[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 1]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 859-860]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[[Page 859]]




             CONGRESSIONAL RECORD 


                United States

                 of America



February 8, 2000



                          EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS

              UNFAIRNESS IN TAX CODE: MARRIAGE TAX PENALTY

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. JERRY WELLER

                              of illinois

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, February 8, 2000

  Mr. WELLER. 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.
  I want to thank both you and Chairman Archer for the pledge to bring 
H.R. 6, the Marriage Tax Elimination Act, to the floor for 
consideration before Valentine's Day. This is truly one of the best 
Valentine's Day presents we can give to America's working couples. As 
you know, H.R. 6, as considered by the Ways and Means Committee, will 
provide $182 billion in marriage penalty relief over 10 years. This is 
a significant increase over the $45 billion proposal offered by 
President Clinton just before this year's State of the Union Address. 
Ultimately, as a result of H.R. 6, 28 million working couples will 
receive up to $1,400 in marriage tax penalty relief.
  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 percent 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'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 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 $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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Machinist      School teacher        Couple            H.R. 6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjusted Gross Income...................           $31,500           $31,500           $63,000           $63,000
Less Personal Exemption and Standard                 6,950             6,950            12,500            13,900
 Deduction..............................                                                            (Singles x2)
Taxable Income..........................            24,550            24,550            50,500            49,100
                                                   (x .15)           (x .15)   (Partial x .28)           (x .15)
Tax Liability...........................            3682.5            3682.5              8635             7,365
    Marriage Penalty....................  ................  ................              1270  ................
    Relief..............................  ................  ................  ................              1270
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  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 up to $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 car center.
  To that end, U.S. Representative David McIntosh (R-IN) and U.S. 
Representative Pat Danner (D-MO) and I have authored H.R. 6, The 
Marriage Tax Elimination Act.
  H.R. 6, The Marriage Tax Elimination Act, as considered by the House 
Ways and Means Committee, will increase the 15 percent tax bracket 
(currently at 15 percent for the first $26,250 for singles, whereas 
married couples filing jointly pay 15 percent on the first $43,850 of 
their taxable income) to twice that enjoyed by singles; H.R. 6 would 
extend a married couple's 15 percent tax bracket to $52,500. Thus, 
married couples would enjoy an additional $8,650 in taxable income 
subject to the low 15 percent tax rate as opposed to the current 28 
percent tax rate and would result in up to $1,200 in tax relief.
  Additionally the bill will increase the standard deduction for 
married couples (currently $7,350) to twice that of singles (currently 
at $4,400). Under H.R. 6, the standard deduction for married couples 
filing jointly would be increased to $8,800.
  H.R. 6 enjoys the bipartisan support of 233 cosponsors 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 the 1996 State of the Union address when the 
President declared emphatically that, ``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 running a $3 trillion 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.

[[Page 860]]

  We ask that President Clinton join with Congress and make elimination 
of the marriage tax penalty . . . a bipartisan priority. During the 
State of the Union Address this year, the President signaled his 
willingness to work to eliminate the marriage tax penalty. We must send 
him a bill to eliminate the marriage penalty suffered by 28 million 
American working couples.
  The proposal offered by the President to reduce the marriage tax 
penalty is a good start, but it is not enough! By doubling the standard 
deduction, only couples who do not itemize their income taxes receive 
the benefits of tax relief. In order to provide relief to couples who 
itemize, mainly homeowners, we must address the difference in the 
income tax brackets. If we follow only the President's plan, the result 
will be a marriage tax penalty against couples who are homeowners and 
couples who contribute to charities. This is not right and it is not 
fair!
  Speaker Hastert and House Republicans have made eliminating the 
marriage tax penalty a top priority. In fact, we plan to move 
legislation out of the House before Valentine's Day.
  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 
health 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!

                          ____________________