ILNews

BGBC: ‘RAIDS’ may be behind spouse’s drop in income

July 17, 2013
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

By Howard I. Gross, Steven W. Reed, Erika M. Gowan and Casey L. Higgs

In family disputes, we’re often faced with a dilemma in which the supporting spouse’s income suddenly and/or dramatically decreases without valid support or explanation. In the valuation industry, this disorder is commonly known as “R.A.I.D.S.” or Recently Acquired Income Deficiency Syndrome. Your client’s spouse may have been diagnosed with this terrible affliction as a spousal- or child-support payment obligation is about to be set.

R.A.I.D.S. is most common in self-employed individuals and business owners because they have ownership and control of the financial records of the business, which makes manipulation possible. However, there are times, of course, where a decrease in income is legitimate. For example, the economic recession in 2008 took a toll on small businesses and many companies experienced a decline in profits around this time. Owners of construction companies, residential and commercial builders, and other companies in the real estate industry likely experienced a decline in profits during the recession. There also could be internal factors that cause a legitimate decrease in income. For example, a company losing one of its largest customers or perhaps one of its key employees is cause for a decline in profits. Both external and internal factors present may cause a drop in income to be legitimate.

When a drop in income cannot be attributed to such external and internal factors or may seem unjustified, R.A.I.D.S may be the culprit. The supporting spouse finds ways to hide or divert income so it appears their business is suffering, which results in less money available for spousal- and child-support payments. There are many ways that income can be diverted or hidden by business owners, including, but not limited to:

Revenues can be held until the next fiscal year and not recorded in the year in which the services were performed or the sale was made, thus reducing revenues and income.

Sometimes revenues are just not collected, which is evidenced by a rise in accounts receivable. This reduces cash basis revenues and income.

There also may be several large equipment- and capital-expenditure purchases made unnecessarily, which increases expenses and reduces income.

The business owner may decide to run his or her personal expenses through the business, which would be evidenced by an increase in expenses and a reduction in income.

Another common area that is manipulated is cash. In a cash-intensive business like a restaurant and bar, skimming cash can go undetected. This could be evidenced by a decrease in revenues and a gross profit margin that is not in line with industry standards.

There can be diverted payments to third parties disguised as legitimate business expenses. This results in an increase in expenses and a reduction in income.

The business owner may have customers pay in cash or pay another related entity.

Not recording assets on the financial records and/or federal income tax returns.

Rapid pay down or payoff of substantial mortgages, personal loans, commercial loans or other liabilities before maturity dates, resulting in an increase in expenses and reduction in income.

Temporarily shutting down the business which gives the appearance the business was failing and without income.

Even non-owner employees going through divorces are susceptible to R.A.I.D.S, although it is not as common. One way that income can be diverted is by not working overtime when overtime was available and taken in prior years.

There are ways that R.A.I.D.S. can be detected. Has the spouse’s lifestyle spending changed at all? Does the spouse seem genuinely concerned about his or her own future earnings capacity? Has the spouse expressed concern about the business to any friends or relatives? Collectively these can help to paint a financial picture of the situation.

Forensic accounting specialists and business valuators frequently help attorneys determine if the decrease in income is legitimate or if the income is contrived. A business valuator who also has the skills of a forensic accountant can help with normalizing the earnings of the business when conducting the business valuation. If you suspect your client may be a victim of R.A.I.D.S and you wish to find a cure, seek a seasoned forensic accounting/business valuation specialist.•

__________

Howard I. Gross, CPA/ABV/CFF, CFP; Steven W. Reed, CPA/ABV; Erika M. Gowan, CPA/CFF, CFE; and Casey L. Higgs, CPA/CFF, CFE, CVA are with BGBC Partners, LLP – Litigation, Forensic and Business Valuation. Contact BGBC at 317-633-4700 or visit www.bgbc.com. The opinions expressed are those of the authors.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Bob Leonard killed two people named Jennifer and Dion Longworth. There were no Smiths involved.

  2. Being on this journey from the beginning has convinced me the justice system really doesn't care about the welfare of the child. The trial court judge knew the child belonged with the mother. The father having total disregard for the rules of the court. Not only did this cost the mother and child valuable time together but thousands in legal fees. When the child was with the father the mother paid her child support. When the child was finally with the right parent somehow the father got away without having to pay one penny of child support. He had to be in control. Since he withheld all information regarding the child's welfare he put her in harms way. Mother took the child to the doctor when she got sick and was totally embarrassed she knew nothing regarding the medical information especially the allergies, The mother texted the father (from the doctors office) and he replied call his attorney. To me this doesn't seem like a concerned father. Seeing the child upset when she had to go back to the father. What upset me the most was finding out the child sleeps with him. Sometimes in the nude. Maybe I don't understand all the rules of the law but I thought this was also morally wrong. A concerned parent would allow the child to finish the school year. Say goodbye to her friends. It saddens me to know the child will not have contact with the sisters, aunts, uncles and the 87 year old grandfather. He didn't allow it before. Only the mother is allowed to talk to the child. I don't think now will be any different. I hope the decision the courts made would've been the same one if this was a member of their family. Someday this child will end up in therapy if allowed to remain with the father.

  3. Ok attorney Straw ... if that be a good idea ... And I am not saying it is ... but if it were ... would that be ripe prior to her suffering an embarrassing remand from the Seventh? Seems more than a tad premature here soldier. One putting on the armor should not boast liked one taking it off.

  4. The judge thinks that she is so cute to deny jurisdiction, but without jurisdiction, she loses her immunity. She did not give me any due process hearing or any discovery, like the Middlesex case provided for that lawyer. Because she has refused to protect me and she has no immunity because she rejected jurisdiction, I am now suing her in her district.

  5. Sam Bradbury was never a resident of Lafayette he lived in rural Tippecanoe County, Thats an error.

ADVERTISEMENT