Using Experts: Vocational and Financial

Experts can clarify complex questions: What could a parent realistically earn? What is the true income from a closely held business? When used sparingly and strategically, vocational and financial experts can transform a murky case into a clear order.

Vocational experts. A vocational expert evaluates a parent’s education, work history, skills, local job market, and reasonable wages. The expert may administer aptitude tests, review resumes, and analyze job postings. Their report estimates earning capacity and typical time to secure work. Courts consider vocational opinions when a parent is underemployed or claims they cannot work due to health or childcare duties. The goal isn’t punishment; it’s setting support on what’s realistically achievable.

Financial experts. Forensic accountants analyze self‑employment income, cash flows, retained earnings, and add‑backs (personal expenses paid by the business). They reconcile bank statements, tax returns, POS reports, and vendor invoices. In high‑variability or suspected “cash‑heavy” businesses, a neutral expert can provide a credible income figure and a payment structure (base plus percentage) that tracks actual performance.

Choosing and scoping experts. Pick experts with family‑law experience and clear, courtroom‑ready reports. Define a limited scope to control costs: “Assess earning capacity for a parent with X background in Y market,” or “Analyze 24 months of bank statements and tax returns to estimate average monthly income.” Ask for a short executive summary, detailed methods, and exhibits that a judge can digest quickly.

Discovery and cooperation. Experts need documents: resumes, applications, medical restrictions (if relevant), job logs, tax returns, general ledgers, and bank statements. Obtain protective orders for sensitive data. If the other parent won’t cooperate, seek a court order compelling evaluation or document production with deadlines.

Cost‑benefit analysis. Experts are expensive; use them when the delta between positions justifies the spend. If you believe income is understated by $2,000/month, a one‑time expert fee that leads to a correct, durable order may pay for itself within months. Consider jointly retaining a neutral expert to reduce dueling opinions and improve credibility.

Presentation. File reports on time and bring the expert for short, focused testimony if required. Use demonstratives—simple charts of income, job openings, or add‑backs. Tie opinions to guideline inputs (gross income, overnights) so the judge sees exactly how the expert’s work affects the number.

Bottom line. Experts are tools to reach the right number. Use vocational evaluations to set realistic earning capacity and forensic accounting to cut through complex finances. Scoped well, expert input can shorten litigation and produce orders that match economic reality.

Disclaimer: Educational information only; not legal advice. Standards and availability vary by state and change over time. Consult a licensed attorney.

Mini‑case. A salon owner reports $2,000/month income, but bank‑deposit analysis shows $7,500/month average with cash deposits matching appointment logs. The forensic report identifies $1,200/month in personal expenses run through the business (cell phones, groceries) as add‑backs. The court sets support using $7,500 gross less allowable expenses and adds a 10%‑of‑net‑bonuses clause for seasonal spikes. Clear methods, clear number, durable order.

Cost control. Ask the court to apportion expert fees in proportion to results or ability to pay, and to allow a neutral expert shared by both sides when feasible. Many judges prefer one trusted neutral over two partisan reports, saving time and money.