AtMP believes that individuals' incomes should be taxed without regard to their marital status. People should be free to choose whether to marry without having to calculate if marrying will make their income taxes higher or lower. Child-centered tax policies should be separated from marital status so that all taxpayers who care for children will be treated equally.

AtMP urges the media, the public, and all policymakers to acknowledge that:

• the tax structure favors upper-income married provider-dependent households, a minority among American household types; and
• the tax system uses marital status to represent both economic unity and family, but in fact being married does not necessarily equate with economic unity, nor is being married the only way to be a family.

Two factors create inequalities between the amount of tax paid on the same total amount of income earned by a single person, two (or more) unmarried people, and a married couple. First, the current U.S. income tax structure is progressive: higher incomes are taxed at higher rates than lower incomes. Second, the current system assigns single and married taxpayers to different tax brackets (the income levels at which tax rates change): wider brackets allow married people to employ "income splitting".

Marriage bonuses can occur when only one spouse earns income and her/his income is taxed as though it is split between both spouses, or when a high-income spouse and a low-income spouse are taxed as though they both earn moderate incomes. In these scenarios a married couple's taxes are lower than they would be if the two people were unmarried and taxed individually.

To see how marriage bonuses are unfair to unmarried people, imagine two employees. Each earns the same salary. One is unmarried; the other has a spouse who is an unpaid caretaker or earns a very low income. The married employee pays lower taxes, ending up with more take-home pay than the unmarried employee.

According to a Treasury Department study, in 2004 nearly 30 million couples enjoyed marriage bonuses totaling $49 billion; their average bonus that year was $1,691.

Marriage penalties do exist, and the worst are suffered by low-income couples. When two low-income people marry, their combined income — though still modest by any standard — can disqualify them from benefiting from programs such as the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC). It is ironic that some welfare policies promote marriage for low-income families, while income tax policies and welfare benefit formulas penalize many low-income families for marrying. Marriage penalties also affect couples where both spouses earn significant incomes. They are taxed as though they represent one very-high-income taxpayer. In this scenario the total taxes are more than they would be if the two people were unmarried and taxed individually.

According to the Treasury Department study, in 2004 nearly 18 million couples suffered marriage penalties totaling $19.1 billion; their average penalty that year was $1,056.

While penalties do exist in the basic tax structure and in welfare policies, they probably do not affect the majority of tax filers. About 57% of people who file tax returns are in the 10% and 15% tax brackets, meaning their taxable incomes are between $7,550 - $30,650 for each single or between $15,100 - $61,300 for a married couple in 2006. In these brackets, a couple will not pay higher income taxes as a result of being married (unless marrying lowers their EITC).

In sum, bonuses benefit married couples with so-called ‘provider/dependent' marriages. Penalties hurt low-income couples, and well-off married couples with balanced incomes.

At AtMP, we want to see consistent policies that help all singles, couples (married and unmarried) and families thrive regardless of marital status, because supporting family diversity is good for society.

Special thanks to:
Jim Larson, an AtMP member who volunteered exhaustive research, editing and moral support to make these pages happen.
Dennis J. Ventry Jr., a professor at American University Washington College of Law, who provided extensive comments and background materials.

• Articles and links about marital status discrimination in taxation
• Federal studies and statements that quantify the extent to which married couples pay more or less under different taxation models

Articles and links about marital status discrimination in taxation

• Law professor Shari Motro’s op-eds argue that singles are subsidizing marriage even though marriage does not always create an economic unit or achieve social goals.
  • The IRS's Shotgun Marriage (PDF)
  • Single and Paying (PDF)
• Law professor Dennis J. Ventry, Jr.’s conference paper “The Politics and Economics of Gender Norms and Competing Family Forms under the U.S. Federal Income Tax, 1969-2006”.
• AtMP member Jim Larson’s website “Marriage Bonuses And Penalties”. It compares the taxes an unmarried couple pays with the taxes the same couple would pay if married, at several different levels of income. It links to an Excel spreadsheet that has additional tables and graphs.
• Thomas F. Coleman’s website describes the many ways singles are discriminated against by government and the private sector, including an explanation of income tax discrimination (as it stood before key changes were made in 2003).

Federal Studies and Statements that quantify the extent to which married couples pay more or less under different taxation models.

• 2006 EITC figures, “The Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC): An Overview,” by Christine Scott, CRS Report for Congress, Order Code RL31768 (January 10, 2007). http://law.gsu.edu/gcarey/fall06/EITC.pdf
• Quantitative data on the size of marriage penalties/bonuses, “Marriage Penalties and Bonuses: A Longer Term,” by Robert Gillette, Janet Holtzblatt, and Emily Y. Yin, Proceeding of the National Tax Association, 2004, Washington, DC, National Tax Association, pp. 468-478. As of March 2007 this report is not available online. If you find an online link for it, please tell us.
• 2004 figures from the Congressional Research Service, “Federal Income Tax Treatment of the Family”, by Jane G. Gravelle http://www.opencrs.net/rpts/RL33755_20061219.pdf.
  This December 2006 report also has a helpful discussion of the different ways tax policy can address equity, although it fails to recognize unmarried families.
• 1996 figures from the Congressional Budget Office: “For Better or Worse: Marriage and the Federal Income Tax” 3-4 (June, 1997). http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=7&sequence=0&from=1.
  This June 1997 report is a simulation of tax year 1996 and discusses the methodology in detail.
• 1999 figures from the Congressional Budget Office: “Updated Estimates of Marriage Penalties and Bonuses. Memorandum dated September 18, 1998”. http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/TaxFacts/papers/cbo_marriage_update.pdf
  This memorandum merely updates the main numbers in the above report. It simulates tax year 1999, even though it was written in 1998.
• 1999 figures from the Treasury Department: “Defining And Measuring Marriage Penalties And Bonuses” by Nicholas Bull Janet Holtzblatt, James R. Nunns, US Department of the Treasury, 1999. http://www.ustreas.gov/ota/ota82_revised.pdf
• Congressional Research Service analysis of CBO and Treasury Department studies: “RL30800: The Federal Income Tax and the Treatment of Married Couples: Background and Analysis”, Gregg A. Esenwein, Congressional Research Service, updated March 23, 2001. http://www.cnie.org/nle/crsreports/economics/econ-95.cfm
  This discusses the CBO’s 1999 figures and the Treasury’s 1999 study, and has a good discussion of the history of marriage and taxes. It explains how marriage bonuses and marriage penalties occur, and why it is impossible to eliminate them in a tax system (a) that allows married couples to file jointly, (b) where married couples with the same joint income are all taxed the same, and (c) that is progressive (higher incomes pay higher tax rates).
• May 2003 Treasury Department press release: http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/js410.htm.
  “Enacting marriage penalty relief in 2003 will reduce taxes for 34 million married couples by an average of $589”. This tax reduction for marrieds totals $20 Billion: (34 million x $589). These changes were enacted and made retroactive to Jan. 1, 2003. We are not aware of any publicly available study that documents this estimate.
• Statistics on number of tax filers by filing status in 2003: “Table 1.2--2003, Individual Income Tax, All Returns: Adjusted Gross Income, Exemptions, Deductions, and Tax Items, by Size of Adjusted Gross Income and by Marital Status” http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/03in12ms.xls.

• Letters to media
• Letters to politicians

Letters to media

People really do read letters to newspapers and magazines, comments on blogs, and postings in online forums. So getting a letter published is a great way to influence public opinion.

Newspapers receive a great many letters to the editor. The more people who send letters on one topic, the better chance that the editor will print something on that topic. So even if you letter isn’t published, writing is a great way to influence the editorial board.

Here are some tips on writing a letter to a newspaper editor. With some tweaking, the same tips should help you with electronic media, too.

• A letter to the editor responds to a recently published story.
• A letter can either favor or oppose a point made in the story.
• Don't just be negative; instead, suggest what the reporter/author should have said.
• Letters to the editor communicate personal opinions.
• If you can add a personal detail, great! Put a human face on the issue.
• Letters to the editor are most often published if written by local residents, not by organizations.
• In your opening sentence, reference the title and date of the article you are responding to.
• Do not waste space repeating what the article said - instead, go straight to your main point.
• Make the most important point in the first paragraph.
• Write no more than three quick paragraphs, totaling between 100 and 200 words - shorter is better.
• Include your name and contact information. Anonymous letters are rarely printed.

Here is a sample letter. If you write a letter, send us a copy. If it gets published, please let us know so we can celebrate with you!

Letters to politicians

One good place to send the same letter to multiple legislators (e.g. Congress person, both senators, your state legislators) and the President is at http://www.congress.org.

Sample letter to Congress: