Singer Sia (Sia Furler) agreed on March 28, 2026 to pay ex-husband Daniel Bernad $42,500 per month in child support for their 23-month-old son, plus private school tuition, healthcare, extracurriculars, and a $5 million life insurance policy naming the child as beneficiary. Payments started April 1, 2026. On April 7, 2026, Sia called California's child support framework "incredibly high" on X and said she was "trying to buy peace." The settlement, reported by Billboard, illustrates how Cal. Fam. Code § 4055 treats ultra-high earners — and why mothers in Sia's tax bracket pay the same formula fathers do.
Key Facts
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| What happened | Sia agreed to pay ex-husband $42,500/month in child support, plus tuition, healthcare, and $5M life insurance |
| When | Settlement March 28, 2026; payments effective April 1, 2026; public statement April 7, 2026 |
| Where | Los Angeles County Superior Court, California |
| Who's affected | Sia Furler (payor), Daniel Bernad (recipient parent), 23-month-old son Somersault |
| Key statute | Cal. Fam. Code § 4055 (statewide guideline formula) |
| Practical impact | Confirms California guideline applies symmetrically regardless of payor's gender; high-earner settlements often include collateral obligations beyond base support |
Why this matters legally
The Sia settlement confirms that California's child support guideline applies identically regardless of which parent earns more. Cal. Fam. Code § 4053(d) requires that "each parent should pay for the support of the children according to his or her ability," with no statutory presumption that mothers receive support and fathers pay it. In 2024, the U.S. Census Bureau reported approximately 1 in 5 custodial parents are fathers, and California courts have steadily applied § 4055 to mother-payor cases for over two decades.
The Bernad case had drawn attention because Bernad initially requested $250,856 per month in temporary spousal support before the parties resolved both spousal and child support together, as reported by Us Weekly. The negotiated $42,500 figure for child support reflects a downward-from-formula compromise — common when both sides want finality.
The collateral terms — private school tuition, extracurriculars, healthcare, and a $5 million life insurance policy — are not part of the § 4055 base calculation. Those obligations come from Cal. Fam. Code § 4062, which permits courts to add "mandatory add-ons" (childcare for work, uninsured healthcare) and "discretionary add-ons" (private school, special needs, travel for visitation). Life insurance to secure support is authorized under Cal. Fam. Code § 4012.
How California law handles high-earner child support
California uses a statewide algebraic formula, not a percentage cap. Cal. Fam. Code § 4055(a) sets the equation: CS = K(HN − (H%)(TN)), where K is a multiplier based on combined net income, HN is the high earner's net monthly disposable income, H% is the high earner's approximate timeshare with the child, and TN is total combined net income. The result is the presumptively correct amount under Cal. Fam. Code § 4057.
For ultra-high earners, the guideline can produce numbers far above what a child reasonably needs. Cal. Fam. Code § 4057(b)(3) provides the "extraordinarily high income" rebuttal: a court may deviate downward when the payor parent has "an extraordinarily high income and the amount determined under the formula would exceed the needs of the children." This is the rule a high-earner payor uses to argue against a seven- or eight-figure annual award. The leading authority is In re Marriage of Cheriton, 92 Cal. App. 4th 269 (2001), which held that even with the wealth deviation, courts must protect the child's right to share in the standard of living of both parents.
In practice, California high-earner settlements typically resolve below the raw formula number. The $42,500/month figure ($510,000 annually) is consistent with negotiated outcomes where one parent has substantial income but the other parent also has earning capacity and primary custodial time. Bernad reportedly has primary physical custody, which under § 4055 drives the support number upward because the H% (high-earner timeshare) is low.
The $5 million life insurance requirement is enforceable under Cal. Fam. Code § 4012, which allows courts to require a support obligor to maintain life insurance to secure ongoing payments. For a 23-month-old child whose support obligation could run 17+ years, $5 million represents roughly the present value of remaining base support plus add-ons, discounted for time.
Practical takeaways for California parents
-
Run the DissoMaster or Xspouse calculation before agreeing to any number. California's guideline is formulaic, and any settlement should be measured against Cal. Fam. Code § 4055 output. Deviations require written findings under Cal. Fam. Code § 4056.
-
Document custody timeshare precisely. The H% input drives outcomes more than most parents realize. A shift from 20% to 30% timeshare for the higher earner can reduce monthly support by thousands of dollars.
-
Negotiate add-ons separately. Private school, healthcare, and extracurriculars under Cal. Fam. Code § 4062 are negotiated apart from base support. Lock in cost-sharing percentages and approval procedures up front.
-
If you are a high earner, preserve the § 4057(b)(3) deviation argument. Document the child's actual needs with specificity. Courts are more receptive to deviations supported by lifestyle evidence than to bare "too high" objections.
-
Address life insurance early. Cal. Fam. Code § 4012 lets courts mandate life insurance, but the amount, term, and beneficiary structure are negotiable. A trust beneficiary can prevent a young child from receiving lump-sum payouts.
-
Modification is available. Under Cal. Fam. Code § 3651, child support orders can be modified upon a material change in circumstances — including substantial income changes for either parent. Sia's settlement is not necessarily fixed for 17 years.
Frequently Asked Questions
Brief CTA
If you are negotiating child support in California — as a high earner or a custodial parent — the difference between a guideline calculation and a negotiated settlement can be hundreds of thousands of dollars. Speak with a California family law attorney who routinely handles cases involving substantial income before signing any stipulated order.
Disclaimer
This article discusses recent news and provides general legal commentary. It does not constitute legal advice. Every case is unique. Consult a qualified family law attorney for advice specific to your situation.