Unexpected Expense: Employees Must Pay Tax on Domestic Partner Benefits

[DeepModem Mom]

Washington Post:
Unexpected Expense
Employees Must Pay Tax on Benefits for Domestic Partners

By Albert B. Crenshaw
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 5, 2005; Page E01


....As an increasing number of employers make health care coverage available, unmarried workers are finding that as one barrier falls, another remains standing: taxes.

Whether in same-sex or heterosexual unmarried unions, employees who take advantage of health care coverage for their partners are stuck with tax bills for the benefits.

Under federal law, any portion of an employer-paid insurance premium that goes for coverage for a domestic partner is treated as taxable income to the employee. The employee also may not make any payments for partner coverage, such as premiums under a "cafeteria" benefit plan, with pretax dollars.

The rules apply whether an employer buys medical coverage from an insurance company or whether it "self-insures" and allocates part of the costs to the worker, said Randall Abbott of the Boston office of Watson Wyatt Worldwide, a benefits consulting firm....


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/04/AR2005050402383_pf.html

[davidinalameda]

1. I know this all too well

My ex was and is still on my dental plan and the money is taken out after taxes.

If he had been my spouse, it would have been before taxes.

And I want one of the anti-marriage morans to say that denying gays the right to marry isn't a punishment

[mourningdove92]

2. Yeah, I agree.

Also, when Gays and Lesbians are accused of asking for "special rights" instead of simply being allowed the same rights as those around us.

We have a long way to go.

[Francis]

3. Why not simply remove him?

[davidinalameda]

4. he doesn't have dental coverage and probably can't get it

he's on disability and a pension

[progressivebydesign]

5. That stinks. We've turned into a fundamentalist country. n/t

[Francis]

6. I'm genuinely surprised

That this is a surprise or shock to anyone.
There never has been any tax allowances for same sex partners, so why would this benefit be any different?