Illinois Child Support Is Changing in 2027: A Plain-English Guide for Parents

August 10, 2026

Share this article

Child hugging teddy bear on couch while two adults argue in the background

Illinois has passed a new child-support law, Public Act 104-0733, which takes effect on January 1, 2027. The law changes sections 505 and 510 of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act. Its biggest changes involve shared parenting time, low-income support orders, incarcerated parents, and the exchange of income information. 

The new law does not automatically change every existing child-support order. A parent will generally still need a legal basis to modify an existing order. The fact that Illinois changed the law is not, by itself, enough to reopen an old support order.

The shared-parenting threshold will drop from 146 to 110 overnights

Under the current law, Illinois uses its special “shared care” child-support formula only when each parent has at least 146 overnights per year with the child.

Starting in 2027, the shared-care formula will apply when each parent has at least:



  • 110 overnights per year, or 
  • 110 “overnight equivalents.” 

This means the special formula may apply when a parent has the child about 30% of the year, rather than the approximately 40% required under the old law. Public Act 104-0733, §5, amending 750 ILCS 5/505(a)(3.8). 


Reaching 110 overnights does not mean that no child support will be paid. The court will still consider both parents’ incomes and how much time the child spends with each parent. The parent with the higher income may still owe support, even when parenting time is close to equal.


The new law keeps the existing shared-care calculation, including the 1.5 multiplier. The parents’ separate support obligations are calculated and then compared. The parent with the larger obligation generally pays the difference.

The law tries to avoid a sudden drop at one particular number

The old law created a major dividing line at 146 overnights. A parent with 145 overnights did not automatically qualify for shared-care treatment, while a parent with 146 did.

The new law still gives some weight to the difference between 110 and 146 overnights. When a parent has fewer than 146 overnights, the parent’s shared-care calculation is increased according to this table:

Annual overnights

110–114

115–119

120–124

125–129

130–134

135–139

140–145

Increase

10%

9%

8%

7%

6%

4%

2%

In plain English, the adjustment is larger when a parent is closer to 110 overnights and becomes smaller as the parent approaches 146. The final adjusted amount cannot be greater than the amount that would have been ordered under the regular child-support formula.

Daytime parenting may sometimes count like an overnight

The new law introduces the idea of an “overnight equivalent.”


An overnight equivalent may be used when a parent has significant parenting time on a separate day, personally cares for the child, but does not keep the child overnight. The parents may agree that this time should count, or a judge may recognize it as a reason to depart from the usual guidelines. 


For example, a parent may regularly pick up the child after school, provide dinner, help with homework, and care for the child until late evening before returning the child to the other parent. Under the new law, that arrangement may receive more attention than it did under the old overnight-only system.


The difficulty is that the law does not explain:

  • How many daytime hours equal one overnight. 
  • What “significant” parenting time means. 
  • Whether time at school, daycare, or activities counts. 
  • How cancellations or schedule changes should be handled. 

Parents negotiating an agreement should describe any overnight equivalents in detail. Simply writing that “daytime visits will count” may create a future dispute.

What does “rebuttable presumption” mean?

The new law uses the phrase “rebuttable presumption” several times.


A rebuttable presumption is simply the court’s starting point. The judge begins by assuming that a particular result should apply. But that result is not automatic or permanent. A parent may present evidence showing that a different result would be fairer or more appropriate.


For example, Illinois begins with the assumption that the amount produced by the child-support guidelines is the correct amount. A judge may order something different, but the judge must have a reason and must explain that reason in writing.

More low-income parents may qualify for a minimum support order

Under the old law, the court generally starts with minimum support of $40 per month per child, up to a total of $120 per month, when the paying parent’s income is at or below 75% of the federal poverty guideline for one person.


The new law raises that income limit from 75% to 100% of the federal poverty guideline. This means more very-low-income parents may qualify for the minimum-order starting point. Public Act 104-0733, §5, amending 750 ILCS 5/505(a)(3.3a). 


Because this is a rebuttable presumption, the $40 amount is the starting point—not an unavoidable result in every case.


The law also keeps the separate starting point of a zero-dollar order for certain parents who have no income, receive only means-tested public benefits, or cannot work because of a medically proven disability, incarceration, or institutionalization.

A new procedure will apply when a parent is incarcerated

When a parent will be incarcerated for more than 180 consecutive days, the new law begins with the assumption that the parent cannot pay child support.

That assumption can be challenged. For example, the other parent may show that the incarcerated parent has substantial income, investments, property, or other assets that can still be used to support the child. 



A party or the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services may file a notice of incarceration. If no written objection is filed within 45 days, the support obligation may be reduced to zero as of the date of the notice. If someone objects, the court must hold a hearing. 


After release, the law generally provides for support to resume at the statutory minimum after 90 days. Either parent may still ask the court to set a different amount based on the parent’s actual income and ability to pay. 


This procedure may prevent the buildup of large support debts that an incarcerated parent had no realistic ability to pay. The disadvantage is that the parent caring for the child may receive no support during the incarceration even though the child’s expenses continue.

Parents will have to exchange income information every year

Orders entered under section 505 will have to require both parents to exchange written information verifying their net income every year.


Parents must also continue reporting new employment or the loss of employment within 10 days. For new employment, the information must include the employer’s name and address. Public Act 104-0733, §5, amending 750 ILCS 5/505(h). 


The law does not state:

  • The date on which the annual exchange must occur. 
  • Which documents must be exchanged. 
  • Whether tax returns, pay statements, W-2s, 1099s, or business records are required. 
  • Whether support changes automatically after the information is exchanged. 


A well-written settlement should answer those questions. For example, it could require an exchange every April 15 and list the exact documents each parent must provide.

How the law may help settlement negotiations

The new law may make settlements easier because it reduces the importance of the old 146-overnight cutoff. Parents with substantial parenting time will no longer face an all-or-nothing jump between 145 and 146 overnights.



The law may also produce fairer results for parents who provide substantial daytime care but do not always have the child overnight. Annual income exchanges should make it easier to identify major raises, job changes, bonuses, or other income changes.


The new rules for low-income and incarcerated parents may also encourage more realistic support orders instead of orders that cannot reasonably be paid.

How the law may make settlements harder

The financial importance of reaching 110 overnights could make parenting-time negotiations more difficult. A parent may be accused of asking for additional time mainly to reduce child support. The other parent may be accused of resisting additional time mainly to preserve support.


Overnight equivalents may become another source of disagreement. Parents may argue over whether an afternoon, evening, or weekend day is long enough to count.



The parent maintaining the child’s main home may also object that many expenses do not decrease when the child spends additional time elsewhere. Rent, mortgage payments, utilities, clothing, school expenses, and transportation costs often continue regardless of the exact overnight count.


For that reason, parents should not negotiate only about the basic support number. They should also address health insurance, medical bills, childcare, school costs, extracurricular activities, transportation, and other major child-related expenses.

Challenges courts are likely to face

Illinois courts will need new worksheets and calculation software for the 110-to-145 overnight adjustments. The Department of Healthcare and Family Services is responsible for issuing the shared-care worksheets. 



Judges will also have to decide what qualifies as an overnight equivalent. Disputes may arise over scheduled parenting time versus time actually exercised, children who have different schedules, changing work shifts, missed visits, and daytime care provided partly by relatives or childcare providers.


Courts and clerks will also need procedures for incarceration notices, 45-day objections, release dates, and the resumption of support. Annual income exchanges may create enforcement disputes because the law requires the exchange but does not specify a uniform date or document list.

The main takeaway

Beginning January 1, 2027, Illinois will recognize shared parenting for child-support purposes at 110 overnights instead of 146, allow certain significant daytime periods to count, expand minimum-order treatment for low-income parents, create a new incarceration procedure, and require annual income disclosures.



The changes may produce more flexible and realistic support calculations. They will also make precise parenting schedules and carefully written settlement agreements more important than ever.


This article provides general information about Illinois law and is not legal advice for any particular case.

Recent Posts

Upset child sitting on a couch while two adults argue in the background
October 23, 2026
Learn the most common custody mistakes Illinois parents make and how to protect your parental rights while supporting your child's best interests.
October 11, 2026
Anyone paying for groceries, insurance, housing, or medical care knows that the cost of living has increased. But does inflation—or simply spending more money than you did when you divorced—automatically allow you to return to court and seek more maintenance? A recent Illinois appellate decision says no . The important question is not simply whether expenses have increased. The party seeking modification must show that the change has substantially affected his or her financial needs . In In re Marriage of Tompkins, 2026 IL App (3d) 250482-U , the Illinois Appellate Court, Third District, affirmed the dismissal of a former wife's request to increase maintenance because she had not alleged sufficient facts demonstrating a substantial change in circumstances. There is one important qualification: Tompkins is a Rule 23 order , designated by the “-U” in its citation. It therefore is not precedential except in the limited circumstances permitted by Illinois Supreme Court Rule 23(e)(1). Nevertheless, it provides a useful recent illustration of how Illinois courts approach requests to modify maintenance. What Happened in Tompkins? When John Tompkins and Amy Itoku divorced in 2019, their marital settlement agreement recognized that John's income as a self-employed portfolio manager fluctuated. The parties therefore created an unusual maintenance formula. Amy received a $6,500 monthly draw, followed by an annual “true-up” based upon John's actual income. Their agreement contained a detailed schedule specifying the percentage Amy would receive at various income levels, including income exceeding $4 million. Years later, Amy sought to modify maintenance. Among other things, she alleged that: John had gone from self-employment to salaried employment; his income had increased dramatically; her medical expenses had increased by approximately $10,000 per year; and because of uncertainty concerning her maintenance payments, she had reduced expenditures for vacations, health-club memberships, vehicles, streaming services, and household help. The trial court dismissed her petition, and the appellate court affirmed. A Change in Expenses Is Not Necessarily a “Substantial Change” Illinois law provides that a maintenance award may be modified or terminated “only upon a showing of a substantial change in circumstances.” 750 ILCS 5/510(a-5). The statute then directs the court to consider factors including changes in employment, earning capacity, income, property, the recipient's efforts to become self-supporting, and other equitable circumstances. The appellate court in Tompkins emphasized an important distinction: life circumstances can change without financial need changing substantially enough to justify modifying maintenance. The court explained that a substantial change generally requires a change in either: the needs of the spouse receiving maintenance; or the paying spouse's ability to pay. Amy alleged increased medical expenses and that she had cut back her lifestyle. But she did not allege that those changes left her unable to meet her expenses, that her financial needs had materially increased, or that the maintenance she was receiving was inadequate to meet those needs. The court therefore held that those allegations, standing alone, were insufficient. That distinction is important. It is not enough to say: “Everything costs more now.” The stronger case is: “My necessary expenses have materially increased, here are the numbers showing the increase, and my present income and maintenance are no longer sufficient to meet those needs.” What About the Paying Spouse Earning More Money? Tompkins also illustrates another important limitation. Amy alleged that John's income had increased dramatically after the divorce. Ordinarily, a significant increase in the payor's income is one of the factors a court considers under section 510(a-5). But the parties' MSA had specifically anticipated both different forms of employment income and income levels exceeding $4 million. The appellate court concluded that the agreement already addressed the circumstances upon which Amy relied. This issue must be considered together with the current version of section 510(a-5). Illinois law now provides that the foreseeability or contemplation of a future event generally cannot be used to defeat a claim of substantial change unless that future event was expressly specified in the court order or agreement incorporated into the judgment. 750 ILCS 5/510(a-5) . That makes careful drafting of marital settlement agreements increasingly important. If the parties want a particular future event—retirement, changes in compensation, receipt of bonuses, or another defined circumstance—to be treated in a particular way, the agreement should say so expressly. Does Tompkins Mean Inflation Never Matters? No. The case should not be read as creating a blanket rule that inflation or increased costs can never support modification of maintenance. What Tompkins demonstrates is that merely identifying increased expenses or reduced discretionary spending is not enough. The moving party must connect those circumstances to a material change in actual financial need. That distinction is also important because child support cases are different. Illinois courts have long recognized that children's needs may increase as they grow older and as the cost of living rises. The First District recently repeated that principle in In re Marriage of Cox , 2026 IL App (1st) 242290, ¶ 52 , citing In re Marriage of Sweet, 316 Ill. App. 3d 101, 105 (2000). So Tompkins should not be generalized into a rule that inflation is irrelevant to every form of support. The Practical Lesson A former spouse considering a maintenance modification should not rely simply upon inflation, higher prices, or a comparison of today's expenses with expenses from several years ago. A persuasive petition should identify specific, material changes and explain their financial consequences. That usually means comparing income, necessary expenses, health costs, employment circumstances, assets, and financial resources at the time of the prior order with those circumstances today. The lesson of Tompkins is fairly straightforward: a higher cost of living may explain why someone spends more money, but the court still needs facts showing that the person's financial need has substantially changed. And before filing, the marital settlement agreement itself should be reviewed closely. Sometimes the parties have already agreed how the very change now being complained about will affect maintenance. Contact LSR Family Law Group If you have questions about whether an existing maintenance or child support obligation may be subject to review or modification under Illinois law, contact Steve Rakowski at LSR Family Law Group at (847) 412-9950 to discuss the particular facts of your case.
Credit report with 720 score, broken red heart, and hands of couple at a desk with cards and calculator
October 8, 2026
Learn practical ways to protect your credit during divorce and avoid financial mistakes that could affect your future in Illinois.
Wedding rings on a gavel and wooden block, symbolizing divorce or legal proceedings
September 23, 2026
Prepare for your first divorce consultation with confidence. Learn which documents to bring and how to make the most of your meeting.
Family sitting on a couch, listening to a person holding a clipboard in a living room
September 9, 2026
Learn how Illinois courts determine the best interests of the child in custody cases and the factors that influence parenting decisions.
August 25, 2026
Divorce is one of the few legal matters where a decision made today can affect your finances, your children, and your family relationships for years to come. That is why choosing a divorce attorney based primarily on hourly rate can be a costly mistake.  A lower hourly rate may seem attractive at the beginning of a case. But divorce litigation is not simply a matter of filling out forms, exchanging financial documents, and appearing in court. The difficult cases require judgment—knowing which issues matter, which do not, when to negotiate, when to litigate, and how a decision made early in the case may affect the final result. That judgment usually comes from experience.
Hands of people in a meeting over house model, calculator, gavel, and paperwork on a table
August 25, 2026
Learn how retirement accounts are divided during an Illinois divorce, including 401(k)s, pensions, IRAs, and Qualified Domestic Relations Orders.
Family sitting in a living room, with a child hugging an orange teddy bear in the foreground
August 10, 2026
Unsure if you need a family law attorney in Illinois? Learn seven signs it's time to seek legal guidance before family issues become more difficult.
July 13, 2026
Not necessarily. In fact, it happens more often than people think. At LSR Family Law Group, many of our clients come to us after previously hiring one — and sometimes more than one — divorce lawyer. That does not automatically mean the client is difficult, unreasonable, or the problem. Divorce is one of the most stressful events a person can go through. The lawyer-client relationship in a divorce case requires trust, communication, honesty, and a plan that makes sense for that client’s life. Sometimes that relationship simply breaks down. One of the most important things a divorce lawyer can do is listen. Really listen. Every client comes into a divorce case with their own concerns, fears, priorities, and goals. Some are worried about their children. Some are worried about financial survival. Some are concerned about protecting a business, a home, retirement, or their reputation. Others just want the conflict to end. There is no one-size-fits-all divorce strategy. A good plan has to be custom tailored to the client, the facts, the law, and the realities of the courtroom. That also means having tough conversations when necessary. Sometimes a client’s goals do not line up with the facts of the case or what Illinois law allows. When that happens, the answer is not to ignore the problem, overpromise, or tell the client only what they want to hear. The better approach is to explain the legal landscape clearly, discuss the risks, and help the client develop realistic goals that can actually be pursued. Those conversations are not always easy. But they build trust. Many divorce firms do not take enough time to listen to the client, understand what matters most, or help the client develop a realistic strategy. When clients feel unheard, confused, or surprised by what is happening in their case, dissatisfaction grows. Eventually, trust and confidence break down. That is often when the client decides to make a change. Hiring a new lawyer during a divorce is not something most people do lightly. It usually means the client knows something is not working and wants a better path forward. At LSR Family Law Group, we understand that. We do not assume that a client who had prior counsel is the problem. We start by listening, learning the history of the case, identifying what went wrong, and building a plan designed around the client’s goals and the realities of the case. Sometimes a fresh start with the right lawyer makes all the difference.
By Giovanni Concepcion • July 13, 2026
While traditionally mothers were favored in custody disputes, as a father, you do have rights to your child. Following are 10 tips for fathers in a divorce case to learn how to protect yourself. Think carefully before leaving your home when you decide to divorce: If you leave your home and children, it may be more difficult for you to negotiate to either get the home back or get access to your children back on a full-time basis. Keep careful records of who cares for your child: While mothers have long been favored in custody disputes, trends may change as fathers take on more of the role of caregivers. In some cases, fathers are the primary caregivers in fact. If you are very involved in the day-to-day care of your child, that may impact the custody agreement the judge determines is appropriate. Collect evidence of paternity as soon as possible: If you believe paternity is going to be questioned, get a copy of your child’s birth certificate and/or of any other evidence that you have that shows you are the child’s father Request a DNA test if there is a dispute: While this doesn’t come up as often in marriage dissolution, paternity can still be disputed at times during custody cases. You may wish to consider getting a paternity test if you believe your ex-wife will question whether you are really the child’s father. Always pay child support as mandated: It may be tempting to withhold child support if your spouse is preventing you from seeing your child, but doing so can make you susceptible to a court order or contempt of court. It can also hurt your rights in a custody case. Comply with court orders and don’t break any laws- While you may not be happy if you are initially granted limited visitation, make sure to comply with all court rules. Don’t take your child from the state without permission or do anything else that might be illegal, as this can land you in jail and can make it hard for you to get custody. Hire an attorney experienced in protecting father’s rights: Your divorce attorney should have specifically worked with fathers before and should have experience in custody fights. Secure witnesses who can attest to your care of the child: If you and your spouse really can’t agree and the court has to decide on custody, the judge may request you call witnesses who can testify to your parenting skills. Ask people to be witnesses on your behalf early. Neighbors, teachers and other caregivers may all be able to tell the court how good a father you are, making it more likely you will be treated favorably in a custody dispute. Understand the custody arrangements and laws available: Each state has different rules and laws, but there are some common types of custody arrangements such as joint custody or partial custody. Understand the language as far as what each type of custody arrangement means. Do not agree to anything you don’t think is fair unless the court mandates you do so: While you may want to just end the custody battle, especially if it drags on for a long time, don’t give up custody of your child without a fight.
Show More