In the Northwest Territories, 50/50 shared parenting does not eliminate child support: the higher-earning parent still pays a "set-off" amount under section 9 of the Federal Child Support Guidelines § 9. Once each parent has at least 40% parenting time, courts subtract the lower table amount from the higher and weigh increased costs and each household's means.
Key Facts: Child Support with 50/50 Custody in Northwest Territories
| Factor | Detail |
|---|---|
| Governing law | Federal Child Support Guidelines (SOR/97-175), s. 9; Divorce Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 3 (2nd Supp.); Children's Law Act, S.N.W.T. 1997, c. 14 |
| Shared parenting threshold | 40% parenting time (146 days / 3,504 hours per year) |
| Calculation method | Set-off (higher table amount minus lower), adjusted for s. 9(b) and 9(c) factors |
| Filing fee | Approximately $200-$450 CAD at the Supreme Court of the NWT (verify with the registry) |
| Residency requirement | One spouse ordinarily resident in NWT for 12 continuous months before filing |
| Court | Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories, Yellowknife |
| Tables updated | October 1, 2025 (current federal tables) |
Do You Still Pay Child Support with 50/50 Custody in Northwest Territories?
Yes. With 50/50 parenting time in the Northwest Territories, the higher-earning parent still pays child support to the lower-earning parent through the set-off method under Federal Child Support Guidelines § 9. Equal parenting time does not cancel the obligation. The goal is to keep the child's standard of living reasonably comparable across both homes.
The widespread belief that equal time means zero support is the single most common error parents make in the NWT. The Federal Child Support Guidelines, adopted by the territory on November 1, 1998, under the Children's Law Act, S.N.W.T. 1997, c. 14, require a court making or varying a support order to apply the federal tables. Because both parents rarely earn identical incomes, a set-off almost always produces a payment from the higher earner. A parent earning $90,000 who shares time equally with a parent earning $45,000 will still transfer a meaningful monthly amount. The question is never whether 50/50 parenting time support is owed, but how much — and that depends on each parent's table figure, the increased costs of running two homes, and the broader financial circumstances the court must review.
What Triggers Shared Custody Child Support Rules in the NWT?
Shared custody child support rules apply once each parent exercises not less than 40% of parenting time over the course of a year. In practical terms, 40% equals 146 days or 3,504 hours annually. A true 50/50 arrangement easily clears this threshold, switching the calculation from the full table amount to the section 9 set-off framework.
The 40% figure is the legal trigger that moves a case out of the standard "primary parent" calculation and into the shared-parenting analysis. Under Federal Child Support Guidelines § 9, the relevant measure is the time a child is in the care and control of a parent, not merely the hours a parent is physically present. Time the child spends sleeping, at school, or in daycare counts toward whichever parent had responsibility at that moment. The leading Alberta authority, Kolada v. Kolada, 1999 ABQB 409, established the influential "responsible hours" approach courts across Canada, including the NWT, use to count time. The burden falls on the parent claiming to have reached 40% to prove it. Where one parent has the child 60% or more of the time, that parent becomes the primary parent and the other pays the full table amount instead of a set-off.
How Is the Set-Off Amount Calculated for Equal Custody Child Support?
The set-off for equal custody child support is calculated in three steps: determine each parent's full table amount based on income, subtract the lower amount from the higher, and then adjust for the increased costs of two households and each parent's circumstances. At a $60,000 income, the NWT table amount for one child falls in roughly the $550-$600 per month range under the October 1, 2025 federal tables.
The set-off method works by asking what each parent would pay if the other had the child the majority of the time. Consider a worked example: Parent A earns $90,000 and would owe about $830 per month for one child under the NWT table; Parent B earns $50,000 and would owe about $470. The straight set-off is $830 minus $470, or $360 per month payable by Parent A to Parent B. This figure is the starting point — never the automatic answer. Under Federal Child Support Guidelines § 9(b), the court examines whether shared parenting has increased total costs because the child is effectively maintained in two fully equipped homes. Under s. 9(c), the court weighs each parent's means, needs, and the child's standard of living in each household. The Supreme Court of Canada in Contino v. Leonelli-Contino, 2005 SCC 63, confirmed the set-off is not mandatory and courts may modify it.
| Income Scenario (one child) | Parent A Table | Parent B Table | Set-Off Payable |
|---|---|---|---|
| $90,000 vs $50,000 | ~$830/mo | ~$470/mo | ~$360/mo (A pays B) |
| $75,000 vs $60,000 | ~$700/mo | ~$565/mo | ~$135/mo (A pays B) |
| $60,000 vs $60,000 | ~$565/mo | ~$565/mo | ~$0 (incomes equal) |
Figures are illustrative estimates based on the October 1, 2025 NWT federal tables. Confirm exact amounts using the Department of Justice Canada online lookup tool.
The Three-Factor Test Under Section 9
Section 9 of the Federal Child Support Guidelines requires courts to weigh three factors once the 40% threshold is met: the table amounts for each parent, the increased costs of shared parenting, and the conditions, means, needs, and other circumstances of each parent and child. No single factor controls; the court balances all three to reach a fair amount.
The first factor, set out in Federal Child Support Guidelines § 9(a), is the set-off of each parent's table amount described above. The second factor, s. 9(b), recognizes that raising a child across two homes typically costs more than in one — duplicate bedrooms, clothing, technology, and transportation between Yellowknife, Hay River, or Inuvik households. Courts in the NWT examine each parent's actual budgets and expenditures to measure this increase. The third factor, s. 9(c), grants broad discretion to look at the resources and needs of both parents and the child. The governing principle is that the child should enjoy a standard of living reasonably comparable across both homes and should not experience marked material differences moving between them. Because of this discretion, two families with identical incomes can receive different support orders depending on their proven expenses.
Does 50/50 Parenting Time Support Differ from Sole Custody Support?
Yes. With 50/50 parenting time, support uses the set-off method under section 9, while sole custody (one parent having 60% or more of the time) uses the full table amount paid by the other parent. The set-off almost always produces a smaller payment than the full table figure, but it does not reduce it to zero unless both parents earn identical incomes.
The distinction turns entirely on the 60% mark. When one parent has the child 60% or more of the time, that parent is the primary parent under the Children's Law Act, S.N.W.T. 1997, c. 14 framework, and the other parent pays 100% of their own income-based table amount. There is no offset. At a $60,000 income, that full table amount is roughly $565 per month for one child. By contrast, in a 50/50 arrangement the same $60,000-earner might pay only the difference between their table amount and the other parent's — potentially far less, or nothing if incomes match. This is why parenting time percentages are litigated so heavily: crossing or staying under the 40% and 60% lines can shift the monthly obligation by hundreds of dollars. The shared custody child support calculation rewards genuine equal involvement, but it never erases the duty to contribute proportionally to income.
How Do Special or Section 7 Expenses Work in Shared Custody?
Section 7 expenses are added on top of the base child support amount and are shared by both parents in proportion to their incomes, regardless of parenting time. These include childcare, health and dental costs not covered by insurance, post-secondary education, and extraordinary extracurricular activities. A parent earning 60% of the combined income pays 60% of each eligible expense.
Under section 7 of the Federal Child Support Guidelines, these "special or extraordinary expenses" sit outside the table and set-off calculation entirely. In a 50/50 NWT arrangement, the parents first establish the base set-off, then separately apportion section 7 costs by income share. For example, if combined parental income is $150,000 and one parent earns $90,000 (60%), that parent contributes 60% of a $10,000 annual daycare cost — $6,000 per year. The other parent covers the remaining $4,000. Courts in the Northwest Territories require receipts and documentation to substantiate these expenses, and they consider whether each expense is reasonable in light of the family's means and necessary in the child's best interests. Health care expenses must generally exceed $100 annually to qualify. Because remote NWT communities can carry higher travel and medical costs, section 7 claims for transportation to specialists in Yellowknife or southern Canada are not uncommon.
What Income Is Used to Calculate Child Support in the NWT?
Child support in the Northwest Territories is calculated using each parent's annual guideline income, which starts with Line 15000 (total income) on their most recent income tax return and is adjusted under Schedule III of the Federal Child Support Guidelines. Parents with income over $12,000 owe a table amount; for income above $150,000, courts apply additional discretion.
Determining income accurately is the foundation of any 50/50 parenting time support calculation, because the set-off depends entirely on both parents' figures. The guidelines require disclosure of three years of tax returns, notices of assessment, and current pay information. Self-employed parents, contractors, and rotational mine workers at Ekati, Diavik, or Gahcho Kué face closer scrutiny, since the court can add back business deductions or impute income where earnings are understated or a parent is intentionally underemployed. Schedule III adjustments may remove union dues or add certain benefits. Where a parent's income exceeds $150,000, the Federal Child Support Guidelines § 9 and the high-income provisions allow the court to depart from a strict table figure if the table amount would be inappropriate given the child's needs. For most NWT families, however, the straight table amount tied to verified income governs, and the set-off flows directly from those two numbers.
Enforcement and Filing in the Northwest Territories
Child support orders in the Northwest Territories are enforced by the Maintenance Enforcement Program (MEP), which collects payments, registers orders, and pursues arrears. Divorce petitions raising support are filed at the Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories in Yellowknife, with a filing fee of approximately $200-$450 CAD, after one spouse has been ordinarily resident in the territory for 12 continuous months.
The residency rule comes from section 3(1) of the Divorce Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 3, which requires at least one spouse to be ordinarily resident in the NWT for the full year before filing. Only one spouse must meet it. Once an order is granted, either parent can register it with the MEP at no cost; the program then handles collection, including wage garnishment and interception of federal payments where arrears accumulate. Filing fees vary across sources and the registry charges additional amounts for motions (around $50) and a Certificate of Divorce (around $25). As of June 2026, expect total court costs in the $400-$600 CAD range. Verify with your local clerk — call the Supreme Court Registry in Yellowknife at (867) 873-7122 before filing. The Legal Aid Commission of the Northwest Territories may cover family law matters, including support, for residents who cannot afford a lawyer.