Posted on 08/09/2007 2:58:34 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
(CBS/AP) MOUNT LAUREL, N.J. -- New Jersey now grants gay couples the same state benefits that married heterosexual couples receive, but that does not mean they can file their tax returns jointly for the 2006 tax year, a court ruled Thursday.
In a unanimous ruling, a three-judge appeals panel affirmed the state's position that the benefits -- at least regarding tax returns -- did not start until Feb. 19, when gay couples were allowed to join in civil unions.
Maureen Quarto and Judith Prichason went to Canada, where gay marriage is legal, to wed in 2003. The next year, they registered as domestic partners in New Jersey so they could receive the limited benefits the state was allowing then.
Last October, the state Supreme Court ruled that New Jersey had to extend to same-sex couples all the rights that married couples are granted. But the court left it up to lawmakers to work out the mechanism for doing that.
The Legislature decided to enact civil unions, which are essentially marriages in all but name and which previously in place in only Vermont and Connecticut.
Under New Jersey law, Quarto and Prichason were considered to be in a civil union because they are legally married in Canada.
They asked the state if they could file a joint income tax return as a symbolic measure -- even though it would mean paying the state an extra $411.
The state Division of Taxation said no, reasoning that their union was not recognized in the 2006 year and that it could be hard administratively to deal with more couples filing jointly.
The couple sued, saying it was not the law that gave them the right to file joint tax returns, but last year's state Supreme Court decision.
The court, in an opinion by Judge Jack M. Sabatino and a separate concurring opinion by Judge Edwin H. Stern, disagreed and said that ruling the other way might mean many couples could amend their previous tax filings and ask the state for refunds.
It appears the case affects only one year's worth of tax returns for couples like Quarto and Prichason.
In court papers, the state has said it would accept the joint filings from couples with civil unions for the 2007 tax year.
Tax returns could be the basis for a federal court case on marriage. Suppose a judge somewhere decides that Mass. married same sex couples, or civil union couples from another state should be treated as married per IRS regulations. If that ever happened, that would pave the way for 50 state gay marriage. After all, the legal reasoning would be, that the IRS, a unit of the federal government, recognizes these couples as married, and that other units of government should also.
If Hillary is elected, she would appoint liberal judges who would make rulings such as noted above though it uses convoluted logic to arrive at the conclusion.
Oh, great citizens, suing for symbolic reasons, while costing the state an untold sum of money. That money has to come from somewhere. You suppose somewhere there’s an abused child whose life will be forfeit because the bucks went elsewhere and no one was watching?
I don’t think we should insult this couple by using the word “joint” in the title. They obvously find that to be objectionable.
The simple solution is for the state to make everyone file their own tax return. A married couple would be able to assign all the dependents, other than the spouse, to one or the other, but not both’s tax return.
Before you go roaring off about this proposed change as being anti-family, please examine that it would pay stay at home mothers as much as we now pay those who won’t work through the incorrectly named “earned income tax credit”. And who knows, this proposal may just get the lamestream media to examine that tax transfer program when millions more Americans become “eligible” for it. And the scrutiny might kill another of Uncle Teddy’s crapbrained ideas.
This was not really a victory, as they will be able to pretend to be married on future tax returns.
Suing to pay more taxes? Wow......
Don't they know married couples pay higher taxes than singles?
That’s true; but remember the Texas case. This is probably a set up by the gays to use the law to change things without the peoples input. I think they just tried this recently; but it didn’t work.
Isn’t it a violation of federal law to file different status on your state and federal returns?
it is about full faith and credit onto the federal tax code.
“The simple solution is for the state to make everyone file their own tax return. A married couple would be able to assign all the dependents, other than the spouse, to one or the other, but not both’s tax return.”
I LOVE THIS IDEA.
My accountant once told me that my husband should quit (he wouldn’t hear of it).
Then he said we should get divorced on paper, it would save us a bundle. Did you know, that when you run the taxes both way in MD, and assume for young kids that you are going to pay 20K a year in child care, with a dual working family, each spouse making 100K/year, the second spouse, after taxes and child care - is working for 10K take home pay ?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.