Child support after the Great Revision: what has changed since 2026 and what are the real options for beneficiaries

End of automatic criminality: when is non-payment of maintenance still a criminal offence after 1 January 2026

As of 1 January 2026, non-payment of maintenance is no longer automatically a criminal offence in Czech law. The amendment to the Criminal Code has fundamentally changed the existing concept of the criminal offence of maintenance neglect and significantly narrowed the range of situations in which a non-paying parent can be prosecuted. Whereas previously, the mere failure to fulfil the maintenance obligation for a statutory period of time was sufficient, criminal liability is now linked to a qualitatively stricter condition.

The only criminal offence is now that of non-payment of maintenance by which the obliged parent puts the child at risk of destitution. It is therefore not every maintenance debt, but situations where non-payment poses a real threat to the child’s basic living needs – typically the provision of housing, food, basic health care or schooling. Crucially, the court must specifically assess and prove this threat of hardship; the mere existence of a debt is not enough to establish criminal liability.

The change responds to a long-standing criticism of the practice where criminal sanctions also fell on parents who failed to pay child support not out of choice, but for objective reasons such as unemployment, low income or health limitations. The new legislation emphasises the real impact of non-payment on the child, not just the formal breach of duty.

For maintenance recipients, this marks a major shift: criminal law is no longer a universal instrument of coercion, but an exceptional means of protecting the child in the most serious cases. This clearly shifts the focus of dealing with maintenance debts to civil law and enforcement instruments.

Release of convicts and open cases: what the amendment means for old and ongoing cases

The entry into force of the amendment to the Criminal Code on 1 January 2026 not only had an impact on the future, but also significantly affected criminal cases that have already become final and ongoing. As a result of the narrowing of the criminality of child neglect, the courts had to reconsider the cases of persons convicted under the former legislation, unless their conduct now fulfils the characteristic of putting a child in danger of distress.

In practice, this meant that for persons serving prison sentences, the courts decided to release them or to modify the sentence imposed. However, the modification did not apply only to unconditionally sentenced prisoners. Cases involving suspended sentences, community service or persons on probation were also reviewed. If a convicted person’s conduct was no longer a criminal offence under the new legislation, the criminal sanction could not be continued.

Significantly, this is neither a mass amnesty nor an “automatic” cessation of all proceedings. Each case must be assessed by the court on an individual basis, in particular in terms of the real impact of non-payment on the child. Where the court concludes that the child has not been put at risk of destitution, criminal liability ceases. Conversely, in serious cases, the criminal sanction may survive beyond 1 January 2026.

This development can be frustrating for eligible parents, particularly if they have long relied on criminal proceedings as their main tool of coercion. However, the amendment makes clear that the criminal law is intended to be a last resort.The fact that criminal liability has lapsed or has not been found does not weaken the civil claim for maintenance owed or the possibility of its further recovery.

The focus shifts to the civil court: what tools an entitled parent has today to enforce child support

With the limitation of criminal liability for non-payment of maintenance from 2026 onwards, a trend already evident before is clearly confirmed: the main tool for protecting the legitimate parent and the child is civil law. Maintenance is primarily a private law claim and its recovery relies on swift and consistent work with the available civil remedies.

The basic pillar remains the court order for maintenance, without which any enforcement is problematic. Once the obligor parent fails to comply, it is crucial not to wait and to apply for enforcement or execution. In practice, deductions from wages or other regular income, or the attachment of a debt from an account, are proving most effective. These methods have not only a high enforceability but also a preventive effect.

In addition to traditional enforcement, state maintenance remains an important tool. While this does not cover the full amount of court-ordered maintenance and is limited in time, it is an important safeguard in situations where recovery fails or is protracted. However, the receipt of alternative maintenance does not change the obligation to actively pursue the debt – the State only temporarily mitigates the effects of non-payment.

The new legislation also increases the importance of procedural strategy. The responsible parent should monitor whether the obligor’s financial circumstances change and flexibly choose the appropriate method of recovery accordingly. A common mistake is passivity and reliance on the ‘last resort’ of a criminal complaint. After 2026, this approach no longer corresponds to legal reality. Civil remedies are not a complement but the main way to recover maintenance due and current.

Assignment of maintenance claims: a new institution between relief and risk

One of the most debated innovations effective from 1 January 2026 is the explicit possibility to assign a maintenance claim due. The new § 921a of the Civil Code definitively closes the previous disputes on whether such a procedure is even permissible and lays down the precise rules under which a parent entitled to alimony may transfer the maintenance due to a third party.

Only maintenance already due and payable and awarded by the court may be assigned. Neither future maintenance nor payments based solely on the parents’ agreement may be transferred. The purpose of the regulation is to offer a solution to situations where the obligor parent is unwilling to pay for a long time and the entitled parent is no longer willing or able to bear the additional burden of recovery. The new institution makes it possible to obtain at least immediate security of performance, albeit often at a certain discount.

At the same time, the law introduces a number of safeguards: the assignment fee must be provided in cash, the transfer of the debt is only effected by actual payment and the assignor is not in principle liable for the recoverability of the debt. In the case of maintenance for minors, the protection is even stricter and the court has to assess whether the assignment is in the best interests of the child.

Nevertheless, the new institution raises legitimate concerns. Critics point to the risk of commercialisation of family relationships and the possibility of practices akin to ‘poverty trafficking’. In practice, the key will be to whom and under what conditions claims will be assigned and how rigorously the courts will supervise the protection of the weaker party.

Thus, the assignment of maintenance claims cannot be seen as a one-size-fits-all solution. It is an instrument of last resort which may bring relief in specific cases, but requires caution and careful legal assessment of the implications.

Interest, debt and time: how the financial consequences of non-payment of maintenance are changing from 2026

In addition to changes in criminal law and the strengthening of civil enforcement tools, the legislation effective from 1 January 2026 also brings a major shift in the financial consequences of non-payment of maintenance for minor children. The role of interest on late payments, which has not only a compensatory but also a preventive and punitive function, has been significantly strengthened. Time is thus becoming one of the key factors that fundamentally affects the overall extent of the debt.

Maintenance debts continue to bear default interest under civil law, but a special regime is introduced for maintenance claims for minor children. For the first six months of delay, an increased rate of 2.5 per cent per day on the amount owed applies. Only after that period does interest return to the normal statutory rate, which corresponds to the repo rate of the Czech National Bank plus eight percentage points. The new regulation thus makes it quite clear that interest is not merely a marginal accessory to the debt but a separate and economically very important claim of the beneficiary.

The practical implications are significant. A delay of just a few months can lead to an increase in the debt by thousands or even tens of thousands of crowns, even for relatively low initial maintenance payments. The legislator has a clear objective: to motivate obliged parents to fulfil their maintenance obligations in a timely manner and to emphasise that maintenance is a basic need of the child, not a voluntary obligation.

However, from the perspective of the entitled parent, it remains crucial to bear in mind that interest on arrears does not automatically accrue without more. In order to become part of the enforceable claim, they must be properly claimed – typically in court proceedings or enforcement – together with the principal. Omission or procedural passivity may lead not only to prolongation of the proceedings but also to a de facto weakening of the position of the creditor.

At the same time, the increased interest rate has its limits. For solvent debtors, it may act as an effective pressure to pay the debt quickly, but for low-income debtors it may, on the contrary, contribute to further deepening the debt. This is why the legislation does not combine stricter interest in isolation, but links it with other institutions, in particular with the substitute maintenance provided by the State and the emphasis on civil enforcement channels.

The year 2026 thus clearly confirms that a simple but fundamental rule applies to maintenance: the earlier the debt is addressed, the less the financial and social impact will be. The new legislation makes it clear that late payment of maintenance will not be tolerated and that the protection of the child takes precedence in the system over the convenience of the obliged parent.

Summary

The amendment effective from 1 January 2026 fundamentally changes the way Czech law responds to non-payment of maintenance. Criminal law takes a back seat and is reserved for exceptional situations where non-payment puts the child in real danger of distress. This shift has had an impact not only on future cases but also on criminal cases already concluded, including the release of convicted persons and the review of suspended sentences. This clearly shifts the protection of beneficiaries to the civil law sphere, where summary execution, judicial enforcement and the institution of substitute maintenance are gaining importance.

At the same time, the amendment extends the range of instruments to include the possibility of assignment of a maintenance claim due and strengthens the importance of the financial consequences of non-payment through interest on late payment. These changes may bring relief to the parents entitled in specific situations, but they also place greater demands on information, prudence and a proactive approach. Maintenance after 2026 is not an area where automatic state intervention through criminal law can be relied upon. Success in protecting the rights of both the child and the legitimate parent will increasingly depend on the timely and thoughtful use of civil tools and a realistic assessment of which course of action is actually most appropriate in a given family situation.