April 16, 201214 yr So then I am correct. It is okay for wealthy to stay home, but not poor ones. Just asking. "I know you are but what am I?" . . . You know this is the first time that I have ever typed UKMustangFan in a post. The only time I ever remember being the least bit personal with anyone was about section 8 about three years ago, yet you guys make it that way every time. Can't just answer the darn question? Ironic isn't it.
April 16, 201214 yr Deduction? It is commonly (and correctly) called the marriage tax penalty. The states and fed tax married individuals more than if they are married since supposedly they combine their income. It is basically an extra tax for the status of being married. Somewhat like discriminating against those that are 'married'. Queue the Beatles 'Tax Man'... NO, NO and NO. The marriage penalty is not a penalty for stay at home spouses. When filing a joint return, married couples where both have income pay at the rate for their combined incomes. As an example, two single individuals making $50,000 each would llikely have a lower tax liability than a married couple with a combined $100,000 income. If they are unmarried and one has $100,000 in income and the other has zero income, their tax liability would likely be higher by being single rather than married.
April 17, 201214 yr NO, NO and NO. The marriage penalty is not a penalty for stay at home spouses. When filing a joint return, married couples where both have income pay at the rate for their combined incomes. As an example, two single individuals making $50,000 each would llikely have a lower tax liability than a married couple with a combined $100,000 income. If they are unmarried and one has $100,000 in income and the other has zero income, their tax liability would likely be higher by being single rather than married. Sorry its different. Create a returns as 'married filing separately' and 'single' with the same revenue. Trust me - they will not come out the same and 'married filing separately' will be on the short end.
April 17, 201214 yr Sorry its different. Create a returns as 'married filing separately' and 'single' with the same revenue. Trust me - they will not come out the same and 'married filing separately' will be on the short end. That has nothing to do with the marriage penalty.
April 17, 201214 yr Never understood why anyone that was married would file separately; unless you're pretty sure that your spouse is a tax cheat and you don't want to assume any of that liability by filing jointly. Just don't check the box.
April 17, 201214 yr Never understood why anyone that was married would file separately; unless you're pretty sure that your spouse is a tax cheat and you don't want to assume any of that liability by filing jointly. Just don't check the box. Usually claimed when one spouse wants protection against the other's circumstances. Back taxes or child support for instance. Can also result in being able to claim some schedule A deductions that would otherwise be lost.
April 17, 201214 yr Leatherneck, this class warfare you project onto the Obama campaign is a double edged sword to play with. The opposition does nothing to help their own position by attacking policies with obstructionism and never putting forth viable alternatives, and by refusing to acknowledge that outside the insular wealthy circle, average Americans do not benefit from the status quo. I guess I would be interested in what you consider "average" and "not-benefitting". Of course the "status-quo" isn't what it was a few years ago, but there are enormous numbers of people in this country that came up from average and below and are doing quite well. Our standard of living on the average is far superior to any other country especially for the "average person". I don't buy that thinking. However, it is that thinking during the last elections that created this imaginary "mandate for change" which has proven to be a lot of slop.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.