[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 98 (Tuesday, July 21, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H5960-H5961]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
FOLLOWING THROUGH ON THE COMMITMENT OF THE HOUSE TO ELIMINATE THE
MARRIAGE TAX PENALTY
The SPEAKER pro tempore. 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, earlier this summer this House made a
commitment to eliminate the marriage tax penalty. I thought this
morning that I would talk about why it is so important that we follow
through on that commitment, and follow through on that commitment with
a series of simple questions that I hear in the South suburbs and the
South Side of Chicago, the area that I have the privilege of
representing.
That is, do Americans feel that it is fair that our tax code imposes
a higher tax on married working couples? Do Americans feel it is fair
that 21 million married working couples pay, on average, $1,400 more in
higher taxes just because they are married? Do Americans feel that is
fair that this couple pays higher taxes than an identical couple that
lives together outside of marriage? Do Americans feel it is fair that
our tax code actually provides an incentive to get divorced, because
the only way today to avoid the marriage tax penalty is to get divorced
and to file that paperwork?
That is wrong. It is unfair. Frankly, really, it is immoral that our
tax code punishes society's most basic institution for 21 million
married working couples; that is, $1,400 in higher taxes.
Let me give an example of a south suburban couple from Illinois that
suffers the marriage tax penalty. The gentleman in the couple is a
machinist at Caterpillar. That is where they make the big heavy earth-
moving equipment in Joliet. This machinist makes $35,500. If he is
single, under our tax code he files and, of course, with the standard
exemption and deduction, he is in the 15 percent tax bracket.
He meets a schoolteacher, a schoolteacher in the public schools. She
has an identical income of $35,500. If she stayed single, just like her
machinist fiance, she would be in the 15 percent tax bracket. Under our
tax code, if they choose to get married, they will file jointly. When
they file jointly, because they combine their income, and their
combined income is $61,000, that pushes them into a higher tax bracket.
They are now taxed in the 28 percent tax bracket just because they are
married, producing an almost $1,400 marriage tax penalty just because
they are married.
That is wrong that this couple, just because they choose to get
married, pay higher taxes. If we think about it, what is the bottom
line, here? We propose the Marriage Tax Elimination Act which puts a
working married couple like our machinist and schoolteacher on parity
with an identical married couple that lives outside marriage.
In 1996 this House of Representatives led the way by working to
provide an adoption tax credit to help families provide a loving home
for a child in need of adoption. In 1997 this House led the way in
convincing the President and the Senate that we should provide a $500
per child tax credit which will benefit 3 million Illinois children.
That helped families. Of course, this year we can help families again
by strengthening marriage and no longer punishing marriage.
Let me share how we propose eliminating the marriage tax penalty. The
Marriage Tax Elimination Act, H.R. 3734, is very simple. It is
legislation which essentially doubles relief for working married
couples by doubling the standard deduction from its current level of
$4,150 to $8,300, and also doubling the income tax threshold, which of
course you file in the 15 percent if you are single, and just over
24,000, doubling that to a little over 49,000.
So when you are single and you choose to get married, your tax
essentially doubles. Your rates are double the income. That brings
fairness to the tax code. That is a very simple way of eliminating the
marriage tax penalty under the Marriage Tax Elimination Act, doubling
the standard deduction, doubling rates, so married taxpayers are not
punished just because they are married. That is a simple solution.
[[Page H5961]]
This House, of course, made a commitment about 2 months ago to
address and eliminate the marriage tax penalty. Our friend, the
President, he has a proposal of his own which he says is a better idea.
He says we should just expand the child care tax credit for families
that are lower-income and, of course, happen to have children. So I
thought I would compare, for this machinist and this schoolteacher in
Joliet, Illinois, which is really better.
Under the President's proposal, under the President's proposal for a
child tax credit, those couples or families that have qualified for the
President's expanded tax credit, and they already have one, he just
wants to make it a little bigger, they would see about a $350 net
increase on take-home pay, money to spend on child care.
I looked into this and asked some local day care providers in Joliet,
what does that mean? They said that the average weekly day care cost is
about $127 in Joliet, so under the President's proposal, for a working
married couple with a child who goes to day care, they would see just
less than 3 weeks of day care financed by the President's proposal. If
we compare this with this machinist and schoolteacher, eliminating the
marriage tax penalty, $1,400, with the same weekly day care costs for
this machinist and schoolteacher, if they have a child in day care, it
is almost 3 months' worth of day care. So which is better, 3 months or
3 weeks?
Mr. Speaker I ask Members to make a bipartisan commitment to
eliminate the marriage tax penalty. This House of Representatives made
a commitment earlier this summer to address the marriage tax penalty,
and make elimination the centerpiece of this year's budget.
Let us follow through on that commitment. Let us help working
families. Let us eliminate the marriage tax penalty. For 21 million
couples, $1,400, that is real money for real people. Let us help
married couples, and eliminate the marriage tax penalty now.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to highlight what is arguably the most
unfair provision 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.
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 it's fair that our tax code
imposes a higher tax penalty on marriage? Do Americans feel it's fair
that the average married working couple pays almost $1,400 more in
taxes than 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 martrimony, 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 our 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 6,500............. 6,500............. 11,800............ 13,100 (Single2)
Standard Deduction.
Taxable Income.................. 23,950............ 23,950............ 49,200............ 47,900
(.15)............. (.15)............. (Partial .28)..... (.15)
Tax Liability................... 3,592.5........... 3,592,5........... 8,563............. 7,185
.................. Marriage Penalty: Relief: $1,378
$1,378.
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 $1,400 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
bite 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
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. 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
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 hearth to America's children, the U.S. tax
code should not be one of them.
Let's eliminate The Marriage Tax Penalty and do it now!
____________________