http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/ Same Sex Tax en-us Copyright 2013 Santa Clara University School of Law http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/rss.xml Wed, 15 May 2013 17:50:11 PST Years ago I blogged about the tax treatment of alimony payments ordered by the courts in the case of a divorce or dissolution of a same-sex relationship. I thought I had also blogged about the probable tax treatment of property divisions. But since I keep getting questions about the property division question, I'm guessing I didn’t say as much as I should have. So here is my opinion for today. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/taxation-of-property-divisions-by-same-sex-couples.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Wed, 15 May 2013 17:46:00 PST The case, Windsor v. United States, will be handed down by the Supreme Court sometime in the next 6 weeks. At that time we will know whether or not DOMA remains good law. Discussions about the Windsor case and its likely aftermath occur frequently and often. There were numerous discussions of the case at the recent ABA Tax Meeting in D.C. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/predicting-life-after-windsor.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Tue, 14 May 2013 16:46:00 PST There is much speculation after the oral arguments in Windsor v United States that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) may fall by the end of June (the likely time that the United States Supreme Court will issue its opinion in the case). If DOMA falls in June there are some things to think about now regarding you income taxes. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/the-potential-fall-of-doma-are-you-tax-prepared.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Wed, 10 Apr 2013 21:17:00 PST The Supreme Court of the United States has granted cert petitions in two same-sex marriage cases, Perry v. Hollingsworth (previously Perry v. Brown) and Windsor v. United States. Perry is the case challenging the constitutionality of Proposition 8 and Windsor is one of the cases challenging the constitutionality of DoMA. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/petition-for-cert-granted-in-windsor-and-prop-8-cases.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Fri, 07 Dec 2012 12:54:00 PST Marriage equality issues were on the ballot in four states Tuesday night. Looks like a same-sex marriage sweep (although it is still too close to call for certain in the state of Washington). http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/same-sex-marriage-wins-on-the-ballot.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Wed, 07 Nov 2012 08:54:00 PST SCOTUSBLOG has announced that all same-sex marriage cases currently before the Supreme Court will be considered at the Court's conference scheduled for November 20. This includes the Arizona benefits case. UPDATE- The Supreme Court has now announced that the date for consideration will be November 30. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/supreme-court-review-of-doma-cases.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Mon, 29 Oct 2012 17:13:00 PST As you probably all know by now, the Second Circuit has joined the First Circuit in ruling that DOMA (the Defense of Marriage Act) is unconstitutional. The Second Circuit case is Windsor v. United States and it challenges DOMA as applied to the marital deduction for estate tax purposes. In my view, there is no rational reason why opposite sex surviving spouses should be allowed to continue the pre-death of spouse standard of living estate tax free while a same-sex spouse will have to reduce standard of living to the extent there is a significant estate tax bill. But the case raises additional issues. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/the-windsor-case-and-new-york-recognition-of-marriage.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Sun, 21 Oct 2012 20:54:00 PST Here we go again. Another federal court has once again ruled that DOMA is unconstitutional. This is another case brought by GLAD (Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders). It involves a number of different plaintiffs, all married in either Connecticut, New Hampshire, or Vermont. As with GLAD's other DOMA challenge (the Gill case recently decided by the First Circuit), this case includes a number of tax claims. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/the-impending-death-of-doma.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Tue, 31 Jul 2012 17:01:00 PST All of us, when we turn age 65, are supposed sign up for Medicare. But for employees covered by employer health plans, the only requirement is to sign up for Part A (Hospital Insurance). No need to sign up for Part B (Medical Insurance) because that is being provided by the employer plan. When the employee retires, Medicare provides a special enrollment period during which the employee can sign up for Part B on basically the same terms that would have been available at age 65. How do these rules impact RDPs (and same-sex spouses) who are covered on their partner's plan? If you are approaching age 65, you need to know the answer to this question. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/the-medicare-trap-for-rdps-and-same-sex-spouses.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Tue, 17 Jul 2012 16:38:00 PST Today the Federal District Court for the Southern District of New York handed down its decision in the Windsor case. In alignment with every other court ruling on this issue in the past 12 months, the court ruled DOMA unconstitutional. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/another-victory-in-a-doma-case.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Wed, 06 Jun 2012 16:20:00 PST The Federal Court of Appeals for the First Circuit has ruled in the two cases from Massachusetts in a single opinion unanimously holding that DOMA is unconstitutional. This is the first appellate decision to so hold. What does this mean for same-sex married taxpayers? http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/doma-unconstitutional-(again).cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Thu, 31 May 2012 11:56:00 PST Under Poe v. Seaborn, all community income is split between spouses and Registered Domestic Partners (RDPs) for purposes of the income tax. That is because the income is owned equally by the two taxpayers. Does that mean the non-earning spouse or partner is similarly liable for half of the self-employment tax? I don't think so. But the IRS does. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/the-self-employment-tax-issue-for-same-sex-spouses-and-rdps-in-community-property-states-litigation-is-on-the-way.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Fri, 18 May 2012 16:50:00 PST The mortgage interest deduction rules limit deductible interest to the amount of interest paid on $1.1 million of qualified mortgage debt ($1.0 million of acquisition debt plus $100,000 of home equity debt). The statute is not clearly drafted about how to apply this limit and so the issue has arisen whether a same-sex couple, unmarried in the eyes of federal tax law, should be restricted to the same limit on their mortgage deduction as a married couple is. The Tax Court has just answered this question in the affirmative. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/bad-news-for-same-sex-couples-with-high-mortgages.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Thu, 08 Mar 2012 12:12:00 PST Since opposite-sex RDPs are not affected by DOMA, is it possible for them to be considered married at the federal tax level? In other words, should they be filing as married (either jointly or separately)? http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/how-are-opposite-sex-rdps-treated-by-the-irs.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Thu, 23 Feb 2012 18:37:00 PST Today Federal District Judge Jeffrey S. White (Northern District, California) ruled that DOMA was unconstitutional as applied to Karen Golinski, a staff attorney at the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. This is a great opinion, explaining cogently why classifications on the basis of sexual orientation are entitled to heightened scrutiny. For anyone looking for substantial authority to support filing your federal taxes as married, this opinion is a strong plus. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/doma-ruled-unconstitutional-(again).cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Wed, 22 Feb 2012 17:02:00 PST The Ninth Circuit handed down its decision in the Perry case on February 7, 2012, finding that Proposition 8 was unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment of the Federal Constitution. Today, the proponents of Proposition 8 filed for rehearing en banc. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/the-perry-case.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Tue, 21 Feb 2012 16:33:00 PST Tomorrow, February 7, 2012, is the day. The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has just announced that it will release its opinion by 10-00 AM California time. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/proposition-8-ruling-is-due-out-tomorrow.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Mon, 06 Feb 2012 11:24:00 PST Nina Olson, the National Taxpayer Advocate, has started a blog. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/taxpayer-advocate-blog.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Thu, 02 Feb 2012 18:00:00 PST I will be participating in two national tax advice call-ins. Both will be at 3PM ET, with the first one on Wednesday, January 25 and the second one on Wednesday, February 8. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/tax-advice-call-in-sponsored-by-national-lgbt-bar-association.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Fri, 20 Jan 2012 11:01:00 PST Happy New Year. It is a new year and we have new tax laws. That's the way it works these days. Of the new laws the one of most interest to the same sex tax community is the expiration of the refundable credit for adoption expenses. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/happy-new-year-and-tax-changes.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Sun, 01 Jan 2012 15:00:00 PST In 2003, the United States Supreme Court reversed the 1986 opinion in Bowers v Hardwick, holding that the right of sexual intimacy was protected by the U.S. Constitution. The plaintiff in that case was John Geddes Lawrence. His willingness to fight for the right to love makes him a gay hero. I learned tonight of his death and thought this worth sharing with the wider commuity. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/in-remembrance-john-geddes-lawrence-(lawrence-v-texas).cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Thu, 22 Dec 2011 21:24:00 PST Rep. Jim McDermott just introduced a new Estate Tax Bill that would return the estate tax exemption to $1.0 million and restore the pre-20001 progressive rate structure with a top rate of 55%. This bill makes sense as a fair revenue raiser except for its failure to acknowledge that same-sex couples will be over taxed unless they are allowed access to the marital deduction that opposite sex married couples are given. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/estate-tax-and-the-marital-deduction.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Fri, 18 Nov 2011 13:54:00 PST Are the expenses incurred for gender reassignement surgery deductible medical expenses under §213 of the Internal Revenue Code or are they nondeductible expenses for cosmetic surgery? Rhiannon O'Donnabhain thought so and so she deducted them in 2001. The IRS denied the deduction and she sued in Tax Court. The Tax Court ruled in her favor in 2010 and now the IRS has acquiesced in that decision. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/the-irs-agrees-gender-reassignment-surgery-is-a-deductible-medical-expense.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Thu, 03 Nov 2011 13:05:00 PST If DOMA is repealed or ruled unconstitutional, then same-sex marriages will have to be given the same effect as opposite sex marriages. But what about registered same sex couples in those states that recognize the relationship as a marital equivalent, but don't call it marriage? http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/in-a-world-without-doma-how-will-rdp-and-civil-union-partners-be-treated.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Thu, 27 Oct 2011 23:36:00 PST The recently issued IRS guidance for community property partners and same-sex spouses in California (and partners in Washington and Nevada) clarified an important substantive question that affects couples in all 16 jurisdictions where same-sex relationships are recognized. If under state law, your partner's child is recognized as your stepchild, then that child is your stepchild for federal income tax purposes. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/same-sex-couples-stepchildren-and-employer-health-plans.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Thu, 27 Oct 2011 11:23:00 PST This is not a tax case. It is a case involving a same-sex couple and their adoption, in New York, of a child who had been born in Louisiana. The couple requested that the child's Louisiana birth certificate be changed in accord with recognition of their out of state adoption. The state registrar refused. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/cert-petition-denied-in-adar-v-smith.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Tue, 11 Oct 2011 14:01:00 PST In the past few weeks, the IRS has issued two pronouncements on this question, both concluding that if the receipts are community income under the applicable state law then they will be taxed as community income at the federal level. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/are-current-social-security-receipts-taxed-as-community-income.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Mon, 10 Oct 2011 16:56:00 PST I am sad to report that Paula Ettelbrick, long time legal crusader for LGBT rights, died early Friday morning. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/paula-ettelbrick-in-memoriam.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Sun, 09 Oct 2011 10:14:00 PST Today the IRS released a Q & A document addressing a number of questions that have been asked by same-sex couples in the three recognition community property states, California, Washington, and Nevada. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/irs-guidance-on-tax-reporting-for-community-property-rdps.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Mon, 19 Sep 2011 10:08:00 PST The annual Lavender Law conference was held in Los Angeles, September 8-10. Lavender Law is an essential gathering for anyone who wants to stay up to date on key developments in LGBT law. I participated in a number of tax and estate planning panels and I learned quite a bit from my co-presenters. I will summarize some of those highlights. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/tax-and-estate-planning-notes-from-lavender-law.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Mon, 12 Sep 2011 14:12:00 PST Section 36C of the Internal Revenue Code authorizes an adoption credit for qualified adoption expenses paid by a taxpayer to adopt an eligible child. Many lesbian couples incur adoption expenses when they have children. One partner is the birth mother and the other partner will go through a 'second parent adoption' in order to solidify the legal relationships within the family. Adoption expenses of this sort are clearly covered by the statute. But in recent weeks, a number of IRS notices have been sent to lesbian mothers denying them the credit. How can this be? http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/the-adoption-credit-for-second-parent-adoptions.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Wed, 03 Aug 2011 13:46:00 PST The New York State Department of Taxation and Finance has issued its initial guidance for same-sex married couples who have tax questions. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/new-york-state-department-of-taxation-and-finance-speaks-up-on-tax-questions-for-same-sex-married-couples.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Mon, 01 Aug 2011 14:58:00 PST The Respect for Marriage Act (RMA) would repeal DOMA and provide that any marriage that was entered into legally in the place of celebration would be recognized by the federal government as a valid marriage. The bill was introduced in the House and the Senate in March of 2011. Tomorrow, July 20, the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold hearings on the bill. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/respect-for-marriage-act.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Tue, 19 Jul 2011 15:37:00 PST The state of New York has been recognizing same-sex marriages from other states or countries for years. Soon, New Yorkers will not have to leave the state in order to enter into a legal marriage. But the state's new law has another important impact as well. Same-sex married couples will, for the first time, be treated as married under the state income tax. Or will they? http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/the-new-york-tax-conundrum.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Sat, 25 Jun 2011 10:27:00 PST Late today New York approved same-sex marriage. This is a tremendous step forward in the battle for same-sex marriage rigts in the country. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/hooray-new-york.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Fri, 24 Jun 2011 22:43:00 PST We have at least 8 U.S. Senators on our side, urging the IRS to do something to help same-sex couples in recognition states file their tax returns correctly without the threat of penalties. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/the-senate-eight.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Wed, 22 Jun 2011 13:10:00 PST What would I like for my birthday? How about an apology from the IRS about how it has been treating same-sex couples in community property states this tax season? Voila! It came -- just one day after my real birthday. Close enough. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/my-birthday-present.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Sat, 11 Jun 2011 17:53:00 PST Last March (2010) at the Estate and Gift Tax Conference of the Taxation Section of the California State Bar, an IRS representative reported that the IRS was launching a 'compliance initiative' intended to uncover unreported gifts of real estate. While the initiative is not aimed at same-sex couples, it is likely to affect many such couples. That is because RDPs, same-sex spouses, and cohabitants often change title to the home once they begin living together. And they rarely file a gift tax return. Yesterday the Wall Street Journal reported that this program is well under way in many states but has hit a snag in California. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/irs-search-for-unreported-gifts-of-real-estate.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Fri, 27 May 2011 14:28:00 PST 2010 is the first year that registered or married same-sex couples in California, Washington, and Nevada were expected to file single returns splitting all income, including income from wages and from self-employment. Most couples and tax return preparers that I have talked with have done their best to comply with these income splitting rules. Now numerous taxpayers are receiving form letters from the IRS that appear to challenge this reporting position. If you have received any such letters, you will want to read more of this post. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/have-you-heard-from-the-irs-lately.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Tue, 24 May 2011 17:09:00 PST Karen is self employed and her partner is an employee, whose salary exceeds the social security maximum for social security taxes. Karen earns $140,000 from her business. It is all community income. According to IRS Publication 555, Karen will pay income taxes on only $70,000 of her income. Of course she will also pay taxes on half of her partner's W-2 income. The partner will get full credit for social security benefits ($106,800), but, according to Pub 555, Karen will be limited to $70,000 for social security benefits purposes. Can this be right? http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/community-property-rdps-and-self-employment-taxes.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Tue, 12 Apr 2011 10:56:00 PST Remember that this year's tax deadline is April 18 rather than April 15. That is because Emancipation Day, April 16, the day that President Lincoln signed the Compensated Emancipation Act, is a legal holiday in DC. And since it falls on a Saturday this year, it is being officially celebrated on April 15, traditionally known as Tax Return Day. This holiday extends this year’s deadline for filing timely 2010 tax returns (or any other returns that otherwise would have been due on April 15) to April 18. If you are in a same-sex couple that is recognized by your state this April 18 deadline might be important to you regarding your 2007 tax year. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/tax-deadline-approaches-for-2010-and-for-2007.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Fri, 01 Apr 2011 19:16:00 PST Turbo Tax has announced that it is not going to be able to provide full support for RDPs and same-sex spouses who are required to split their community income and deductions on their federal tax returns. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/announcement-from-turbo-tax-for-community-income-couples.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Sat, 12 Mar 2011 11:19:00 PST President Obama and Attorney General Holder have announced that they will stop defending the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in court. But, they also say that executive agencies will continue to enforce the law. What does this mean for taxpayers who want to file tax returns claiming their marital status is valid? http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/doma-and-the-irs.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Thu, 03 Mar 2011 09:07:00 PST President Obama and Attorney General Holder say they will no longer defend Section 3 of DOMA in cases currently being litigated in federal court. But that does not mean that DOMA is gone. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/obama-administration-will-no-longer-defend-section-3-of-doma-in-court.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Wed, 23 Feb 2011 13:04:00 PST The IRS has revised Publication 555, which describes how the community property rules can affect the income tax reporting of couples who are subject to such rules. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/community-property-and-rdps-revised-irs-publication-555-is-now-available.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Sat, 19 Feb 2011 16:02:00 PST Many employers include the same-sex partner or spouse of an employee in their health insurance plans. But the federal taxation of these benefits is controlled by the Internal Revenue Code (IRC), a federal law that is subject to the provisions of DOMA (the Defense of Marriage Act). Most employers understand that health plan benefits are tax-exempt when extended to an employee's spouse, but that under DOMA a same-sex spouse does not count. So are benefits extended to same-sex spouses and partners automatically taxable? http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/taxation-of-domestic-partner-health-benefits.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Wed, 16 Feb 2011 19:28:00 PST CCA 201021050 announced that the IRS will recognize the application of Poe v Seaborn to Registered Domestic Partners (RDPs) in community property states. Under Seaborn, partners are required to split their community income 50/50, no matter who earns the income. I get inquires almost every day from people who question whether or not this rule is mandatory or optional. I have answered this question before. The income-splitting rule is mandatory as of 2010. If you are still unsure about why, you might want to read the rest of this post. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/are-community-property-same-sex-rdps-required-to-split-income-for-2010.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Sun, 13 Feb 2011 16:27:00 PST Many tax return preparers are dealing with community property issues for same-sex RDPs for the first time. Questions arise daily. A recent pressing question is- how do you report income earned by a partner in a non-community property state if the couple is domiciled in California? Yes, the income is split for federal purposes. But what about the state in which the income is earned? What if that state is not a community property state? Will it recognize income splitting? http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/community-income-and-the-multi-state-problem.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Fri, 04 Feb 2011 18:51:00 PST Michael Asimow, Professor of Law Emeritus, UCLA, and Visiting Professor, Stanford Law School, sent me an interesting inquiry the other day. It involves the question of how Same-Sex Married Persons (SSMPs) in California should file their state income tax returns. Some of us have been so busy focusing on how SSMPs file their federal tax returns that the question of how to file in California sort of slipped by us. Professor Asimow has accepted my invitation to write a guest blog post on the point. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/state-filing-status-for-california-ssmps.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Tue, 25 Jan 2011 14:39:00 PST For tax year 2010, RDPs and SSM couples in community property states (California, Washington, and Nevada are the only states affected) must file their federal tax returns by splitting community income and deductions. There are substantive and procedural questions that have yet to be clearly answered on how exactly to file these returns. But a recent telephone conference call with IRS National Office Personnel has provided some essential information. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/irs-national-office-personnel-provide-critical-advice-for-community-property-same-sex-couple-returns.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Fri, 21 Jan 2011 17:47:00 PST The National Taxpayer Advocate, Nina E. Olson, has released her 2010 Report to Congress. Included in her list of Most Serious Problems is a six page discussion of the tax problems faced by same-sex Registered Domestic Partners. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/national-taxpayer-advocate-reports-that-tax-law-creates-serious-problem-for-same-sex-couples.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Sat, 15 Jan 2011 16:03:00 PST Scott James, writing for the New York Times, January 14, 2011, headlines his piece 'For Same-Sex Couples, a Tax Victory That Doesn't Feel Like One.' He?s talking, of course, about the requirement that California, Washington, and Nevada RDPs must split their community income and deductions. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/tax-victory-or-not.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Fri, 14 Jan 2011 13:20:00 PST Happy New Year and welcome back to the Same Sex Tax Law Blog. Something important happened in December that I haven't yet mentioned on this blog. Congress finally gave us some tax certainty by enacting the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010. I'll call it simply the Tax Relief Act of 2010. It gives us certainty (maybe) for two years - so already you know I'm being facetious. But the question I'll address in this post is this- what's in it for same-sex couples? http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/tax-relief-act-of-2010-whats-in-it-for-same-sex-couples.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Mon, 03 Jan 2011 11:25:00 PST I know the new IRS Publication 17 (available online) appears to say that RDPs in California, Nevada, and Washington may choose to split their community income. But it isn't really a choice. If it is community income, then the rule adopted in Poe v Seaborn, U.S. Supreme Court, 1930, applies and requires the splitting of community income. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/rdps-and-community-income-not-really-a-choice.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Mon, 20 Dec 2010 14:51:00 PST Many taxpayers and their tax advisers are confused by the Internal Revenue Service's apparent inconsistency regarding who can split community income on their federal tax returns. Some complain that they can find no binding authority to support the position that Registered Domestic Partners (RDPs) in California, Nevada, and Washington can split community income. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/splitting-community-income-yes-you-can.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Sun, 12 Dec 2010 13:58:00 PST A common question on tax accounting blogs is who gets to claim the mortgage interest deduction when the home is jointly owned. Or, who gets to claim the property tax deduction? http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/shared-home-ownership-who-gets-to-take-interest-and-property-tax-deductions.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Mon, 06 Dec 2010 15:04:00 PST When two people fall in love and decide to move in together, interesting tax questions arise about home ownership. Married couples don't have this problem. Statutes exempt spousal transfers from income and gift taxation. But these statutes do not apply to same-sex couples. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/tax-consequences-of-shared-home-ownership-the-first-question.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Thu, 02 Dec 2010 18:56:00 PST On my inaugural welcome post to this blog I mentioned that the IRS has issued a CCA holding that California RDPs (Registered Domestic Partners) are covered by the holding in Poe v. Seaborn, a 1930 Supreme Court case that ruled all community income, including earned income from wages, was to be split between the spouses for income tax purposes. This post addresses questions about who should be covered by that CCA. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/same-sex-couples-in-community-property-states.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Tue, 23 Nov 2010 19:23:00 PST This morning I woke up thinking about the estate tax. Will we continue to have one? Will the exemption of $3.5M be reinstated or will it revert to the meager $1.0M exemption, as scheduled for January 1, 2011. And, when I think of the estate tax, I think of Gertrude Stein and Alice B. Toklas. Why? Read on .. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/the-estate-tax-gertrude-and-alice.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Fri, 19 Nov 2010 14:00:00 PST Many states recognize formally created relatioships of same-sex couples and treat them the same as spouses under their divorce laws. Some states recognize marriage (e.g., Massachusetts, Iowa). Some recognize Registered Domestic Partnerships or RDPs (e.g., California, Washington, Nevada, Oregon). And some recognize civil unions (e.g., New Jersey). If the state imposes alimony on a divorcing couple in any of these states, how will federal income tax law treat those alimony payments? This blog post addresses that question. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/alimony-and-the-income-tax.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Wed, 17 Nov 2010 10:44:00 PST When a same-sex couple, whose relationship is recognized by state law, divorces and one partner pays alimony to the other, what are the federal tax consequences? This blog post suggests some answers. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/taxation-of-alimony.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Tue, 16 Nov 2010 14:00:00 PST The Internal Revenue Code provides numerous special provisions for spouses. At the current time none of these provisions applies to same-sex couples. This blog will consider what rules do or should apply to same-sex couples. http://law.scu.edu/blog/samesextax/welcome-to-same-sex-tax-law.cfm patricia-cain@uiowa.edu (Pat Cain) Mon, 15 Nov 2010 13:10:00 PST