Yet Another Same Sex Question

[Gary2]

Thanks for bringing the subject to the board.
I prepared a return for a client (CUs/RDPs) in NJ this year.
That interested me to check IRS issued FAQs on the subject.
Interesting to note that CUs/RDPs are not eligible to file jointly.
Federal recognize individuals of the same sex who are married under state law, but not CUs/RDPs.
NJ recognize CUs/RDPs.

Stay tuned for NJ. A NJ court just ruled that they have to allow same-sex marriage. Gov. Christie has announced he'll appeal. I don't know what the time frame is, but given that the NJ legislature is in favor of SSM, it seems likely that full marriage as recognized under federal law will come to NJ, either this year or next.

[David1980]

Thanks for bringing the subject to the board.
I prepared a return for a client (CUs/RDPs) in NJ this year.
That interested me to check IRS issued FAQs on the subject.
Interesting to note that CUs/RDPs are not eligible to file jointly.
Federal recognize individuals of the same sex who are married under state law, but not CUs/RDPs.
NJ recognize CUs/RDPs.

You can have different gender registered domestic partnerships as well (not sure it applies in all states that has RDP laws.) The short of it is a registered domestic partnership isn't a marriage. If you're not married you can file as single, HOH, or QW (assuming conditions for HOH/QW are met).

If anything, things have gotten far simpler at the federal level. Taxpayers are either married or they're not married. No need to worry about what they're hiding in their pants.

[NSNM]

CU/RDPs not eligible

Thanks for bringing the subject to the board.
I prepared a return for a client (CUs/RDPs) in NJ this year.
That interested me to check IRS issued FAQs on the subject.
Interesting to note that CUs/RDPs are not eligible to file jointly.
Federal recognize individuals of the same sex who are married under state law, but not CUs/RDPs.
NJ recognize CUs/RDPs.

[taxmandan]

Rev. Rul. 2013-17: 'the ruling in Windsor said any federal law that confers marriage benefits and burdens only on opposite-sex married couples is unconstitutional.' Ergo, all the appropriate laws apply regardless of the gender of the two people in the marriage whether it's a benefit or burden and whether a state recognizes the marriage is moot.

[David1980]

Married taxpayers cannot file using single filing status.

[buzzardbreath]

If this has been discussed before I apologize, but I am curious to know the answer, and I think I know what it should be. Please disassociate any political or religious feelings you may have on this volatile subject.

One of the complaints for years by those who have wished their same-sex unions to be legal are various positions under the law which have been exclusively available to heterosexual unions. Among these is the ability to file a MFJ tax return and get the benefit of the lowest tax rate.

However, we know as tax preparers that the rates are "de jure" the lowest, but not "de facto" the lowest. Married couples with both spouses working can easily move into a higher tax bracket, even amongst the lowest rate.

Recent changes in the IRS position now allow MFJ if a same-sex couple were legally married in such a state, even though they may reside in a state that doesn't recognize their marriage. My question: are they now allowed to file married or forced to file married?

Example: Hugh and Robert were married in Massachusetts in 2009 and moved to Mississippi. At the time of their marriage, Massachusetts allowed same-sex marriage. They both work, make appx $60,000 annually apiece, and since their marriage have been filing single. The "single" status was all that was allowed until the recent ruling.

It is now 2013. The way I understand it, they now have the same rights as heterosexuals. However, it follows that they can no longer file single!! Their options are now MFJ or MFS. Heterosexual marriages do not have the right to file single if they are married and living together at the end of the year.

Comments? Opinions? Cites? If they are allowed to continue to file single, are they now given superior rights over heterosexual unions?

"What's good for the goose is good for the goose" - old Tennessee proverb, updated for the times...