Oklahoma panel opens four‑year review of child support guidelines; DHS recommends examining $15,000 income cap

The Oklahoma Legislature’s Judiciary Committee began a mandated four‑year review of the state’s child support guidelines, with the Oklahoma Department of Human Services urging lawmakers to reconsider the guidelines’ low combined‑income cap.

Dawn Zellner, deputy director of child support services at the Oklahoma Department of Human Services, told the committee the agency has served about 162,820 children and that 19% of Oklahoma children live in poverty. "We're here on the 4 year review of the child support guidelines," Zellner said as she outlined recent cost and collection data.

Why it matters: Zellner said the cost of raising a child in Oklahoma rose about 17% in one year and that mean earnings rose roughly 5% from 2023 to 2024. She told the committee that Oklahoma’s guidelines currently cap combined income at $15,000 and pointed to neighboring states with higher caps — New Mexico and Arkansas at $30,000 and Colorado and Missouri at $40,000 — noting two states increased their caps in 2026. Zellner asked the committee to "monitor" the guidelines and consider updating the cap so the guidelines reflect current incomes and costs.

How the guideline works: Committee members asked whether the cited $25,210 cost figure factors directly into the formula. Zellner and senators explained the DHS tool begins with combined gross income, allocates responsibilities proportionally by each parent’s share of income, and then applies deductions for items such as daycare, insurance and fixed medical costs. The department uses an Excel calculator that encodes the statutory chart; Zellner said the full statutory chart is in Title 118 (and the combined‑income schedule also appears in Title 143.118, as referenced during the meeting).

Collections and income withholding: Committee members discussed enforcement tools. Senator Boren noted that "89.2% are under an income withholding scenario," referring to the widespread use of automatic income withholding (IWO) for employed obligors. Zellner confirmed IWO is the department’s primary collection mechanism and that the figure includes both private attorneys’ orders and DHS cases when withholding is employed.

Shared parenting and overnight credits: Senators pressed on how shared overnights are counted and whether the statute’s current 182/183‑day threshold creates perverse incentives to litigate parenting time. Zellner acknowledged the tension, said many states use similar gross‑income models and described how courts can deviate from guidelines when appropriate. She also warned that some proposed bills that equate shared parenting with zero child support would disadvantage lower‑earning custodial parents.

Visitation and administrative hearings: Zellner told the committee that most DHS child support matters are handled in administrative court and that administrative law judges cannot enter custody or visitation orders; visitation typically requires a separate court order. She said DHS previously had a federal grant for access and visitation but had limited vendor capacity now, with one remaining vendor providing parenting classes and supervised visitations.

Public access and transparency: A parent and advocate, Roberta Lewis of Pottawatomie County, asked where parents can see the line‑by‑line calculations behind a final child support number. Zellner said the statutory chart in Title 118 (and the related chart in Title 143.118 as noted in the hearing) is the basis and that DHS provides an Excel guideline calculator on its website; she offered that DHS could expand the calculator’s transparency to show calculations more clearly for lay users.

Next steps and legislative context: Zellner told the committee the last full review appears to have been May 1, 2016, and referenced a 2019 economic study DHS commissioned. She said a statutory change took effect on Nov. 1, 2023, and asked lawmakers to consider monitoring and updating the guidelines to reflect current costs and incomes. Zellner briefly mentioned a drivers‑license revocation bill the department supports to improve collections, but Chair Borden halted that portion as lobbying and closed the committee’s review. The committee adjourned, concluding the Judiciary Committee’s final meeting of the 60th Legislature.

The meeting contained no formal committee motions or votes on guideline changes; DHS requested legislative review and monitoring.