
Opinion Editorial | |
| Monday, January 5, 1998 | |
Black and Middle-Class Couples Hit Hardest by Marriage Penalty |
Congressional Republicans have indicated that elimination of the so-called
marriage penalty will be their highest tax priority in 1998. A marriage
penalty occurs when a husband and wife both work, causing them to pay more
taxes as a couple than they would pay if both were taxed as singles. Already,
however, liberals are attacking the plan as a give-away to the rich. The
New York Times charges that 90 percent of the benefits will accrue to families
earning more than $50,000.
Indeed, the current system of rewarding single-earner couples with bonuses
does far more to benefit the rich than eliminating the marriage penalty
would. A marriage bonus occur when a couple pays less taxes by filing jointly
than they would pay as singles. In fact, according to a recent article in the University of Cincinnati
Law Review (Spring 1997), blacks suffer disproportionately from the marriage
penalty. According to the author, Dorothy Brown, "Black taxpayers
are more likely to pay a marriage tax, whereas white taxpayers are more
likely to receive a marriage bonus." The reason is because among married couples, black women are more likely
to work than white women. Furthermore, working black women on average provide
a higher percentage of the couple's total income than working white women.
These facts are important to the debate about the marriage penalty because
it occurs only when both spouses work. And it tends to be greatest when
the husband and wife each earn roughly the same income. Thus if married
black women work in higher percentages and earn incomes closer to their
husbands', they are much more likely to be impacted by the marriage penalty. Republicans should not be frightened by liberal attacks. They are on
firm ground when opposing the marriage penalty. It mainly hurts blacks
and the middle class. Getting rid of the marriage penalty is no give-away
to the rich. Source: Bruce Bartlett (senior fellow, National Center for Policy Analysis),
January 5, 1998. Home | Support Us | All Issues | Social Security Debate Central | Contact Us |