Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ccice2.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!rochester!ritcv!ccice5!ccice2!bwm
From: bwm@ccice2.UUCP (Brad Miller)
Newsgroups: net.taxes,net.singles,net.flame
Subject: Re: Marriage penalty
Message-ID: <604@ccice2.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 18-Feb-85 17:36:13 EST
Article-I.D.: ccice2.604
Posted: Mon Feb 18 17:36:13 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 21-Feb-85 05:12:28 EST
References: <285@calmasd.UUCP> <399@wxlvax.UUCP> <501@homxb.UUCP>
Reply-To: bwm@ccice2.UUCP (Bradford W. Miller)
Organization: CCI Central Engineering, Rochester, NY
Lines: 19
Xref: linus net.taxes:564 net.singles:4900 net.flame:7461
Summary: 

In article <501@homxb.UUCP> hrs@homxb.UUCP (H.SILBIGER) writes:
>
>Let's put the question another way:
>
>Why should two people living together without the
>formality of marriage pay less taxes than a formally
>married couple?

Actually, I think singles currently pay disproportionally much of
the taxes collected. Better: Tax not only income but imputed income. That is,
given you are married and your wife does not work, she would still pay tax on
the imputed income of the rent for her abode. Same for children. This properly
moves the brunt of the tax burden to those who are most benefitting from
govenment services, and lowers overall marginal tax rates.

Waiting for flames,
Brad Miller
-- 
..[cbrma, ccivax, ccicpg, rayssd, ritcv, rlgvax, rochester]!ccice5!ccice2!bwm