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.