- Days left

Court's Marriage Ruling Could Save Same-Sex Couples Big Money

A same-sex marriage supporter waves a rainbow flag in front of the US Supreme Court on March 26, 2013 in Washington, DC, as the Court takes up the issue of gay marriage. The US Supreme Court on Tuesday heard arguments on the emotionally charged issue of gay marriage as it considers arguments that it should make history and extend equal rights to same-sex couples. Waving US and rainbow flags, hundreds of gay marriage supporters braved the cold to rally outside the court along with a smaller group of opponents, some pushing strollers. Some slept outside in hopes of witnessing the historic hearing. AFP PHOTO / Saul LOEB        (Photo credit should read SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images)
Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty ImagesA same-sex marriage supporter waves a rainbow flag in front of the US Supreme Court on March 26, 2013 in Washington, DC, as the Court takes up the issue of gay marriage. Waving US and rainbow flags, hundreds of gay marriage supporters braved the cold to rally outside the court along with a smaller group of opponents, some pushing strollers. Some slept outside in hopes of witnessing the historic hearing.
By Blake Ellis

Should the Supreme Court overturn a federal law that defines marriage as solely between a man and a woman, some married same-sex couples will save $8,000 or more in income tax, a new analysis finds.

This week, the court will hear a case challenging the Defense of Marriage Act, a 1996 law that prevents same-sex couples from receiving more than 1,000 federal benefits that opposite-sex married couples receive.

This includes the right to file federal taxes jointly -- which, depending on income, gives some married filers a "bonus" of thousands of dollars, while penalizing others.

A same-sex couple with combined income of $100,000, in which one person earns $70,000 and the other makes $30,000, currently pays an extra $1,625 a year by filing separately rather than jointly, according to an analysis H&R Block conducted for CNNMoney. The calculations assume a standard deduction, no children and no tax credits.

The extra tax liability jumps to nearly $8,000 when one spouse earns all $100,000 and the other reports no income. In this case, couples filing jointly owe tax of $11,858, while a same-sex couple filing separately owes $19,585 -- a 65 percent difference.

Cutting Tax Liability in Half

"[There's] a myth that any time married people file jointly they are worse off than filing singly, and that's just not correct at all -- sometimes they get a marriage bonus," said Jackie Perlman, a principal analyst at H&R Block Inc. (HRB).

That's because filing jointly merges the two incomes, shifting some of the higher-earning spouse's income into a lower tax bracket. In some scenarios, couples would even cut their tax bills in half by filing jointly -- typically when incomes are low, Perlman said.

As the gap between incomes shrinks, however, the difference in tax liability is less pronounced. In H&R Block's scenario, no extra tax is owed when each spouse earns an income of $50,000 and they file jointly instead of individually.

Other couples would end up owing more by filing jointly, especially if they miss out on deductions or credits like the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit because, when combined, their income is no longer low enough to qualify or receive the full benefit.


Another major tax issue at stake in the DOMA case is the estate tax. Currently, surviving spouses in federally-recognized marriages don't have to pay taxes on their deceased spouse's estate, while same-sex widows pay a 35 percent estate tax on anything in excess of a $5 million exemption.

The case challenging DOMA was filed by New Yorker Edith Windsor, who sued to get back the $363,000 in estate taxes she paid when her partner of more than 40 years died.

Her arguments are being presented on Wednesday. Meanwhile, opposition to the law is growing -- with the Obama Administration, a coalition of big businesses and even a group of prominent Republicans all signing legal briefs in support of gay marriage.

If the court decides to overturn DOMA, it could significantly impact the financial lives of same-sex couples married at the state level. But it's up in the air whether federal benefits would be extended to domestic partnerships and civil unions. Currently, same-sex marriage is legal in nine states and Washington, D.C.

'Small Price to Pay'

In addition to not being able to file jointly and owing extra estate tax in certain cases, many same-sex couples owe tax on medical benefits received through a partner's employer-sponsored health insurance plan, are denied thousands of dollars in spousal Social Security benefits or don't qualify for survivors benefits if a spouse or partner passes away.

Mikey Rox and Earl Morrow, from New York City, would boost their refund by nearly $2,000 a year by filing jointly. And the $2,500 in tax they currently pay on the health insurance benefits Mikey receives from Earl's plan would vanish.

Some couples could even get refunded for the extra tax they paid in the past three years as well, if they file protective refund claims with the IRS and amend their returns to file jointly. Adele and Jennifer Hoppe-House, from Los Angeles, expect to get more than $13,000 back by doing this if DOMA is struck down.

Even for those who would owe more tax if they were allowed to file jointly, the extra money is often a small price to pay to see DOMA overturned.

"I'm sure more people are going to get financial wins than losses, whether it's taxes or Social Security," said Nanette Miller, head of the LGBT practice at accounting firm Marcum LLP. "But it's not just an economic issue -- it's that they want that equality."

More from CNNMoney

Increase your money and finance knowledge from home

Managing your Portfolio

Keeping your portfolio and financial life fit!

View Course »

How Financial Planners go Grocery Shopping

Learn to shop smart and save.

View Course »

TurboTax Articles

Tax Tips for the Blind

Anyone whose field of vision falls at or below 20 degrees, who wears corrective glasses but whose vision is 20/200 or less in his best eye, or who has no eyesight at all, meets the legal definition of being blind and is eligible for certain tax deductions.

What is Form 4255: Recapture of Investment Credit?

When is a tax credit not a tax credit? When the IRS takes it back. If you're in the situation where you have to file IRS Form 4255, you might have to pay back a tax credit you've earned in prior years. This process, known as recapture, occurs if you claim a credit -- in this case, a credit for a specific type of business investment -- and then no longer qualify for that credit.

The Most Important Tax Forms for ALEs (Applicable Large Employers)

In 2015, some parts of the Affordable Care Act specifically apply to businesses, in particular, large employers. The Employer Shared Responsibility provisions affect companies with 50 or more full-time employees or an equivalent of part-time or seasonal workers. These companies are called Applicable Large Employers, or ALEs. 2015 is considered a transition year as everyone gets used to the new normal for workplace health plans.

Employer Sponsored Health Coverage Explained

The Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, is simpler than some people may give it credit for. The basic rule to remember is that everyone must carry Minimum Essential Coverage (MEC) or pay a penalty. Employers with 50 full-time employees or more are obligated to sponsor plans for their workers to help them meet this requirement.

How to Report RSUs or Stock Grants on Your Tax Return

Restricted stock units (RSUs) and stock grants are often used by companies to reward their employees with an investment in the company rather than with cash. As the name implies, RSUs have rules as to when they can be sold. Stock grants often carry restrictions as well. How your stock grant is delivered to you, and whether or not it is vested, are the key factors when determining tax treatment.

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum

5 Comments

Filter by:
petpetdon

The tax laws would need to be changed. The divorce laws would need to be changed. The mos really don't know what they are getting themselves into. Most of them don't want a committed relationship anyway. They are too busy, getting busy in the gay bars. With 10% of the population being gay the minority should never get what they think they want.

March 26 2013 at 3:20 PM Report abuse +2 rate up rate down Reply
2 replies to petpetdon's comment
clarita995

2 things-
we have minority rule
and the will of the people/they voted HOW MANY TIMES IN CALI ??? simply gets OVERTURNED by their judge--

so NOW if even ONE INDIVIDUAL doesn't LIKE SOMETHING--get a judge to change the LAWS
which in itself IS AND REMAINS UNCONSTITUTIONAL as the judicial branch is NOT THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH......but this IS HOW IT GETS DONE.

March 26 2013 at 3:36 PM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
steveham13

ARE...YOU...FRIGGIN'...SERIOUS???

March 26 2013 at 5:21 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
rforeverfree

and this is what all the pleas for 'equality" are about, the buck.

March 26 2013 at 2:33 PM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to rforeverfree's comment
petpetdon

You are correct. It isn't about love or marriage. They just don't want to pay their fair share of their income taxes. They want their cake and to eat it too. In the land of the free and the home of the brave, THEY ARE NEITHER.

March 26 2013 at 3:22 PM Report abuse +2 rate up rate down Reply