True, but then if she persists they will check the MFJ return for her signature and if you forged it, Bad Things will occur.
If there is no signature, they will reject your return.
Actually, DrDeth’s post was completely true.
I don’t believe there is a signature on electronically filed returns, so there are no forging issues?
So the only way for it to get rejected is if the MFJ was filed after the MFS form was processed by the one spouse?
The US tax code is designed to encourage people to get married, and have children, and so provides benefits to married couples. Likewise, the tax code is designed to frown upon married couples who decide to part ways. Whoever keeps custody of the children is viewed as the more responsible citizen, so they can file as HOH while the other files MFS, or they may both file HOH if each has custody of a child.
Also, as mentioned, the tax code is designed to discourage happily married couples from filing separate tax returns. Allowing married couples to file separately as Single wouldn’t discourage that.
Moreover, the IRS intends Married Filing Separately to be a bad filing status, Single a neutral filing status, and MFJ and HOH to be beneficial filing statuses. If your spouse owes debts to the IRS, you can file as an “injured spouse” to avoid having to file MFS.
*Topic 255 - Self-Select PIN Signature Method for Online Registration
If you e-file using online filing software, you must sign the tax return using the self-select PIN (personal identification number) signature method. The self-select PIN signature method allows taxpayers to electronically sign their individual income tax return by selecting a five-digit PIN. *
In any case, if two tax returns were filed for the same person, the second one will get frozen, but both will be questions. The system will assume the 2nd is a duplicate filing but when the separated souse sez “No, I didn’t file Joint with that sleazbag” , they will verify the MFJ return.
If it turns out you filed a return without her knowlege and consent, it’s a pretty serious crime.
I’d suggest you pay for a tax pro to look at it (get one of those “second look” services) before you send it in. MFS is an unusual case, so I’d be suspicious of bugs. I’ve had tax prep training in two states, and in both instances the instructor stated that they’d never seen a MFS reduce tax.
It can happen, but that tax status is designed for cases where either a spouse is unavailable under questionable circumstances (missing, estranged, imprisoned, or otherwise legally untrustworthy, etc.), and is not intended to ever be a benefit. It allows a spouse to file their return when they’re not sure what the other spouse will do --that’s pretty much all. To get a benefit out of it requires a very unusual set of circumstances, usually involving very high medical expenses and very unbalanced earnings for a childless couple.
(I am not a tax professional, this is not tax preparation advice).
I wonder if there is ever a case where the person who filed MFJ would NOT be the sleazbag.
TimeWinder: thanks. I haven’t filed yet and I plan to print everything out and look at it carefully first. If I can’t figure out why it changed, that’s good advice.
If you look at the tax tables, the income levels where tax rate increases for married filing jointly are exactly double what they are for married filing separately. As a result, the first $17,400 of combined income is taxed at the lowest rate (10%) if married filing jointly, but if married filing separately no more (but possibly less) than $17,400 of their combined income is taxed at the lowest rate. Similarly for the 2nd highest rate (15% to $70,700). Since the combined exemptions and deductions are likely to be the same for MFJ and MFS, and you can’t get the EIC when filing MFS, tax is very likely to lower for MFJ.
There are some cases where itemized deductions can be higher for MFS. For example, medical expenses greater than 7.5% of income are deductable, and MFS may allow a medical deduction that would not be permitted with MFJ because of too high a combined income. Before 2003 the combined standard deduction for two MFS was greater than for MFJ, but ever since it has been the same.
Before 1971, the tax rates schedules for married filing separately were the same as for single.
Why would state law affect federal tax liabilities?
Because the IRS says so - there’s even an entire publication (555) regarding community property
Huh. Thanks.
Yes, you definitely have to pay higher premiums for that liability.
There’s not always much logic behind law and tax, but the reasoning starts with the fact that community property states give each spouse a 50/50 share of community property income like wages. Since federal law says you pay tax on your earnings and the state says 50% of the spouse’s earnings are yours… there you go.
The logic has even been applied to domestic partnerships, but only in WA, CA and NV, because of specific provisions in those states’ community property and domestic partnership laws. They still file Single (because federal law refuses to recognize the RDP for an MFJ or MFS status), but they have to allocate income 50/50 using the MFS worksheet. Again, the same reasoning - the state says 50% of the income is yours, and federal law says you pay tax on all of your income.
Interesting. I hadn’t ever thought of your first two scenarios. So while it would cost more tax money in the short term, there are the other benefits (in the case of #1, a longer-term scenario to be sure).
We saved money by filing MFS - just once. They had just changed the law regarding deductible IRAs so that if you had a 401(k) or whatever, you couldn’t deduct an IRA (subject to income cutoffs etc. ). BUT - they didn’t close the loophole that if you filed separately, your spouse’s income wouldn’t cause you to be cut off.
My husband was in grad school and earned almost nothing. I had a real job, and was earning enough that we were past the cutoff. But by filing separately, he was able to put aside the IRA money and take the deduction. We crunched numbers both ways and we saved a couple hundred dollars by doing it separately. Admittedly, we were out more cash that way (because of the IRA deduction) but that was money into savings, so we didn’t lose the money.
To add to the discussion, I think same-sex domestic partners in Oregon have to file as MFS or have to make a dummy federal MFS for the state. I’m sorry I don’t know the details except that it makes people angry.
Drunkards do tend to run up debts. 
It’s a favorite trope for many, and apparently works like dynamite.