# U.S tax policy and the "marriage penalty" **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 28, 2009, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-tax-policy-and-the-marriage-penalty/491089 "2009-03-28T13:53:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2009, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-tax-policy-and-the-marriage-penalty/491089/21 "2009-03-30T00:04:06Z")
> [@sqweels](#): > > When you marry, it becomes undeniable that you’re sharing household expenses with another wage earner. So it’s mainly a question of the IRS being able to identify people who are living together vs those who are single. Not undeniable, because many married couples live in separate homes (because they are separated or, not infrequently, because they are temporarily living in different places for work). But you’re right that it is a good proxy for living together. But the thing is, we predicate almost our entire tax system on the fact that people will answer forms honestly if they are subject to possible audit. I don’t see why asking if you live with another adult is fundamentally different from asking whether received some gifts, took some rides in the company car, lost a bunch of money on gambling, or made some cash tips. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2009, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-tax-policy-and-the-marriage-penalty/491089/22 "2009-03-30T00:15:10Z")
Actually, if you are going to discriminate on the basis of marital status, presumably you’d want to encourage marriage, not discourage it. The so-called marriage penalty should be eliminated. ---
**Author:** ![Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freddy_the_Pig)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2009, 12:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-tax-policy-and-the-marriage-penalty/491089/23 "2009-03-30T00:46:16Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > Is it fair that Couple B pay **vastly** more in taxes than Couple A? Because that’s the consequence of a progressive tax system which taxes marriage instead of whether you’re living with another tax-paying adult . . . I don’t see why asking if you live with another adult is fundamentally different from asking whether received some gifts, took some rides in the company car, lost a bunch of money on gambling, or made some cash tips. The tax code recognition of marriage is about more than just living together. Married couples usually pool their time, money, and property resources in a way that casual roommates don’t. When one spouse does well, the other does well. When one roommate does well, the other doesn’t care. I’m not out to defend the fairness of the present system–as a single person, I damn sure have my own grievances–so much as to point out that, when you combine progressive taxation with the tendency of humans to form couples and families, _any_ system is unfair. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2009, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-tax-policy-and-the-marriage-penalty/491089/24 "2009-03-30T01:04:03Z")
> [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](#): > > The tax code recognition of marriage is about more than just living together. Married couples usually pool their time, money, and property resources in a way that casual roommates don’t. When one spouse does well, the other does well. When one roommate does well, the other doesn’t care. I’m not talking about casual roommates. I’m talking about unmarried couples. There are something like 7 million unmarried long-term couples living together in the US. ---
**Author:** ![Hari\_Seldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hari_seldon/32/5173_2.png) [@Hari\_Seldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hari_Seldon)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2009, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-tax-policy-and-the-marriage-penalty/491089/25 "2009-03-30T02:28:35Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > I’m not sure if you’re referring to how it was in the past but Canada does have a “Standard deduction,” if you mean what I think you mean, which is an across-the-board standard deducation on all incomes. The standard deduction is $5450, independent of anything else. It used to be a fixed percentage of income (10%, I think). It is used only if you don’t itemize deductions. There is nothing like that in the Canadian return. And when I was filing in the US, it was used, basically, only by people not having mortgages. ---
**Author:** ![amarinth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3be4f8/32.png) [@amarinth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amarinth)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2009, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-tax-policy-and-the-marriage-penalty/491089/26 "2009-03-30T02:40:48Z")
> [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](#): > > Couple A1 and A2 work at forty-hour-a-week jobs paying $75,000 each. They split the work of maintaining the house, shopping, and raising their children as best they can. > > Couple B1 and B2 have a different arrangement. Spouse B1 works at a demanding job requiring frequent overtime and travel, paying $150,000. Spouse B2 stays at home, doing all of the shopping, housework, and most of the raising of the children. > > Couples A and B have the same household income. Each has exactly the same lifestyle in material terms. > > Is it fair that Couple B pay **vastly** more in taxes than Couple A? Because that’s the consequence of a progressive tax system which ignores marriage. If C (who is unmarried ) earns 150,000 - the exact same as B1, is it fair C pays vastly more in taxes than Couple B? With progressive taxes, someone is going to get screwed. ---
**Author:** ![CookingWithGas](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cookingwithgas/32/485_2.png) [@CookingWithGas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CookingWithGas)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2009, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-tax-policy-and-the-marriage-penalty/491089/27 "2009-03-30T02:53:21Z")
> [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](#): > > Couple A1 and A2 work at forty-hour-a-week jobs paying $75,000 each. They split the work of maintaining the house, shopping, and raising their children as best they can. > > Couple B1 and B2 have a different arrangement. Spouse B1 works at a demanding job requiring frequent overtime and travel, paying $150,000. Spouse B2 stays at home, doing all of the shopping, housework, and most of the raising of the children. > > Couples A and B have the same household income. Each has exactly the same lifestyle in material terms. > > Is it fair that Couple B pay **vastly** more in taxes than Couple A? Because that’s the consequence of a progressive tax system which ignores marriage. Please check your figures. My calculations, documented in the spreadsheet referenced in the OP, show that \*both \*couples pay the same $25,200 in taxes. This is a direct consequence of the tax rate structure. The spreadsheet shows the marginal brackets plus assumptions about personal exemptions and standard deduction. (I did not develop other scenarios using mortgage interest deductions, etc., etc.) ---
**Author:** ![Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freddy_the_Pig)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2009, 2:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-tax-policy-and-the-marriage-penalty/491089/28 "2009-03-30T14:01:44Z")
> [@CookingWithGas](#): > > Please check your figures. Please reread _your own OP_. You’re advocating a tax code which ignores marriage. My post described the inequities which would arise under such a system. Quoting results from the current tax code is irrelevant. > [@amarinth](#): > > With progressive taxes, someone is going to get screwed. Exactly. ---
**Author:** ![spazattak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8e8cbc/32.png) [@spazattak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spazattak)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2009, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-tax-policy-and-the-marriage-penalty/491089/29 "2009-03-30T14:35:56Z")
> [@Snnipe\_70E](#): > > If you want a better example of the marrage penalty. > > Take a woman who has children living with a man. If they make approx the same income. She can file single with dependant children, and he will file single. If they get married they can now file married. Now if he also has children then it becomes a double hit. Filing married in each case will mean more taxes with out a change in income. > > Now I do realise that in most houses both spouces do not make the same income. My home is 60/40. Or take an executive making $500,000 and his teacher wife making $32,000. You really think we should treat this couple like each one is in an individual tax column? Seriously? I’m half a dink and you won’t hear me complaining. My household is also 60/40. ---
**Author:** ![CookingWithGas](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cookingwithgas/32/485_2.png) [@CookingWithGas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CookingWithGas)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2009, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-tax-policy-and-the-marriage-penalty/491089/30 "2009-03-31T00:01:33Z")
> [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](#): > > Please reread _your own OP_. You’re advocating a tax code which ignores marriage. My post described the inequities which would arise under such a system. Quoting results from the current tax code is irrelevant. I reread my OP and your post. Your post doesn’t have anything do with being married vs. not being married. It has to do with distribution of income within a married couple. You are not comparing married people to single people. How can analysis of the current tax code be irrelevant when that’s the point? ---
**Author:** ![CookingWithGas](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cookingwithgas/32/485_2.png) [@CookingWithGas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CookingWithGas)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2009, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-tax-policy-and-the-marriage-penalty/491089/31 "2009-03-31T00:24:26Z")
> [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](#): > > My post described the inequities which would arise under such a system. Quoting results from the current tax code is irrelevant. Hang on a sec. Is your earliest post describing a hypothetical situation under an imaginary tax system? That was not clear. I am still not sure how you are making your point but I’m open to trying to understand it. ---
**Author:** ![amarinth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3be4f8/32.png) [@amarinth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amarinth)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2009, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-tax-policy-and-the-marriage-penalty/491089/32 "2009-03-31T00:37:10Z")
**Cooking With Gas** , here’s the problem - we have the following 5 families Family 1: Consists of person A, who earns 30K/year. Family 2: Consists of person B1 and B2. They are unmarried. They each earn 30K/year. Family 3: Consists of person C1 and C2. They are married. They each earn 30K/year. Family 4: Consists of person D1 and D2. D1 earns 60K/year. D2 does not work outside the home. They are married. Family 5: Consists of person E. E earns 60K/year. In a progressive tax system, how do you tax all 5 of those families “fairly”? ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2009, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-tax-policy-and-the-marriage-penalty/491089/33 "2009-03-31T01:48:50Z")
> [@Hari\_Seldon](#): > > The standard deduction is $5450, independent of anything else. It used to be a fixed percentage of income (10%, I think). It is used only if you don’t itemize deductions. There is nothing like that in the Canadian return. OIC. So the $10K or whatever it is I deduct - I don’t remember what the number was this year, we did our taxes weeks ago - is different in that I take it even while taking other deductions, whereas a US taxpayer takes that OR takes other deductions, whichever better suits them? ---
**Author:** ![CookingWithGas](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cookingwithgas/32/485_2.png) [@CookingWithGas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CookingWithGas)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2009, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-tax-policy-and-the-marriage-penalty/491089/34 "2009-03-31T15:36:31Z")
> [@amarinth](#): > > **Cooking With Gas** , here’s the problem - we have the following 5 families Well put. This does bring it into focus. I guess a lot of it boils down to “the government extracts as much taxes as it can from everybody regardless of any doctrine of ‘fairness.’” It takes over a third of the income from the wealthiest Americans because it can, and because nobody feels very sorry for the wealthiest 0.1% of the population. Someone who is supporting a spouse pays less taxes that a single person at the same salary. You can state this two ways, depending on your bias: 1. The government should not penalize people who choose to get married. Marriage is a valued institution in our culture, and the government though its tax policy should not discourage it. But taxes are a bump under the rug–if you reduce them somewhere, you must increase them somewhere else. Thus: 1. The government should not require single people to subsidize the chosen lifestyle of people in single-earner families. ---
**Author:** ![flex727](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/258eb7/32.png) [@flex727](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flex727)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2009, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-tax-policy-and-the-marriage-penalty/491089/35 "2009-03-31T15:54:17Z")
> [@amarinth](#): > > In a progressive tax system, how do you tax all 5 of those families “fairly”? The way I would do it would be to have a single category for all income earners (no “single” vs "married), but allow married couples (and any other formal financial partnerships) to distribute the total household income and deductions between the individuals in any way they choose. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2009, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-tax-policy-and-the-marriage-penalty/491089/36 "2009-03-31T17:43:32Z")
> [@flex727](#): > > The way I would do it would be to have a single category for all income earners (no “single” vs "married), but allow married couples (and any other formal financial partnerships) to distribute the total household income and deductions between the individuals in any way they choose. That would be a fantastic benefit for married couples and would screw over singles incredibaly. ---
**Author:** ![amarinth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3be4f8/32.png) [@amarinth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amarinth)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2009, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-tax-policy-and-the-marriage-penalty/491089/37 "2009-04-03T17:58:27Z")
> [@flex727](#): > > The way I would do it would be to have a single category for all income earners (no “single” vs "married), but allow married couples (and any other formal financial partnerships) to distribute the total household income and deductions between the individuals in any way they choose. So in family 4, D1 distributes income to their spouse. And even though D1 & E make the same amount, E pays more. ---
**Author:** ![flex727](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/258eb7/32.png) [@flex727](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flex727)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2009, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-tax-policy-and-the-marriage-penalty/491089/38 "2009-04-03T18:19:31Z")
> [@amarinth](#): > > So in family 4, D1 distributes income to their spouse. And even though D1 & E make the same amount, E pays more. Yes. Preferential treatment of marriage by the government would be a whole 'nother debate. My solution retains both progressive taxation and favorable treatment of marriage while maximizing overall fairness. As has been stated upthread, you cannot have a perfectly fair system that includes both progressive taxation and recognition of marriage. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/u-s-tax-policy-and-the-marriage-penalty/491089.md?page=1)