Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The HoH filing status needs to be eliminated. Not because "single mothers don't deserve it," but rather because it is bad tax policy. This is why. . .
Standard deduction for a single individual is $6,300. For someone filing as HoH, they get the $6,300 of a single taxpayer, plus $3,000 in "Bonus" deductions for maintaining a household for a dependent, for a total standard deduction of $9,300. Now here is where the bad policy comes in. Two single individuals, each maintaining a household for a dependent, gets the $9,300 standard deduction described above. Between the two of them, that is a total of $18,600 in standard deductions. However, if those two individuals get married, their standard deduction would only be $12,600 (double the single rate). By marrying, they lose $6,000 in "bonus" deductions, even though they are still maintaining a household for a dependent (the same as the single person filing as HoH).
It is very bad policy to tell a single person, "You will get an additional $3,000 of deductions because you maintain a household for a dependent" while a married couple, who also maintain a household for a dependent just like the person filing as HoH, doesn't get the additional $3,000 of deductions, when they are doing the exact same thing.
When a deduction is predicated upon a particular activity, in this case, maintaining a household for a dependent, that deduction needs to be available to all who engage in the particular activity. There is no sound policy reason for the $3,000 "bonus" deduction available for maintaining a household for a dependent to be available to an unmarried person, while not being available to a married person.
The HoH filing status needs to be eliminated. Not because "single mothers don't deserve it," but rather because it is bad tax policy. This is why. . .
Standard deduction for a single individual is $6,300. For someone filing as HoH, they get the $6,300 of a single taxpayer, plus $3,000 in "Bonus" deductions for maintaining a household for a dependent, for a total standard deduction of $9,300. Now here is where the bad policy comes in. Two single individuals, each maintaining a household for a dependent, gets the $9,300 standard deduction described above. Between the two of them, that is a total of $18,600 in standard deductions. However, if those two individuals get married, their standard deduction would only be $12,600 (double the single rate). By marrying, they lose $6,000 in "bonus" deductions, even though they are still maintaining a household for a dependent (the same as the single person filing as HoH).
It is very bad policy to tell a single person, "You will get an additional $3,000 of deductions because you maintain a household for a dependent" while a married couple, who also maintain a household for a dependent just like the person filing as HoH, doesn't get the additional $3,000 of deductions, when they are doing the exact same thing.
When a deduction is predicated upon a particular activity, in this case, maintaining a household for a dependent, that deduction needs to be available to all who engage in the particular activity. There is no sound policy reason for the $3,000 "bonus" deduction available for maintaining a household for a dependent to be available to an unmarried person, while not being available to a married person.
That's an interesting analysis, but from reading what you wrote I'm not sure why you started out by saying "HoH filing status needs to be eliminated." It seems like you made a better argument for keeping the HoH deduction of $3,000 per dependent even when people are married.
That's an interesting analysis, but from reading what you wrote I'm not sure why you started out by saying "HoH filing status needs to be eliminated." It seems like you made a better argument for keeping the HoH deduction of $3,000 per dependent even when people are married.
Either one would accomplish the same thing (creating equity). However, expending it to married couples would have the effect of reducing tax revenues. Which I believe to be generally a good thing, unless spending remains unchanged. If spending remains unchanged, additional tax revenue will have to be raised somewhere else.
I'm just not sure than additional deductions (related to dependents) are necessary, given what is already available.
The HoH filing status needs to be eliminated. Not because "single mothers don't deserve it," but rather because it is bad tax policy. This is why. . .
Standard deduction for a single individual is $6,300. For someone filing as HoH, they get the $6,300 of a single taxpayer, plus $3,000 in "Bonus" deductions for maintaining a household for a dependent, for a total standard deduction of $9,300. Now here is where the bad policy comes in. Two single individuals, each maintaining a household for a dependent, gets the $9,300 standard deduction described above. Between the two of them, that is a total of $18,600 in standard deductions. However, if those two individuals get married, their standard deduction would only be $12,600 (double the single rate). By marrying, they lose $6,000 in "bonus" deductions, even though they are still maintaining a household for a dependent (the same as the single person filing as HoH).
It is very bad policy to tell a single person, "You will get an additional $3,000 of deductions because you maintain a household for a dependent" while a married couple, who also maintain a household for a dependent just like the person filing as HoH, doesn't get the additional $3,000 of deductions, when they are doing the exact same thing.
When a deduction is predicated upon a particular activity, in this case, maintaining a household for a dependent, that deduction needs to be available to all who engage in the particular activity. There is no sound policy reason for the $3,000 "bonus" deduction available for maintaining a household for a dependent to be available to an unmarried person, while not being available to a married person.
Quite a lot wrong here. First of all, only one person per household can claim HOH (kind of obvious). Secondly, two people can't use the same qualifying child (or person), to qualify for HOH.
If you believe I am mistaken, by all means, point out where/how. Quotes from my post would be helpful.
Oh, you are talking about 2 households combining into 1? Well of course the standard deduction will be lower. Just like the itemized deductions would be lower if they itemized. Apples and oranges.
Oh, you are talking about 2 households combining into 1? Well of course the standard deduction will be lower. Just like the itemized deductions would be lower if they itemized. Apples and oranges.
You aren't getting it. HoH provides $3,000 in "bonus" standard deduction for maintaining a household with a dependent. A married couple that ALSO maintains a household for a dependent gets ZERO "bonus" deduction for maintaining that household for a dependent. The exact same activity - maintaining a household for dependent, is worth an extra $3,000 to a single individual, but is worth ZERO to a married couple. It's apples to apples. And it's bad tax policy.
Itemized deductions MIGHT be lower, but not necessarily.
You aren't getting it. HoH provides $3,000 in "bonus" standard deduction for maintaining a household with a dependent. A married couple that ALSO maintains a household for a dependent gets ZERO "bonus" deduction for maintaining that household for a dependent. The exact same activity - maintaining a household for dependent, is worth an extra $3,000 to a single individual, but is worth ZERO to a married couple. It's apples to apples. And it's bad tax policy.
Itemized deductions MIGHT be lower, but not necessarily.
You're comparing the taxation of two households vs one. Apples to Oranges.
A more interesting discussion might be to compare the tax situation of an unmarried couple living together vs two singles. Or a single and a HOH living together. That would be an interesting comparison. Your scenario is just silly.
You're comparing the taxation of two households vs one. Apples to Oranges.
What are you talking about?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
