I have a serious question that I do not think has been addressed.
For gay couples to obtain the various benefits of a married couple (employee and tax benfits), do they officially have to get married (and assumably have to prove they are married)?
Some employers have domestic partner benfits already in place and I do not know how they monitor it. Do they have to be qa couple for a month, six months, a year to “qualify”?
I can easily see people trying to tke advantage of tax laws by “saying” their married, but really are not.
Has anyone (CBO) figured out the tax implications of the marriage credits that are going to be claimed now and the impact of the deficit?
As I said in previous posts, the devil is in the details.
“For gay couples to obtain the various benefits of a married couple (employee and tax benfits), do they officially have to get married (and assumably have to prove they are married)?”
Yes. Same as straight people.
“Some employers have domestic partner benfits already in place and I do not know how they monitor it. Do they have to be qa couple for a month, six months, a year to “qualify”?”
I could be totally wrong, but I *think* the domestic partnership benefits co-inside with civil unions in various states. I would imagine a couple would qualify if they registered their union with the state.
“I can easily see people trying to tke advantage of tax laws by “saying” their married, but really are not.”
I don’t think the ruling is going to make gay people more likely to commit tax fraud than they were previously. If you’re not married, but claim that you are, and take advantage of tax laws, eventually you’re going to be found out and have a date with the IRS. But that’s the same for gay and straight people.
Makes sense! Although, I will admit I got confused when I first read it on the other page and didn’t see my response. I *knew* it had posted and couldn’t figure out where my comment had gone. Took me a minute to realize that I was on an entirely different article…
It’s been a long couple of weeks. I’ll be VERY glad once 7/2 is here! :)
I AGREE! This has been one of the most strenuous 7/1’s, in years!
I hope you retained all that you wanted to and wrote more new business than you lost!
June 29, 2015 at 11:10 am
BS says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
Thanks integrity matters! I hope your 7/1’s were profitable, too. :)
It looks like everything will be retained, so I’m not too concerned about that. But I just KNOW that the bind orders will be coming in at 4:50 tomorrow, and I’ll be scrambling to get confirmation of binding from the carriers before they leave for the day. No matter how far in advance you start the renewal, it always, ALWAYS comes down to the wire. *sigh*
June 26, 2015 at 4:29 pm
Candee says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
13
0
I am a woman married to a man, covered under his employment plan, and nobody has ever asked to see our marriage certificate.
Agreed, a few years ago there were a few vendors selling eligibility audit services and having some success saving plans money as they would invariably find people who had lied about being married, or a particular custody arrangement, etc.
I’m sure this same lack of attention to detail will continue on the part of most plan sponsors.
They should separate marriage from the issues of social security, insurance (Except for certain joint agreements or agreements of responsibility), taxation,etc. You can still have marriage with certain rights and responsibilities, but your martial status should afford you no special privileges and at the same token no discrimination.
Although this is a great soundbite for MSNBC it’s displays a lack of understanding a range of issues.
1. This would force plan sponsors to either cover everyone who had any form of relationship with a member of their plan (financially impossible), or to cover no one other than the employee which would force dependents to buy their own coverage.
2. If a stay at home spouse had no tie to their working spouses SS, they would be left destitute if their working spouse pre-deceased them.
3. The benefits received when filing ones taxes related to supporting a spouse and/or children are intended to make the tax system more progressive, or rewarding to those with greater need. i.e. A given taxpayers income is not just supporting one person, it’s supporting 2, 3, 4…
There are very few simple answers and that why these topics are so hotly debated. There are also years and years of data from a range of research projects that strongly support the idea that a nuclear* family is best for civilized society.
*Nuclear meaning two adults working together to support one another, kids, pets and a mortgage.
How long do insurance companies have to come up with “how” they will do this. I am waiting for Anthem Blue Cross/Blue Sheild to let me know but I think I will be waiting a long time. The rep told me that I could only get coverage for my spouse at renewal, then I was told they are “working on it”… Are no time limits set for companies adding this?
I live in Washington State & I was married to my partner in Washington State in 2013. This took the place of my Domestic partisanship from the registration period of 2007 to 2013. However for my 2014 & 2015 W2 there is a line item note “SSS – imputed income” of $7000.00 + for each year. I though as a married couple we were no longer subject to imputed income for the medical benefit of my spouse
I have a serious question that I do not think has been addressed.
For gay couples to obtain the various benefits of a married couple (employee and tax benfits), do they officially have to get married (and assumably have to prove they are married)?
Some employers have domestic partner benfits already in place and I do not know how they monitor it. Do they have to be qa couple for a month, six months, a year to “qualify”?
I can easily see people trying to tke advantage of tax laws by “saying” their married, but really are not.
Has anyone (CBO) figured out the tax implications of the marriage credits that are going to be claimed now and the impact of the deficit?
As I said in previous posts, the devil is in the details.
“For gay couples to obtain the various benefits of a married couple (employee and tax benfits), do they officially have to get married (and assumably have to prove they are married)?”
Yes. Same as straight people.
“Some employers have domestic partner benfits already in place and I do not know how they monitor it. Do they have to be qa couple for a month, six months, a year to “qualify”?”
I could be totally wrong, but I *think* the domestic partnership benefits co-inside with civil unions in various states. I would imagine a couple would qualify if they registered their union with the state.
“I can easily see people trying to tke advantage of tax laws by “saying” their married, but really are not.”
I don’t think the ruling is going to make gay people more likely to commit tax fraud than they were previously. If you’re not married, but claim that you are, and take advantage of tax laws, eventually you’re going to be found out and have a date with the IRS. But that’s the same for gay and straight people.
Thanks, BS. I didn’t see this one and appreciate you copying it on the other site.
I posted it in both places because it kind of fits both articles and are related.
Makes sense! Although, I will admit I got confused when I first read it on the other page and didn’t see my response. I *knew* it had posted and couldn’t figure out where my comment had gone. Took me a minute to realize that I was on an entirely different article…
It’s been a long couple of weeks. I’ll be VERY glad once 7/2 is here! :)
I AGREE! This has been one of the most strenuous 7/1’s, in years!
I hope you retained all that you wanted to and wrote more new business than you lost!
Thanks integrity matters! I hope your 7/1’s were profitable, too. :)
It looks like everything will be retained, so I’m not too concerned about that. But I just KNOW that the bind orders will be coming in at 4:50 tomorrow, and I’ll be scrambling to get confirmation of binding from the carriers before they leave for the day. No matter how far in advance you start the renewal, it always, ALWAYS comes down to the wire. *sigh*
I am a woman married to a man, covered under his employment plan, and nobody has ever asked to see our marriage certificate.
Your insurance enrollment form contains both of your SSNs, as does your marriage certificate. It doesn’t take much to verify a legally married couple.
Agreed, a few years ago there were a few vendors selling eligibility audit services and having some success saving plans money as they would invariably find people who had lied about being married, or a particular custody arrangement, etc.
I’m sure this same lack of attention to detail will continue on the part of most plan sponsors.
They should separate marriage from the issues of social security, insurance (Except for certain joint agreements or agreements of responsibility), taxation,etc. You can still have marriage with certain rights and responsibilities, but your martial status should afford you no special privileges and at the same token no discrimination.
Although this is a great soundbite for MSNBC it’s displays a lack of understanding a range of issues.
1. This would force plan sponsors to either cover everyone who had any form of relationship with a member of their plan (financially impossible), or to cover no one other than the employee which would force dependents to buy their own coverage.
2. If a stay at home spouse had no tie to their working spouses SS, they would be left destitute if their working spouse pre-deceased them.
3. The benefits received when filing ones taxes related to supporting a spouse and/or children are intended to make the tax system more progressive, or rewarding to those with greater need. i.e. A given taxpayers income is not just supporting one person, it’s supporting 2, 3, 4…
There are very few simple answers and that why these topics are so hotly debated. There are also years and years of data from a range of research projects that strongly support the idea that a nuclear* family is best for civilized society.
*Nuclear meaning two adults working together to support one another, kids, pets and a mortgage.
How long do insurance companies have to come up with “how” they will do this. I am waiting for Anthem Blue Cross/Blue Sheild to let me know but I think I will be waiting a long time. The rep told me that I could only get coverage for my spouse at renewal, then I was told they are “working on it”… Are no time limits set for companies adding this?
I live in Washington State & I was married to my partner in Washington State in 2013. This took the place of my Domestic partisanship from the registration period of 2007 to 2013. However for my 2014 & 2015 W2 there is a line item note “SSS – imputed income” of $7000.00 + for each year. I though as a married couple we were no longer subject to imputed income for the medical benefit of my spouse