Washington calls it spousal maintenance. Discretionary multi-factor statute—no formula. Courts examine need, ability to pay, duration of marriage, and standard of living. Forms include Temporary and longer-term maintenance; awards are often rehabilitative in framing.. That is what separates Washington spousal maintenance from a generic national summary. Read Wash. Rev. Code § 26.09.090 before the background sections below. Duration: Informal practice often ties duration to marriage-length bands, but the statute does not impose rigid caps. Termination: Death, remarriage, or the end of the ordered term; cohabitation may support modification under case law.
Eligibility and statutory factors
Discretionary multi-factor statute—no formula. Courts examine need, ability to pay, duration of marriage, and standard of living.
Fault. Washington is a no-fault dissolution state; fault is not a maintenance factor.
Document income, earning capacity, health, length of marriage, contributions as homemaker or to the other spouse's career, and the marital standard of living. Those facts drive both temporary (pendente lite) and final awards.
Types of spousal maintenance in Washington
Temporary and longer-term maintenance; awards are often rehabilitative in framing.
Labeling matters. Rehabilitative awards usually require a plan (schooling, retraining, re-entry to the workforce). Durational or term awards run for a fixed period. Lump-sum or reimbursement awards may be non-modifiable depending on the judgment language and statute.
How amount is set
Washington does not use a statewide calculator for final spousal maintenance. Judges weigh the statutory factors and the record. Online “alimony calculators” are at best rough illustrations and are not controlling.
Temporary support while a divorce is pending often follows different local practices or guidelines than the final award. Confirm what your county or division actually uses.
A concrete Washington scenario
Here is one way the Washington pieces fit together. Change any fact and the statute may point somewhere else.
One spouse asks a Washington court for spousal maintenance after a divorce filing.
- Use the label and statute Washington actually uses: spousal maintenance under Wash. Rev. Code § 26.09.090.
- There is no formula. Apply the statutory factors: Discretionary multi-factor statute—no formula. Courts examine need, ability to pay, duration of marriage, and standard of living.
- Set duration from Washington rules: Informal practice often ties duration to marriage-length bands, but the statute does not impose rigid caps.
- Identify what ends the award: Death, remarriage, or the end of the ordered term; cohabitation may support modification under case law.
Limited. Permanent maintenance is rare and usually reserved for long marriages with lasting impairment of earning capacity. Fault: Washington is a no-fault dissolution state; fault is not a maintenance factor. TCJA: post-2018 maintenance is not federally deductible/includible; Washington has no personal income tax.
How long spousal maintenance lasts
Informal practice often ties duration to marriage-length bands, but the statute does not impose rigid caps.
Permanent / indefinite support. Limited. Permanent maintenance is rare and usually reserved for long marriages with lasting impairment of earning capacity.
When spousal maintenance ends or can be changed
Death, remarriage, or the end of the ordered term; cohabitation may support modification under case law.
Either party may usually seek modification upon a substantial change in circumstances unless the award was expressly made non-modifiable. Retirement, disability, remarriage, cohabitation, and large income swings are frequent triggers — but the statutory test and burden of proof are Washington-specific.
Taxes
TCJA: post-2018 maintenance is not federally deductible/includible; Washington has no personal income tax.
Child support remains non-deductible and non-taxable. Do not assume spousal maintenance treatment mirrors child support.
Case law: how Washington courts decide spousal maintenance
These LawDiver opinions illustrate how Washington appellate courts discuss need, ability to pay, duration, and related issues:
In the Matter of the Marriage of Marigail Washburn, Appellant, and Gerald R. Washburn, Responde — Rosellini, J
…of a professional degree could be considered in matters of alimony for support and maintenance and for property settlement where marital property existed to be divided. It should further be noted that the Graham majority, unlike Washington, appears to consider goodwill as not a community asset subject to distribution. In In re Marriage of Horstmann, 263 N.W.2d 885 (Iowa 1978),…
Washington opinions such as In the Matter of the Marriage of Marigail Washburn, Appellant, and Gerald R. Washburn, Responde — Rosellini, J are cited where spousal maintenance is disputed. The court stated: "It should further be noted that the Graham majority, unlike Washington, appears to consider goodwill as not a community asset subject to distribution. In In re Marriage of Horstmann, 263 N.W." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
In the Matter of the Marriage of Sandra Rae Williams, Respondent, and James Eldon Williams, Petitioner
…esumption that the receiving spouse's remarriage terminates alimony. See In re Marriage of Thach, 29 Wn. App. 672, 630 P.2d 487 (1981); In re Marriage of Mason, 40 Wn. App. 450, 698 P.2d 1104, review denied, 104 Wn.2d 1017 (1985); RCW 26.09.170(2). Judge Quinn ordered Sandra to pay James $1,806.50 for spousal maintenance paid since her remarriage and $500 for attorney fees. San…
Washington opinions such as In the Matter of the Marriage of Sandra Rae Williams, Respondent, and James Eldon Williams, Petitioner are cited where spousal maintenance is disputed. The court stated: "See In re Marriage of Thach, 29 Wn. App. 672, 630 P.2d 487 (1981); In re Marriage of Mason, 40 Wn. App. 450, 698 P.2d 1104, review denied, 104 Wn.2d 1017 (1985); RCW 26.09.170(2). Judge Quinn ordered Sandra to pay James $1,806." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
In the Matter of the Marriage of John Nicholson, Appellant, and Gwendoline P. Nicholson, Respondent
…s of Case John Nicholson appeals from an award of property, alimony, child support and attorneys' fees in a decree of dissolution. This dissolution action was commenced by Mr. Nicholson. The decree was entered following a 2-day trial in May of 1975. The issues presented require that some factual detail be set out. The parties were married in January of 1947 and three children w…
Practitioners open In the Matter of the Marriage of John Nicholson, Appellant, and Gwendoline P. Nicholson, Respondent when Washington spousal maintenance turns on the distinction in this sentence: "Case John Nicholson appeals from an award of property, alimony, child support and attorneys' fees in a decree of dissolution. This dissolution action was commenced by Mr. Nicholson. The decree was entered following a 2-day trial in May of 1975." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
In the Matter of the Marriage of Daniel Valente, and Fukiko Valente
In the Matter of the Marriage of Daniel Valente, and Fukiko Valente, 179 Wash. App. 817 (2014)
…not clear what the basis was for the trial court’s award of alimony” and held that the award was error: [T]here is neither evidence in the record nor a finding of fact to support an alimony award on such a conjectural basis. . . . There is no evidence of an existing or reasonably anticipated future impairment of respondent’s health that now adversely affects her earning capacit…
Washington opinions such as In the Matter of the Marriage of Daniel Valente, and Fukiko Valente are cited where spousal maintenance is disputed. The court stated: "T]here is neither evidence in the record nor a finding of fact to support an alimony award on such a conjectural basis. . . ." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
In the Matter of the Marriage of Beverly Sheffer, Appellant, and Alfred Sheffer, Respondent
…yment. Traditionally, Washington cases have emphasized that alimony is not a matter of right and that one spouse should not be given a perpetual lien on the other spouse's future income. See, e.g., Hogberg v. Hogberg, 64 Wn.2d 617, 619, 393 P.2d 291 (1964). At the same time, the Washington Supreme Court has noted the importance of the parties' postdissolution economic status. I…
In the Matter of the Marriage of Beverly Sheffer, Appellant, and Alfred Sheffer, Respondent is worth reading on Washington spousal maintenance because the court put the point in its own words: "Traditionally, Washington cases have emphasized that alimony is not a matter of right and that one spouse should not be given a perpetual lien on the other spouse's future income. See, e.g., Hogberg v. Hogberg, 64 Wn.2d 617, 619, 393 P.2d 291 (1964)." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
In re Marriage of Wilcox
In re Marriage of Wilcox, 3 Wash. 3d 507 (2024)
…N Prior to 1973, Washington courts observed the concept of “alimony” in marital dissolution cases. See, e.g., LAWS OF 1949, ch. 215, § 11. “Alimony” is defined as “[a] court-ordered allowance that one spouse pays to the other spouse for maintenance and support while they are separated, while they are involved in a matrimonial lawsuit, or after they are divorced; esp[ecially], m…
Washington opinions such as In re Marriage of Wilcox are cited where spousal maintenance is disputed. The court stated: "N Prior to 1973, Washington courts observed the concept of “alimony” in marital dissolution cases. See, e.g., LAWS OF 1949, ch. 215, § 11." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
In the Matter of the Marriage of Carol Ann Huteson, Appellant, and Gerald James Huteson, Respondent
…e capable of paying substantially greater child support and alimony amounts.'' 1 Both issues were thus left open should a change of circumstances warrant such reconsideration. Finding of fact No. 16, challenged in connection with the disability pension, provided in part: Respondent's disability income compensates him for loss of future income and is not a community asset to be…
Practitioners open In the Matter of the Marriage of Carol Ann Huteson, Appellant, and Gerald James Huteson, Respondent when Washington spousal maintenance turns on the distinction in this sentence: "Both issues were thus left open should a change of circumstances warrant such reconsideration. Finding of fact No." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
In the Matter of the Marriage of Patricia A. Melville, Respondent, and John H. Melville, Appellant
…urff, J. — John Melville appeals from an award of property, alimony, child support and attorneys’ fees in a decree of dissolution. His net worth was in excess of $100,000 when the parties were married in 1966. In 1973 the parties’ net worth, including both separate and community property, was approximately $31,800. The court awarded Patricia Melville $14,000 in cash, the househ…
Washington opinions such as In the Matter of the Marriage of Patricia A. Melville, Respondent, and John H. Melville, Appellant are cited where spousal maintenance is disputed. The court stated: "J. — John Melville appeals from an award of property, alimony, child support and attorneys’ fees in a decree of dissolution. His net worth was in excess of $100,000 when the parties were married in 1966." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
Practical checklist
- Identify the correct statutory label (spousal maintenance) and controlling section (Wash. Rev. Code § 26.09.090).
- Assemble income, budget, and health evidence for both spouses.
- For rehabilitative requests, prepare a concrete plan and timeline.
- Address fault only if Washington law makes it relevant to eligibility or amount.
- Search LawDiver for recent Washington decisions before mediation.
- Cross-check child support interactions via the Washington child support guide.
Key takeaways
- Washington uses the term spousal maintenance under Wash. Rev. Code § 26.09.090.
- Amount and duration are largely discretionary, guided by statutory factors. Discretionary multi-factor statute—no formula. Courts examine need, ability to pay, duration of marriage, and standard of living.
- Common forms include: Temporary and longer-term maintenance; awards are often rehabilitative in framing.
- Duration framework: Informal practice often ties duration to marriage-length bands, but the statute does not impose rigid caps.
- Permanent / indefinite support: Limited. Permanent maintenance is rare and usually reserved for long marriages with lasting impairment of earning capacity.
- Companion child-support guide: Washington child support guidelines.
What spousal maintenance is (and is not)
Spousal maintenance is court-ordered support from one spouse to the other after separation or divorce. It is separate from child support (see Wash. Rev. Code ch. 26.19) and from property division. A single judgment may include all three, but each has its own legal tests.
No spouse is automatically entitled to spousal maintenance. Courts typically ask whether one party has a genuine need and whether the other has the ability to pay, then apply Washington's statutory framework.
Frequently asked questions
Does Washington still award permanent spousal maintenance?
Limited. Permanent maintenance is rare and usually reserved for long marriages with lasting impairment of earning capacity.
How is spousal maintenance calculated in Washington?
Washington leaves amount largely to judicial discretion under Wash. Rev. Code § 26.09.090, guided by statutory factors rather than a mandatory statewide calculator.
How long do I have to be married to receive spousal maintenance?
Informal practice often ties duration to marriage-length bands, but the statute does not impose rigid caps. Short marriages rarely produce long-term awards; longer marriages support broader remedies where the statute allows.
Does remarriage or cohabitation end spousal maintenance?
Death, remarriage, or the end of the ordered term; cohabitation may support modification under case law.
Is spousal maintenance taxable?
TCJA: post-2018 maintenance is not federally deductible/includible; Washington has no personal income tax.
Where can I read Washington spousal maintenance opinions?
Open the cases linked above or search LawDiver scoped to Washington. For support of children, see the Washington child support guidelines guide.
Disclaimer
This article provides general information about Washington spousal maintenance and is not legal advice. Confirm the current text of Wash. Rev. Code § 26.09.090 and consult a licensed Washington family-law attorney before acting on any rule described here.