Tax V Marriage Unit Analysis

IV. Tax v the Marriage Unit
Historically, common law doctrines and civil law jurisdictions have treated property management and economic policies under the husband-wife relationship to be owner by a unit. The marital estate was deemed to be owner by one person. Women were viewed as having no capability to be taxed directly because as individual as they would not have any economic gain or ‘political power’. This illustrated how the marriage unit was in fact, treated as one basic tax unit. Feminists have advocated that once a woman enters into a contract of marriage, she is embedded into society not as an ‘equal individual but as a natural subordinate, she is ‘civilly dead’ and is deprived of all her rights as a married woman. In essence,
This derives from the conservative model of the traditional family unit, supported by the church, who value the symbol of marriage more than the unwedded in the light of children. They do so by introducing perquisites such as increased spouse dependant rebate and other spousal benefits and most significantly inheritance through which children were granted ownership of property. One of the advantages of marriage are ‘tax credits and the standard rate cut – off points which can be allocated between the spouses to suit their own circumstances’. It is known to be as a bonus as it lowers the tax liability of a couple if assessed together. Dulude describes lawyers as ‘optimistic’ to presume that couples share their incomes equally. In reality, women have never won the right to an equal share of their matrimony property combining of pensions, shares and property interest. Therefore, it can consequently result to disincentive marriage, encourage artificial marriages and support romantic cohabitation and children without the expense of the ‘married’ title which is most
Yet in both situations, the motive for a married woman to consider employment outside the family home is compelling. It could result in either a financial gain for the household or a penalty leaving the woman in a vulnerable position. Because of the male-female dominance split, the higher earner who regards to be supporting the household is the ultimate winner. The woman is not rewarded for her efforts in the household or her decision to be absent from the workplace. Additionally, the distributive effect of the tax system provides benefits which are far from gender budgeting initiatives. The lack of empowerment of women is entirely because of the social stigma of mothers working and the branded family model which have provided marginalization of historical