1. UIFSA 2008 It’s Time Has Come!
Margaret Campbell Haynes
Center for the Support of Families

2. Hague Maintenance Convention: Making of the Treaty
55 Hague member countries + 15 “observer” (non-Hague- member) countries and non-governmental organizations (e.g., NCSEA)
5 years of negotiations ( )
U.S. signed the Hague Convention on November 23, 2007, committing to work toward ratification and implementation in the U.S.

3. Hague Maintenance Convention: Current Status
31 Countries have ratified
European Union countries (27)
Norway
Albania
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Ukraine

4. US Ratification in 2016?
The pigs are flying!
6/20/2013

5. What Has Happened
The Senate gave advice and consent to ratify the treaty (Sept. 29, 2010)
Congress approved implementing legislation that the President signed on Sept. 24, 2014
Pub. L Preventing Sex Trafficking and Strengthening Families Act
Requires a state to enact UIFSA 2008 in its next legislative session as a condition of federal Title IV-D funding
UIFSA 2008 – state legislation that will implement the Convention in U.S.

6. What Needs to Happen
All states must enact UIFSA 2008 by the effective date in Pub. L. No
The President must sign the instrument of ratification.
THEN: United States will be able to deposit its instrument of ratification with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the depository for the Hague Conference. It will take effect for the U.S. on the first day of the first month that is not less than three months after the date of deposit.

7. UIFSA – Tell Me More! Three current versions in use among states
1996
2001
2008
All versions built around two major concepts
Controlling Order
Continuing, Exclusive Jurisdiction

8. Changes from 1996 to 2001 - DCO Determination of Controlling Order
Jurisdiction
Who can request and when it occurs
Notice
Findings - consolidation of arrears

9. Changes from 1996 to 2001 - Evidence
New definition for “record” allows electronic transmission of testimony
Requires tribunal to allow telephonic or other electronic testimony by non-resident party

10. Changes from 1996 to 2001 – Modification Jurisdiction
Issuing state can modify its order even if no party lives there so long as both parties consent
A U.S. state can modify a foreign order, even if country would have CEJ, if issuing country cannot or will not modify its order
Long arm jurisdiction not applicable

11. Changes from 1996 to 2001 – Choice of Law Clarification
Law of issuing state governs duration and interest
Once arrears under old orders consolidated, prospective interest is that of controlling order state

12. Changes from 1996 to 2001 – Redirection of Payments
Applies when no party or child resides in issuing state
Request must be made by a support enforcement agency
Money sent instead to support enforcement agency of state where obligee now receiving IV-D services
Proposed new intergovernmental form

13. Goals of UIFSA 2008 Implement the Hague Convention
Address international cases in general
Build upon UIFSA 2001

14. UIFSA 2008 – New Definitions
Definition of “state” includes “tribes”
Separate definition of “foreign country” incl. many but not all foreign nations
Foreign reciprocating country
State reciprocal arrangement
Country with laws substantially similar to UIFSA
Convention country

15. Services by Support Enforcement Agency
State legislature may choose between 2 alternatives
Must, upon request, provide services to all petitioners
Must, upon request, provide services to a petitioner residing in a state or requesting services thru a Central Authority (Hague or bi-lat case) AND may, upon request, provide services to an individual petitioner not residing in a state (all other foreign cases)

16. UIFSA 2008 – Road Map
Articles 1 – 6 apply to support proceeding involving
A foreign support order
A foreign tribunal
An obligee, obligor, or child residing in a foreign country
Articles 1 – 6 may be applied by a tribunal recognizing and enforcing a foreign support order based on comity
Article 7 applies to Convention cases only

17. Enforcement Under UIFSA 2008
Direct income withholding only for support orders issued by a state. No longer requires U.S. employers to honor DIWs from foreign countries.
Registration for enforcement is different if request for enforcement comes from a Hague country.

18. Registration for Enforcement
Procedure for non-Hague foreign support orders
UIFSA 2001
Procedure for Hague foreign support orders
New Article 7
Major differences
Documents
Time frames
Defenses

19. Required Documents Non-Hague Foreign Support Orders Transmittal letter
2 copies of order, including 1 certified copy
Sworn or certified statement of arrears
Certain obligor & obligee information
Name/address of person to whom support payments to be sent (if applicable)
Request for DCO, if appropriate
Hague Foreign Support Orders
Complete text of order (or abstract by issuing tribunal)
Record: order is enforceable in issuing country
Record attesting to due process (if default order)
Record: arrears and automatic adjustment of support
Record of receipt of free legal assistance in issuing country (if necessary)

20. Time Frame to Contest Non-Hague Foreign Support Orders
Within [20] days after notice of registration
Hague Foreign Support Orders
Not later than 30 days after notice of registration
Not later than 60 days after notice if contesting party does not reside in U.S.

21. Defenses to Recognition & Enforcement of Convention Order Include
Recognition and enforcement of order is manifestly incompatible with public policy, including failure of issuing tribunal to observe minimum standards of due process
Issuing tribunal lacked personal jurisdiction consistent with Section 201;
Order is not enforceable in issuing country;
If default order, there was a lack of due process re: notice & opportunity to be heard

22. Non-Recognition of Hague Order
If a tribunal does not recognize a Hague order because
There was a lack of personal jurisdiction;
There was procedural fraud;
A proceeding between same parties with same purpose is pending before a tribunal of that state and that proceeding was filed first; or
The order is a default order but the notice and opportunity to challenge did not satisfy due process

23. Non-Recognition of Hague Order (cont’d)
Then
The tribunal may not dismiss the proceeding without allowing a reasonable time for a party to request the establishment of a new Convention support order
and the [governmental entity] must take all appropriate measures to request a child support order for the obligee if the application for recognition and enforcement was received through the Central Authority system.

24. Modification of U.S. Support Order
A U.S. tribunal retains jurisdiction to modify an order it has issued if:
(1) one party resides in another U.S. state (as defined by UIFSA); and
(2) the other party resides outside the United States

25. Currency Conversion Hague Convention does not address.
UIFSA says when it must occur and who has responsibility to prepare conversion but does not specify how to do currency conversion.
Recommended practice re: wording of NOTICE OF REGISTRATION OF FOREIGN SUPPORT ORDER:
The amount of the alleged arrearage is 900 Euros as of [12/25/YYYY] having a United States of America Dollar equivalence of $ 1080 as of [9/1/YYYY].

26. U.S. Proposed Intergovernmental Forms
Federal-state workgroup
80 Fed. Reg (Aug. 4, 2015)
60 day comment period
Three new forms
Transmittal #1 – Acknowledgment
Personal Identifiable Information (PII) Form
Request for Change of Support Payment Location Pursuant to UIFSA Section 319(b)
Amendments to other forms

27. Hague Convention Forms
Two mandatory forms: Transmittal and Acknowledgment
Number of recommended forms developed by the Forms Working Group
Applications not under penalty of perjury

28. OCSE Resources
OCSE international web page:
International Case Processing Guides for Caseworkers
International Dear Colleague Letters to FRCs
Policy Guidance to States
IM-15-01
family-support-act-2008-and-hague-treaty-provisions

29. Convention Resources
From website, go to the page for Child Support and Family Maintenance Section
Convention text
Explanatory report
Mandatory and recommended forms
Country Profiles
Handbook for Caseworkers

30. Practical Handbook for Caseworkers
Contains procedures, flowcharts and guides

31. I-Support
Case management application to assist Central Authorities in processing Convention applications and EU regulation cases
iSupport Advisory Board
Workgroups – functional, technical and security
RFP – ProTech was selected vendor
Pilot

32. I-Support Functionality
Ability to generate required and recommended forms in multiple languages
Secure transmission of messages and documents between Central Authorities
Allows case managers to track cases and complete required Convention tasks
May be able to handle payment transmissions and exchange in the future

33. Questions?? Margaret (Meg) Campbell Haynes mhaynes@csfmail.org