Jeremy Renner agreed to pay more in child support as his annual income increased

Premiere of 'Wind River' - Arrivals

Back in February, we learned that Kevin Federline was asking Britney Spears to increase her child support payments to him, given that he still maintained full custody of their two sons and given the fact that Britney’s income had dramatically increased because of her Las Vegas residency. As some of the lawyer-commentators noted, this happens all the time with divorced couples: when one ex-spouse (the ex-spouse who pays child support) has any kind of notable increase in income, the other ex-spouse will often request an increase in child support. In Hollywood and everywhere else, usually that means that the ex-husband pays more. So… it will be interesting to see how the comments differ on this story, about how Jeremy Renner is now paying more in child support.

Jeremy Renner’s boosted his star power in Hollywood, which means he’s also boosting the amount of money he pays to support his his kid … TMZ has learned. Jeremy and his ex-wife, Sonni Pacheco, have agreed to a new payment structure, due to the court deeming him an “extraordinary high income earner” — $11.4 million per year … according to the docs.

Renner and Sonni’s initial child support deal for their daughter, Ava, called for him to pay $13k per month, plus 5% of any excess he made over his annual salary of $2.3 million.

Now, the exes have signed off on a new deal. Jeremy still pays $13k monthly, but the 5% has ballooned since he’s hauling in so much more. They’ve agreed to cap that at $200k per year. Anything over that will go in an investment fund for Ava, which she can access when she turns 27. She’s only 5 now, but we’re guessing Ava’s gonna enjoy Daddy’s ‘Avengers’ dough when she’s older.

[From TMZ]

Back when everything was going down between Jeremy and Sonni, there were a lot of stories about how Jeremy didn’t want to pay much in alimony or child support, and that he believed Sonni should get a job and support herself and whatever. After some time passed, I don’t think Renner still feels that way – he gets lots of time with Ava, and he and Sonni seem to have come to some kind of arrangement where they don’t loathe each other anymore. It sounds like Sonni’s lawyers made a simple request that for an increase and Renner complied with relative ease and little drama. Good for them. I await all of the comments about how Sonni is a total K-Fed and she has no right to ask for any additional child support!

Premiere of 'Wind River' - Arrivals

Photos courtesy of WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

50 Responses to “Jeremy Renner agreed to pay more in child support as his annual income increased”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Darla says:

    Dude’s not aging well.

    • Margo S. says:

      Tell me about it. Why does he keep getting cast in films? I don’t get it…

      • minx says:

        He makes my skin crawl, I don’t know why.

      • Anon33 says:

        @minx mine too. Do not get it with this one.

      • lucy2 says:

        I think he’s a good actor, and has a decent box office track record, so I’m not surprised he gets hired a lot. Plus men in Hollywood are allowed to age and not look perfect, unlike women.

        But aside from thinking he’s talented, there’s something about him that I don’t like either.

    • kittyhawk says:

      I know, he was so cute in Pinks western themed video (forgot the name of the song). 😕

  2. Rumi says:

    When ex spouses who are parents get nasty it’s the kids that suffer. He makes good money, should be reflected in his payments. Seems like both have grown up.
    Loved Wind River he was great in it.

  3. mia girl says:

    Wait, maybe I read this wrong (I admit I don’t like this guy) but I don’t see this as a case of Renner happily agreeing to pay her more alimony.

    If, above the 13K a month, Sonni is entitled to 5% of his annual income over 2.3M, and he made 11.5M, then she would have received like $450K for the year. In this new agreement, they have kept the monthly at $13K and agreed to cap the 5% rule at $200k. I get the rest will go to an fund for Ava, but I see this as Renner not wanted to pay Sonni more alimony.

    • Jellybean says:

      He isn’t paying her any alimony, it is officially all child support.

    • BendyWindy says:

      It’s not alimony. Alimony would be money for Sonni. It’s child support. It’s for Ava. They’ve decided $200,000 extra per year is enough and the other $300,000 goes into her trust fund. That’s wonderful long term planning for their daughter. She benefits now and later.

    • Algernon says:

      That’s a good compromise, though, right? He obviously doesn’t want to pay Sonni, so he found a way to raise her support fund while still ensuring the bulk of the money goes into an account for his kid, who is the one he is responsible for supporting. Sonni will get over $150k a year in support, plus up to $200k in bonus earnings. That is a lot, even in LA, and she is able-bodied and capable of working if she wants more. I don’t mean that to sound hateful, but my impression has always been she thought having a famous dude’s baby was a golden ticket, and he has worked to ensure his money is going to his kid, not her.

    • Ankhel says:

      I know? Sonny gets less money per month, while the rest is put aside for the little girl. Sounds like Renner is the one who demanded this!

      • Algernon says:

        She’s not getting less per month, the monthly rate is the same. They just capped how much of the excess earnings go to her for support versus go into a trust for the kid.

    • ORIGINAL T.C. says:

      It appears he would like most of the money to go towards his daughter in terms of child support. Which IMO is fair and it seems that his ex-wife is also agreeable to those terms. I’m sure this doesn’t include extras like paying for the kids vacations, tutoring, school, new car etc. Unless they had a contract that upon marriage, his wife will never have to work for the rest of her life…

    • mia girl says:

      Thanks @Jellybean for clarifying. I haven’t really followed this closely and thought the agreement was a combo of child support and alimony.

      But I guess my point still stands to an extent. As you explain in your comment below, he is limiting the pay out of annual child support to Sonni per the original agreement – not increasing it. My POV is, I agree that he seems like a devoted dad and that he will take care of his daughter well into her future – but I’m not sure this proves he has a better relationship with or support for Sonni.

      Anyway, yes @T.C. good for Ava that mutual agreement was made.

      • Jellybean says:

        Since their last court fight they have all been photographed together a couple of times. They appear to be doing some things as a family, such as going for a meal when they hand Ava over or a trip to the theatre. It is so much better for a child when the parents can comfortably be in a room together for those special events.

  4. Algernon says:

    It seems like they have figured out their co-parenting situation and things have settled down, which is good for the kid.

  5. Jellybean says:

    This isn’t quite right. He hasn’t increased his payments, they have capped the payments that go directly to her. He has always paid a flat $13K a month and at the end of the year he has to pay 5% of his income if it goes over $2.3M. It is just that his money is now well over that, giving his ex several hundred thousand dollars over the basic monthly child support. He will still put all that money towards his daughter, but his ex will only get extra of upto $200K and the rest will go into a trust fund for Ava. If her mother wants to use some of it, she has to account for it and prove it is being used for the child and anything left over will go to Ava directly when she is an adult.

    • Jamie says:

      Yea, I think Kaiser misunderstood what they said. Renner didn’t agree to pay more in child support. He is paying the same. His initial agreement is that he pays 13k/month +5%. He is still paying 13k a month Plus 5 %.

      Before, the exwife gets all of the 13k and 5% (unlimited), now she gets 13k +5% (max of 200k) rest goes to a trust for the baby.

      I feel like this is very fair for renner. Not as good as a deal as what she had before tho.

    • someone says:

      Yes, the Daily Mail headline also makes it read like he is voluntarily increasing his child support but in reality he is lowering it and putting the difference in a trust fund for his daughter. Which is fair, but Renner shouldn’t portray it like he is giving her more than he was required.

    • lucy2 says:

      Right, he’s not agreeing to pay her more, he’s bypassing her with the extra money he’d always agreed to.
      I don’t think that’s a bad deal though, and probably best for the kid. I assume he takes care of other expenses as well, such as school and medical coverage. I don’t know if he provided a house or not, can’t remember. No one is making out bad in this, as far as I can see.

  6. HelloSunshine says:

    Is Renner paying for Sonny’s house, car, all of his daughter’s extracurriculars and schooling? Because then the situations are more comparable. If he’s not, then it isn’t.
    Still think people need to understand that the KFed situation is different for many reasons, including the fact that a conservatorship is involved and when something legal like child support comes up, they can’t just hand money over without justification.

    • Algernon says:

      I’ve never been clear on how school costs are calculated in child support. What happens if one parent can afford tuition to a top private school, but the other can’t?

      • bma says:

        I’m not sure how it works in Cali, but in my state, Courts will not order private school tuition be paid by either party. The Courts view it as an unnecessary expense outside of the jurisdiction of the Court. If one parents wants to pay for it, both parties just have to agree to send their kid to that school. If both parties want to pay, then its still fine.

      • Algernon says:

        That makes sense, particularly if you live in an area with good public schools. I just remembered something about them fighting over preschool costs, which Lightpurple and Jellybean broke down below.

    • Lightpurple says:

      He is paying for her pre-school. They litigated that previously. Before he was paying for the percentage of the schooling related to the days he had custody. He now pays all of it.

      • Jellybean says:

        I am not sure that is right. Sonni asked for something like $50k in over due child support and said he should be paying his share of pre-school fees. Sonni was awarded just $16K and no mention of school fees. He said he was up to date on child support and there had been no agreement about preschool starting when Ava was that young. I assumed it was really a disagreement about how much the extra 5% had come to that year; he has a lots of businesses and deductibles that could have made agreeing on a figure difficult. Maybe they now have binding arbitration over the final amount? Also, one article said Sonni could use Ava’s trust fund to pay her half of the school fees.

  7. A says:

    This is a great compromise that no one can protest without showing that they are acting in bad faith. Britney/her dad should suggest the same to Kfed.

    • Ankhel says:

      Federline will sign such a deal when Satan opens a skating rink. How would he “provide” for all his other kids?

      • A says:

        Then if that happens, it will be clear he is acting in bad faith. That’s why it’s such a good idea!

    • Jamie says:

      I agree. They should have the same deal with kevin, do some math on what it cost for all expense of the 2 kids + some for shared things with the other silbings (housings, nanny, body guard,car, etc). Then britney pays whatever amount is needed for her income and subtract all the expenses and the rest goes to the 2 kids trust fund.

      • lucy2 says:

        I think that’s a good idea for Britney too. Her kids are well taken care of now and the extra provides a financially secure future for them.

  8. bma says:

    My understanding is that Sonni gets up to $356k in support and anything over that goes into a trust for the daughter…that sounds like something that Renner pushed for (even if she filed for the increase initially). Based on the article, Sonni got approximately $611k this past year and then by asking for an increase, is guaranteed much less goes directly to her. I actually think this is incredibly smart on Renner’s part bc he’s providing a trust for his daughter while also providing more than enough money to mom to keep the child in a comfortable and similar living situation at home. I know LA is more expensive than most places, but that’s a good chunk of tax-free $ to get each year. and AS WITH K-FED, she can work and provide for her child too and she should be required to do so if she wants to provide the child with additional wants.

    • Jellybean says:

      i don’t think it is fair to say that Sonni asked for more, there is nothing in any article to say that she did. It is possible that Renner was asking either to cut the agreed payment or to keep it the same, but ring fence some so that it was guaranteed to benefit Ava. Even that is speculation, we only know that they both agreed to the ring fencing.

      • Rita says:

        I totally agree. It sounds more that Renner didnt want all that money to go directly to Sonni, and to assure Ava´s future. And if Sonni wouldn’t have agreed, there would be no agreement.

        At the same time, she is the one that is going to manage it and has to give reports about the fund investments.

      • bma says:

        true i was basing that off Kaiser’s article saying she asked for an increase. somehow it ended up in court so someone asked for a modification– very well may have been Renner wanting the money allocated to go to daughter now and in the future.

  9. Margo S. says:

    What role of his can I watch that will actually make me like him. Because im sorry, this guy does nothing for me and I don’t understand the appeal…

    • Jellybean says:

      He was oscar nominated for The Hurt Locker and The Town. Kill the Messenger and Wind River were both award worthy lead performances.

      • Happy21 says:

        I find him an exceptionally great actor.

      • Lightpurple says:

        Kill the Messenger came out in a very crowded year but, yes, that was a really good performance. I think he was robbed of a nomination for Wind River, it was a quiet yet powerful performance of grief and heartache in a hauntingly sad film. Nomination for The Town was well deserved, he managed to nail the accent and had me convinced he could pass for a Townie.

        I’m loving all the teasing he’s doing on social media about Hawkeye missing from the Avengers trailers and posters.

      • browniecakes says:

        He is a terrific actor. I am alone here, but I enjoyed him in Bourne Legacy too.

      • jetlagged says:

        You aren’t alone. I think he’s a super-compelling actor – everything I’ve seen him in has been top notch. I really enjoyed Bourne Legacy too, and wish he’d been given the Bourne franchise going forward. The last one where Damon came back was pointless, and made me mad I gave them my money.

      • lucy2 says:

        He was really good in Wind River, but that is a super depressing movie, be warned.

  10. Eggsbenedict says:

    I’d be a lot more on board with K-Fed’s requested increase if it were structured like this; into a trust fund for the boys and not K-Fed’s pockets. I hadn’t heard of child support being structured like Renner’s before, but it makes all kinds of sense.

    There also isn’t a conservatorship over Renner, so I don’t feel like it makes sense to draw a comparison between Renner and Britney. It’s not just a gender difference here. There is a mental illness on Britney’s side and an assurance that a significant portion of the increase goes to the actual child on Renner’s side.

  11. Khymera says:

    I think I preferred his old face

  12. Aang says:

    I’ve said this before, over the course of my career I’ve seen men pushed into homelessness when 17 – 25% of their minimum wage income, or income close to minimum, is taken for child support. The custodial parent can get rental assistance, food stamps, utility subsidies, and cash assistance plus child support. The other parent becomes homeless and is then prevented by practicalities from visitation thereby destroying their relationship with their children. Why do rich people get to play by different rules? It seems like Renner could pay the minimum set by CA law with no problem and the exceptions be made for patents who want to pay but can’t afford the legal minimum without living in a car.

  13. Hannah Maguire says:

    Fair enough. Not sure re the comparison to Federline though. The child support isn’t paying for Sonni’s workshy partner and four kids.

  14. SJhere says:

    You know how there are some actors who you will watch a film just because they are starring in it?
    I have never seen the attraction to this guy. I know he’s been in several hit movies but I just do not see it. (I also don’t see the big deal about Matt Damon, Ben Affleck, or Adrien Brody)