[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 1]
[House]
[Pages 363-364]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



              UNFAIRNESS IN TAX CODE: MARRIAGE TAX PENALTY

  Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, it is a great day here and today we are, of 
course, responding to an important question that we have asked in this 
well of the House over the last several years and that is a pretty 
basic fundamental question. That is: Is it right, is it fair that under 
our Tax Code married working couples pay more in taxes than an 
identical couple in an identical situation living together outside of 
marriage? It is just wrong that under our Tax Code 28 million married 
working couples pay, on average, $1,400 more in higher taxes just 
because they are married.
  Mr. Speaker, is it right that under our Tax Code that couples are 
punished, that they are penalized when they choose to participate in 
society's most basic institution?
  That is the fact today. I represent a diverse district on the south 
side of Chicago. In the south suburbs in Cook and Will Counties, in 
Joliet and the bedroom and farm communities they all ask the same 
question. They wonder why for 30 years now Washington has punished 
marriage and no one has gone back to fix it.
  I am pleased that under the leadership of the Speaker of the House, 
the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert), this House has made it a top 
priority to eliminate and wipe out the marriage tax penalty suffered by 
28 million married working couples. The Speaker has said that the 
elimination of the marriage tax penalty will be fast out of the box and 
on a fast track through the Senate and to the President, wiping out the 
marriage tax penalty and stopping the Tax Code from punishing marriage.
  The marriage tax penalty really results from our very complicated Tax 
Code. And, unfortunately, because we have a progressive Tax Code, if 
couples get married, they get punished. That is just wrong.
  Mr. Speaker, here is how the marriage tax penalty works. Here is how 
it ends up. Say there is a machinist and a school teacher in Joliet, 
Illinois. A machinist who works at Caterpillar at the local plant. The 
machinist makes that heavy equipment, the big bulldozers and cranes and 
earth-moving equipment. He makes $31,500 a year. If he is single, he 
pays taxes in the 15 percent tax bracket.
  Now, Mr. Speaker, if he meets a tenured public school teacher in the 
Joliet Public School System with an identical income, as long as she is 
single she pays in the 15 percent tax bracket. But if this school 
teacher and machinist choose to get married, when they are married they 
file jointly and add together their income. What happens then is their 
combined income is $63,000 and that pushes them into the 28 percent tax 
bracket, and they are punished with an almost $1,400 marriage tax 
penalty. If they chose to stay single and live together outside of 
marriage, they would avoid that marriage tax penalty.
  In this case, because this machinist and school teacher chose to live 
in holy matrimony, society's most basic institution, they are punished 
under our Tax Code. I find most Americans, whether they live in the 
city or the suburbs or the country, think it is just wrong and they 
want Congress and the President to do something about it.
  That is why I am so pleased, because I have a another couple from 
Joliet, Illinois, two public school teachers, Shad and Michelle 
Hallihan. They came and told me they suffered a marriage tax penalty of 
$1,000. They just had a baby. Michelle told me, ``Congressman, tell 
your colleagues in the Congress that $1,000 average in marriage tax 
penalty is 3,000 diapers.'' Of course, they point out that $1,400, the 
average marriage tax penalty, is one year's tuition in the local 
community college.
  Well, House Republicans are going to do something about this. We are 
going to work to eliminate the marriage tax penalty and the Speaker has 
put it on a fast track. This Wednesday, tomorrow, the House Committee 
on Ways and Means will have committee action on legislation that will 
essentially wipe out the marriage tax penalty for a majority of those 
who suffer it. We double the standard deduction for joint filers to 
twice that of singles, which will not only help 3 million couples who 
will no longer have to itemize their taxes, but will essentially wipe 
out their marriage tax penalty for those who do not itemize.
  Of course, many homeowners itemize. In order to help homeowners and 
those who itemize from suffering the marriage tax penalty, we widen the 
15 percent bracket so that joint filers can earn twice as much as 
single filers and still pay in the 15 percent bracket. And for low-
income families who benefit from the Earned Income Tax Credit, we also 
provide marriage tax relief for poor families and low-income families 
who suffer from the marriage tax penalty.
  Mr. Speaker, it is good, common-sense legislation and deserves 
overwhelming bipartisan support. There is no excuse to vote against 
legislation wiping out the marriage tax penalty. The Speaker of the 
House has also indicated that by Valentine's Day that we are going to 
pass this through to help couples like Shad and Michelle Hallihan who 
suffer the marriage tax penalty. And what better Valentine's Day gift 
to give 28 million married working couples than legislation which will 
eliminate the marriage tax penalty.
  Think in these terms: $1,400 is a drop in the bucket here in 
Washington. It is chump change for the Washington bureaucrats and the 
big spenders here in Washington. But back home in Illinois, a $1,400 
marriage tax penalty is one year's tuition at a local community 
college; 3 months of day care for Shad and Michelle for their child; it 
is several months' worth of car payments; it is most of the 
contribution to an IRA for Michelle. It is real money for real people.
  House Republicans are making it a priority. We invite the Democrats 
to

[[Page 364]]

join with us. Let us make it a bipartisan effort to eliminate the 
marriage tax penalty. What better Valentine's Day gift to give 28 
million married working couples. I urge my colleagues to pass the 
legislation with bipartisan support and send it to the Senate and send 
it on the President.
  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.
  This month President Clinton gave his State of the Union Address 
outlining many of the things he will spend the budget surplus on. House 
Republicans want to preserve 100% of the Social Security surplus for 
Social Security and Medicare and use the non-Social Security surplus 
for paying down the debt and to bring fairness to the tax code.
  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 parades a long list of new spending totaling 
$72 billion in new programs--we believe that a top priority after 
saving Social Security and paying down the national debt 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 is fair that our tax code 
imposes a higher tax penalty on marriage? Do Americans feel it is 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 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 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 $31,500 a year in salary. His wife is a 
tenured elementary school teacher, also bringing home $31,500 a year in 
salary. If they would both file their taxes as singles, as individuals, 
they would pay 15%.

                                            MARRIAGE PENALTY EXAMPLE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Machinist        School teacher          Couple              H.R. 6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjusted gross income..........  $31,500...........  $31,500...........  $63,000..........  $63,000
Less personal exemption and      $6,950............  $6,950............  $12,500..........  $13,00 (singles x 2)
 standard deduction.
Taxable income.................  $24,550 x (.15)...  $24,550 x (.15)...  $50,500 (Partial   $49,100 x (.15)
                                                                          x .28).
Tax liability..................  $3682.5...........  $3682.5...........  $8635............  $7,365
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marriage penalty, $1,270. Relief, $1,270.

  But if they chose to live their lives in holy matrimony, and now file 
jointly, their combined income of $63,000 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 year's tuition at a local community college, or 
several months worth of quality child care at a local day care center.
  To that end, U.S. Representative David McIntosh and U.S. 
Representative Pat Danner and I have authored H.R. 6, The Marriage Tax 
Elimination Act.
  H.R. 6, The Marriage Tax 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; H.R. 6 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 H.R. 6 the standard deduction for married couples 
filing jointly would be increased to $8,300.
  H.R. 6 enjoys the bipartisan support of 223 co-sponsors along with 
family groups, including: American Association of Christian Schools, 
American Family Association, Christian Coalition, Concerned Women for 
America, Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern 
Baptist Convention, Family Research Council, Home School Legal Defense 
Association, the National Association of Evangelicals and the 
Traditional Values Coalition.
  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 that 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 gentlemen, 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.
  Speaker Hastert and House Republicans have made eliminating the 
marriage tax penalty a top priority. In fact, we plan to move 
legislation in the next few weeks.
  Last year, President Clinton and Vice President Gore vetoed our 
efforts to eliminate the marriage tax penalty for almost 28 million 
married working people. The Republican effort would have provided about 
$120 billion in marriage tax relief. Unfortunately, President Clinton 
and Vice President Gore said they would rather spend the money on new 
government programs than eliminate the marriage tax penalty.
  This year we ask President Clinton and Vice President Gore to join 
with us and sign into law a stand alone bill to eliminate the marriage 
tax penalty.
  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.
  The greatest accomplishment of the Republican Congress this past year 
was our success in protecting the Social Security Trust Fund and 
adopting a balanced budget that did not spend one dime of Social 
Security--the first balanced budget in over 30 years that did not raid 
Social Security.
  Let's eliminate the marriage tax penalty and do it now!

                          ____________________