Ethics & Religion
A Column by Michael J. McManus
 

Home
Page

For Current Column
See the Home Page

 

About the
Columnist

 

Search this
Site...

 

Column Archives
List of all columns 
2021
2020

2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012

2011

2010

2009
2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

For 2003 and earlier
only the title is listed.
Use the Search Function
to find the article.

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

 

About The
Columnist

 

Email
Comments
to Mike

February 12, 2000
Column #963

MARRIAGE TAX PENALTY COULD BE REMOVED

     There is a real chance that the marriage tax penalty will be removed from the law this year.

     For the first time ever, President Clinton proposed in his State of the Union ''to reduce the marriage penalty, to make sure it rewards marriage.'' Rep. David McIntosh, R-Ind., who has long sponsored a bill to remove the extra tax on two earner couples, said, 'I'm glad he mentioned it in the State of the Union. Now all acknowledge the Democratic Administration and conservatives that we need to do something.''

     Second, the House is expected to pass a $182 billion reform this week that will provide relief to all married couples. The bill is about four times as generous as the $45 billion proposal of the President, whose limited benefits are targeted at marriages where both parties work. House Republicans are gambling that the President would find it difficult to veto a larger popular bill.

     In the current tax code, the marriage penalty taxes the income of a married couple at a much higher rate than that of a cohabiting couple. As the Family Research Council has noted, ''If a married couple with one income or two makes the same income as two singles, the married couple will likely be paying higher taxes simply for being married.''

     Tax law has thus been one of the engines driving down marriage rates by 41 percent since 1960 and helping spark a ten-fold increase in the number of cohabiting couples.

     For these reasons 85 percent of Americans believe the marriage tax penalty is unfair and 61 percent think it is very unfair, according to a poll by Wirthin Worldwide.

     ''The current tax code punishes millions of couples by pushing them into higher tax brackets,'' says Rep. Bill Thomas, R-Cal. ''This unfair system must be changed, and we have the solution.'' If two teachers each earn $25,000 and are single, they pay 15 percent of taxable income as tax. If they marry, more than $6,000 of their income is taxed at 28 percent.

     The House bill eliminates that differential by the year 2008, so a married couple would pay the same tax as a cohabiting couple. The President's proposal doesn't touch this tax penalty.

     Another marriage tax penalty is in the standard deduction. Married couples get $7,350, $1,450 less than double the $4,400 standard deduction for singles. Clinton's proposal would raise the standard deduction to equal that of a cohabiting couple, but it would only be given to couples with both spouses working. For couples where the wife is at home, taking care of children, the standard deduction only rises $500, a quarter of what employed women would get..

     By contrast, the House bill closes the gap immediately, and it applies equally to stay-at-home moms as well as working wives. This tax reform will make it more possible for millions of women to be full-time mothers while their children are small. It can give a long-needed shot in the arm to families with kids. Sadly, the Clinton proposal values employed women four times more than those who pour their lives into their children. It will induce more mothers to work.

     What does this have to do with faith?

     Dr. Richard Land, head of the Southern Baptist's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, says, ''One of the oldest truisms in politics is that which you tax, you will get less of; and that which you subsidize, you get more of. To tax people, to penalize them for being married is courting instability in our society and in the lives of children.

     ''As I read the Bible, there are only three divinely ordained institutions in society the family, the church, and the civil magistrate. For the civil magistrate to penalize people for getting married in how they pay their taxes is counter-productive and unfair.''

     He noted that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich never seemed to understand the importance of the issue. While he understood the importance of having social conservatives as part of his coalition, when bargaining time came, issues like the marriage penalty were bargained away. ''He was not a social conservative, but a libertarian conservative.'' Indeed, he is on his third wife.

     Can the nation afford a $182 billion tax cut? It is only a tenth of the projected non-Social Security surplus of $1.8 trillion according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office. Democrats as well as Republicans are expected to vote for the Marriage Tax Penalty Relief Act of 2000. The Senate is expected to pass the bill.

     But will the President sign it? Yes, if he meant what he said about having the tax structure ''reward marriage.''

Copyright 2000 Michael J. McManus.

  Since 1981...
2000+ Columns
  LATEST ARTICLE
  October 20, 2021: Column 2097: Blacks Must Consider Marriage
  Recent Columns
  Is Prayer Effective
  United Methodist Church Is Splitting
  How To Pay for Biden's Initiatives
  Newspapers Are Vanishing
  Texas Abortion Law - A Disaster
  U.S. Is Wise to Leave Afghanistan
  How To Mandate COVID-19 Vaccinations
  Leaving Afghanistan Is Devastating
  How To Increase Vaccinations
  The Need to End Catholic Priest Celibacy
  Build More Wind Farms
  More Lessons For Life
  Lessons For Life
  The Rich Should Pay More Tax
  Rebuilding Marriage in America
  40th Anniversary of My Column
  Richmond Columnist Wins Pulitzer Prize
  55 Corporations Pay No Tax
  How To Reduce Drunk Driving Deaths
  The Value of Couples Praying Together
  New Anti-Black Discrimination
  Reaching Age 80
  Do Not Leave Afghanistan
  Stop Executions for Murder
  A Case for Pro-Life
  End The Death Penalty?
  Christian Choices Matter
  The Biblical Sexual Standard
  The Addictive Nature of Pornography
  Abortion Becoming Illegal
  Protecting Girls from Suicide
  The Worst Valentine: Cohabitation
  Pornography: A Public Health Hazard
  Sextortion Kills Teens
  Cohabitation: A Risky Business
  Recent Searches
  gun control, euthanasia, cohabitation, sexting, sextortion, alcoholism, prayer, guns, same sex marriage, abortion, depression, islam, divorce, polygamy, religious liberty, health care, pornography, teen sex, abortion and infanticide, Roe+v+Wade, supreme court, marriage, movies, violence, celibacy, living+together, cohabitation, ethics+and+religion, pornography, adultery, divorce, saving+marriages
2021 Michael J. McManus syndicated columnist
Ethics & Religion at http://www.ethicsandreligion.com
Site Sponsored by enktesis.com