A lesson for any man that does not sort finances at divorce

[Rick101]

mjb1 said:

hid his true income inside his companies to minimise child support payments etc. So morally, he's no better by the sound of it.

That's an interesting statement. I see exactly your point but the more I think about it, the more I conclude - no scrub that.

Is he immoral because he 'hid' money?
Or
Is he immoral because he hasn't provided the 'due' finance for the child?

On the first, it's quite a common thing amongst self employed regardless of whether there is a child of not. It's simply tax efficient, whether is is immoral is a different question.
I'd maybe consider the second the less immoral of the two scenarios. The CSA system is broken and inherently unfair. It's closer to a system of fine and punishment than one to actually help kids not be disadvantaged.
I've thankfully managed to avoid it. I probably don't pay my 'due' but that's more than made up for in other ways and I have a great relationship with my kids.

Is he any more moral now the payment has been made?

Sorry, bit off topic but it got me thinking.

[PurpleMoonlight]

Not sure I buy the child maintenance bit.

Back in the 1990's if a resident parent received income support then the CSA collected child maintenance from the non-resident parent to reimburse the treasury. His child was born in approx 1983.

So if child maintenance was due it was the responsibility of the CSA to collect it.

Of course the mother here may not have claimed income support.