{"title":"种族,民族和家庭税收:婚姻惩罚/奖励的许多阴影","authors":"J. Alm, J. Leguizamon, Susane Leguizamon","doi":"10.1086/724934","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent events have increased the focus on racial justice. One aspect of this attention is the realization that race interacts in important — but often not fully understood — ways with taxation, including taxation of the family. In this paper, we quantify the racial disparity in the magnitude of the “marriage penalty” or “marriage bonus,” using individual micro-level data from the Current Population Survey for the years 1992–2019. We find that Black married couples nearly always face a higher averaged marriage penalty (or a smaller averaged marriage bonus) compared with white married couples, even when we compare couples with similar family earnings. This occurs primarily because the incomes of Black married couples tend to be more evenly split between spouses than the incomes of white married couples. The differences between white couples and Hispanic couples tend to be smaller, but nonetheless they are still present in many cases, with Hispanic couples also facing a marriage penalty. We conclude with suggestions for reform of the individual income tax that would reduce the disparate racial and ethnic treatments across families.","PeriodicalId":18983,"journal":{"name":"National Tax Journal","volume":"76 1","pages":"525 - 560"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Race, Ethnicity, and Taxation of the Family: The Many Shades of the Marriage Penalty/Bonus\",\"authors\":\"J. Alm, J. Leguizamon, Susane Leguizamon\",\"doi\":\"10.1086/724934\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Recent events have increased the focus on racial justice. One aspect of this attention is the realization that race interacts in important — but often not fully understood — ways with taxation, including taxation of the family. In this paper, we quantify the racial disparity in the magnitude of the “marriage penalty” or “marriage bonus,” using individual micro-level data from the Current Population Survey for the years 1992–2019. We find that Black married couples nearly always face a higher averaged marriage penalty (or a smaller averaged marriage bonus) compared with white married couples, even when we compare couples with similar family earnings. This occurs primarily because the incomes of Black married couples tend to be more evenly split between spouses than the incomes of white married couples. The differences between white couples and Hispanic couples tend to be smaller, but nonetheless they are still present in many cases, with Hispanic couples also facing a marriage penalty. We conclude with suggestions for reform of the individual income tax that would reduce the disparate racial and ethnic treatments across families.\",\"PeriodicalId\":18983,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"National Tax Journal\",\"volume\":\"76 1\",\"pages\":\"525 - 560\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"National Tax Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1086/724934\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"National Tax Journal","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/724934","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Race, Ethnicity, and Taxation of the Family: The Many Shades of the Marriage Penalty/Bonus
Recent events have increased the focus on racial justice. One aspect of this attention is the realization that race interacts in important — but often not fully understood — ways with taxation, including taxation of the family. In this paper, we quantify the racial disparity in the magnitude of the “marriage penalty” or “marriage bonus,” using individual micro-level data from the Current Population Survey for the years 1992–2019. We find that Black married couples nearly always face a higher averaged marriage penalty (or a smaller averaged marriage bonus) compared with white married couples, even when we compare couples with similar family earnings. This occurs primarily because the incomes of Black married couples tend to be more evenly split between spouses than the incomes of white married couples. The differences between white couples and Hispanic couples tend to be smaller, but nonetheless they are still present in many cases, with Hispanic couples also facing a marriage penalty. We conclude with suggestions for reform of the individual income tax that would reduce the disparate racial and ethnic treatments across families.
期刊介绍:
The goal of the National Tax Journal (NTJ) is to encourage and disseminate high quality original research on governmental tax and expenditure policies. Articles published in the regular March, June and September issues of the journal, as well as articles accepted for publication in special issues of the journal, are subject to professional peer review and include economic, theoretical, and empirical analyses of tax and expenditure issues with an emphasis on policy implications. The NTJ has been published quarterly since 1948 under the auspices of the National Tax Association (NTA). Most issues include an NTJ Forum, which consists of invited papers by leading scholars that examine in depth a single current tax or expenditure policy issue. The December issue is devoted to publishing papers presented at the NTA’s annual Spring Symposium; the articles in the December issue generally are not subject to peer review.