SB1403

Incarceration-related adjustments. After verifying an order for confinement of at least 180 consecutive days, the agency still must review the support order, but now may, rather than must, administratively adjust child, medical and dental support using the support guidelines and the person’s resources during incarceration. Existing exclusions remain for confinement over failure to comply with a child-support order or family violence against the person owed support or a covered child. The existing rule also leaves support due before the adjustment unchanged. This is not an automatic reduction to zero. Final law, section 4; Prior adjustment law.

The adjustment notice must use the agency’s form and go to the party’s last known residence, mailing or email address supplied to the agency; if no updated address was supplied, it may go to the address in the most recent court-filed order. The statute directs courts to treat its notice and service requirements as met when that address rule is followed. A party retains 30 days after receiving the initial notice to request agency review. That review checks both the incarceration exclusions and whether the adjustment reflects available resources; the agency may conduct it with the contesting party in person, by phone or by remote communication. Final law, sections 4–5; Prior review procedure.

Challenging an adjustment. After the agency affirms an adjustment, a party still has 30 days after receiving that determination to request a court hearing. A timely request now pauses the adjustment; the court must hold the hearing within 30 days after filing. The new text limits the court’s fresh review to the agency’s determinations under section 231.1015(b), the incarceration exclusions, rather than promising a full rehearing of every calculation. The agency may also file a signed investigation report supporting an adjustment, including its address-notice compliance. The act says its findings are conclusive unless contested under the hearing subsection. That contest provision must be read alongside the express limit on the hearing’s scope; this explanation does not promise that every report finding or income calculation can be retried under that procedure. Final law, section 5.

Adjustment orders must use agency forms and omit the listed identifying, address, employment and telephone information when an existing, unsuperseded protective nondisclosure order applies, or when an agency investigation report identifies an agency-recorded family-violence indicator. Court clerks may collect fees already authorized for these state child-support cases when an adjustment order is filed; the act does not specify a new dollar amount. Final law, section 5; Protective nondisclosure context; Authorized case fees.

Other enforcement and evidence changes. The agency may stop its enforcement services against a payer for arrears when the person owed support is jailed or imprisoned for family violence against a child covered by the order. This permission concerns agency enforcement of arrears, not cancellation of the debt or a general end to current support. The agency’s mediation/arbitration protections now cover establishing support as well as enforcement and modification, and its exemption from mediation/arbitration costs no longer has the old agreement-based qualifier. Courts’ power to dismiss specified defective claims also extends to contracted attorneys and political subdivisions; the grounds remain frivolous or malicious claims, failure to state a claim, or monetary relief from the agency or employee where immunity applies. This is not blanket immunity from every claim. Final law, sections 2–3.

An agency-produced child-support payment record joins the documents admissible without further authentication as evidence of an assignment of support rights. A signed agency investigation report about average monthly gross income is likewise admissible without additional authentication, but the respondent may present contrary income evidence. Agency attorneys may appear for the agency at a court proceeding without notice to the parties; they represent the state, not an individual parent’s personal legal interests. Final law, sections 6–7 and 10; Prior assignment evidence rule; State attorney role.

Remote proceedings, service and information. In the covered child-support associate-judge remote proceedings, the separate rule requiring a pretrial deposition before remote witness testimony no longer applies. SB1403 does not erase the existing written-objection provision or the protected in-person final hearings involving possible contempt or community-supervision revocation. Final law, section 1; Existing remote-proceeding safeguards; Separate deposition requirement.

When a pleading requests a protective nondisclosure finding, or a prior nondisclosure order for the party remains unsuperseded, a service return must omit the served address despite contrary law or rule, and courts must treat notice and service requirements as satisfied as provided in the act. License-suspension notices and petitions may be emailed to the last known email address on file with the court and registry when the party was ordered to provide current mailing or email information. Administrative child-support-review notices may also be emailed to an address the party supplied to the court or agency. That administrative-notice provision does not cover notice upon filing a review order or later judicial actions. Review notices now say that refusing or stopping participation will not prevent the process or filing of an order, instead of describing nonparticipation as something the recipient “may” choose. Final law, sections 8 and 11–13; Limits of administrative notice rule.

The existing exception to the court’s arrears-judgment time limit expressly includes a child-support review order containing an arrears determination and judgment. It is not a repeal of all child-support deadlines. Requests for state case-registry information must now be made under the parent-locator-services provision; the existing recipient list, court-ordered nondisclosure protection and federal-law limits remain. Agency brochures must be online and supplied at relevant county courthouses on a district clerk’s request, rather than automatically at every family-law courthouse. Final law, sections 9 and 14–15; Court time limits; Parent-locator provision; Prior registry-access rule.

Dates matter. The remote-proceeding and attorney-appearance changes apply to proceedings commenced on or after September 1, 2025; the claim-dismissal change to suits filed then or later; adjustment changes to adjustments for which agency notice is filed then or later; specified service/notice changes to notices provided or citations served then or later; assignment-evidence changes to proceedings commenced then or later; and registry changes to information requested then or later. The arrears-review-order change applies to orders rendered before, on or after that date. The online-brochure deadline was December 1, 2025; the act’s deadline is not evidence of actual agency compliance. Final law, sections 16–24.

Changes during passage. The Senate substitute changed two proposed “may consider” notice/service directives to “shall consider,” added “or rule” to the protected-address override, clarified agency/report wording, and removed the new family-violence arrears-enforcement provision from the clause applying to orders of any date. The latter clause covers only the arrears-review-order provision in the final act. The Senate-passed, House committee and enrolled substantive texts match the substitute. No floor amendments are listed. Introduced text; Senate substitute; Senate-passed text; House committee text; Final law; Version index; Amendment index.

Compare the published text versions in the official text index. A change is not attributed to a specific amendment here without a verified record.

The agency receives simpler notice and evidence procedures; affected families gain specified privacy protections and a pause when an adjustment is timely challenged in court. But adjustment decisions remain conditional, court review has a stated scope limit, and people must monitor notices and response deadlines. Electronic notice is not a guarantee that someone will actually read it. Neither the enforcement discretion nor the procedure changes establish a particular family’s savings, recovery or loss. Final law.

The March 21 substitute fiscal note anticipates no significant fiscal impact on the state or local governments and assumes costs can be absorbed within existing resources. The March 18 introduced note reached the same conclusion. These are fiscal estimates, not an appropriation, a promise of no administrative work, or a calculation of parents’ legal expenses or support collections. Substitute fiscal note; Introduced fiscal note. This briefing explains SB1403 as enacted, not an individual case’s outcome or a ruling on the constitutional validity of its notice provisions.