Posted on 10/08/2006 8:01:47 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
The new California law that requires registered domestic partners to file their state taxes like married people is a symbolic victory for gay couples. But the financial impact won't always be positive, and most will face new tax-filing and planning headaches when the law takes effect next year.
Under SB1827, signed by Gov. Schwarzenegger last weekend, registered domestic partners can no longer file their state tax returns as single or head of household. For tax year 2007 and beyond, they can choose married filing jointly or married filing separately, the same options married couples generally have.
However, domestic partners must continue filing their federal taxes as single or head of household. ...
Californians start their state tax returns by transferring their adjusted gross income from their federal return, then making certain adjustments. The new law will require additional adjustments, adding to the complexity and probably the cost of tax preparation. Planning also will become harder because actions that minimize federal taxes might not minimize state taxes.
The discrepancy in filing status will create many thorny issues that have yet to be resolved, such as whether one partner's capital losses can offset the other's capital gains for state taxes.
Partners who file jointly also will become potentially liable for each other's state tax debts and the proper inclusion of all income, says Lynn Freer, editor of Spidell's California Taxletter.
Despite the potential drawbacks, some gay couples are happy with the new law.
"Politically, it's just one step closer to accepting gay people as equals, financially in California and hopefully federally at some point," says Curt Branom of San Francisco, who is in a registered partnership. "I do think it could benefit us, but even if it doesn't, I'm all for it because we are treated as part of the mainstream."
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
And don't give me that bigoted "we can't marry our farm animals" stuff. Who are we to judge? It's a loving relationship so marriage between a man and his farm animal, when they are in love (look at that sheep's BIG brown eyes! Love just gushing from them...), MUST be allowed. The Mass Constitution says so, right?
"I'm all for it because we are treated as part of the mainstream."
It's comming, don't think that there aren't groups pressing those very issues.
Nor, according to Romans One, will the eternal impact be anything but negative.
One of us will ping the list later.
One of us will ping the list later.
all of you people are so predjudice...anti-sheep...that is so not PC!!!!
I personally have 2 cats that I am declaring as dependents for the tax credits!!!!!
and don't go off on them...they vote!!!!!
California's political class, absent any sign of principled leadership, is simply codifying the whim of the mob, a mob bent on hedonism rather than responsibility. Both major, political parties have joined the devolution of an ordered society in California and the results are becoming a point of public chagrin and ridicule across the breath of this nation.
Those California residents who do posses a moral fiber and who do conduct their lives in accordance with traditional principles, which stress a community responsibility, suffer the tyranny of the majority without the constitutional protection of due process, which has been cleverly and legally bypassed by the political class.
California has become a direct democracy. The minority has no voice in its destiny. The majority rules; absolutely.
Bottom line: California has become a cesspool?
Isn't that taking animal husbandry a bit far?..........(I know, that was baaaaaaaaad.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.