Mississippi Code
Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (2026)
Child support award guidelines
✓ current as of July 2026
- (1) The following child-support award guidelines shall be a rebuttable presumption in all judicial or administrative proceedings regarding the awarding or modifying of child-support awards in this state:
Number Of Children Due Support
Percentage Of Adjusted Gross Income That Should Be Awarded For Support
1
14%
2
20%
3
22%
4
24%
5 or more
26%
- (2) The guidelines provided for in subsection (1) of this section apply unless the judicial or administrative body awarding or modifying the child-support award makes a written finding or specific finding on the record that the application of the guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate in a particular case as determined under the criteria specified in Section 43-19-103.
- (3) The amount of "adjusted gross income" as that term is used in subsection (1) of this section shall be calculated as follows:
- (a) Determine gross income from all potential sources that may reasonably be expected to be available to the absent parent including, but not limited to, the following: wages and salary income; income from self-employment; income from commissions; income from investments, including dividends, interest income and income on any trust account or property; absent parent's portion of any joint income of both parents; workers' compensation, disability, unemployment, annuity and retirement benefits, including an Individual Retirement Account (IRA); any other payments made by any person, private entity, federal or state government or any unit of local government; alimony; any income earned from an interest in or from inherited property; any other form of earned income; and gross income shall exclude any monetary benefits derived from a second household, such as income of the absent parent's current spouse;
- (b) Subtract the following legally mandated deductions:
- (i) Federal, state and local taxes. Contributions to the payment of taxes over and beyond the actual liability for the taxable year shall not be considered a mandatory deduction;
- (ii) Social security contributions;
- (iii) Retirement and disability contributions except any voluntary retirement and disability contributions;
- (c) If the obligated parent is subject to an existing court order for another child or children, subtract the amount of that court-ordered support;
- (d) If the absent parent is also the parent of another child or other children residing with him, then the court may subtract an amount that it deems appropriate to account for the needs of said child or children;
- (e) Compute the total annual amount of adjusted gross income based on paragraphs (a) through (d) of this subsection, then divide this amount by twelve (12) to obtain the monthly amount of adjusted gross income.
Upon conclusion of the calculation of paragraphs (a) through (e) of this subsection, multiply the monthly amount of adjusted gross income by the appropriate percentage designated in subsection (1) of this section to arrive at the amount of the monthly child-support award.
- (4) In cases in which the adjusted gross income as defined in this section is more than One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00) or less than Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00), the court shall make a written finding in the record as to whether or not the application of the guidelines established in this section is reasonable. The court shall take into account the basic subsistence needs of the obligated parent who has a limited ability to pay.
- (5) Imputation of income shall not be based upon a standard amount in lieu of fact-gathering. In the absence of specific sufficient evidence of past earnings and employment history to use as the measure of an obligated parent's ability to pay, the recommended child-support obligation amount should be based on available information about the specific circumstances of the obligated parent. This can include, but is not limited to, such factors as assets, residence, job skills, educational attainment, literacy, age, health, criminal record and other employment barriers, and record of seeking work, as well as the local job market, the availability of employers willing to hire the obligated parent, prevailing earnings level in the local community, and other relevant factors in the case.
- (6) Unless extended or waived, the Department of Human Services shall review the appropriateness of these guidelines beginning January 1, 1994, and every four (4) years thereafter and report its findings to the Legislature no later than the first day of the regular legislative session of that year. The Legislature shall thereafter amend these guidelines when it finds that amendment is necessary to ensure that equitable support is being awarded in all cases involving the support of minor children.
- (7) All orders involving support of minor children, as a matter of law, shall include reasonable medical support. Notice to the obligated parent's employer that medical support has been ordered shall be on a form as prescribed by the Department of Human Services. In any case in which the support of any child is involved, the court shall make the following findings either on the record or in the judgment:
- (a) The availability to all parties of health insurance coverage for the child(ren);
- (b) The cost of health insurance coverage to all parties.
The court shall then make appropriate provisions in the judgment for the provision of health insurance coverage for the child(ren) in the manner that is in the best interests of the child(ren). If the court requires the custodial parent to obtain the coverage then its cost shall be taken into account in establishing the child-support award. If the court determines that health insurance coverage is not available to any party or that it is not available to either party at a cost that is reasonable as compared to the income of the parties, then the court shall make specific findings as to such either on the record or in the judgment. In that event, the court shall make appropriate provisions in the judgment for the payment of medical expenses of the child(ren) in the absence of health insurance coverage.
Laws, 1989, ch. 439, § 1; Laws, 1990, ch. 543, § 2; Laws, 2000, ch. 530, § 3; Laws, 2004, ch. 582, § 1; Laws, 2012, ch. 552, § 2, eff. 5/22/2012.
Amended by Laws, 2022, ch. 365, HB 1067,§ 1, eff. 7/1/2022.
Amended by Laws, 2013, ch. 356, SB 2338, 1, eff. 7/1/2013.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 207
cases (18 in the last 5 years), 1989–2025 · leading case: Lowrey v. Lowrey, 25 So. 3d 274 (Miss. 2009).
Lowrey v. Lowrey, 25 So. 3d 274 (Miss. 2009). “See Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (Rev.2004). Thus, we reverse and remand this issue for consideration by the chancellor consistent with this opinion.”
Wheat v. Wheat, 37 So. 3d 632 (Miss. 2010). “Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (1) (Rev.2009).”
Yelverton v. Yelverton, 961 So. 2d 19 (Miss. 2007). “James next contends that the chancellor failed to make findings to support his deviation from the child support guidelines as required by Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (Rev.2004) and Chesney v.”
Johnston v. Johnston, 722 So. 2d 453 (Miss. 1998). “Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101 sets forth a set of statutory guidelines to aid in the awarding of child support.”
Moulds v. Bradley, 791 So. 2d 220 (Miss. 2001). “In making the required on the record finding for a guidelines departure pursuant to Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (2000), [3] the Chancellor stated that: [T]he Court finds that the application of the guidelines in this case are unjust and inappropriate due to the evidence presented…”
Barnes v. Dep't of Human Servs., 42 So. 3d 10 (Miss. 2010). “See Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (Rev.2009). The guidelines' suggested percentages are based on the noncustodial parent's adjusted gross income and the number of children to be supported.”
Thurman v. Thurman, 559 So. 2d 1014 (Miss. 1990). “See Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (Supp. 1989).”
Chamblee v. Chamblee, 637 So. 2d 850 (Miss. 1994). “Guidelines for determining the proper amount of child support a parent must pay are set out in Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 . This law must be considered for what it is, a set of guidelines and not absolute rules.”
Bailey v. Bailey, 724 So. 2d 335 (Miss. 1998). “Furthermore, while Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(3)(d) allows the trial court to deduct an appropriate amount to account for the expense of a child living in the non-custodial parent's home for purposes of calculating child support, the deduction is purely discretionary.”
Hensarling v. Hensarling, 824 So. 2d 583 (Miss. 2002). “Ken alleges that the chancellor failed to apply the statutory guideline set out in Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (2000) when he determined the amount of child support owed.”
Selman v. Selman, 722 So. 2d 547 (Miss. 1998). “" Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (2) (1993). *555 ¶ 35.”
Gray v. Gray, 909 So. 2d 108 (Miss. Ct. App. 2005). “Believing that the lower court failed to satisfy the requirements of Miss. Code Ann. §§ 43-19-101 and -103 (Rev.”
— Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(1) — 42 cases
Yelverton v. Yelverton, 961 So. 2d 19 (Miss. 2007). “James next contends that the chancellor failed to make findings to support his deviation from the child support guidelines as required by Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (Rev.2004) and Chesney v.”
Johnston v. Johnston, 722 So. 2d 453 (Miss. 1998). “Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101 sets forth a set of statutory guidelines to aid in the awarding of child support.”
Wheat v. Wheat, 37 So. 3d 632 (Miss. 2010). “Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (1) (Rev.2009).”
Moulds v. Bradley, 791 So. 2d 220 (Miss. 2001). “In making the required on the record finding for a guidelines departure pursuant to Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (2000), [3] the Chancellor stated that: [T]he Court finds that the application of the guidelines in this case are unjust and inappropriate due to the evidence presented…”
Clark v. Clark, 754 So. 2d 450 (Miss. 1999).
— Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(1)(2) — 1 case
Grant v. Grant, 765 So. 2d 1263 (Miss. 2000).
— Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(1998) — 1 case
Watkins v. Watkins, 748 So. 2d 808 (Miss. Ct. App. 1999).
— Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(2) — 27 cases
Wheat v. Wheat, 37 So. 3d 632 (Miss. 2010). “Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (1) (Rev.2009).”
Hensarling v. Hensarling, 824 So. 2d 583 (Miss. 2002). “Ken alleges that the chancellor failed to apply the statutory guideline set out in Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (2000) when he determined the amount of child support owed.”
Rakestraw v. Rakestraw, 717 So. 2d 1284 (Miss. Ct. App. 1998).
Gray v. Gray, 909 So. 2d 108 (Miss. Ct. App. 2005). “Believing that the lower court failed to satisfy the requirements of Miss. Code Ann. §§ 43-19-101 and -103 (Rev.”
Weeks v. Weeks, 29 So. 3d 80 (Miss. Ct. App. 2009).
— Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(2000) — 2 cases
Southerland v. Southerland, 816 So. 2d 1004 (Miss. 2002).
Bresnahan v. Bresnahan, 818 So. 2d 1113 (Miss. 2002).
— Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(3) — 11 cases
Moulds v. Bradley, 791 So. 2d 220 (Miss. 2001). “In making the required on the record finding for a guidelines departure pursuant to Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (2000), [3] the Chancellor stated that: [T]he Court finds that the application of the guidelines in this case are unjust and inappropriate due to the evidence presented…”
Pittman v. Pittman, 791 So. 2d 857 (Miss. Ct. App. 2001).
Bustin v. Bustin, 806 So. 2d 1136 (Miss. Ct. App. 2001).
Kilgore v. Fuller, 741 So. 2d 351 (Miss. Ct. App. 1999).
Nix v. Nix, 790 So. 2d 198 (Miss. 2001).
— Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(3)(2000) — 1 case
Nix v. Nix, 790 So. 2d 198 (Miss. 2001).
— Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(3)(a) — 9 cases
Wheat v. Wheat, 37 So. 3d 632 (Miss. 2010). “Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (1) (Rev.2009).”
Barnes v. Dep't of Human Servs., 42 So. 3d 10 (Miss. 2010). “See Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (Rev.2009). The guidelines' suggested percentages are based on the noncustodial parent's adjusted gross income and the number of children to be supported.”
Neville v. Neville, 734 So. 2d 352 (Miss. Ct. App. 1999).
Kilgore v. Fuller, 741 So. 2d 351 (Miss. Ct. App. 1999).
Robertson v. Robertson, 812 So. 2d 998 (Miss. Ct. App. 2001).
— Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(3)(b) — 3 cases
Faerber v. Faerber, 13 So. 3d 853 (Miss. Ct. App. 2009).
White v. White, 722 So. 2d 731 (Miss. Ct. App. 1998).
Magruder v. Magruder, 881 So. 2d 365 (Miss. Ct. App. 2004).
— Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(3)(d) — 4 cases
Bailey v. Bailey, 724 So. 2d 335 (Miss. 1998). “Furthermore, while Miss.Code Ann. § 43-19-101(3)(d) allows the trial court to deduct an appropriate amount to account for the expense of a child living in the non-custodial parent's home for purposes of calculating child support, the deduction is purely discretionary.”
Dunn v. Dunn, 911 So. 2d 591 (Miss. Ct. App. 2005).
McClee v. Simmons, 834 So. 2d 61 (Miss. Ct. App. 2002).
Magruder v. Magruder, 881 So. 2d 365 (Miss. Ct. App. 2004).
— Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(3)(e) — 1 case
Williams v. Dep't of Human Servs., 116 So. 3d 176 (Miss. Ct. App. 2013).
— Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(4) — 17 cases
Wheat v. Wheat, 37 So. 3d 632 (Miss. 2010). “Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101 (1) (Rev.2009).”
Dunn v. Dunn, 911 So. 2d 591 (Miss. Ct. App. 2005).
Collins v. Collins, 112 So. 3d 428 (Miss. 2013).
Peters v. Peters, 906 So. 2d 64 (Miss. Ct. App. 2004).
Hults v. Hults, 11 So. 3d 1273 (Miss. Ct. App. 2009).
— Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(5) — 1 case
Gray v. Gray, 909 So. 2d 108 (Miss. Ct. App. 2005). “Believing that the lower court failed to satisfy the requirements of Miss. Code Ann. §§ 43-19-101 and -103 (Rev.”
— Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(6) — 2 cases
Byrd v. Byrd, 100 So. 3d 443 (Miss. 2012).
Dobbins v. Coleman, 930 So. 2d 1246 (Miss. 2006).
— Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(b) — 1 case
Wells v. Wells, 800 So. 2d 1239 (Miss. Ct. App. 2001).
— Miss. Code Ann. § 43-19-101(l) — 1 case
Grove v. Agnew, 14 So. 3d 790 (Miss. Ct. App. 2009).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.