Should we reinstitute the marriage penalty?

[Feanorcurufinwe]

Some candidates want to, others don't. Some posters have suggested that 'there was no marriage penalty'.

So should we reinstitute the marriage penalty? Was there such a thing? If there was no marriage penalty, what exactly did Congress do when they 'eliminated it'? That change (whatever you want to call it), should it be undone?

[leftofthedial]

1. marriage is enough of a penalty

without the gummint getting involved

[onebigbadwulf]

2. A child penalty is better

A child penalty after 2 kids is much better than a marriage penalty.


Unless it's adoption. Adoption credit would be awesome.

[demsrule4life]

3. :)

[quaker bill]

6. I know, someone had to say it.

If you hadn't I was going to.

[MissMarple]

4. So, married couples should pay more than an unmarried couple?

Nah.... :D

[liberalhistorian]

5. Why the hell should I pay more as a single

just because Mr. Right hasn't come into my life yet? Singles pay a lot more taxes than many married couples; I'm a never-married single parent and I pay more taxes than friends who are married and I make less than they do!!!!!!!!!! THAT is not fair. So please spare me the river of tears over this so-called "marriage penalty!"

[Avalon Sparks]

9. Liberal Historian~

I'm not sure what you're talking about.

For the last 5 years I have figured out my husband's and my taxes both ways, married, or not married and everytime we've had to pay much more married, or we get much less back. It was such a big difference a couple years ago, I suggested that we pretend to be separated~ As a married couple without kids or owning a home, we get shafted.

[leftofthedial]

16. in fact, some people do get divorced

just to save money on taxes

[Yupster]

11. How is that?

Can you explain more?

[Fixxxxer]

12. The question

properly worded is as follows.

Should a married couple earning X in income pay more in federal income taxes than a single individual earning the same amount.

The obvoius answer (or at least it should be obvious) is no.

[Hammie]

14. Here is how it works

Under the "marriage penalty":

A married couple earning X pays less tax than an individual earning X. But, if each member of the couple earns .5X then the married couple pays more tax than two individuals would who were each earning .5X

It is most easily seen by two income families, who find that after marriage, their total tax burden is higher than it was before marriage.

The degree to which a particular couple falls victim depends on the parity of their incomes. It is maximized when each member contributes exactly half. The marriage penalty is completely eliminated when the tax burden for a couple making X is the same or less than the tax burden for 2 individuals making .5X.

[newyawker99]

17. deleted n/t

[Loyal]

7. Why shouldn't married couples pay more?

2 people, it's easier to take care of the kids, if you have any. With two people you generally have more income, and you typically have 2 incomes. I don't think it's unfair to have married couples pay more.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

8. Maybe we should call it an 'unmarried bonus' instead.

"Don't get married, and you'll have lower taxes."

Maybe that should be our policy.

[Fixxxxer]

13. Why shouldn't?

As posted to another poster on this thread, if a married couple makes X, should they pay more than a single person earning the exact same amount? No.

And if you think they should, please tell us why?

[AP]

10. How but means testing it?

You certainly shouldn't get it if you don't need it.

[ex_jew]

15. I say we REWARD couple who stay married 15 or 20 years !

Give them something to look forward to if they stick it out - maybe 5 or 10 thousand dollars. The savings in social services might be immense !