Rocky Mtn Saver
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 9:40:57 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by Rocky Mtn Saver on Nov 15, 2012 9:10:57 GMT -5
I heard on the radio this morning that a well-known comedienne recently discovered that she has actually been legally married for 20 years. (first of all, ) She got married through a drive-thru chapel in Vegas when they were hammered, and neither party thought it had been legal because they didn't go sign anything or something. Just out of curiosity, I was wondering how would the IRS handle this situation. They should have been filing MFJ, HOH, or MFS all this time, right? Would the IRS make them go back and amend? Would it take ignorance as a basis for tossing the whole question out? Would they care, since Single is a less advantageous filing status. Any thoughts?
|
|
resolution
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:09:56 GMT -5
Posts: 7,272
Mini-Profile Name Color: 305b2b
|
Post by resolution on Nov 15, 2012 9:17:32 GMT -5
I was under the impression that there had been a marriage penalty for many years and that after the Bush tax cuts marriage was cost neutral. Is it really advantagous now to be married?
|
|
|
Post by BeenThere...DoneThat... on Nov 15, 2012 9:22:30 GMT -5
<<< Just out of curiosity, I was wondering how would the IRS handle this situation. >>> ...imo, the tax code is complicated enough to handle these contingencies... <<< Is it really advantagous now to be married? >>> ...I wouldn't get married for tax reasons, if that's what you mean...
|
|
mwcpa
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 7, 2011 6:35:43 GMT -5
Posts: 2,425
|
Post by mwcpa on Nov 15, 2012 10:10:56 GMT -5
chances are the IRS is going to leave this matter alone.... I would venture to guess that the marriage was not real and will probably be annulled, as if it never occurred... but I do not expect the IRS to come after the two people over this.... would be bad PR, something the IRS does not need these days... but their is always an aggressive US Attorney out there...
Generally, a married couple (assuming both earn) pays a high tax than two single people with the same income... marriage is advantageous (tax wise) generally when one spouse works and the other does not... while the law is the 1986 act, it is based off the 1954 code in many cases.
There is still a marriage penalty.... think of it this way... under the President's plan... singles making over 200K are "rich," married couple making over a combined 250K are "rich." (I do not intend to get involved with the whole 'tax the rich' thing here...merely making an example in a way it easy to see)
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,858
|
Post by thyme4change on Nov 15, 2012 10:17:48 GMT -5
Good to know they were drinking and driving.
|
|
Rocky Mtn Saver
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 9:40:57 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by Rocky Mtn Saver on Nov 15, 2012 10:20:36 GMT -5
Sad but true, Thyme. Unfortunately for them, apparently what happened in Vegas didn't stay in Vegas! Thanks for the reminder about annullment, mw. That makes more sense.
|
|