Congressional Record, Volume 144 Issue 78 (Tuesday, June 16, 1998)

[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 78 (Tuesday, June 16, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H4571-H4573]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

MARRIAGE TAX ELIMINATION ACT

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Radanovich). Under the Speaker's
announced policy of January 21, 1997, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
Weller) is recognized during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, 2 weeks ago this House of Representatives
did something that many said could not be done. I remember when I came
to Congress, there were those that said we could not balance the budget
and lower taxes for the middle class at the same time. Well, we did
that last year with the bipartisan budget agreement, and 2 weeks ago,
the House passed the second balanced budget in over a generation.
What was significant about that balanced budget is it was a balanced
budget that not only spent less, but it taxed less; and of course, when
it made taxes lower for middle class families, it made elimination of
the marriage tax penalty the centerpiece and the number 1 priority.
I thought I would take a few minutes today to talk about why
elimination of the marriage tax penalty is so important for middle
class Americans throughout this country. I think a series of questions
really best illustrate why the marriage tax penalty should be
eliminated, and that is, do Americans feel that it is fair that our Tax
Code imposes a higher tax on marriage? Do Americans feel that it is
fair that 21 million average, married, working couples pay on the
average $1,400 more in higher taxes just because they are married; that
a married couple pays higher taxes than an identical couple with
identical income that lives together outside of marriage? Do Americans
feel that it is right, or is it fair, that the only way to avoid the
marriage tax penalty is to file for divorce?
It is clear that the marriage tax is not only unfair, it is wrong;
and really, it is immoral that our Tax Code punishes our society's most
basic institution, the institution of marriage. Let me remind my
colleagues again that 21 million married, working couples pay on the
average $1,400 more in higher taxes.
I have an example of a couple in Joliet, Illinois, in the south
suburbs of Chicago that I have the privilege of representing, and let
me just give an example here of how the marriage tax penalty works.
Usually the way it works is the husband and wife get married, they both
work; when they file their taxes, they file jointly and it pushes them
into a higher tax bracket. In this case we have a machinist at
Caterpillar, and Caterpillar makes the heavy earth-moving equipment,
and their biggest plant is right in Joliet in my district.
We have a machinist who works there, and he makes $30,500 a year in
annual income as a machinist at Caterpillar. After we factor in the
standard exemption and deduction for which he qualifies, he is going to
be taxed at a rate of 15 percent. Now, say across town he meets a gal,
she is a school teacher in the Joliet public schools, and she has an
identical income of $30,500.
Now, if she stayed single, she would be taxed at 15 percent. But
under our Tax Code when they marry, they file jointly, even after we
factor in for this couple the standard deductions and exemptions for
this married couple, this machinist and school teacher in Joliet,
Illinois, they end up paying more in taxes just because they got
married. In fact, this couple, this machinist and school teacher pays
the average marriage tax penalty of $1,400, just because they got
married.

[[Page H4572]]

Now our Tax Code actually says, stay single and live together outside
of marriage. It is to your financial advantage. That, of course, we
believe is just wrong.
Mr. Speaker, if we think about it, $1,400 for this couple in Joliet,
Illinois is real money, real money, as I say, for real people. That is
because $1,400 is one year's tuition at Joliet Junior College; it is 3
months' day care at a local day care center.
Now, we have proposed a solution for eliminating the marriage tax
penalty, and the Marriage Tax Elimination Act, also known as Weller-
McIntosh II, is legislation which is simple. It eliminates the marriage
penalty and of course it is very simple and does not complicate the Tax
Code.
What we propose to do is to double the standard deduction. In this
case, by doubling the standard deduction, it would help that machinist
and school teacher, and also we double the brackets in the Marriage Tax
Elimination Act. Right now, if one is married or if one is single, one
pays 15 percent on just less than the first $25,000 in income; but if
one is married, one only has a 15 percent rate up to about $41,000.
Clearly, what our legislation does is essentially double the bracket
for married couples to exactly that of singles. That is fair; that is a
simple way of eliminating the marriage penalty. The Marriage Tax
Elimination Act doubles relief for married couples by doubling the
standard deduction as well as doubling the brackets to eliminate the
marriage penalty.
That is simple legislation. I think it is pretty important as we work
to make elimination of the marriage tax penalty the centerpiece of this
year's budget and, hopefully, the President will join with us and make
it a bipartisan effort.
Remember in 1997 the President embraced the Republican proposal for a
$500-per-child tax credit. We made it a bipartisan effort and we
succeeded, and 3 million children in Illinois now qualify for that,
providing $1.5 billion in higher take-home pay for Illinois families in
the coming year because of the $500-per-child tax credit.
Elimination of the marriage penalty is the centerpiece of the House
budget that we passed this past week. The elimination of the marriage
tax penalty should be a number one priority as we finalize the budget
this year.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to highlight what is arguably the most
unfair prevision in the U.S. Tax code: the marriage tax penalty. I want
to thank you for your long term interest in bringing parity to the tax
burden imposed on working married couples compared to a couple living
together outside of marriage.
I would also like to commend the leadership of House budget Chairman
Kasich for including elimination of the marriage tax penalty as a top
priority in his budget resolution. The Republican House Budget
Resolution will save a penny on every dollar and use those savings to
relieve families of the marriage penalty and restore a sense of justice
to every man and woman who decides to get married.
Many may recall in January, President Clinton gave his State of the
Union Address outlining many of the things he wants to do with the
budget surplus.
A surplus provided by the bipartisan budget agreement which: cut
waste; put America's fiscal house in order; and held Washington's feet
to the fire to balance the budget.
While President Clinton paraded a long list of new spending totaling
at least $46-$48 billion in new programs--we believe that a top
priority should be returning the budget surplus to America's families
as additional middle-class tax relief.
This Congress has given more tax relief to the middle class and
working poor than any Congress of the last half century.
I think the issue of the marriage penalty can best be framed by
asking these questions: Do Americans feel its fair that our tax code
imposes a higher tax penalty on marriage? Do Americans feel its fair
that the average married working couple pays almost $1,400 more in
taxes that a couple with almost identical income living together
outside of marriage? is it right that our tax code provides an
incentive to get divorced?
In fact, today the only form one can file to avoid the marriage tax
penalty is paperwork for divorce. And that is just wrong!
Since 1969, our tax laws have punished married couples when both
spouses work. For no other reason than the decision to be joined in
holy matrimony, more than 21 million couples a year are penalized. They
pay more in taxes than they would if they were single. Not only is the
marriage penalty unfair, it's wrong that out tax code punishes
society's most basic institution. The marriage tax penalty exacts a
disproportionate toll on working women and lower income couples with
children. In many cases it is a working women's issue.
Let me give you an example of how the marriage tax penalty unfairly
affects middle class married working couples.
For example, a machinist, at a Caterpillar manufacturing plant in my
home district of Joliet, makes $30,500 a year in salary. His wife is a
tenured elementary school teacher, also bringing home $30,500 a year in
salary. If they would both file their taxes as singles, as individuals,
they would pay 15%.

MARRIAGE PENALTY EXAMPLE IN THE SOUTH SUBURBS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Machinist School teacher Couple Weller/McIntosh II
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjusted Gross Income........... $30,500..................... $30,500..................... $61,000..................... $61,000
Less Personal Exemption and 6,550....................... 6,550....................... 11,800...................... 13,100 (Singles 2)
Standard Deduction.
Taxable Income.................. 23,950 ( .15)............... 23,950 ( .15)............... 49,200 (Partial .28)........ 47,900 ( .15)
Tax Liability................... 3,592.5..................... 3,592.5..................... 8,563....................... 7,185
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Marriage Penalty: $1378; Relief: $1378. Weller-McIntosh II
Eliminates the Marriage Tax Penalty.
But if they chose to live their lives in holy matrimony, and now file
jointly, their combined income of $61,000 pushes them into a higher tax
bracket of 28 percent, producing a tax penalty of $1400 in higher
taxes.
On average, America's married working couples pay $1,400 more a year
in taxes than individuals with the same incomes. That's serious money.
Millions of married couples are still stinging from April 15th's tax
bit and more married couples are realizing that they are suffering the
marriage tax penalty.
Particularly if you think of it in terms of: A down payment on a
house or a car; one years tuition at a local community college; or
several months worth of quality child care at a local day care center.
To that end, Congressman David McIntosh and I have authored the
Marriage Tax Penalty Elimination Act.
The Marriage Tax Penalty Elimination Act will increase the tax
brackets (currently at 15% for the first $24,650 for singles, whereas
married couples filing jointly pay 15% on the first $41,200 of their
taxable income) to twice that enjoyed by singles; the Weller-McIntosh
proposal would extend a married couple's 15% tax bracket to $49,300.
Thus, married couples would enjoy an additional $8,100 in taxable
income subject to the low 15% tax rate as opposed to the current 28%
tax rate and would result in up to $1,053 in tax relief.
Additionally the bill will increase the standard deduction for
married couples (currently $6,900) to twice that of singles (currently
at $4,150). Under the Weller-McIntosh legislation the standard
deduction for married couples filing jointly would be increased to
$8,300.
Our new legislation builds on the momentum of their popular H.R. 2456
which enjoyed the support of 238 cosponsors and numerous family, women
and tax advocacy organizations. Current law punishes many married
couples who file jointly by pushing them into higher tax brackets. It
takes the income of the families' second wage earner--often the woman's
salary--at a much higher rate than if that salary was taxed only as an
individual. Our bill already has broad bipartisan cosponsorship by
Members of the House and a similar bill in the Senate also enjoys
widespread support.
It isn't enough for President Clinton to suggest tax breaks for child
care. The President's child care proposal would help a working couple
afford, on average, three weeks of day care. Elimination of the
marriage tax penalty would give the same couple the choice of paying
for three months of child care--or addressing other family priorities.
After all, parents know better than Washington what their family needs.
We fondly remember the 1996 State of the Union address when the
President declared emphatically that, quote ``the era of big government
is over.''
We must stick to our guns, and stay the course.
There never was an American appetite for big government.
But there certainly is for reforming the existing way government does
business.
And what better way to show the American people that our government
will continue along

[[Page H4573]]

the path to reform and prosperity than by eliminating the marriage tax
penalty.
Ladies and Gentleman, we are on the verge of running a surplus. It's
basic math.
It means Americans are already paying more than is needed for
government to do the job we expect of it.
What better way to give back than to begin with mom and dad and the
American family--the backbone of our society.
We ask that President Clinton join with Congress and make elimination
of the marriage tax penalty . . . a bipartisan priority.
Of all the challenges married couples face in providing home and
health to America's children, the U.S. tax code should not be one of
them.
Lets eliminate The Marriage Tax Penalty and do it now!
Mr. Speaker, I include the following for the Record.
Do Americans feel that it's right to tax a working couple
more just because they live in holy matrimony?
Is it fair that the American tax code punishes marriage,
our society's most basic institution?

weller-mcintosh ii marriage tax compromise

Weller-McIntosh II, H.R. 3734, the Marriage Tax Penalty
Elimination Act presents a new, innovative marriage penalty
elimination package which pulls together all the principle
sponsors of various legislative proposals with legislation.
Weller-McIntosh II will provide equal and significant relief
to both single and dual earning married couples and can be
implemented immediately.
The Marriage Tax Penalty Elimination Act will increase the
tax brackets (currently at 15% for the first $24,650 for
singles, whereas married couples filing jointly pay 15% on
the first $41,200 of their taxable income) to twice that
enjoyed by singles; the Weller-McIntosh proposal would extend
a married couple's 15% tax bracket to $49,300. Thus, married
couples would enjoy an additional $8,100 in taxable income
subject to the low 15% tax rate as opposed to the current 28%
tax rate and would result in up to $1,215 in tax relief.
Additionally the bill will increase the standard deduction
for married couples (currently $6,900) to twice that of
singles (currently at $4,150). Under the Weller-McIntosh
legislation the standard deduction for married couples filing
jointly would be increased to $8,300.
Weller and McIntosh's new legislation builds on the
momentum of their popular H.R. 2456 which enjoyed the support
of 238 cosponsors and numerous family, women and tax advocacy
organizations. Current law punishes many married couples who
file jointly by pushing them into higher tax brackets. It
taxes the income of the families' second wage earner--often
the woman's salary--at a much higher rate than if that salary
was taxed only as an individual.

Marriage Penalty: $1378; Relief: $1378. Weller-McIntosh II
Eliminates the Marriage Tax Penalty.
The repeal of the Marriage tax was part of the Republican's
1994 ``Contract with America,'' but the legislation was
vetoed by President Clinton.

____________________