Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site cbosgd.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!mark From: mark@cbosgd.UUCP (Mark Horton) Newsgroups: net.taxes,net.singles,net.flame Subject: Re: Marriage penalty Message-ID: <879@cbosgd.UUCP> Date: Wed, 13-Feb-85 00:50:26 EST Article-I.D.: cbosgd.879 Posted: Wed Feb 13 00:50:26 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 14-Feb-85 01:20:39 EST References: <285@calmasd.UUCP> Organization: Bell Labs, Columbus Lines: 9 Xref: watmath net.taxes:650 net.singles:5847 net.flame:8327 The original intent of the "married, filing jointly" category was to help out married couples. And in fact, if you are married and only one of you works, you're better off being married than single, for tax purposes. This was the norm back when this rule wasn invented. Now that the norm is a two-income family, you're worse off married than single. This is known as the "marriage penalty" and it's starting to get a bit of attention. There is now a calculation in there to at least partly ease the penalty, but it doesn't compensate completely.