PDA

View Full Version : Gay couples face higher tax bills


patriotsblade
04-14-2008, 12:21 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/personal/04/14/gay.taxes.ap/index.html

MOUNT LAUREL, New Jersey (AP) -- For gay couples, the April 15 tax filing deadline can be a reminder of the disparities they face, even in a nation that is becoming more accepting of same-sex couples.

Gay couples often pay higher taxes because they don't get the federal tax benefits that go with marriage. And for couples in state-sanctioned domestic partnerships, civil unions or same-sex marriages, filing federal income taxes can involve doing three sets of paperwork instead of one.

"It's a significant financial disability," said Beth Asaro, who last year entered into one of New Jersey's first legally recognized civil unions.

While the debate over government recognition of gay marriage is a political hot-button with arguments about morality, civil rights and tradition, the tax issue is a mostly practical one for hundreds of thousands of same-sex couples.

Most states ban gay marriage and don't recognize same-sex unions in any way. Only in Massachusetts can gay couples legally marry. Since 1997, nine other states and Washington D.C. started offering civil unions or domestic partnerships that give some or all the legal protections of marriage.

Those protections include allowing gay couples to file state taxes jointly -- and potentially save them money. But they can also make tax filing more complicated for the couples.

That's because the state protections do not help with federal taxes. Under the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, the government defines marriage as being allowed only between a man and a woman.

"You're running one household," said John Traier, a partner in the Butler, New Jersey, accounting firm Hammond & Traier. "But the federal government and a lot of states treat them as two households."

The same is true for straight unmarried straight couples who are living together.

There are two main effects of the different treatment under federal law.

One is the tax rate. Take two couples where one partner has a taxable income of $20,000 and the other makes $40,000. If they can file their federal taxes jointly, the tax bill would be $8,217.50. Filing separately, the combined bill would be $9,032.50 -- more than $800 higher.

Another disparity comes with the federal government's treatment of employer-provided health insurance, which also affects unmarried heterosexual couples.

For example, Dan Jessup is a project manager at JPMorgan Chase in Indiana. His partner, Bob Chenoweth, is self-employed, running two businesses out of the couple's Mooresville, Indiana, home. So Chenoweth gets health insurance through Chase.

But Jessup is required to count the company's cost of his partner's benefits as additional income for tax purposes.

State and federal taxes on those benefits cost about $1,800 per year, Jessup said.

"I certainly think about it every payday," when the extra withholding is taken from his paycheck, he said. "If you think about 10 years, $18,000 is a lot of money. That could buy me a pretty nice car."

The tax on benefits for domestic partners also applies to employers. Companies including Chase are endorsing the Human Rights Campaign's push for a bill that would end the tax on health plan benefits for people who are neither the spouse nor legal dependent of the employee. Versions of the bill have been introduced in Congress in the last three sessions, but have never moved out of committee.

A government analysis estimated the bill would cost about $10 billion in lost federal tax revenue over 10 years. Advocates for the bill say it would create savings elsewhere, including reducing the Medicaid rolls.

Ryan Ellis, the tax policy director for Americans for Tax Reform, said his group supports the concept, but not the specific language of the bill, because it does not propose increasing how much domestic partners could put into health savings accounts.

It's not just the higher bills that can be frustrating for same-sex taxpayers; it's also the process of filing taxes, particularly in states that offer some joint benefits to gay couples.

"I don't want to say it's chaotic, but it's very difficult for a lot of reasons," said Traier, the accountant who is in a civil union partnership himself.

In New Jersey and the other states where same-sex unions are formally recognized, couples can file their state taxes jointly, but they must file their federal tax returns as individuals.

That means doing income calculations twice. Many tax programs such as Intuit's TurboTax are set up to deal with that extra math.

But there are other issues where even up-to-date software might not solve.

These issues also affect unmarried straight couples.

For instance, couples with children must decide which partner gets to claim them as dependents for tax purposes on federal returns and returns in states that don't recognize same-sex unions. Similarly, couples who own homes together have to sort out how much of the mortgage interest payments each partner gets to use as a deduction, said Lara Schwartz, the Human Rights Campaign legal director.

"If you are not a different sex," from your partner, Schwartz said, "you are strangers, basically, under federal law."

issac the dragon
04-14-2008, 12:30 PM
I think that the tax code should be amended to get rid of the marriage benifit. Why am I and millions of single people being charged more in taxes than married people? That is a vicious way to treat people because their spouse died. Sorry about your loss, and by the way, you owe us more money.

All people in this country are supposed to be equal, so why aren't we being treated equally?

Sweet Tart
04-14-2008, 01:07 PM
I agree, isaac. While I do benefit from the extra break, it is unfair to all couples in a relationship, regardless of gender. If marriage is, in essence, a contract then that contract should extend to couples who are willing to sign off on it :yep

Oceanbreeze
04-14-2008, 01:27 PM
I think that the tax code should be amended to get rid of the marriage benifit. Why am I and millions of single people being charged more in taxes than married people? That is a vicious way to treat people because their spouse died. Sorry about your loss, and by the way, you owe us more money.

All people in this country are supposed to be equal, so why aren't we being treated equally?

I agree. :(

John Gault
04-14-2008, 02:14 PM
I think that the tax code should be amended to get rid of the marriage benifit. Why am I and millions of single people being charged more in taxes than married people? That is a vicious way to treat people because their spouse died. Sorry about your loss, and by the way, you owe us more money.

All people in this country are supposed to be equal, so why aren't we being treated equally?

Actually it was a marriage penalty for decades if both spouses earned decent money.

Say the husband makes 75k a year and that takes him from the 10% to the 25% marginal rate. If the wife also made 75k then the entire 75k is taxed starting in the 25% braket and some may even make it to the next braket. If filing single she would have had some of the 75k taxed at lower rates.

That is not a benefit it is a penalty to one couple.

Now they have simply lessened the penalty. The first 55k of the second income is treated as if single. So even here the couple I mentioned would still ghet penalized.

Wa WA

John Gault
04-14-2008, 02:16 PM
I agree. :(

They are, if they get married they will get the same treatment as other married people.

Besides like I explained, it is not a break but a lessening of a long time penalty.

BartonX
04-19-2008, 02:01 PM
I think that the tax code should be amended to get rid of the marriage benifit. Why am I and millions of single people being charged more in taxes than married people? That is a vicious way to treat people because their spouse died. Sorry about your loss, and by the way, you owe us more money.

All people in this country are supposed to be equal, so why aren't we being treated equally?

If all things were equal, homos would be taken to the pound and if not adopted within a few days the currs would be euthanized. Is that what you wnat to happen to them??? :LL

AYFR
04-19-2008, 02:14 PM
If all things were equal, homos would be taken to the pound and if not adopted within a few days the currs would be euthanized. Is that what you wnat to happen to them??? :LL

:nono

I have had it with you lame and useless remarks.

BartonX
04-19-2008, 10:08 PM
:nono

I have had it with you lame and useless remarks.

Like I said in the post you removed. Put an "r" on "you" it was meant to be "your". I really don't give a shit what you have had it with neither does anyone else. You think that means something???

Ringo
04-20-2008, 06:32 AM
I think that the tax code should be amended to get rid of the marriage benifit. Why am I and millions of single people being charged more in taxes than married people? That is a vicious way to treat people because their spouse died. Sorry about your loss, and by the way, you owe us more money.

All people in this country are supposed to be equal, so why aren't we being treated equally?

Write the Democrats, they made it PERMANENT under Wilson, and FDR showed how real robber barons operated? Now prepare to be chastised by Doggie, HE LOVES taxes, the more the merrier!! I like you am in the high bracket, I believe Married people do need a better break, as they are raising kids for the most part, and normally have higher expenditures, than you and I would!

What do you think of the Death Tax, TB thinks there is no problem, as she gets a thrill handing over her earnings to the Govt, especially Tax & Spend Dems! To be fair the GOP is no damned better, but I admit that, whereas HARDCORE Liberals will never do that!!:mw

AYFR
04-20-2008, 07:14 AM
Like I said in the post you removed. Put an "r" on "you" it was meant to be "your". I really don't give a shit what you have had it with neither does anyone else. You think that means something???

It means more then you think it does.

McLovin
04-20-2008, 08:43 AM
If all things were equal, homos would be taken to the pound and if not adopted within a few days the currs would be euthanized. Is that what you wnat to happen to them??? :LL

That was so intellectual. :paclap

BartonX
04-21-2008, 12:20 AM
That was so intellectual. :paclap

You sir are to be congratulated since you are of a caliber to recognise wit while most allow intelligence to go over their heads because they don't know shit! :):rooster

McLovin
04-21-2008, 10:04 AM
You sir are to be congratulated since you are of a caliber to recognise wit while most allow intelligence to go over their heads because they don't know shit! :):rooster

:rofl Thanks, ma'am.

Sweet Tart
04-21-2008, 10:34 AM
:think

:snicker

McLovin
04-21-2008, 11:05 AM
:para

BartonX
04-25-2008, 03:15 PM
:rofl Thanks, ma'am.

:think