This, I contend, is the root motivation for their “re-assessment”. Collect more taxes, but give none of the same benefits as marrieds.

Currently, I am managing home renovations, have no reported income, yet my husband cannot count me as a dependent on his return.

I’m sorry but you are mistaken. While this is (I agree) no recognition of equal worth, in most unequal income situations there will be a significant tax savings (In your example above you need to consider that each partner is only taxed on half of the income).

An IRS ruling would not necessarily apply just to California. If there are other states in which same-sex spouses/DPs have community property laws that impact state taxes, they would presumably use the same methods.

This is something that will have to be determined on a state by state basis so if you think this applies to you, call your accountant.

Splain Lucy! :)

Under the old law:
Bob has AGI of 100000
minus personal exemption of 3650
minus standard deduction of 5700
Taxable income: 90650
total tax 19109
Tim does not file.

Under the new law:
Bob and Tim each have AGI of 50000
minus personal exemption, standard deduction
Taxable income: 40650 each
tax 6356 each
total tax 12712

Savings of $6397

This change finds only ways for the IRS to collect more. It does not allow one partner (or legally married gay spouse, which I happen to be) to claim the other partner on tax returns, nor does it address the After-Tax status of healthcare premiums, nor does this address the ability of a partner to collect on the other partners Social Security Benefits as a straight wife can do with her higher-earning Husbands benefits, etc, etc, the list goes on…

This is ONLY a way for the IRS to collect more, and of little or no real benefit to Gays. Not being unnecessarily negative, just realistic.

I fail, too, to see how this is not in conflice with DOMA? Help me here please?? _______________

I suppose we could abolish federal taxes and the tax agencies that regulate them, but then the federal government would die, we’d have no military beyond state militias, and anarchy would rule in the states that couldn’t deal with the pressures of becoming their own country.

I’m sorry but you are mistaken. While this is (I agree) no recognition of equal worth, in most unequal income situations there will be a significant tax savings (In your example above you need to consider that each partner is only taxed on half of the income).