Latest News

Do you know of other news stories about RefuseToLie? Let us know!

Tom and Art got an extension on their taxes but intend to file jointly as a married couple in October. But the case and their impending filing got Tom thinking about how filing joint tax returns may in-and-of-itself be a kind of direct action non-violent civil disobedience (similar to the Refuse to Lie campaign last April) – one that may drive the public to question Boehner’s defense of DOMA, tax lawsuit-by-tax lawsuit. 

READ their story here: http://www.lgbtpov.com/2011/06/tom-carpenter-tax-filings-as-direct-actio...

NY Times

The Internal Revenue Service, not exactly known as a bastion of compassion, had these words for gay and lesbian couples this week: we’re sorry.

EXCERPT:
Are we willing to pay the price that civil rights movements require at this critical moment when a reinvigorated national dialogue is raging about our place under the law? Are we willing to compel the government be as ugly as it will have to be to enforce its determination that we are not married? Are we willing to say we are married, regardless of the costs?

'No excuses, no delays' is a fine rallying cry, but it's one that has to cut both ways.

Dear Friend of NCLR,

My birthday is April 15. No one ever forgets my birthday, which is great of course, but it is also a sometimes bittersweet date since April 15 is always—until this year’s anomaly—tax day.

Every year, I, like most other Americans, have dutifully filed my taxes by April 15. I’ve signed my tax return without giving it much thought, until this year.

Summary of the General Accounting Office Reports on Section 3 of the Federal Defense of Marriage Act
How does the federal government discriminate against married same-sex couples?

Miami Herald

Campaign Launches as 80,000+ Couples Face Impossible IRS Demand

(TAMPA) A new campaign called “Refuse to Lie” has been launched to assist legally married gay couples who plan to ignore the government’s requirement that they lie on their taxes by filing as “single.”

The Federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) not only denies legally married gay couples the 1138 legal protections and benefits of marriage, but the IRS also uses DOMA as a justification for telling couples to disavow their spouses.

NPR

Please visit the link above to listen to the story.

by Tovia Smith

Tax Day brings a dilemma for same-sex married couples whose marriages are not recognized by the federal government. They are required to file their federal taxes as single even though they are legally married in their home state. But this year, many couples are protesting by checking the married box on their federal return.

Examiner.com


Those who do file as married are making a statement that could in fact cost them legally. In some cases, they are also making a statement that costs them monetarily.

For example, Kate Kendell, head of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, said she and her wife chose to file jointly, and pay an extra $5,000 to do so. In order to pay that extra amount, the couple will give up their summer vacation.

Chicago GoPride

Washington, D.C.Gays and lesbians who are legally married face a conundrum every year at tax time: which box to check on the IRS forms.

NY Times

Using that definition, federal tax returns ask taxpayers to check one of five options under their filing status: single, married filing jointly, married filing separately, head of household or qualifying widow(er) with dependent child. Married same-sex partners typically file their own federal returns either as single or, if they qualify, as head of household, which has more favorable rates than the single filing status.

Santa Clara Law
January 15, 2011 at 4:03 PM

The National Taxpayer Advocate, Nina E. Olson, has released her 2010 Report to Congress. Included in her list of Most Serious Problems is a six page discussion of the tax problems faced by same-sex Registered Domestic Partners.

 

We will be updating the tax tip page to account for the recent cases ruling DOMA unconstitutional as well as the AG opinion that DOMA is unconstitutional.

 

The following paragraph is no longer correct: