
“No statutory cap listed” means the guideline schedule applies broadly and high-income adjustments occur through deviation findings; the practical bar and procedure vary by court. Caps marked with effective dates were verified against the state statute or agency publication on 2026-08-08. Confirm before relying on any figure.
3. What courts do above the cap
The patterns across states converge on a small set of considerations:
- Extend the formula — NY routinely applies CSSA percentages above the cap (or blends with the § 240(1-b)(f) factors); Florida applies fixed excess percentages (5%–12.5%); Texas requires proof of the child’s proven needs.
- Cap-rate discipline — Massachusetts requires any percentage applied to income above $450,000 to be below the 10% rate at the cap.
- Actual-needs analysis — NJ, CO, and WA direct courts to the child’s established standard of living, actual expenses (education, activities, health care), and both parents’ resources.
- Extraordinarily high income — California allows deviation only where guideline support would exceed the children’s needs, and courts have treated “extraordinarily high” as roughly $2M+/year in practice (Fam. Code § 4057).
The practical takeaway for negotiations: above a cap, evidence decides the case — documented lifestyle, expenses, and needs carry more weight than the formula would.
4. Practical guidance for high earners
- If you pay: know whether your state has a hard cap, and prepare the deviation evidence (your fixed costs, the child’s actual expenses, both households’ standards of living) if you plan to argue the formula amount is unjust.
- If you receive: a cap increase does not change an existing order — petition for modification (NY: substantial change/3 years/15% income change; other states similar), and bring the current cap into the hearing.
- Model the spread: your state’s calculator shows the guideline number; the comparison tool shows how much a change of state would move it; the simulator tests income changes.
- Watch 2025–2026 updates: NY ($193k), MA ($450k), WA ($50k/mo), CO ($40k/mo) all moved recently — see the 2026 changes page.
Not legal or financial advice. This estimate follows the state’s statutory guideline formula but cannot capture every factor a court considers (health insurance, childcare, prior orders, deviations, imputed income).