Less than a month to go before taxes are due. I got my return on its way yesterday, once again asking myself why some folks' fair share seems fairer than others.
My expertise in this arena is limited to my experience
paying taxes as an individual wage earner (single, then married, now single
again) and, for a time, as a small business owner. So, I’m coming at this as a
layperson operating strictly off 2011 IRS tax tables, without the creativity available to wealthy persons
assisted by tax attorneys.
Still, why should married persons qualify for lower tax
rates?
High to low, here’s the hierarchy: married filing
separately; single; head of household; married filing jointly. Hmm.
Having your wedding cake and eating it, too.
Married persons filing separately pay the highest rates, presumably
as a gamer’s penalty for working the system to pay less and
adding unnecessarily to the stack of returns in need of processing.
That said, the difference doesn’t amount to much until you get into six figures.
Here’s an example for Chris, married filing separately, and
Carol who is single.
· At an arbitrary taxable income (IRS line 43) of
$40,583, the table says Chris pays $6,269—$25 more than Carol who pays $6,244.
·
Up the income ladder, with taxable income of
$121,748 Chris pays $28,904—$1,198 more than Carol who pays $27, 706. And the
spread widens as earnings rise further.
I get all that. But check this out.
Marriage tax discount: why?
Married persons filing jointly—whether or not they have
children—pay less than a single parent with children filing as head of
household. Here’s the math using the same two arbitrary taxable incomes as
above for Sara, single parent of Adam, and Chris and Christa, married and
child-free.
· With
$40,583 on line 43, Sarah supporting her son Adam pays $5,479—$243 more than Chris and Christa who pay $5,236
· With
$121,748 on line 43, Sarah pays $25,275—$2,588 more than Chris and Christa who pay $22,687.
Does this make any sense to you?
No comments:
Post a Comment