I think that is true unless you fall into the AMT bracket...


>AFAIK, marriage penalty was essentially removed from the tax code few years ago. Probably, some problems still exist in case of big disparity of incomes, like 30K and 120K. However, as my accountant says, it is always possible to file return as 'married but filing separately'.
>
>>I agree. It's also why two people who both earn 75,000/yr or more and want to get married shouldn't. Otherwise just geting married causes too much of your income to go to taxes.
>>
>>
>>>>>>>Jim, just a curiosity, how you define 'very very' and/or 'crazy' level for taxes in numerical terms?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I remember hearing, several years ago, that some famous Swedish director couldn't return home because he was wanted for tax evasion. But his taxes, it was claimed worked out to just over 100% of what he had earned. Now that's crazy!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>But in my head I'd go to 55% as being on the edge of crazy. Anything more would be crazy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Just my opinion.
>>>>>
>>>>>Would that 55% apply to the total tax burden or just the federal income tax? Right now a married couple earning 150k, living in California would enjoy a 28% federal income tax, 6.2% Social Security, 1.45% Medicare, a 10% state/local income tax in addition to $0.504/gallon gas and 7.25% sales tax.
>>>>
>>>>Another way of looking at that is to see a couple with a household income of $150,000 a year whining. And there are many such couples (and individuals). Never have so many felt so sorry for themselves for so little reason.
>>>
>>>That would be the way an envious person would look at it. Do you really believe that class warfare is the best way to set tax policy?