Thank you for this.  

My younger sister and I are both in our mid-40s and I have lived together since college years in a sort of “sibling-marriage”.  We intend to live this way for the rest of our lives and have often wondered if there was a movement afoot somewhere that would allow us similar rights to married people.  

My sister is a full-time employee with 25 years service and a great benefits package, and I am a freelance graphic designer struggling to pay incredibly high insurance costs.  Even a Gay or Lesbian couple in a similar circumstance would not be struggling.  

As single women it feels as though we pay more into the public system than married people with children — despite the fact that we use up fewer public resources.  

Do you have information that would connect us with other people with similar concerns?  

Best regards,

Karen B. of California

p.s.  I would like to hear from others who live in a similar situation.  They can e-mail me at: burnbright@earthlink.net

I'm 49 and have always been single and have, over the years, noticed the many ways in which I'm discriminated against (legally and socially) for being single.  Your list of laws that discriminate is very interesting and I would like to add one to the list that is VERY IMPORTANT financially to singles, and that is related to capital gains tax.  To wit, married people are entitled, when they sell their home, to a $500,000 capital gains exemption.  Thus, for marrieds, $500,000 of the gain from sale of the home is exempt from taxes.  Singles are only entitled to a $250,000 exemption. 

Under the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution, as interpreted by the courts, a state law may validly treat similarly situated persons differently if there is a "rational basis" for doing so (except with respect to certain classes, such, as race and gender) where the state must have more than a merely "rational basis" for the distinction, but rather must show a compelling basis).  Financial issues fall under the "rational basis" test.

There is no rational basis for the capital gains exemption.  Singles are paying the same mortgage amount as the married couple.  Singles are paying the same real estate taxes on the property.  Singles and married couples alike are benefiting in the gain exactly the same, that is, a single person owning the same piece of property as the married couple would gain the same.  True that the married couple (should they divorce) would have to split the exemption and gain in half, but this should not alter the conclusion since, theoretically, they also split the expenses of the property (mortgage, insurance, taxes etc.).  If anything, it is far more burdensome for the single person to own the same piece of property and therefore, the single person should "at least" have the same tax exemption benefit at the end of it.

If a single person were in the 25% tax bracket, he/she will have to pay $62,500 more in taxes on the sale of property where the gain is $500,000 or more than the married person.  NOT FAIR!!!

Just thought I'd bring that to your attention, as it would be a great issue to lobby.

Best,
Anne M.

January 23, 2006
Many unmarried taxpayers denied 'head of household' status