Child Support in Israel: The Complete and Updated Legal Guide

Child support refers to the payments that one parent transfers to the other parent in order to cover the living needs of their children when the parents live separately, usually the father to the mother.

Child support is the right of the child, not the right of either parent. Therefore, any agreement between the parents, as well as any judicial decision on the matter, must serve the child’s best interests and provide for the child’s needs. Otherwise, it will not be approved.

As of today, Israeli law does not set a fixed child support amount or a rigid formula for calculating the division of the burden between the parents. The matter is left to the discretion of the courts, which has created differences in rulings between different judicial instances.

Below, we will present the legal background, explain the existing approaches and central precedents, with an emphasis on accessible and practical interpretation for parents. The guide also includes calculation examples, answers to common questions, and enforcement options, in order to provide a real understanding of child support law in Israel.

Child Support: Legal Background and Basic Principles

The Duty to Support Children in Israel

Every parent has a basic duty to bear the living needs of their minor children, as long as the children cannot support themselves.

This duty is recognized as the duty of child support, and its purpose is to ensure that the children’s basic needs, such as food, clothing, housing, education and similar essential needs, are met.

Any agreement between parents regarding child support, as well as any judicial decision, must be approved by a court and examined in light of the child’s best interests. Without such approval, it will not have binding legal force.

In the important Sharagai precedent from 1969, the Israeli High Court of Justice held that a child’s claim for support is the child’s personal right. Therefore, it cannot be automatically joined to the parents’ divorce claim in the Rabbinical Court without the express consent of both parents.

This precedent was intended to ensure that personal religious law would not override the best interests of the child, and that the child’s right to support would not become a bargaining chip in divorce arrangements between the parents.

What Governs Child Support – Religious Law or Civil Law?

Israel has a multi-system structure in matters of personal status. This means that the duty to pay child support is determined according to the personal law that applies to the parents.

Section 3 of the Family Law Amendment Law (Maintenance) provides that, for Jews, Jewish religious law applies, regardless of whether the case is heard before the Rabbinical Court or the Family Court.

Jewish law reflects halakhic principles, which originally placed the main duty of child support on the father.

By contrast, when the parents are not subject to a personal religious law, for example couples who do not belong to a recognized religious community, or where their personal law does not impose a child support obligation, the civil arrangement under Israeli law applies. Under that arrangement, the duty is equal between the parents.

According to the civil arrangement in Section 3A of the Maintenance Law, both parents bear the minor’s support together, according to the ratio of their financial abilities.

In the overwhelming majority of families in Israel, personal law, especially Jewish law for Jewish parents, guides the determination of child support. This guide will therefore focus on that framework, while addressing the developments created by updated judicial interpretation.

The Best Interests of the Child and Essential Needs

The courts, as well as religious law, emphasize that the best interests of the child are a superior principle. Child support is designed to ensure that the child enjoys a reasonable standard of living, as much as possible similar to the standard of living the child was accustomed to before the parents separated.

The expenses that parents are required to fund are divided into two main categories:

(1) Essential needs – minimum expenses that the child requires for basic existence, such as food, clothing, housing, basic education, essential medical expenses and similar needs. These needs do not require detailed proof and are considered an absolute obligation, mainly imposed on the father under Jewish law.

(2) Additional needs under the law of charity – expenses that are not immediately essential for existence yet improve the child’s welfare, such as extracurricular activities, summer camps, a computer, leisure activities, gifts, private lessons and similar expenses.

The parents’ duty to bear these expenses depends on the standard of living to which the child was accustomed and on the parents’ financial ability. After the essential needs are met, these expenses are divided between the parents on a proportional basis.

The parents’ income capacity and disposable income affect the amount of support beyond the minimum baseline. The more financially established the parents are, the more likely it is that they may also be required to fund “non-essential” expenses in order to preserve the child’s standard of living. Where resources are limited, the court will focus on the most essential needs.

What Parameters Determine the Amount of Child Support?

Child support in Israel is determined according to several combined parameters, with the aim of ensuring a fair response to the child’s needs in accordance with the parents’ abilities and life circumstances.

Children’s Needs and Standard of Living

The starting point is the child’s essential needs – food, housing, clothing and basic education – which are considered needs without which the child cannot exist. Additional needs are also examined, such as extracurricular activities, allowance, a mobile phone and vacations, but these will be taken into account only if the standard of living the child was accustomed to and the parents’ income justify them. The objective is to preserve, as much as possible, the child’s quality of life after the parents’ separation.

The Parents’ Income and Financial Ability

The court examines the actual income of each parent – salary, assets, benefits, a company car – and sometimes also potential earning capacity.

The court examines the income of both the father and the mother from every source, including employment income, allowances, income-producing assets, a company car and similar benefits. It may also examine their broader economic potential, such as education, future earning capacity, and sometimes also realizable assets and property.

The court may attribute income to a parent who intentionally reduces income in order to evade support obligations.

While religious law mainly obligates the father, civil case law, especially following BAM 919/15, increasingly takes the mother’s income into account as well, especially for children over the age of 6, and divides the burden according to the financial ratio between the parents.

Division of Parenting Time

When a child spends equal time with both parents, the expenses are divided in practice, and the child support obligation may be reduced to zero, except for the division of exceptional expenses.

By contrast, when the custodial parent bears most of the day-to-day burden, the other parent will be required to participate in child support, even if the children visit that parent from time to time. Since the Supreme Court’s 2017 ruling in BAM 919/15, the division of parenting time has become a significant component in determining child support.

Number and Age of Children

The obligation is not linear. Two children do not necessarily require double the amount payable for one child. There is a certain economy of scale.

As explained below, at a young age, up to age 6, the obligation is imposed mainly on the father. From age 6 to 18, the burden is divided according to the parents’ income. Once a child reaches adulthood, usually from 18 to 21, the obligation is often reduced or symbolic. The court conducts an individual balancing analysis according to the children’s ages.

Housing – Participation in Residential Costs

A non-custodial parent participates in the children’s housing costs, meaning the rent or mortgage costs borne by the custodial parent.

The calculation is based on the number of children, commonly around 30% for one child, 40% for two children, and so forth, with adjustments according to the child’s time with the non-custodial parent. Housing may be included in general child support or awarded separately.

Exceptional Expenses – Education, Activities and Health

Beyond regular child support, the parents also share exceptional expenses: medical treatments, private tutoring, after-school programs, summer camps and more.

These expenses are usually divided according to the income ratio, or sometimes equally, with receipts required. In some cases, fixed amounts are built into the support payment for frequent recurring expenses.

How Child Support Is Calculated by Age: 0-6, 6-18, and Adult Children

The duty to pay child support changes according to the children’s ages. Three main age categories are usually distinguished.

Children from Birth to Age 6

This period is known in Jewish law as “young minors.” Under Jewish law, the father bears an absolute and complete duty of support at these ages.

The father’s income or financial ability does not change the existence of the obligation. Even a father who does not work, lacks means, or is disabled is still obligated to support his young children until age 6. During these years, the mother is not obligated under Torah law to participate in the essential support obligation. Her duty may arise only if she is financially well-off, and only regarding expenses under the law of charity, meaning beyond the essential minimum.

In practice, the halakhic rule means that for young children, the father will almost always pay the full current child support amount to the mother who raises the child, regardless of parenting time or the mother’s income.

Growing Consideration Even Below Age 6

In recent years, however, more and more Family Court rulings have begun to take into account, even for children aged 0-6, factors such as parenting time and income gaps between the parents. These rulings do not always impose the maximum full amount on the father.

For example, some judges reduce support for a father who has joint custody even when the child is under age 6, or consider an unusually high income on the mother’s part. This reflects a broader trend toward equality, even though there is no legal duty to apply this balancing approach at these ages.

This trend is not anchored in express legislation. Therefore, whether balancing will be applied for children aged 0-6 depends on the judge hearing the case and on the specific circumstances.

Children Aged 6 to 18

This is the age range in which the most significant change in case law has occurred over the past decade. Under Jewish law, the duty of support at these ages is defined as a duty under the law of charity, meaning both parents are obligated according to their financial abilities.

Until 2017 and the BAM (בע”מ) 919/15 precedent, most courts still imposed the main burden on the father at these ages, as though the obligation continued to apply mainly to him, with the mother’s participation treated as secondary.

Before 2017, even if the mother earned more than the father and custody was shared, courts often ruled that the father would pay child support to the mother almost as though the children lived only with her.

How Did the Situation Change in 2017 – The BAM 919/15 Precedent?

This situation changed dramatically following a new Supreme Court ruling.

Today, as a general rule, for children aged 6-18, both parents share the burden of child support. The Supreme Court clarified that from age 6 onward, the father should no longer be automatically obligated alone. Instead, the court must examine the relative financial abilities of both parents and the division of the children’s parenting time between them.

In practice, the new precedent balanced the scale. The child support duty at these ages is shared and more equal, replacing the exclusive responsibility previously placed on the father.

The meaning of the precedent will be detailed later, but it is important to emphasize here that the Supreme Court treated it as a guiding principle rather than a rigid calculation formula. Although there are now clearer benchmarks – income and parenting time – the Family Court still applies discretion in each specific case and may depart from an automatic calculation if justice requires.

For example, where there are extreme income gaps between the parents, or where one parent actually pays most of the direct expenses for the children, sometimes referred to as the “central parent,” such as a parent who purchases nearly all clothing, toys and books for the children, the court may adjust the support amount so that it reflects the situation fairly.

From Age 18 Onward – Young Adults

When a child reaches age 18, the child is no longer a minor under the law. In theory, the duty of child support under personal law or statute ends at that point.

In practice, it is customary to continue assisting young adults during mandatory military service, national service or a service year, under what is commonly called support for an adult child.

Courts usually rule that after age 18 and during service, the father, and sometimes both parents, will continue paying reduced support in the amount of about one-third of the amount previously paid for that child.

For example, if NIS 1,500 per month was paid until age 18, the amount between ages 18 and 21 may be reduced to approximately NIS 500. This reduction reflects the fact that the young adult can sometimes work part-time, or that military service provides part of the young adult’s needs, such as housing and food. At the same time, it recognizes that the young adult is often not yet fully financially independent.

This duty after age 18 is not anchored in written legislation. It is based on case law and on common agreements between parents. Family Courts and many parents treat it as an accepted convention.

In many cases, parents voluntarily agree to continue reduced support during military service or studies as part of the divorce agreement. Sometimes the agreement expressly anchors the reduced payment until the end of military service.

In any event, after age 21, there is generally no legal obligation to pay child support, except perhaps under a special contractual agreement. For example, parents may agree to fund academic studies, but that is already a contractual undertaking rather than classic child support.

How Revolutionary Was the BAM 919/15 in 2017 Precedent on Child Support in Joint Custody?

As noted, in July 2017 the Israeli Supreme Court created a major change in Israeli child support law in BAM 919/15, Anonymous v. Anonymous. Until then, courts were required to award child support under religious law only. In practice, fathers were almost always obligated alone, even when both parents earned similar incomes and even where custody was shared.

The result was structural inequality that harmed many fathers who bore a heavy financial burden alone, despite taking an active part in raising their children.

In the consolidated judgment, delivered by an expanded panel of seven Supreme Court justices headed by Justice Uzi Vogelman, it was unanimously held that from age 6 onward, the duty of support applies to both parents together, under the law of charity, while considering the children’s parenting time and each parent’s financial ability.

This broke the historic model under which the father was the sole financial provider and introduced a more equal model that fits contemporary social and family reality.

The ruling relied on an updated interpretation of Jewish law, especially the writings of modern halakhic authorities. The justices emphasized that even under halakha, in cases involving children above age 6, the duty does not rest solely on the father’s shoulders, but is shared by both parents according to their ability.

Then-President Justice Daphne Barak-Erez and Justice Vogelman presented complementary opinions. Justice Vogelman emphasized the need to ensure a similar standard of living in both homes. Justice Barak-Erez emphasized the economic logic of mutual offset in situations of equal custody, under which each parent directly bears the expenses during the time the children are with that parent.

The Bottom Line of BAM 919/15

The judgment held that, as a general rule, in a typical case of joint custody and similar incomes, no monthly child support will be awarded. Instead, arrangements will be set for the proportional division of expenses that are not dependent on where the child is staying, such as education and health expenses.

The court also held that Family Courts may depart from the general rule according to the circumstances of the case. Examples include significant income gaps or situations where only one parent actually bears most of the children’s expenses.

Since then, BAM 919/15 has become the central basis for calculating child support for children aged 6-18, even when custody is not fully equal. However, it has not been anchored in legislation, and therefore its application is still not fully uniform. Courts do adopt the equality principle, but sometimes calculate according to formulas and sometimes apply broader flexibility, all according to the child’s best interests and a fair balance between the parents.

The principle set by the Supreme Court continues to filter into practice: child support is a shared responsibility of both parents, in a way that serves the children’s best interests in both homes. As a firm active in this field for years, this change is also felt in practice, and many cases handled by our office reflect it.

How Do the Parents’ Income and Parenting Time Affect the Amount of Support?

In light of the above, child support calculation has become dependent on two main factors: the parents’ incomes and the division of the children’s parenting time between them. The Supreme Court also presented a three-stage calculation method for awarding support for children aged 6-18, intended to create a fair division.

What Is the New Calculation Method?

Stage One: Calculate each parent’s relative share of the parents’ combined income. For example, if the father and mother together earn NIS 15,000 per month, with the father earning NIS 9,000, or 60%, and the mother earning NIS 6,000, or 40%, the income ratio is 60/40 in favor of the father. This ratio reflects each parent’s relative financial ability to contribute to the children’s needs.

Stage Two: Estimate the total monthly cost of raising the children, meaning their financial needs, and divide those expenses between the parents according to the income percentages calculated in the first stage. In practice, this creates a kind of “virtual fund” for the children’s expenses: each parent contributes an amount equal to that parent’s proportional share of the children’s expenses.

In our example, if we assume that the child’s total monthly expenses are NIS 2,000, and we will later discuss how to estimate this amount, the father contributes 60% of that amount, meaning NIS 1,200, while the mother contributes 40%, meaning NIS 800.

Stage Three: Calculate how much of this “fund” is actually used by each parent, according to the division of parenting time.

In other words, the court examines how many days, or what percentage of time, the child stays with each parent, while assuming that each parent directly covers the child’s expenses while the child is with that parent. A parent with whom the children stay more “uses” a larger share of the fund, because that parent incurs more day-to-day expenses for them.

A parent who sees the children less uses a smaller share for direct needs. Therefore, after offsetting the direct expenses, that parent may be required to transfer the difference to the other parent.

Child Support Calculation – Numerical Examples for Better Understanding

Below are several scenario examples for calculating child support, demonstrating how the burden may be divided under different conditions.

It is important to clarify that these examples are for illustration only. In each specific case, the court may award a different amount according to the unique circumstances. In practice, this is also what happens based on our experience: the court independently weighs the facts in most cases.

In the examples, we will assume hypothetical amounts for the children’s needs, based generally on common amounts in case law: about NIS 1,400 per month for a child’s essential needs, with housing and exceptional expenses bringing the total to around NIS 2,000 per child per month.

Child Support for One Child – Different Monthly Scenarios

In a case of full custody with the mother, where the father has a higher income, for example NIS 12,000 compared with the mother’s NIS 6,000, and the child spends 100% of the time with the mother, courts commonly impose a full child support obligation on the father.

This amount includes the child’s essential needs, around NIS 1,400, participation in housing, around 30% of the mother’s rent, and half of exceptional education and health expenses. In such a situation, the estimated support amount may reach approximately NIS 2,000 per month.

In a scenario of joint custody and equal parenting time, where both parents have identical income, for example NIS 10,000 each, no monthly child support will usually be awarded. Each parent directly bears the child’s costs while the child stays with that parent, and the parents share only the exceptional expenses equally.

Where custody is shared but there are income gaps, suppose the father earns NIS 15,000 and the mother earns NIS 7,500, a balancing calculation will be performed based on their relative ability.

If the child’s expenses are about NIS 2,100, the father is expected to bear 67% of the amount and the mother 33%. In practice, each parent pays half of the expenses when the child is with that parent, around NIS 1,050. Therefore, the father will make up the difference to the mother, about NIS 350, which may be reflected in an overall child support payment of about NIS 750 per month.

In the reverse case, where the mother is the custodial parent but earns significantly more than the father, for example NIS 14,000 compared with the father’s NIS 8,000, the court may impose a reduced support obligation on the father.

Where the father’s parenting time is limited, for example he sees the child once every two weeks and one midweek day, and he directly bears about NIS 400 of the child’s expenses, the court may require him to pay the mother an additional amount of about NIS 320. After rounding, child support may be set at only about NIS 800. In this scenario, the mother, despite being the custodial parent, bears most of the burden due to her higher income.

When the child is in the father’s full custody and the mother earns more than him, for example the mother earns NIS 11,000 and the father earns NIS 9,000, the court may decide not to impose monthly child support at all, while requiring the mother to participate directly in specific expenses, such as half the cost of extracurricular activities, daycare or clothing.

This follows BAM 919/15, which recognizes that a mother may also be considered obligated in support under the law of charity, especially when the father is the child’s main caregiver and she has greater financial ability.

The above examples show that the child support amount may range from zero in an ideal case of equal division and similar financial ability, to around NIS 2,000 or more per child where the burden rests mainly on one parent.

Naturally, many cases fall between these extremes.

If there is more than one child, the total amount is not necessarily multiplied in a linear way. Usually, there is an economy of scale, which will be addressed below.

For example, two children in the mother’s custody will not necessarily cost exactly twice as much as one child, because they may share a room or some of the expenses. As noted, case law commonly calculates housing for children by increasing percentages, around 30% for one child, 40% for two, and 50% for three or more, rather than allocating 100% to each child.

Courts also often reduce the per-child amount somewhat as the family grows, due to practical efficiencies. For example, NIS 1,300 per child may be awarded where there are three children, instead of NIS 1,400 as might have been awarded for one child. These factors are all taken into account when child support is awarded for a family with several children.

Another Scenario – Two Children

Consider the following short comparison: suppose the father earns NIS 12,000 and the mother earns NIS 8,000. They have two children and equal joint custody. Their combined income is NIS 20,000, meaning a 60/40 ratio in favor of the father.

Assume the two children’s total expenses are NIS 3,600 per month, including everything. The parents’ shares are: father NIS 2,160, mother NIS 1,440. In each home, the direct expenses are NIS 1,800, because the time is divided equally. Therefore, the father must transfer the difference to the mother: NIS 2,160 minus NIS 1,800, meaning NIS 360.

In this case, despite there being two children, the payment remains low because parenting time is equal and the income gap is not extreme.

In another scenario, if the children were with the mother 70% of the time, the father would directly cover only 30% of the expenses, around NIS 1,080. Since he should cover NIS 2,160 according to his income ratio, he would complete the balance by transferring approximately NIS 1,080 to the mother. Thus, in a case of unequal custody, he would pay about NIS 1,080 for two children, in addition to the expenses he bears when they are with him. These are of course rough calculations, but they demonstrate how each component changes the amount.

The Child Support Amount The basic rules: How Much Is Paid for One, Two or Three Children?

One of the most common questions divorced parents ask is: “How much child support will I pay, or receive, for X children?” The answer is not fixed and depends on the circumstances, but there are accepted benchmarks. Below are general examples and guidelines, with the important clarification that these are estimates and every case may differ.

Child Support for One Child

Over the years, case law developed a general picture of “minimum support” for one child. In the past, before 2017, courts commonly ordered a father to pay approximately NIS 1,200-1,400 per month for one child, excluding exceptional expenses such as education and health, which were divided separately.

This amount represented the child’s minimum essential needs. Under the former approach, which obligated the father alone, courts limited this obligation to a minimum in order to avoid imposing an excessive burden on the father.

Over time, and with the rise in the cost of living, the minimum amount increased. Several District Court rulings, sitting as appellate courts, held that even NIS 1,600-1,700 per month for one child is a reasonable and fair amount in the current reality.

Today, the approach is that the court should provide for the child’s full reasonable needs. In practice, the estimated basic needs of a minor have risen toward NIS 1,600-1,900 per month as a minimum amount that does not require detailed proof for one child in an average family.

In some cases, courts have referred to an amount of around NIS 2,250 for a child growing up in two homes, due to duplicated expenses, as explained later.

It is important to understand that these amounts are general estimates of a child’s needs. The court does not simply set this number as the child support amount. It must still consider the parents’ incomes and parenting time. For example, if the father and mother have similar net incomes and parenting time is divided equally, no child support payment may be required even for one child, because each parent bears the child’s expenses during that parent’s time with the child.

Indeed, in a recent judgment, the court held that in a situation of full joint custody and identical incomes, no support obligation applies, except for a symbolic obligation for children under age 6 for their basic needs.

In another case involving three children, where the parents had equal incomes of about NIS 9,000 each and almost equal parenting time, the father’s obligation was reduced to about NIS 800 per child, compared with NIS 1,200 or more that would often have been awarded in the past.

On the other hand, where one parent earns much more than the other, the court will tend to obligate the higher-earning parent to pay support above the baseline.

For example, a father with very high income may be required to pay above the minimum in order to preserve for his children a standard of living similar to what they would have enjoyed had they lived with him under one roof.

The first criterion noted above, the standard of living to which the children were accustomed, can justify awarding higher-than-usual support if it is proven that the child enjoyed a high standard of living before the divorce. In affluent families, it is therefore possible to see awards of NIS 2,500 or more per child per month, depending on income and special needs, such as private education, expensive extracurricular activities and similar expenses.

Child Support for Two Children

When asking how much is paid for two children, it is important to understand, as noted, that multiplying the amount for one child is not always the correct result.

On the one hand, a second child does not necessarily double the expenses of the first child. There is a certain economy of scale in family expenses. For example, municipal taxes will not double simply because there are two children instead of one. Some toys, furniture or clothing belonging to the older child may pass to the younger child. If a pot of soup is already being cooked at home, adding one more serving for another child does not significantly double the cost of cooking.

For this reason, some judges believe that support for a second child should be slightly reduced compared with the first child. In practice, in many cases, if NIS 1,500 is awarded for one child, another approximately NIS 1,400 may be awarded for the second child, meaning a reduction of about NIS 100 for the second child. The total may therefore be around NIS 2,900 for two children instead of NIS 3,000 if the amount had been doubled precisely.

On the other hand, some judges take the view that no reduction should be made for the additional child, at least not for the first two children. Under this approach, a significant economy of scale appears mainly in larger families with three or more children. Therefore, in some cases, a similar amount is awarded for each of the first two children, without a meaningful reduction.

In other words, if NIS 1,600 is determined for one child, the second child may receive almost the same amount, and the total may be around NIS 3,200. Every case depends on the judge and the circumstances.

Child Support for Three or More Children

When a family has three or more children, the accepted approach is that the amount is not linear. Courts do not add 100% for each additional child.

In the precedent known as the Vered rule, it was held that the amount of a child’s needs should not be automatically multiplied by the number of children, because some expenses are shared by all the children and do not grow in direct proportion. For example, electricity, water, heating or home maintenance costs are fairly similar whether there is one child in the home or three. Therefore, it makes little sense for support for three children to be three times the amount for one child.

According to this approach, the amount awarded for a third and fourth child is lower per child. In an example often cited by courts: if the needs of one child are estimated at NIS 1,500, a family with three children should not automatically receive NIS 4,500, meaning NIS 1,500 multiplied by three. Instead, a lower total amount may be set, for example around NIS 4,000 for three children.

In many cases, it is customary to say that the eldest child “costs the least,” because that child benefits from resources shared with siblings, while the youngest “costs the most,” because there may be fewer siblings with whom to share expenses once older siblings turn 18 or approach that age. This is mainly a theoretical principle. In practice, the court simply awards a total amount for the three children according to its best judgment. Usually, a reduction of around 20%-30% can be seen for the third child compared with the first child.

A numerical example: if NIS 3,000 is awarded for two children, the court may award approximately NIS 4,000 for three children, instead of NIS 4,500 under a linear calculation. When the eldest child reaches age 18 and exits the calculation, it is common to reduce that child’s smaller proportional share from the total amount, based on the assumption that the two remaining children are “more expensive.”

This means that the reduction when a child leaves the household may often be lower than the amount that would have been assigned to that child as a standalone child. This ensures that the remaining support amount still sufficiently covers the needs of the children who remain minors.

Important Recent Court Rulings on Child Support

Additional HCJ Hearing 6454/14 (2017) – The Child Support Joinder Rule

This was a principled decision by an expanded panel of the High Court of Justice, addressing the jurisdiction of the Rabbinical Courts to hear child support matters. This additional hearing held contrary to the earlier Sharagai rule mentioned above, and ruled that child support could be joined to a divorce claim before the Rabbinical Court even without both parents’ consent, provided that the joinder was legally proper. In other words, the father filed a divorce claim and expressly included the child support issue in it.

At the time, this ruling drew criticism because it was argued that it encouraged the race for jurisdiction, allowing a father to rush to the Rabbinical Court and seize jurisdiction before the mother filed a child support claim in the Family Court.

Following this ruling, there were several years in which the Rabbinical Courts felt that they had broader jurisdiction to hear child support claims. We saw cases in which child support claims were heard in the Rabbinical Court without consent, creating conflicting rulings between the systems.

HCJ 918/20 (2025) – Renewed Approval of the Sharagai Rule

At the end of 2024 and the beginning of 2025, petitions were brought before the High Court of Justice by fathers who argued that the Rabbinical Courts were taking excessive jurisdiction. In February 2025, the Supreme Court, sitting as the High Court of Justice, delivered a precedential ruling that again clarified the limits of jurisdiction.

The judgment clearly held that Rabbinical Courts have no jurisdiction to hear child support matters unless both parents have given their express consent.

The Court thereby returned to and adopted the Sharagai principle from 1969, closing the door to expansive interpretations that had allowed joinder without consent. Justice Yael Willner noted in the judgment that such intervention was required in order to protect children’s rights and prevent a situation where one parent “waives” the children’s support as part of a compromise in divorce proceedings.

According to the practical meaning of this ruling, the race for jurisdiction in child support matters has effectively ended. From now on, only the Family Court will hear child support claims, unless both parties prefer the Rabbinical Court.

Recent Family Court Case Law:

After BAM 919/15, many lower-court judgments began to accumulate, interpreting and applying the ruling.

For example, in Family Court File 21810-06-16 (Tel Aviv Family Court, 2017), the judge examined joint custody but still ruled that the father would partially pay child support due to income gaps, applying the “919 formula” with adjustments.

By contrast, in Family Court File 48528-04-15 (Rishon LeZion Family Court, 2017), a case with similar circumstances, another judge applied a full offset and awarded no child support at all against the father, due to near-complete equality in income. This was another outcome of the same precedent, applied through a somewhat different approach.

District Court appeals, such as Central District Appeal 14655-06-17, clarified that courts should not cling mechanically to a formula if it produces an unjust result, while also making clear that the new principle cannot be ignored.

Overall, today, around 9 years after BAM 919/15, most parents and family lawyers are aware of the expectation that both sides will contribute. As a result, even in negotiations and private agreements, we see more shared child support arrangements. For example, in joint custody, the parties may agree that there will be no ongoing child support, each parent will bear expenses during that parent’s parenting time, and education and medical expenses will be shared equally. Courts view such agreements positively, as long as they serve the children’s best interests.

Child Support – Important Practical Questions and Legal Answers

Is a Father Always Required to Pay Support, or Can the Mother Also Be Required to Pay?

Under the current legal situation, both parents may be obligated to support their children. In the past, it was commonly assumed that only the father pays child support, but following the change in case law in 2017, the mother also bears responsibility. In practice, in most cases where the children are in the mother’s custody, the father will pay her his share of support. However, there are situations, for example when the father is the custodial parent, or when the mother earns much more than the father, where the mother will participate financially.

Courts may obligate a mother to pay child support to the father for the children, especially for children aged 6-18, if justified by the circumstances. For example, if the children live with the father and the mother has high income, she will be required to bear part of the children’s costs exactly as would occur in the reverse situation.

Still, in the common family structure where the mother is the custodial parent, the mother usually fulfills her part through day-to-day care and direct expenses while the child is with her, and the father completes the balance through a monetary payment. The former broad rule of “the father pays, the mother does not” no longer applies as it once did. Both parents bear the burden, directly or indirectly.

What Happens if One Parent Does Not Pay Support as Ordered?

Non-payment of child support is a serious problem. When a parent obligated to pay child support, usually the father, does not pay on time or does not pay at all, there are two main enforcement routes: opening an enforcement file with the Execution Office, or applying to the National Insurance Institute for child support benefits.

Through the Execution Office route, the recipient parent may choose between the regular track, in which the creditor parent manages collection, and a special child support track, in which the Execution Office actively collects the support with limited involvement from the creditor. The Execution Office has strong powers. It may impose restrictions on the debtor, such as driver’s license restrictions, a stay of exit from Israel, banking restrictions and more. In extreme cases, it may even issue an arrest warrant against a debtor who avoids payment.

Alternatively, if the parent applies to the National Insurance Institute, the Institute pays the child, through the custodial parent, a monthly benefit instead of the support, according to the amount set in the judgment or according to a maximum amount set in the regulations, whichever is lower. The National Insurance Institute then collects the money from the obligated parent using administrative collection tools.

It is important to know that the two tracks cannot be used at the same time. One must choose either the Execution Office or the National Insurance Institute. If an Execution Office file has been opened, the parent will not receive National Insurance benefits for those same months, and vice versa.

The choice depends on the support amount and the circumstances. The National Insurance Institute pays only up to a certain ceiling, so if the awarded support is high, the Execution Office may be preferable in order to try to collect the full amount. On the other hand, the National Insurance Institute guarantees a minimum ongoing income, while collection through the Execution Office depends on the ability to collect from the debtor.

Can the Child Support Amount Be Changed, and When?

Yes. Child support payments are not carved in stone. A parent may petition to change them if there has been a material change in the family’s circumstances. As noted above, a court will approve a change, whether an increase or reduction, only where there has been a material change of circumstances.

Such changes may include a significant change in one parent’s income, such as dismissal of the paying parent, or a substantial promotion of the receiving parent; a change in the medical condition of a parent or child that has financial implications; the child moving to the other custodial parent, for example a teenager moving to live with the father instead of the mother; the birth of additional children to the support debtor, increasing that parent’s financial burden; a significant change in the child’s expenses, such as the discovery of a new special need; and similar circumstances.

Not every change gives a right to reopen the case. The change must be material, ongoing and unforeseeable. For example, an increase in the cost of living by itself will usually not justify reopening the issue, because to some extent it is general and expected. A claim such as “X years have passed” will also not be enough without another relevant factor. If both parents agree to the change, for example a temporary reduction during a crisis, they may submit the agreement to the court for approval. If there is no agreement, the parent seeking the change must prove a material change of circumstances.

The question of whether BAM 919/15 itself constitutes a change of circumstances has been discussed in the courts. As clarified, a change in case law by itself is not an automatic ground for modification. A personal change in the family’s situation is still required.

Does Child Support Include All of the Child’s Expenses?

Not exactly. The monthly child support amount awarded, or agreed upon by the parents, is intended to cover the child’s current needs. It usually includes a housing component, and sometimes also part of regular education expenses.

However, special and significant expenses are usually excluded. For example, most judgments state that “the support includes all ongoing living expenses, except for exceptional medical expenses and exceptional education expenses, which the parties will share.”

This means that regular child support includes food, clothing, toys, part of the housing costs, and routine expenses such as allowance and ordinary leisure activities. But if a major expense arises, such as expensive dental treatment, glasses, a school trip abroad or summer camp, those expenses are usually additional.

In most cases, the parents share them equally or according to an agreed income ratio.

Another point: child support is not intended to cover the needs of the custodial parent, but only the child’s share of household expenses. That said, there is no day-to-day supervision over the use of the money. As long as the child is properly cared for, the custodial parent is not required to submit receipts for every shekel.

Support is intended to cover part of the household expenses, such as rent and bills, and part of the child’s costs. Naturally, the money becomes part of the custodial parent’s household economy. Courts recognize that there is no practical way to analyze exactly where every shekel goes, and therefore they do not require it. Only in extreme cases, for example where it is alleged that a parent receives support but neglects the child and fails to provide for the child’s needs, might the court intervene. Such cases are very rare.

In ordinary circumstances, the receiving parent is trusted to use the money for the child’s benefit as part of managing that parent’s household.

Does the Income of a New Partner Affect Child Support?

In principle, the duty to support the child applies only to the child’s biological or adoptive parents. A mother’s new partner or a father’s new partner has no legal duty to support children who are not theirs. Therefore, the income of a new partner by itself is not a ground for changing child support.

In practice, a new partner may have an indirect effect. For example, if the mother moves in with a partner and the partner covers the entire rent, the children’s housing expenses may decrease because the mother no longer has a housing cost. In such a case, the father may seek a reduction of the housing component in his support payments. Similarly, if the new partner voluntarily participates significantly in the children’s expenses, that may ease the mother’s burden and might be taken into account as a change of circumstances. However, the new partner usually must be providing substantial and consistent financial support, which is difficult to prove and remains a gray area.

Similarly, if the father has a new partner and they have a baby together, this does not automatically reduce support for his first children. It may, however, be considered as part of his new expense structure, meaning another child to support, and may justify a certain reduction.

This is relevant when a request based on changed circumstances is brought before the court, where all financial data are examined. As long as there is no different agreement, the presence of a new partner does not directly change the parents’ own child support duty.

What Should I Prepare for a Child Support Claim?

This is a common practical question. First, under current law, before filing a child support claim, like other family claims, the parties must go through a family dispute resolution procedure at the assistance unit near the court.

Only if the procedure does not end in agreement will the parties receive permission to file a claim. When filing the child support claim itself, one should attach documents showing both parents’ income, such as recent payslips for the last 3-6 months, tax reports, bank confirmations of income and similar documents. The claim should also include details of the child’s expenses, including receipts where available, such as daycare, after-school programs, extracurricular activities, special purchases, as well as estimates of ordinary monthly expenses such as diapers, baby formula, food and similar needs. Housing expenses should also be documented, including rent or mortgage, municipal taxes and utility bills.

The claimant, acting on behalf of the child, files an affidavit detailing all requested needs and expenses, as well as the income and assets situation. The defendant files a statement of defense with income details and the defendant’s position regarding the children’s needs.

Courts require transparency and therefore require questionnaires and attachments, such as asset declarations, income questionnaires and similar documents, in order to obtain a full picture. It is important to submit accurate and honest information. If the court discovers concealment or unreasonable exaggeration, your credibility may be harmed. It is advisable to consult a lawyer specializing in this field regarding how to collect and present the information properly.

How Long Does It Take Until Child Support Is Awarded, and What Happens in the Meantime?

Court proceedings may take time, especially if there is a complex dispute. In order to avoid leaving the children without support, temporary child support may be requested immediately after filing the claim.

Temporary child support is a relatively quick court decision, based on preliminary information, intended to provide financial support until the final judgment. Such a decision may sometimes be given within a few months, depending on the court’s caseload and the urgency.

The temporary amount does not determine the final outcome. A different amount may be awarded at the end of the case. However, it often indicates the court’s direction.

Temporary child support can be enforced through the Execution Office like any other ruling. If the proceedings are significantly delayed, a later request may be filed to update the temporary support if something material has occurred. In most cases, after temporary support is awarded, evidentiary proceedings continue, and a final judgment is given within one to two years.

How Is Child Support Treated in Practice When There Is Joint Custody?

Today, most judges view joint custody as a situation of shared parental responsibility, and therefore examine whether child support is required at all. As explained, if both parents have similar financial ability, it is very likely that no ongoing child support will be awarded, or only a symbolic amount. However, an order will almost always be given regarding education and medical expenses. For example: “The parties shall share equally in school payments, summer camps, one extracurricular activity per child, and exceptional medical expenses.”

This ensures that even if there is no monthly transfer of money, each parent is responsible for half, or for an agreed proportion, of the major expenses. If there are income gaps, the court will not hesitate to award child support even in joint custody.

In practice, where there is joint custody and child support is still awarded, the amounts are significantly lower than in the past. Sometimes only a few hundred shekels per child are awarded. Alternatively, no support may be awarded, but the father may bear most of the additional expenses. The goal is to reach an overall result in which each parent contributes according to that parent’s relative share. Another issue is offsetting in-kind payments: if, for example, the father pays the nanny or kindergarten directly, the court will take this into account and reduce another payment to prevent duplication.

Can Children Sue for Child Support Themselves?

Formally, yes. A minor child is the holder of the right to support, so the claim is brought in the child’s name. Ordinarily, the custodial parent, or another guardian, files the claim on behalf of the child. However, there have been exceptional cases in which teenagers, especially aged 16-18, filed an independent child support claim against a refusing parent. For example, if the mother did not want to sue the father, the child may have initiated the claim.

Courts recognize this principled right, but require the appointment of a litigation guardian for the child, such as a relative or representing attorney, to manage the proceedings. In practice, almost all child support cases are managed by the custodial parent on behalf of the child, and not by the child directly, except in rare cases.

Housing Expenses – How Are They Calculated? What if the Mother Lives with Her Parents?

Housing support, an important part of the child support amount, is calculated as a percentage of the rent or housing cost of the custodial parent. If the mother rents an apartment, the court looks at the rent amount, usually adds part of the utility bills, and calculates the percentage according to the number of children.

If the mother lives with her parents, the grandparents, and does not pay rent, the court may still estimate the value of use, such as how much it would cost to rent a room for the child, or it may determine that there is currently no housing expense. Often, the court will clarify that if the situation changes in the future, there may be grounds for reconsideration.

Usually, a mother is not “penalized” for living rent-free with her parents. She still has a right to housing support in principle, as she would if she were renting.

This issue is complex and depends on the judge. There have been cases in which no housing component was awarded because the mother did not actually have a housing expense.

In a case of ownership, for example where the mother lives in an apartment she owns with no mortgage, housing value is generally not calculated because she has no monthly housing cost, or only maintenance expenses may be considered. In any event, the housing component is always derived from the actual cost. The father will also not pay more than his relative share of the actual expenses. For example, if the calculation suggests NIS 1,500 in housing support for two children, but the mother’s rent is only NIS 3,000, the father will pay only 40%, meaning NIS 1,200, and not a theoretical NIS 1,500.

What Is a Child Allowance, and Is It Connected to Child Support?

A child allowance is a payment made by the National Insurance Institute to every family for its children. It is a monthly allowance based on the number of children, regardless of the parents’ marital status. The allowance is usually paid to the mother.

According to case law, this allowance is also intended for the child’s needs, and should be deducted when calculating the support paid by the father. In principle, the father should not fund a portion that the state already provides.

In practice, the allowances are relatively low, around NIS 150-200 per month for one child, and less per additional child. Courts usually do not calculate this with precision, but take it into account generally. It has been held that the child allowance portion should be deducted from child support where relevant.

Today, under the newer models, the calculated amounts usually take everything into account, and in practice the deduction is already embedded.