IRS recognizes same-sex mariages in all states

[oldfart]

I should be cranking out amended returns next week!

Treasury and IRS Announce That All Legal Same-Sex Marriages Will Be Recognized For Federal Tax Purposes; Ruling Provides Certainty, Benefits and Protections Under Federal Tax Law for Same-Sex Married Couples
IR-2013-72, Aug. 29, 2013
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) today ruled that same-sex couples, legally married in jurisdictions that recognize their marriages, will be treated as married for federal tax purposes. The ruling applies regardless of whether the couple lives in a jurisdiction that recognizes same-sex marriage or a jurisdiction that does not recognize same-sex marriage.
The ruling implements federal tax aspects of the June 26 Supreme Court decision invalidating a key provision of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.
Under the ruling, same-sex couples will be treated as married for all federal tax purposes, including income and gift and estate taxes. The ruling applies to all federal tax provisions where marriage is a factor, including filing status, claiming personal and dependency exemptions, taking the standard deduction, employee benefits, contributing to an IRA and claiming the earned income tax credit or child tax credit.
Any same-sex marriage legally entered into in one of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, a U.S. territory or a foreign country will be covered by the ruling. However, the ruling does not apply to registered domestic partnerships, civil unions or similar formal relationships recognized under state law.
Legally-married same-sex couples generally must file their 2013 federal income tax return using either the married filing jointly or married filing separately filing status.
Individuals who were in same-sex marriages may, but are not required to, file original or amended returns choosing to be treated as married for federal tax purposes for one or more prior tax years still open under the statute of limitations.
Generally, the statute of limitations for filing a refund claim is three years from the date the return was filed or two years from the date the tax was paid, whichever is later. As a result, refund claims can still be filed for tax years 2010, 2011 and 2012. Some taxpayers may have special circumstances, such as signing an agreement with the IRS to keep the statute of limitations open, that permit them to file refund claims for tax years 2009 and earlier.
Additionally, employees who purchased same-sex spouse health insurance coverage from their employers on an after-tax basis may treat the amounts paid for that coverage as pre-tax and excludable from income.
How to File a Claim for Refund
Taxpayers who wish to file a refund claim for income taxes should use Form 1040X, Amended U.S. Individual Income Tax Return.
Taxpayers who wish to file a refund claim for gift or estate taxes should file Form 843, Claim for Refund and Request for Abatement. For information on filing an amended return, see Tax Topic 308, Amended Returns, available on IRS.gov, or the Instructions to Forms 1040X and 843. Information on where to file your amended returns is available in the instructions to the form.
Future Guidance
Treasury and the IRS intend to issue streamlined procedures for employers who wish to file refund claims for payroll taxes paid on previously-taxed health insurance and fringe benefits provided to same-sex spouses. Treasury and IRS also intend to issue further guidance on cafeteria plans and on how qualified retirement plans and other tax-favored arrangements should treat same-sex spouses for periods before the effective date of this Revenue Ruling.
Other agencies may provide guidance on other federal programs that they administer that are affected by the Code.
Revenue Ruling 2013-17, along with updated Frequently Asked Questions for same-sex couples and updated FAQs for registered domestic partners and individuals in civil unions, are available today on IRS.gov. See also Publication 555, Community Property.
Treasury and the IRS will begin applying the terms of Revenue Ruling 2013-17 on Sept. 16, 2013, but taxpayers who wish to rely on the terms of the Revenue Ruling for earlier periods may choose to do so, as long as the statute of limitations for the earlier period has not expired.

 

[Moonglow]

so?

 

[bravoactual]

It is about time. I know the RW's will be having full hissy fits, but so the frack what.

 

[Katzndogz]

The IRS recognizes the tax obligations of illegal aliens. The IRS recognizes the proceeds of drug deals as taxable income. The IRS recognizes the proceeds of prostitution as taxable income.

This doesn't mean that same sex marriage has any more legality or legitimacy now than it did before. It means that the IRS has a reason to increase the tax burden on couples who consider themselves married.

 

[bodecea]

I should be cranking out amended returns next week!

Treasury and IRS Announce That All Legal Same-Sex Marriages Will Be Recognized For Federal Tax Purposes; Ruling Provides Certainty, Benefits and Protections Under Federal Tax Law for Same-Sex Married Couples
IR-2013-72, Aug. 29, 2013
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) today ruled that same-sex couples, legally married in jurisdictions that recognize their marriages, will be treated as married for federal tax purposes. The ruling applies regardless of whether the couple lives in a jurisdiction that recognizes same-sex marriage or a jurisdiction that does not recognize same-sex marriage.
The ruling implements federal tax aspects of the June 26 Supreme Court decision invalidating a key provision of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.
Under the ruling, same-sex couples will be treated as married for all federal tax purposes, including income and gift and estate taxes. The ruling applies to all federal tax provisions where marriage is a factor, including filing status, claiming personal and dependency exemptions, taking the standard deduction, employee benefits, contributing to an IRA and claiming the earned income tax credit or child tax credit.
Any same-sex marriage legally entered into in one of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, a U.S. territory or a foreign country will be covered by the ruling. However, the ruling does not apply to registered domestic partnerships, civil unions or similar formal relationships recognized under state law.
Legally-married same-sex couples generally must file their 2013 federal income tax return using either the married filing jointly or married filing separately filing status.
Individuals who were in same-sex marriages may, but are not required to, file original or amended returns choosing to be treated as married for federal tax purposes for one or more prior tax years still open under the statute of limitations.
Generally, the statute of limitations for filing a refund claim is three years from the date the return was filed or two years from the date the tax was paid, whichever is later. As a result, refund claims can still be filed for tax years 2010, 2011 and 2012. Some taxpayers may have special circumstances, such as signing an agreement with the IRS to keep the statute of limitations open, that permit them to file refund claims for tax years 2009 and earlier.
Additionally, employees who purchased same-sex spouse health insurance coverage from their employers on an after-tax basis may treat the amounts paid for that coverage as pre-tax and excludable from income.
How to File a Claim for Refund
Taxpayers who wish to file a refund claim for income taxes should use Form 1040X, Amended U.S. Individual Income Tax Return.
Taxpayers who wish to file a refund claim for gift or estate taxes should file Form 843, Claim for Refund and Request for Abatement. For information on filing an amended return, see Tax Topic 308, Amended Returns, available on IRS.gov, or the Instructions to Forms 1040X and 843. Information on where to file your amended returns is available in the instructions to the form.
Future Guidance
Treasury and the IRS intend to issue streamlined procedures for employers who wish to file refund claims for payroll taxes paid on previously-taxed health insurance and fringe benefits provided to same-sex spouses. Treasury and IRS also intend to issue further guidance on cafeteria plans and on how qualified retirement plans and other tax-favored arrangements should treat same-sex spouses for periods before the effective date of this Revenue Ruling.
Other agencies may provide guidance on other federal programs that they administer that are affected by the Code.
Revenue Ruling 2013-17, along with updated Frequently Asked Questions for same-sex couples and updated FAQs for registered domestic partners and individuals in civil unions, are available today on IRS.gov. See also Publication 555, Community Property.
Treasury and the IRS will begin applying the terms of Revenue Ruling 2013-17 on Sept. 16, 2013, but taxpayers who wish to rely on the terms of the Revenue Ruling for earlier periods may choose to do so, as long as the statute of limitations for the earlier period has not expired.

Our CPA is working on it right now. Should help. The military doesn't take state taxes out of her Retirement check (have tried several times to amend that...but you know the federal red tape)...and that usually bites her in the butt come tax time.....while I get refunds. Should help us immensely.

 

[NightFox]

IRS recognizes same-sex mariages in all states

About time, the federal government never had any constitutional authority to determine what is and what is not legal marriage anyways.

 

[rightwinger]

This could be the beginning of the end for same sex marriage opponents

It opens up gay marriage in every state

 

[Katzndogz]

IRS recognizes same-sex mariages in all states

About time, the federal government never had any constitutional authority to determine what is and what is not legal marriage anyways.

They never did. In states that recognize common law marriage one of the criteria used to establish common law marriage is that the unmarried parties filed joint tax returns as man and wife.

 

[martybegan]

This could be the beginning of the end for same sex marriage opponents

It opens up gay marriage in every state

Not really, because it only recognizes marriages as defined by the states.

 

[NightFox]

This could be the beginning of the end for same sex marriage opponents

It opens up gay marriage in every state

Naw, still have to get past the voters in a lot of states to legalize same sex marriage, which IMHO would be a lot easier in a number of states if those that want it legalized would call it something other than "marriage", like civil unions or something. It's subjective of course but I run into a lot of people that support same sex couples having all the same privileges and responsibilities of traditional married couples but object to redefining the word marriage, it's all about how you word it on the ballot measures.

 

[rightwinger]

This could be the beginning of the end for same sex marriage opponents

It opens up gay marriage in every state

Not really, because it only recognizes marriages as defined by the states.

What it does:

Opens up a finacial incentive for all gays to get married regardless of the state they live in
Creates a class of married gays in every state
Creates legal gray areas where federal benefits and state benefits interact or conflict

 

[WorldWatcher]

This doesn't mean that same sex marriage has any more legality or legitimacy now than it did before.

Actually in those states where same-sex Civil Marriages are legal, it is a recognition of the legality of the marriage and the legitimacy. Remember the majority of States that now recognize same-sex Civil Marriage have done so either through legislative passage or by the people voting to approve it.

It means that the IRS has a reason to increase the tax burden on couples who consider themselves married.

In many of these cases the couples will be in a position to actually keep more of their money instead of sending it to the government through

1. Simplified tax preparation.

2. Transfer of property between spouses without tax consequences.

3. Estate tax exemptions.

4. And a biggy for many, they will no longer be taxed on employer provided health insurance premiums which prior to the striking of DOMA section 3 meant that the employee had such employer compensation treated as taxable income where a different-sex couple did not.



>>>>

 

[Katzndogz]

The IRS will use anything that will get more money going to the government.

Same-sex couples: Beware the marriage penalty - Jun. 27, 2013

For some couples, that new right will be costly. Many same-sex couples who file jointly will have to pay the so-called marriage penalty, taxes they wouldn't have to pay if they were considered single.

Brian Esser and Kevin O'Leary, from New York City, estimate they will owe an additional $5,000 in income tax by filing their tax returns jointly. They both work full-time and earn similar incomes -- Esser as a lawyer at Baker Hostetler and O'Leary as a senior writer for Us Weekly -- so combining incomes will place them in a higher tax bracket.

If both parties are low income wage earners, they might see some kind of benefit providing they stay poor.

 

[oldfart]

Our CPA is working on it right now. Should help. The military doesn't take state taxes out of her Retirement check (have tried several times to amend that...but you know the federal red tape)...and that usually bites her in the butt come tax time.....while I get refunds. Should help us immensely.

Great! But income tax is the tail on the dog. Most couples are about as well off if they can file as unmarried (which is not an option beginning with 2013 returns). The biggest tax issue this simplifies is earned income credit and child tax credit where one spouse has the income and the other is a stay-home parent and the natural parent of the children.

The big benefit of the DOMA ruling is the myriad of rights which now will not have to be parsed to see who they apply to.

 

[oldfart]

This could be the beginning of the end for same sex marriage opponents

It opens up gay marriage in every state

Naw, still have to get past the voters in a lot of states to legalize same sex marriage, which IMHO would be a lot easier in a number of states if those that want it legalized would call it something other than "marriage", like civil unions or something. It's subjective of course but I run into a lot of people that support same sex couples having all the same privileges and responsibilities of traditional married couples but object to redefining the word marriage, it's all about how you word it on the ballot measures.

Check the IRS Information Release again. It does not apply to civil unions or registered partnerships. But it does apply to anyone who is legally married in another jurisdiction who moves to a state that does not recognize such marriages. A same-sex couple married in Massachussetts who move to Georgia will file a married joint return for their 2013 federal income tax.

 

[NightFox]

This could be the beginning of the end for same sex marriage opponents

It opens up gay marriage in every state

Naw, still have to get past the voters in a lot of states to legalize same sex marriage, which IMHO would be a lot easier in a number of states if those that want it legalized would call it something other than "marriage", like civil unions or something. It's subjective of course but I run into a lot of people that support same sex couples having all the same privileges and responsibilities of traditional married couples but object to redefining the word marriage, it's all about how you word it on the ballot measures.

Check the IRS Information Release again. It does not apply to civil unions or registered partnerships. But it does apply to anyone who is legally married in another jurisdiction who moves to a state that does not recognize such marriages. A same-sex couple married in Massachussetts who move to Georgia will file a married joint return for their 2013 federal income tax.

What I'm suggesting is to call it something else but give it the same exact legal status in the state in which it takes place as traditional marriage so that those that want it expanded into additional states don't have to fight an uphill battle against people that would vote "YES" on it if it wasn't a redefinition of the word "marriage". Getting the tax code adjusted to include whatever verbiage XYZ state chooses to use isn't the main challenge involved in getting more states to recognize same sex "marriage" as legal.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Naw, still have to get past the voters in a lot of states to legalize same sex marriage, which IMHO would be a lot easier in a number of states if those that want it legalized would call it something other than "marriage", like civil unions or something. It's subjective of course but I run into a lot of people that support same sex couples having all the same privileges and responsibilities of traditional married couples but object to redefining the word marriage, it's all about how you word it on the ballot measures.

Check the IRS Information Release again. It does not apply to civil unions or registered partnerships. But it does apply to anyone who is legally married in another jurisdiction who moves to a state that does not recognize such marriages. A same-sex couple married in Massachussetts who move to Georgia will file a married joint return for their 2013 federal income tax.

What I'm suggesting is to call it something else but give it the same exact legal status in the state in which it takes place as traditional marriage so that those that want it expanded into additional states don't have to fight an uphill battle against people that would vote "YES" on it if it wasn't a redefinition of the word "marriage". Getting the tax code adjusted to include whatever verbiage XYZ state chooses to use isn't the main challenge involved in getting more states to recognize same sex "marriage" as legal.

"Separate but equal" terms isn't that bad an idea as a transition, but over time all State governments and the people will be referring to it as "marriage" anyway.



>>>>

 

[NightFox]

Check the IRS Information Release again. It does not apply to civil unions or registered partnerships. But it does apply to anyone who is legally married in another jurisdiction who moves to a state that does not recognize such marriages. A same-sex couple married in Massachussetts who move to Georgia will file a married joint return for their 2013 federal income tax.

What I'm suggesting is to call it something else but give it the same exact legal status in the state in which it takes place as traditional marriage so that those that want it expanded into additional states don't have to fight an uphill battle against people that would vote "YES" on it if it wasn't a redefinition of the word "marriage". Getting the tax code adjusted to include whatever verbiage XYZ state chooses to use isn't the main challenge involved in getting more states to recognize same sex "marriage" as legal.

"Separate but equal" terms isn't that bad an idea as a transition, but over time all State governments and the people will be referring to it as "marriage" anyway.



>>>>

Just to be clear using the word "marriage" doesn't bother me personally in the least bit, however I do understand where more traditional people are coming from when they say that it bothers them and given that the opinions of those citizens does matter when it comes to the redefinition of a traditional institution, I think it's both fair and (for those that want to achieve expansion of legal status) politically expedient.

I think you're exactly right though, this is just a step along the way to achieving complete equality in both practice and name before the law in all states.

 

[BDBoop]

Naw, still have to get past the voters in a lot of states to legalize same sex marriage, which IMHO would be a lot easier in a number of states if those that want it legalized would call it something other than "marriage", like civil unions or something. It's subjective of course but I run into a lot of people that support same sex couples having all the same privileges and responsibilities of traditional married couples but object to redefining the word marriage, it's all about how you word it on the ballot measures.

Check the IRS Information Release again. It does not apply to civil unions or registered partnerships. But it does apply to anyone who is legally married in another jurisdiction who moves to a state that does not recognize such marriages. A same-sex couple married in Massachussetts who move to Georgia will file a married joint return for their 2013 federal income tax.

What I'm suggesting is to call it something else but give it the same exact legal status in the state in which it takes place as traditional marriage so that those that want it expanded into additional states don't have to fight an uphill battle against people that would vote "YES" on it if it wasn't a redefinition of the word "marriage". Getting the tax code adjusted to include whatever verbiage XYZ state chooses to use isn't the main challenge involved in getting more states to recognize same sex "marriage" as legal.

Like 'separate but equal,' you mean?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Not all states just those with low moral values