Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site alice.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!alice!ark
From: ark@alice.UUCP (Andrew Koenig)
Newsgroups: net.taxes
Subject: Re: Re: marriage penalty (long quote at
Message-ID: <3471@alice.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 16-Mar-85 10:06:47 EST
Article-I.D.: alice.3471
Posted: Sat Mar 16 10:06:47 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 17-Mar-85 02:15:58 EST
References: <12300001@hp-sdd.UUCP>
Organization: Bell Labs, Murray Hill
Lines: 19

Andrea Frankel says:

> You better believe I resent Uncle Sam charging us $2-3000/year for the
> privilege of filing a little piece of paper in the state capitol.  But
> I am not optimistic about anything happening about it.  The amount of
> money they'd lose would be phenomenal, and when was the last time you
> saw the government voluntarily give up revenues?

The last time was in 1981, shortly after Reagan was first elected.
The legislation he proposed, that was later enacted, reduced the
tax rates by 25%.

I don't hold out much hope of the marriage penalty going away
soon, though.  After all, many people believe that the Reagan
administration took care of that one too, as part of the tax
cuts.  What was actually enacted was that married couples with
two wage-earners can deduct 15% of the smaller income.  Big deal.
But you'd be surprised how many otherwise well-informed people
think the penalty has gone away!