Alimony in Maine.
Whether the state sets a formula or leaves it to the judge, what the court has to weigh, how long it runs, and what brings it to an end.
See a different stateMaine
No amount formula anywhere in s. 951-A. Maine appears on several published 'formula state' lists; what it has is a duration presumption.
The limit is on how long, not how much.
Use the state’s own words
Maine calls it 'Spousal support'. 19-A M.R.S. s. 951-A is captioned 'Spousal support' and names five species: general support, transitional support, reimbursement support, nominal support and interim support (s. 951-A(2)(A)-(E)). 'Interim support' is Maine's word for support during the case. The word 'alimony' is not used in s. 951-A.. Using the state’s own term matters when you are searching for forms or reading an order — the words are not interchangeable across state lines, and some of them mean different things in different places.
What the law actually says
The power the court has
What the judge has to weigh
How long it lasts
Duration
Two rebuttable presumptions, keyed to ten and twenty years, and applying to general support only. 19-A M.R.S. s. 951-A(2)(A)(1)-(2), verbatim and in full: '(1) There is a rebuttable presumption that general support may not be awarded if the parties were married for less than 10 years as of the date of the filing of the action for divorce. There is also a rebuttable presumption that general support may not be awarded for a term exceeding 1/2 the length of the marriage if the parties were married for at least 10 years but not more than 20 years as of the date of the filing of the action for divorce. (2) If the court finds that a spousal support award based upon a presumption established by this paragraph would be inequitable or unjust, that finding is sufficient to rebut the applicable presumption.' Above twenty years there is no presumption in either direction and no cap. Note what these presumptions are: they run against the award, not in favor of one. The default in a Maine marriage of under ten years is no general support at all, and it takes a finding to get past that. Transitional, reimbursement, nominal and interim support are outside these presumptions entirely; their limits are whatever the order states under s. 951-A(3). Source: https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/19-A/title19-Asec951-A.html
Does behavior matter?
Marital misconduct
Maine's factor list reaches conduct in exactly two places, and both are economic. 19-A M.R.S. s. 951-A(5)(M), verbatim and in full: 'Economic misconduct by either party resulting in the diminution of marital property or income'. Section 951-A(5)(M-1), verbatim and in full: 'Economic abuse by a spouse. For the purposes of this paragraph, “economic abuse” has the same meaning as in section 4102, subsection 5'. Nothing in s. 951-A makes adultery, cruelty, desertion or any other non-economic fault relevant to spousal support, and there is no general 'conduct of the parties' factor. The same two concepts appear again as triggers for reimbursement support, s. 951-A(2)(C), verbatim in relevant part: 'Reimbursement support may be awarded to achieve an equitable result in the overall dissolution of the parties' financial relationship in response to exceptional circumstances. Exceptional circumstances include, but are not limited to: (1) Economic misconduct by a spouse; (2) Substantial contributions a spouse made towards the educational or occupational advancement of the other spouse during the marriage; and (3) Economic abuse by a spouse.' Maine also makes reimbursement support residual: 'Reimbursement support may be awarded only if the court determines that the parties' financial circumstances do not permit the court to fully address equitable considerations through its distributive order pursuant to section 953.' Unlike Arizona, Colorado, Delaware and Illinois, Maine has no clause saying support is set 'without regard to marital misconduct'; it simply does not list non-economic fault. Source: https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/19-A/title19-Asec951-A.html
When it ends, and when it can change
What brings it to an end
Death is covered; remarriage is not. 19-A M.R.S. s. 951-A(8), captioned 'Cessation upon death of payee or payor', verbatim and in full: 'An order awarding, denying or modifying spousal support may provide that the award survives the death of the payee or payor, or both. Unless otherwise stated in the order awarding spousal support, the obligation to make any payment pursuant to this section ceases upon the death of either the payee or the payor with respect to any payment not yet due and owing as of the date of death.' Divergence flag: there is no subsection terminating spousal support on the remarriage of the payee. What Maine has instead is a power to write one into the order, s. 951-A(3)(D), verbatim and in full: 'A limit on the payment of support related to the remarriage of the payee'. The same is true of cohabitation, s. 951-A(3)(E): 'A limit on the payment of support related to cohabitation by the payee'. Maine formerly had an automatic cohabitation rule and repealed it: s. 951-A(12), as it now stands on the Revisor's page, reads in its entirety '12. Cessation upon cohabitation. [PL 2019, c. 272, s.2 (RP).]' — the bracketed 'RP' being the Revisor's mark for repealed. So in Maine both remarriage and cohabitation end support only if the order says they do. One further finality rule, s. 951-A(9), verbatim and in full: 'A final judgment that does not award spousal support forever precludes such an award in that action. The complete termination of a spousal support award pursuant to the terms of the award or a final post-judgment order forever precludes the reinstatement of spousal support in that action.' That is what nominal support under s. 951-A(2)(D) exists to avoid. There is no statutory retirement trigger. Source: https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/19-A/title19-Asec951-A.html
Changing it later
The standard changed on 1 October 2013 and both versions are still live text. 19-A M.R.S. s. 951-A(4), verbatim and in full: 'An award of spousal support issued before October 1, 2013 is subject to modification when it appears that justice requires unless and to the extent the order awarding or modifying spousal support expressly states that the award, in whole or in part, is not subject to future modification. An award of spousal support issued on or after October 1, 2013 is subject to modification when there is a substantial change in financial circumstances and it appears that justice requires.' Note that the newer standard is cumulative: a substantial change in financial circumstances and it appears that justice requires. The order can switch modification off in advance — s. 951-A(1)(C) requires the order to state 'If the support awarded is not, in whole or in part, subject to future modification' — and s. 951-A(3)(A)-(C) lets the order limit increases or decreases in amount, in term, or in the method of payment. The trial court keeps the power to act while the case is on appeal, s. 951-A(11), verbatim and in full: 'The trial court may make, modify or enforce an award of spousal support under this section while an action is pending, including while on appeal.' Section 951-A applies to orders granting or denying spousal support entered on or after September 1, 2000 and to the modification, termination and enforcement of orders granting spousal support entered on or after that date (s. 951-A(10)). Source: https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/19-A/title19-Asec951-A.html
Worth knowing about Maine
Maine appears on several published lists of 'formula states'. It is not one. Nothing in 19-A M.R.S. s. 951-A produces a dollar figure; the only numbers in the section are the two duration presumptions at s. 951-A(2)(A)(1), and those run against an award rather than toward one. Three further points a reader is unlikely to find elsewhere. Maine repealed automatic cessation on cohabitation in 2019 and has never had automatic cessation on remarriage, so both are matters for the decree. Maine's 'nominal support' is a named statutory species whose entire purpose is to keep the door open, which matters because s. 951-A(9) closes it permanently if the final judgment awards nothing. And Maine added 'economic abuse' — a defined term borrowed from the protection-from-abuse chapter, 19-A M.R.S. s. 4102(5) — to both the factor list and the reimbursement-support triggers in 2023, which is a narrower and more modern route into conduct than the general fault factors older statutes use.
The tax rule changed, and most guides still describe the old one
For a divorce or separation instrument executed after 31 December 2018, alimony is not deductible by the person paying it and not taxable to the person receiving it. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act repealed the provisions that made it otherwise. For an instrument executed on or before that date the old treatment continues — deductible to the payer, taxable to the recipient — unless it is later modified and the modification expressly adopts the new rule.
This is not a detail. Under the old rule a higher-rate payer could transfer income to a lower-rate recipient and the two of them shared the saving. That saving no longer exists, which changes what a given number is worth to each side. New Hampshire wrote the point into its own statute: its 23 per cent figure assumes non-deductibility, and reverts to 30 per cent if the federal treatment is ever restored.
Whether Maine’s own income tax follows this federal rule, we could not establish. We looked for a current statement from the state revenue department addressing alimony specifically and could not retrieve one, and we are not prepared to infer a state’s tax treatment from a neighboring state. Four states are known to depart from the federal rule, so this is a real question rather than a formality. Ask your accountant: does this state require an adjustment for alimony paid or received? If you get a sourced answer, send it to us and we will publish it. The fifty-state table.
Authority: Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, Pub. L. 115-97, section 11051, repealing Internal Revenue Code sections 71 and 215; see also IRS Publication 504.The other number that decides your budget
How Maine calculates child support, and the overnight count that moves it more than income does.
And the question underneath it
What Maine presumes about custody, and what the judge has to weigh.