Men no longer allowed to deduct alimony on taxes? MISOGYNY!

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

FarCenter (18,588 posts)

Loss of alimony tax break in GOP bill may add to the financial pain of divorce

Figuring out alimony has always been difficult for divorce lawyers, mediators and couples trying not to be couples.

Thanks to the new tax code, it's even tougher.

blah blah blah

JDC (2,062 posts)
3. Sounds like a divorce deterrent, probably hurting women more

Hortensis (20,156 posts)
4. Yes! When I read the Repubs were removing the recipient's duty

to pay income tax, on surface overall seeming to benefit women more, I immediately thought "yeah, right," and went looking for the truth.

And that's that they're screwing women, who are most recipients, again. But also the working classes in general. Again.

There'll be plenty of analyses to come, but this The Hill article from BEFORE passage also gives a little history of the subject.

GOP should divorce itself from alimony scheme in tax bill

But most seasoned family law attorneys are of the position that eliminating a tax deduction for high-income earners who make alimony payments would have unintended consequences on the low-income earning ex-spouses who receive alimony.

This is because the tax deduction for alimony payors creates a large incentive for high-earning spouses to pay larger alimony payments than they would under Trump’s proposed statutory scheme.

Trump’s tax plan also lacks awareness that higher-income earning spouses who would lose the deduction will likely ascend into a higher tax bracket. This ultimately results in a higher aggregate tax liability imposed on the parties. Translation: The higher earner has less cash to pay alimony.

This disparity in alimony payments is not necessarily offset by simply characterizing it as excluded from the recipient’s taxable income. This typically results in the spouse depending on alimony with less cash in the end.

http://thehill.com/opinion/finance/360127-gop-should-divorce-itself-from-alimony-scheme-in-tax-bill


So the religious right's finger is obvious here, but also secular male advantage, plus yet another up-click to that giant sucking sound. If both parties end up with less cash, guess who today's Repubs intend that to benefit.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210189810

[Old n Grumpy]

Sounds like it will be easier and cheaper to just get her bumped off.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Sounds like it will be easier and cheaper to just get her bumped off.

Actually I think men will be all the more reluctant to marry. With the PoundMeToo movement making men afraid to be alone with women the femnists may have just screwed their constituents out of easy marriage for the next couple of generations.

[freedumb2003b]

This is because the tax deduction for alimony payers creates a large incentive for high-earning spouses to pay larger alimony payments

Specious.   No one pays more of anything (except maybe mortgages) to save a few bucks on taxes.  You spend $10,000 to save $3,000?  That is still a $7,000 outflow.

[SVPete]

The tax subsidy for divorce got cut?Maybe there'll be fewer stupid divorces and marriages? Divorce lawyers hardest hit!

Divorce should be for things like adultery, abandonment, chemical addiction, and domestic violence, not, "I got tired of him/her," or, "We didn't invest in our marriage," or, "(S)He got fat (just like me)."

[DumbAss Tanker]

Specious.   No one pays more of anything (except maybe mortgages) to save a few bucks on taxes.  You spend $10,000 to save $3,000?  That is still a $7,000 outflow.

Bingo.  It's like selling ten dollar bills for five bucks apiece.  Stupid analysis for stupid people.

[SVPete]

Bingo.  It's like selling ten dollar bills for five bucks apiece.  Stupid analysis for stupid people.

Have you tried that offer on DU? You might get a few takers.