Updated August 25, 2026. Quick answer: Specified, not built. This page describes an estimator that computes only from figures this package verified at primary – the statutory filing fee for the 18 jurisdictions we read, the responding-party fee where a statute charges one, and the two published federal QDRO figures – and refuses to output anything for the 33 jurisdictions we did not read.
What it would compute, and from what
| Input | What it asks | Where the number comes from |
|---|---|---|
| Statutory filing fee | the state you file in | the 18-row verified table; refuses to output for the 33 gap jurisdictions |
| Responding party fee | the state you file in | only Colorado, of the states read, charges one in the statute we read |
| Plan processing fee, per employer plan divided | how many plans need an order | $600 for a TSP account, as published; for any other plan the field is blank and the output says to read that plan’s written QDRO procedures |
| Order drafting | how many orders | $700 per order, PBGC’s own published estimate, flagged as an estimate |
| Attorney, mediator or expert time | — | NOT COMPUTED. No primary source in this package publishes a rate, so the estimator does not invent one. |
Specification only. No calculator ships with this page.
Why it refuses more than it answers
Every divorce cost calculator we could find outputs a single national figure. The reason ours cannot is on the filing-fee page: 33 of 51 jurisdictions have no verified figure in this package, three of the 18 verified ones cannot be expressed as a single number at all, and no primary source we read publishes an hourly rate for a divorce lawyer, a mediator or a forensic accountant.
An estimator that filled those in would be producing numbers indistinguishable, on screen, from the ones we proved. That is the whole objection to the tables this package was built against.
The three inputs that actually move the answer
How many employer retirement plans need a separate court order. Each one is its own order and, on a plan that charges for processing, its own fee – the Thrift Savings Plan publishes $600 and the PBGC estimates $700 to draft one.
Which state, and whether that state charges the responding spouse. Of the states read, Colorado’s statute charges both: $230 from the petitioner and $116 from the respondent.
Whether a fee waiver or a fee award is available. Both are statutory, both are asked for rather than granted automatically, and either one changes the answer by more than every other input combined.
What this page does not settle
This is a specification for a calculator, not a calculator. Nothing on this page computes anything, and no attorney, mediator or expert rate appears in the specification because this package verified none.
This is a SPECIFICATION, not code. No calculator is shipped in this package.
The estimator cannot price attorney time, mediator time or expert time, because this package read no primary source that publishes a rate for any of them.
Sources
- 705 ILCS 105/27.1b — https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/fulltext.asp?DocName=070501050K27.1b
- Cal. Gov. Code § 70670(b) — https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV§ionNum=70670
- Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-32-105(1)(a), (1)(b) — https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/images/olls/crs2024-title-13.pdf
- Fla. Stat. § 28.241(1)(a)1.b. — https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2024/28.241
- Iowa Code § 602.8105(1)(b) — https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/602.8105.pdf
- Kan. Stat. Ann. § 60-2001(a) — https://www.ksrevisor.gov/statutes/chapters/ch60/060_020_0001.html
- Mich. Comp. Laws § 600.2529(1)(a) — https://www.legislature.mi.gov/Laws/MCL?objectName=mcl-600-2529
- Minn. Stat. § 357.021(2)(1) — https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/357.021
- Mont. Code Ann. § 25-1-201(1)(a) — https://archive.legmt.gov/bills/mca/title_0250/chapter_0010/part_0020/section_0010/0250-0010-0020-0010.html
- N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-305(a)(2), (a2) — https://www.ncleg.gov/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/BySection/Chapter_7A/GS_7A-305.html
- N.D. Cent. Code § 27-05.2-03(1)(b) — https://ndlegis.gov/cencode/t27c05-2.pdf
- Neb. Rev. Stat. § 33-106(1) — https://nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/statutes.php?statute=33-106
- Nev. Rev. Stat. §§ 19.013(1), 19.020(1), 19.030(1) — https://www.leg.state.nv.us/nrs/nrs-019.html
- Okla. Stat. tit. 28, § 152(A)(1) — https://law.justia.com/codes/oklahoma/title-28/section-28-152/
- Va. Code Ann. § 17.1-275(A)(26) — https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title17.1/chapter2/section17.1-275/
- W. Va. Code § 59-1-11(a)(3) — https://code.wvlegislature.gov/59-1-11/
- Wash. Rev. Code § 36.18.020(2)(a) — https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=36.18.020
- Wis. Stat. § 814.61(1)(a), (1)(b) — https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/814/ii/61
Related: Divorce Filing Fees by State · DIY, Online or Attorney · the timing decision, computed · what the estimator cannot price.
General information drawn from the primary statutes, regulations and published federal plan documents named above, not legal, tax or financial advice. Court fees change, and the figures here are what each statute said on the date above; check the section before relying on it.
11 more states, each with a rule that changes the duration or eligibility answer, read from the statute in September 2026. These are additional to the 25-state alimony-factor guide above; each has its own deep-dive page, not just a factor-list restatement.