R
First few paragraphs incomprehensible. Terrible writing.
??????
Kewl!!!
Bi Partisan support is trending toward adding animal friends and beneficial vegetables to the wed-ables
Either Forbes edited their page after you exerpted it or you just made this section up.
The basis of the article is that the IRS used to limit home interest deduction to a house value of $1.1 million with married couples filing separately explicitly limited to $550,000 each (you have to split the allocation equally even if it would be better for you to give it all to one spouse). The 9th Circuit Court said that cohabiting gay couples could each take the $1.1 million maximum deduction stating that the $550,000 for each spouse was an explicitly special case. In my opinion, they ignored the obvious that the special case was only that it had to be split evenly rather than allowing a different split.
It is unclear from the article how this would affect non-homosexual people buying a house together, such as siblings or parent & child.
In an illustration of how multiple smart people can look at the same set of facts and reach a different conclusion, late last year the Ninth Circuit reversed the Tax Court’s holding, deciding instead that the $1,100,000 limitation on qualified debt is determined on a per-taxpayer, rather than a per-residence basis.
But where are the smart people? I only see a reference to the Ninth Circus.
The speiling in dis are tickle es feck end whore eye bell....
From related threads …
Regarding the so-called “IRS” marriage penalty, the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specifc power to regulate marriage. So the feds have no constitutional authority to effectively regulate marriage with taxes imo.
“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
Also, note that the Founding States had made the first numbered clauses in the Constitution, Sections 1-3 of Article I, evidently a good place to hide these clauses from Congress, to clarify that all federal legislative / regulatory powers are vested in the elected members of Congress, not in the executive or judicial branches, or in non-elected federal bureaucrats like those running the constitutionally undefined IRS, EPA, EEOC, etc.. So Congress has a constitutional “monopoly” on federal regulatory / legislative powers whether it wants it or not.
But by unconstitutionally delegating legislative branch powers to the IRS, powers that the post-17th Amendment ratification Congress doesn’t have in this case, such powers actually 10th Amendment-protected state powers which the corrupt feds have stolen from the states, Congress is wrongly protecting such powers from the wrath of the voters in blatant defiance of Sections 1-3 referenced above imo.
Note that lawmakers are wrongly letting federal officials outside the legislative branch get away with stealing legislative branch powers, 10th Amendment-protected state powers with respect to the IRS marriage tax. Consider that by letting officials outside the legislative branch do their unconstitutonal, unpopular dirty work for them that corrupt lawmakers are able to keep their voting records clean, probably to try to fool low-information patriots into reelecting them.
Remember in November !
Patriots need to support Trump / Pence by also electing a new, state sovereignty-respecting Congress that will not only work within its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers to support Trump’s vision for making America great again for everybody, but will put a stop to unconstitutonal federal taxes and likewise unconstitutional inteference in state affairs.
Note that such a Congress will also probably be willing to fire state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices.
This thing is practically unreadable.
Gander married pairs? What the heck is that? Are we talking geese here?
Really? My crippled dog has better command of the keyboard and English language.
Just more attempt to destroy marriage even as they strive to pollute/pervert it in the short run. Will try to discourage all folks from getting married because it has a stabilizing effect on society.
I wonder if couples will return the religious rite of marriage to churches alone, and not even bother to get a secular marriage certificate? For more orthodox churches I doubt there would be a problem, but liberal churches play so fast and loose they would likely only care if it meant they would lose money.