Gay Marriage Increases Federal Tax Headaches

Federal Tax Headaches

Federal Tax Headaches

The advent of a new era in our nation’s history brings with it more than gay marriage acceptance; we are witnessing the dawn of a new era of federal tax headaches.  Tax law for same-sex married couples is more complicated than that of their heterosexual counterparts, creating a need for consultation that was not needed before marriage.  Couples in this situation may find taking their taxes to an institution to be beneficial, especially considering many of them offer free federal tax filing.

Due to the 1996 Defense of Marriage ACT (DOMA), same sex marriages cannot be recognized at a federal level despite the fact that at a state level the tax rules differ quite a bit.  Gay marriage is not recognized federal tax forms so gay and lesbian spouses cannot file their taxes jointly.  Ken Weissenberg, a partner at EisnerAmper in New York says, “The nightmare of compliance is difficult and the cost of compliance will be at least double, and I think you face a greater risk of audit.”

Gay marriage tax-time difficulties affect more than 130,000 couples around the country.  The process changes depending on many factors, including wealth and whether or not there are children. Couples may want to consider taking advantage of the free federal tax filing offers from various companies.  They can then be sure of professional, accurate filing, with the greatest returns.

Chris Christie and Taxes At 10% Realistic Or Rediculous

Tax Act

A ten percent income tax for every citizen in New Jersey is Governor Chris Christie‘s plan. His belief is that to change the present economic crisis requires a radical approach to income taxes. A fiscal conservative he proposing to cut the state’s spending at the same time he is promoting income tax cuts.

Christie views himself as an economic visionary who is willing to take tough actions to pull his state out of its economic quagmire. His speaking engagements on radio, television, and at town hall meetings make him appear as a current Republican candidate for president, but his goal is the 2016 election. He is confident his plan will work for New Jersey and the Nation. In California, Illinois, and New York, Democratic governors are taking an opposite approach to his plan. They are raising taxes for all citizens and making sure the upper-class proportionally pay an equal share of their taxes. These Democratic governors want to lower the deficits in their states. Borrowing on empty bank accounts will only create more debt. States cannot be competitive if their economic standing is low and they have no money for their states infrastructure and basic needs.

Tax policies, which put on increased burden a state’s ability to be economically solvent are seen by many leaders as unrealistic. His plan which borrows from a bankrupt account may not be what New Jersey needs. His plan is radical, but similar to elective surgery the people of his state may want a second opinion.