from October 2004 through May 2005, the trial court concluded that these payments were used to pay the mortgage on the nonmari-tal home and other expenses incurred by the parties. Accordingly, the trial court did not award the former husband any credit towards his child support obligations for these deposits. LEGAL ANALYSIS We review both orders before us for an abuse of discretion. Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197, 1202 (Fla.1980). A. The Equitable Distribution Section 61.075(1), Florida Statutes (2005), requires that a court in a dissolution of marriage proceeding “set apart to each spouse that spouse’s nonmarital assets and liabilities,” prior to distributing the marital assets and liabilities between the parties. See also Farrior v. Farrior, 736 So.2d 1177, 1179 (Fla.1999) (<HOLDING>); Siegel v. Siegel, 967 So.2d 349, 351 (Fla. 3d
holding income tax liability incurred during marriage is one of accepted costs of producing marital income and should be treated as marital debt for purposes of determining equitable distribution of marital estate holding that circuit court erred in failing to consider that marital property in the form of marital earnings was used to pay debt against nonmarital property holding trial court had no authority to award portion of the marital property to wifes children from another marriage even though money they received by way of social security benefits were commingled with the marital estate and used in part for the aequisition of marital property holding that transfer of marital assets to the wifes paramour constituted dissipation holding that the former wifes stocks were not subject to equitable distribution notwithstanding the fact that the stocks were used as collateral for the couples joint debt where no intermingling of marital and nonmarital assets was found