This is the second of three posts on Colorado's 2026 child support law. The first, what changed on March 1, 2026, covers the new schedule, the self-support reserve, and the low-income tiers. This one takes the parenting-time table apart.
For decades, Colorado child support turned on a single number. If each parent had the children for more than 92 overnights a year, the case went on Worksheet B and the paying parent got a substantial credit. If one parent had 92 or fewer, the case went on Worksheet A and that parent got nothing for the time, whether 10 overnights or 90. The 93rd overnight could be worth thousands of dollars a year, and parents litigated it accordingly.
That rule is gone. For orders entered or modified on or after March 1, 2026, House Bill 25-1159 replaced it with a parenting-time table in C.R.S. § 14-10-115(8)(h) that assigns a credit percentage to every overnight count from zero to 365. There is no cliff, so there is no number worth fighting over for its own sake. There is a curve, and every point on it costs or saves money.
How the Old 93-Overnight Cliff Worked
Under the former § 14-10-115(8)(b), a shared-care case multiplied the basic obligation by 1.5 on the theory that two households duplicate expenses, divided the result by income, multiplied each parent's share by the other parent's percentage of time, and offset the two figures. It worked in the middle of the range and broke at the threshold.
A round-number example under the old schedule. Two children, combined income of $10,000 a month, the paying parent earning $6,000 and the other $4,000. At 92 overnights the paying parent was on Worksheet A and owed 60 percent of $1,844, or $1,106. At 93 overnights the same parent moved to Worksheet B and owed about $955. One overnight changed the number by roughly $150 a month, and the fight over it was often a fight about money dressed as a fight about parenting.
What Replaced It on March 1, 2026
Shared physical care under § 14-10-115(3)(h) now requires only that each parent keep the children "for at least one overnight each year." The 1.5 multiplier is gone. The calculation under the new § 14-10-115(8)(b) runs in four steps:
- Take the basic obligation from the schedule and divide it between the parents in proportion to income, as in a sole-care case.
- Look up each parent's credit percentage on the table for that parent's overnights, and multiply the total basic obligation by that percentage.
- Subtract each parent's credit from that parent's share. The parent whose share exceeds the credit owes the difference; the other owes nothing.
- Add each parent's proportionate share of child care, health insurance, and extraordinary expenses, less any ordered direct payments.
The table is symmetric, so the two parents' credits always add up to the whole basic obligation. A few points show its shape. At 52 overnights, every other weekend, the credit is 5.27 percent. At 73, a fifth of the year, it is 8.87 percent. At 104 it is 16.54 percent; at 122, a third of the year, 22.54 percent; at 146, 32.32 percent; at 182.5, 50 percent; and at 292, four-fifths of the year, 91.13 percent.
The credit lags the time share at the low end by design: a parent who has the children one weekend in two does not carry a proportionate share of the primary home's fixed costs. The curve steepens as the schedule approaches equal.
Worked Examples at Several Overnight Counts
Same family under the new schedule: two children, combined income $10,000, the paying parent at $6,000 and the other at $4,000. The new basic obligation is $2,001; the paying parent's share is $1,201 and the other parent's is $800. Rounded results before add-ons:
- Zero overnights: no credit. The paying parent owes $1,201, the sole-care result.
- 52 overnights: credit of 5.27 percent of $2,001, or $105. The paying parent owes $1,095.
- 92 overnights: credit of 13.19 percent, or $264. The paying parent owes $937. Under the old law this parent owed $1,106 with no credit.
- 104 overnights: credit of 16.54 percent, or $331. The paying parent owes $870, within a dollar of the old Worksheet B result.
- 146 overnights, a 60/40 schedule: credit of 32.32 percent, or $647. The paying parent owes about $554, again almost identical to the old result.
- 182.5 overnights, a true 50/50 schedule: each parent's credit is $1,000. The paying parent's $1,201 share less $1,000 leaves about $200; the old formula gave about $277.
Two lessons follow. Families in the 100-to-150 overnight range see little change from the old Worksheet B, while families below 93 overnights, who got nothing before, now get a credit that grows with every night. And equal-income parents on a true 50/50 schedule owe each other nothing, because their shares and credits are identical.
Why Counting Overnights Accurately Now Matters in Every Case
Under the old law, once the threshold question was settled the exact count was irrelevant; a parent with 60 overnights and one with 90 paid the same. Now every overnight has a price. In the example above, each additional overnight between 52 and 104 is worth roughly four to five dollars a month, and each overnight between 146 and 182.5 is worth close to ten. Over a 12-year term, a ten-overnight error compounds into real money.
That puts weight on details plans used to leave vague:
- The plan should state the annual overnight count the worksheet used, so a later dispute is about whether the count was right, not what it was.
- Holiday and summer schedules must be counted, not estimated; a summer block and a holiday rotation can move a parent 15 or 20 overnights either way.
- When siblings have different schedules, the statute averages them: add each child's overnights with a parent and divide by the number of children on the worksheet.
- The court counts the overnights the order provides for. A parent who says the other parent does not use the ordered time is asking for a deviation, and § 14-10-115(8)(e) still lists a parent who spends "substantially more time" with the child than a straight count reflects.
No parent has to prove a particular amount of direct spending during overnights to get the credit; In re Marriage of Redford (1989) said so under the old law, and the new text does not change it.
The Cap: Never More Than the Zero-Overnight Amount
The statute keeps a safety valve from the old law: support ordered "must not exceed the amount owed by that same parent if the parent had no overnights." Because the curve only reduces the paying parent's number from the zero-overnight figure, the cap rarely changes a standard calculation. Where it works is in the low-income tiers. A parent with income at or below the self-support reserve, $1,831.83 a month in 2026, owes a reduced flat amount, and that amount does not apply if shared parenting time would produce a lower figure. The $10 minimum order works the same way. In every tier, overnights can lower support and never raise it.
What This Means for Existing Orders
No existing order changed on March 1, 2026. A Worksheet A order built on 80 overnights still says what it said. To get the new credit, a parent must move to modify under C.R.S. § 14-10-122, and the motion succeeds only if the recalculated figure differs from the existing order by at least ten percent. In the example above, a paying parent with 80 overnights goes from $1,106 under the old order to about $994 under the new table, just over ten percent. A modification reaches back only to the filing date.
The larger effect is on how parenting-time cases are litigated. When the 93rd overnight stopped being worth $1,800 a year, the financial incentive to fight for it went with it, which leaves parenting-time disputes where they belong: on what schedule serves the child.
Talk to a Denver Divorce Attorney About Overnights and Child Support
Aaron Herzberg is a divorce attorney in Greenwood Village, Colorado, serving Denver and the Front Range, with more than 30 years of trial experience and a practice focused on divorce, custody, and financially complex family law. Custody cases are the ones he fights hardest for, and under the new table the parenting schedule and the support number are built together, so the overnight count should be right before either is set. A first meeting is a paid consultation, not a free call and not a sales pitch.
Read the full guide on DenverDivorce.com: Child Support in Colorado.
Educational information only, not legal advice. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship.
