Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (916)	7/12/1999 11:39:00 AM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Bill there is already an option for married file separately. The problem is by repealing the marriage tax "penalty" (which is not really a penalty, imo) you actually end up crediting those with only one working spouse, and those are the wealthier families in many cases. So its another tax credit for the wealthy while at the same time more social engineering to support the 50s ideal nuclear family (which was hardly ideal), one breadwinner etc.

To: Bill who wrote (916)	7/12/1999 2:14:00 PM
From: Les H	Respond to of 769670

If both couples own a home and maintain a mortgage, the tax on the married's filing jointly would probably be reduced by a greater amount. There's $ 60,000 of income against which to deduct at a higher tax rate the mortgage interest, property taxes, etc. They can also pool other deductions, such as medical, job-related, charitable, etc. in order to more easily meet the 2% floor on miscellanous deductions. The married's filing jointly also get cheaper health insurance since one spouse can often piggyback on the other's. There are many other costs reduced by the formalization of the union.