[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 38 (Thursday, March 30, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1974-S1976]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          THE MARRIAGE PENALTY

  Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I rise today to speak on the issue of 
the marriage penalty and progress that has been made today on getting 
this important tax relief out across the country.
  First, I applaud Chairman Roth for his work on this important issue. 
Just today, the Senate Finance Committee considered an important bill 
to provide marriage penalty relief. This bill would provide relief to 
millions of American families--around 25 million--suffering under the 
burden of a marriage penalty.
  The proposal considered by the Senate Finance Committee passed today. 
We are now another step closer to getting this to the floor, which I 
believe will take place sometime during the week of April 11, to be 
able to consider providing this important tax relief to the American 
public. I am delighted that that bill cleared through the Senate 
Finance Committee today.
  The Senate Finance Committee used the House-passed version as a base, 
upon which it built an even broader and more inclusive bill. Our bill 
restores fairness and equity to a Tax Code that has come to penalize 
the institution of marriage in over 66 different ways. That is pretty 
imaginative, to find that many ways, but it is in there.
  First, our bill eliminates the marriage penalty in the standard 
deduction. I want to give the numbers. The standard deduction this year 
for a single taxpayer is $4,400. However, for a married couple filing 
jointly, the standard deduction is only $7,350--not even twice the 
amount for single filers.
  Our bill does a simple, clear, and just thing. Our bill doubles the 
standard deduction by making it $8,800. This change in the tax law 
would take place beginning in 2001, by immediately doubling the 
standard deduction for joint filers. Our bill is fair. That is the fair 
thing to do. It is the right thing to do.
  Second, our bill widens the 15-percent tax bracket. Under current 
law, the 15-percent tax bracket for a single taxpayer ends at an income 
threshold of $26,250. I know these are a lot of numbers, but it is 
important to show the specifics of the Tax Code and where it penalizes 
marriage and how we are fixing it.
  For a married couple, their bracket is less than double this 
threshold of $26,250. In fact, the threshold is $43,850 for a married 
couple filing jointly--another penalty.
  If our bill were fully phased in this year, it would mean that the 
15-percent bracket would extend upward to an income amount of $52,500. 
So for a married couple filing jointly, instead of having a $43,850 
threshold level, it goes up to $52,500. It doubles what it is for a 
single filer. This is real marriage penalty relief and elimination. It 
is relief because even income earners above the current upper income 
threshold for the 15-percent bracket--these are the upper income levels 
of the 15-percent bracket--will be able to fall down through

[[Page S1975]]

the brackets and thus lower their total tax liability. It is 
elimination because it doubles the bracket, thus eliminating the 
marriage penalty in the 15-percent bracket. Again, what we are after is 
to make everything equal. If you have two single filers or if you have 
a married couple both filing, they should pay the same amount in taxes. 
That is what we are trying to get at with this marriage penalty 
elimination.

  It will benefit those people hit by this marriage penalty. It is 
going to lower the taxes for America's families. That is important. It 
is also equitable.
  Third, our bill applies the same principle of bracket widening to the 
28-percent bracket as well. We are just talking about the 15-percent 
bracket, doubling that $26,250 to $52,500 instead of the current level 
of $43,850 for a married couple. That is the 15-percent bracket, the 
upper end of it. We would also do it for the 28-percent bracket, the 
28-percent bracket as applied to singles earning between $26,250 to 
$63,550. That $63,550 is the upper level of the 28-percent bracket.
  As in the 15-percent bracket, this amount is not double for joint 
filers for married couples. You don't get a doubling amount. You 
actually get cut back from that. Under our marriage penalty relief 
bill, it is double. That level at which you can stay in the 28-percent 
bracket as a married couple filing joint would be exactly double what 
you were as a single person. So again, we just make it equitable and 
fair. If it is two people filing singly or if it is a couple filing 
jointly, it will be the same taxable event. That is fair. That is 
equitable.
  Fourth, our bill increases the phaseout range for the earned-income 
tax credit. This is an important feature. Particularly for low-income 
families with children, they can incur a significant marriage penalty 
because of current limits on the earned-income tax credit. If both 
spouses work, the phaseout of the EITC on the basis of their combined 
income can lead to the loss of some or all of the EITC benefits to 
which they would be entitled as singles. In other words, if you have 
two people filing singly, they would be entitled to a certain amount of 
earned-income tax credit. But if you combine their incomes, you don't 
get the same amount of earned-income tax credit for the couple as you 
do for two singles. Our bill fixes that problem as well.
  The Senate Finance Committee proposal increases the beginning and 
ending points of the phaseout range by $2,500. This change will be 
effective December 31, 2000. This will mean families who currently are 
ineligible for the credit but within the $2,500 of eligibility will be 
able to receive the refundable EITC. This will reduce the marriage 
penalty EITC.
  As I mentioned, the marriage penalty is 66 places in the Tax Code. We 
are getting at some of the most pernicious areas. For the earned-income 
tax credit, if you are a two-wage earner family and you should have 
both been able to qualify for the EITC, once you get married you should 
have the same amount of EITC available to your family. This 
particularly applies to lower income families. It is an important thing 
that we are doing. We fix this in our bill.
  Our bill helps families at all income levels: low income, middle 
income, on up.

  Finally, our bill would permanently extend the provision that allows 
the personal nonrefundable credits to offset both the regular tax and 
the minimum tax. It is important that America's families receive the 
full benefit of the tax cuts they were promised. This important change 
will allow America's families to maintain the $500-per-child tax 
credit, the Hope scholarship, the adoption credit, and many others that 
they would not be able to unless we change this particular area of the 
marriage penalty that applies as well.
  Our bill provides fairness and equity. It provides hard-working 
American families with the tax relief they deserve.
  Those are some of the specifics of the bill. I think this is an 
excellent bill in fixing some of these key areas of the marriage 
penalty. I think we have outlined previously the reasons for doing it. 
It is not fair to tax people because they get married and make them pay 
a penalty for the price of being married.
  More important, marriage is important. We should send a positive 
signal that this is a good thing. Stable families are important. Our 
approach also recognizes that every spouse has a great contribution 
that they make. At the same time our approach reduces and eliminates 
the marriage penalty for many filers, it sends an important signal to 
all of America that we recognize the institution of marriage and we 
intend to promote it as a fundamental building block of our society.
  I am hopeful this bill is going to be considered on the floor with a 
reasoned debate and not be too burdened down with amendments that are 
not germane and that we will be able to provide this marriage penalty 
relief to the millions of Americans, around 25 million married couples, 
who are currently adversely affected by the Tax Code.
  There is more to do. The marriage penalty is in 66 different places. 
We only get at a few of them, but we get at some important ones. 
Today's is an important step by the Finance Committee to report this 
bill out. I think it is a clear and an important step towards our 
ultimate goal of getting this through the Senate, the conference 
between the House and the Senate, and to the President where I urge his 
signature. We must pass this important bill.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  (Mr. BROWNBACK assumed the Chair.)
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I express my appreciation to the Chair 
for his important remarks on the details of the legislation that came 
out of the Senate Finance Committee today. That legislation takes a big 
step forward and basically eliminates the marriage penalty that exists 
in our tax law today.
  Chairman Roth has been a champion of improving our Tax Code. I am 
pleased to see that he has moved this legislation. It is something I 
know the Chair and I have advocated for a long time, as have many 
others in this body. We need to look at our policy in America and see 
if it is actually affirming the values we hold dear: Particularly, are 
we setting governmental policy in this country that damages families? 
Is that one of the reasons for the breakup of families in this country? 
I think it needs to be considered. I believe it is a matter of 
importance.
  Good public policy is what we are about. We need to spend more time 
asking ourselves what is going to happen when we pass certain 
legislation. All of us agree that when you tax an item, a process, or 
an act, you get less of it. If you subsidize another act or process, 
you get more of it. That is just fundamental economics on which almost 
everybody would agree.
  What we have in the marriage penalty is an amazing event. In this 
Government, we have created, according to the Congressional Budget 
Office, a tax burden of nearly $1,400 per married couple. If they are 
living separately, they will pay $1,400 on average less than if they 
are married. That is an amazing event. I happen to know someone who got 
divorced recently. When they divorced, they said their tax bill went 
down $1,600. Had they divorced in December instead of January, they 
would have had an extra $1,600 from that year's return. We have the 
incredible, amazing event in which Federal tax policy encourages family 
breakup. It provides a bonus--$1,600 a year--as long as they remain 
single, for example. That is the kind of policy that we have created 
here.

  Likewise, people who marry are penalized. I know a young person that 
married recently. He and his wife both work. They believe it will cost 
them over $1,000 a year to get married. This is $100 a month we are 
talking about. We are talking about people being taxed an additional 
$100 a month for following through on an institution that this Nation 
traditionally--before we got into this matter--venerated, and that is 
marriage and family. So I think this is a big deal. It is a very big 
deal. It is bad public policy. It is wrong. It is unfair. We should not 
continue this policy and we need to end it now. I believe we are on the 
road to achieving that. I am excited about it. Some time ago, we 
realized that we

[[Page S1976]]

were not increasing the deductions for families who had children and 
that young families were struggling to raise children.
  This tax bill doesn't deal with children, just marriage. We had a 
long struggle, but we finally passed a $500 per child tax credit for 
young families trying to raise kids. For two kids, that is $1,000 a 
year, and nearly $85 a month. Parents can buy shoes and clothes, take 
the kids to the movies, buy something after ball practice at 
McDonald's. That is real money to real American citizens. Now we are 
talking here about another $100 a month, on average, or $110, $120 a 
month that married people are having to pay for the privilege of 
getting married. That should not be. It is a punishing and unfair tax. 
Furthermore, it should not, in my view, be based on income. Just 
because you make a little more money than somebody else, why should you 
be penalized for getting married? That doesn't make sense to me. This 
is not, in my view, a tax reduction issue so much as it is a fairness 
issue. Let's eliminate this unfairness. I am excited about what is 
happening here. Families will be able to buy that new dress, buy tires 
for their car, or fix the muffler, or get a new set of shocks, things 
they may need on a monthly basis--things that families do on a regular 
basis.
  Also, I want to point out that this penalty is particularly 
noticeable now that we have more married women working. The penalty is 
even worse when a married woman's income comes close to the amount of 
income of the husband. So the husband and wife marry and there is this 
unexpected tax. You get whacked, and you wonder whether it is worth 
both people working. It oftentimes hurts the woman more than the man. 
In this country we would like to see equal opportunity in salaries, 
that there not be a glass ceiling for women, and that they ought to be 
able to have the same salary opportunities. But the more likely, on a 
statistical basis, that the woman receives the same salary as a man, 
the more this penalty will fall on her. So I think it is clearly unfair 
to both men and women.
  Mr. President, I want to say again that we are making a big step 
toward ending a penalty, a tax, a detriment, a burden on an institution 
that is critical to the salvation and strength of this country, which 
is marriage. We are taxing that, penalizing that, and we are 
discouraging marriage. We are subsidizing singleness and divorce, 
actually. That is not good public policy. I believe we can do better. 
Of course, it will have no impact on a single person. No burden will 
fall on them because of passing this bill. It will simply be leveling 
the playing field and making it a more fair system. I thank the Senator 
from Kansas, and I thank Senator Roth and the others who have worked on 
this legislation. We are moving forward. It is time to pass this bill, 
to give some relief and eliminate this unfair tax on marriage.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________