IN RE: the MARRIAGE OF Maja Liana CLAYTON and Scott Elliott Clayton (2019)

Scott Clayton filed a petition to modify his child support obligation, seeking to reduce the amount of his child support obligation. Maja Clayton, his former spouse, filed a counterclaim, seeking to increase Scott's child support obligation. The district court denied Scott's petition and granted Maja's counterclaim. In so doing, the district court made explicit credibility findings that Scott's testimony and evidence regarding his income was not credible. In contrast, the district court found Maja's testimony and evidence credible. Scott timely filed this appeal.

On de novo review, see In re Marriage of Robbins, 510 N.W.2d 844, 844 (Iowa 1994), we affirm the judgment of the district court. The more credible evidence, including the parties' testimony, expert testimony, tax returns, and other financial records, supports the district court's findings regarding Scott and Maja's respective incomes. See In re Marriage of Knickerbocker, 601 N.W.2d 48, 51 (Iowa 1999) (“In calculating child support, the first step is to determine the parents' current monthly net income from the most reliable evidence presented.”); Hillman v. Cannon, No. 11-0367, 2011 WL 6670657, at *6 (Iowa Ct. App. Dec. 21, 2011) (discussing evidence relevant to establishing a partnership); In re Marriage of Will, 602 N.W.2d 202, 204 (Iowa Ct. App. 1999) (explaining that “completed federal and/or state income tax returns are the best evidence of income and tax liability”).

We have considered each of the parties' arguments whether or not set forth explicitly herein. We affirm the judgment of the district court without further opinion. See Iowa Ct. R. 21.26(1)(a),(d),(e). We decline Maja's request for appellate attorney fees. See Iowa Code § 598.36 (2017) (allowing for an award of fees).

AFFIRMED.

McDONALD, Judge.