# Will we save on income tax if we marry or stay single?



## kbmo (3 Jan 2012)

Hey all...

Hope someone can help with a quick question..
Sorry if asked before, but the search facility confuse me a little..

I am a single man living with my partner and we have 3 children. One of the children (eldest) is not my blood child but her blood father plays no part in her life, either financially or otherwise….

I earn 95k /year with a company car and my partner stays at home minding our children with this likely to remain the case for the foreseeable future…
My partner has no income whatsoever and receives no social welfare or anything similar ( except childrens allowance obviously)..

We are engaged and plan on marrying at some stage when finances allow etc.. My question really is, would we be better off financially by even (now) going ahead with a civil marriage initially? 
I am clueless on tax really and wondered about this recently, as to how much we would change our situation by..?

If you need more info in order to provide guidance, let me know and I will post back.
thanks in advance for any help


----------



## mandelbrot (3 Jan 2012)

Simple answer - yes. If your partner has no income, and you are a high  rate taxpayer, then marriage will have a financial benefit.

As it stands, in 2012 a married couple with children, with only one  earner, earning 95k (or anything more than the mid 40's), would be  better off by €4,350 over the course of the year.


----------



## kbmo (4 Jan 2012)

Hey Mandelbrot,

Thanks for the quick reply!

That figure really is food for thought given our tight circumstances at present.....
Forgive my ignorance, but is there a simple way you worked that out, just so I can see for myself….?
(after all, you could be my partner trying to trick me into early marriage  )

Again thanks for the quick reply


----------



## mandelbrot (4 Jan 2012)

kbmo said:


> Hey Mandelbrot,
> 
> Thanks for the quick reply!
> 
> ...


 
Single: 


Income | | 
95,000

Notional Tax 
32,800 @ 20% | | 6,560
62,200 @ 41% | | 25,502
Tax Credits
Personal | 1,650 | 
PAYE | 1,650 | 
Total credits | | 
(3,300)

Tax payable | | 28,762 
 
Married:


Income | | 
95,000

Notional Tax 
41,800 @ 20% | | 8,360
53,200 @ 41% | | 21,812
Tax Credits
Personal (1,650 x 2) | 3,300 | 
PAYE | 1,650 | 
Home carers credit | 810 |
Total credits | | 
(5,760)

Tax payable | | 24,412 
The difference being made up of:
Additional 9,000 taxed at 20% (rather than 41%) - tax effect 1,890 [9k x (41%-20%)]
Marriage credit (3,300) > Single credit (1,650) = 1,650
Home carers tax credit = 810

You can play around with figures here: http://www.taxcalc.eu/ (warning: don't tick the box for children if selecting "single", as it will automatically give you a one parent family credit that you aren't entitled to, since you are living with your partner!)


----------



## kbmo (4 Jan 2012)

Hi Mandelbrot,

again thanks for the quick reply...makes sense to me now alright..
"Home carers allowance" -is that a tax credit a married person can avail of due to the fact their wife (or husband) stays at home to mind their children..??

thanks again


----------



## mandelbrot (4 Jan 2012)

kbmo said:


> Hi Mandelbrot,
> 
> again thanks for the quick reply...makes sense to me now alright..
> "Home carers allowance" -is that a tax credit a married person can avail of due to the fact their wife (or husband) stays at home to mind their children..??
> ...


 
Yep, that's pretty much it... http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/it/leaflets/it66.html


----------



## kbmo (5 Jan 2012)

Perfect.. thanks..

Now to find out how to and how long does it take to organize a civil marriage..!!


----------



## PolkaDot (5 Jan 2012)

kbmo said:


> Perfect.. thanks..
> 
> Now to find out how to and how long does it take to organize a civil marriage..!!



Would you give her a proper day out?


----------



## Bronte (5 Jan 2012)

Your partner should make sure she is signing on for prsi credits for her future pension entitlements.  Unemployed people as far as I know are entitled to a 'free' stamp each week.  Also there is credit for a certain amount of years for stay at home mothers.


----------



## kbmo (5 Jan 2012)

PolkaDot said:


> Would you give her a proper day out?


 
Definitely will..

The plan would be to use any tax-saving cash accruing to help save for such an event...We have both discussed it and although we dont know alot about civil marriage (yet!), if we did go thru with it, we would do so on the qt from families etc (if possible)....


----------



## kbmo (5 Jan 2012)

Bronte said:


> Your partner should make sure she is signing on for prsi credits for her future pension entitlements. Unemployed people as far as I know are entitled to a 'free' stamp each week. Also there is credit for a certain amount of years for stay at home mothers.


 
Not sure what you mean but my partner is not signing on for anything at moment..I suppose technically she is not unemployed as we have no choice but for her to be a stay at home mum...

what do you suggest we do, if anything ?


----------



## PolkaDot (5 Jan 2012)

kbmo said:


> Definitely will..
> 
> The plan would be to use any tax-saving cash accruing to help save for such an event...We have both discussed it and although we dont know alot about civil marriage (yet!), if we did go thru with it, we would do so on the qt from families etc (if possible)....



Good idea. I'd imagine it's something you could arrange relatively quickly. Although, you have to notify the state at least 3 months in advance of your intention to marry. So that is probably the quickest time in which you could do it.

http://www.groireland.ie/getting_married.htm#section1


----------



## kbmo (10 Jan 2012)

As a final question on this, I am presuming that there is no other way on this?? That is, beacuse we are not married, we are not maximising our tax position??  

Presume there is no point ringing the Tax office?...I am PAYE so all would be in order on that side thru my employer's records I'd say

So it's get married or continue to be less tax efficient....??


----------



## ClubMan (10 Jan 2012)

kbmo said:


> Perfect.. thanks..
> 
> Now to find out how to and how long does it take to organize a civil marriage..!!


3 months minimum

http://www.groireland.ie/getting_married.htm


----------



## mandelbrot (10 Jan 2012)

What other way could there be, legitimately?

You may well not be claiming everything (tax credit-wise) that you personally are entitled to, but that's unrelated to what I described above - which is specifically the tax benefit from being married (or civil partnered).

I have a real bugbear about it personally TBH, as I don't really want to get "married" and would quite happily enter a civil partnership with my OH, but the piece of legislation intended to combat inequality is inherently discriminatory in that it only allows same sex civil partnership - go figure... 

I reckon if I could get a SC to take a Supreme Court case or a European case on it, we could get civil partnership for heterosexual couples - but since when do they care about equality for the majority; it's all about the minorities in the politically correct world we currently inhabit.


----------



## ClubMan (10 Jan 2012)

Bronte said:


> Also there is credit for a certain amount of years for stay at home mothers.


Stay at home parents! 

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/e.../social_insurance_prsi/homemakers_scheme.html


----------



## ClubMan (10 Jan 2012)

Maybe veering off topic but this comparison of marriage versus civil partnership in Ireland might be of interest - it seem to be balanced enough even if it is published by an advocacy group with a particular view on matters in this context:

[broken link removed]


----------



## mandelbrot (10 Jan 2012)

xeresod said:


> From a financial (tax, inheritance, sw etc) standpoint civil partnership gives the same benfits as marraige, the big difference being lack of rights for adoption and no recognition of the non-bioligal parent in the partnership, so I'm curious as to why you want civil partnership rather than marraige?
> 
> (Anyway, hopefully this "discriminatory" civil partnership will be ended sooner rather later - in favour of full marraige for same-sex couples)


 
That would be fine with me Xeresod, as it stands there's double inequality!


----------



## kbmo (11 Jan 2012)

mandelbrot said:


> What other way could there be, legitimately?
> 
> You may well not be claiming everything (tax credit-wise) that you personally are entitled to, but that's unrelated to what I described above - which is specifically the tax benefit from being married (or civil partnered).
> 
> ...


 
Hey Mandelbrot..

I'll take that as a NO so..!! Its civil wedding or nothing so....
I agree with you that it is totally discriminatory too, and as you say against the majority....


----------



## Murfnm (11 Jan 2012)

Same sex people asked & lobbied for Civil Marriage, not a cut down subset of it, which is what Civil Partnership is.

Yes I agree the same options should be there for everyone, but please dont make it sound like the minorities asked that the majority be excluded!


----------



## xeresod (12 Jan 2012)

Murfnm said:


> Same sex people asked & lobbied for Civil Marriage, not a cut down subset of it, which is what Civil Partnership is.
> 
> Yes I agree the same options should be there for everyone, but please dont make it sound like the minorities asked that the majority be excluded!


 

Any why would anybody in the majority think it was discriminatory to have more rights and want instead to benefit from less rights in a civil partnership, seems crazy to me!


----------



## mandelbrot (12 Jan 2012)

xeresod said:


> Any why would anybody in the majority think it was discriminatory to have more rights and want instead to benefit from less rights in a civil partnership, seems crazy to me!


 
To me, it's not about "more" or "less".

Same sex couples are bing discriminated against by not being allowed to marry.

Heterosexual couples are being discriminated against by not being allowed to enter civil partnerships.

Both of the above statements are true. The motivation of individuals is irrelevant!

Consider a heterosexual couple who may want to make the commitment to each other, but don't have the money for the big wedding that one of them wants. They could enter into a civil partnership, which would at least give the relationship some kind of status, such as tax benefits, to help save for the wedding they ultimately intend to have. Now I know that isn't necessarily the intention of the Civil Partnership Legislation, as it's supposed to be an alternative to marriage, but it could explain what may appear crazy to you!!


----------



## xeresod (12 Jan 2012)

mandelbrot said:


> To me, it's not about "more" or "less".
> 
> Same sex couples are bing discriminated against by not being allowed to marry.
> 
> ...


 
True!


----------



## Murfnm (12 Jan 2012)

mandelbrot said:


> I reckon if I could get a SC to take a Supreme Court case or a European case on it, we could get civil partnership for heterosexual couples - but since when do they care about equality for the majority; it's all about the minorities in the politically correct world we currently inhabit.



So its not 'all about the minorities' then?


----------



## mandelbrot (12 Jan 2012)

Murfnm said:


> So its not 'all about the minorities' then?



Sorry? I don't understand what you're driving at there..?


----------



## txirimiri (12 Jan 2012)

mandelbrot said:


> To me, it's not about "more" or "less".
> 
> Same sex couples are bing discriminated against by not being allowed to marry.
> 
> ...


 
You are conflating marriage with a wedding.

It's not discriminatory for the state to not facilitate your desire for a big expensive wedding! What is stopping you undergoing a civil marriage ceremony and then having a celebratory party later? Or do what I did - simply undergo a civil marriage ceremony and focus on the commitment and life long love that decision entails and forget the whole 'beg day' palaver?


----------



## mandelbrot (12 Jan 2012)

txirimiri said:


> You are conflating marriage with a wedding.
> 
> It's not discriminatory for the state to not facilitate your desire for a big expensive wedding! What is stopping you undergoing a civil marriage ceremony and then having a celebratory party later? Or do what I did - simply undergo a civil marriage ceremony and focus on the commitment and life long love that decision entails and forget the whole 'beg day' palaver?


 
I'm not conflating anything with anything - an earlier poster had suggested they couldn't see any reasons why people would want to act in a certain way, and I outlined a hypothetical situation that might explain why someone (not me) might wish to act that way.

I never suggested that the state should legislate to suit the wishes of such people. My point, as I said previously, is that it's discriminatory that certain entitlements, namely marriage and civil partnership, are only available to certain classes of people, based solely on the grounds of their sexual orientation.

And while I (and my partner thankfully) actually agree with you about the whole "big day" palaver, please don't be so patronising to other posters - each to their own etc...


----------



## Dachshund (13 Jan 2012)

There is no discrimination in terms of the notification fees for a civil wedding or a civil partnership. It costs €150.00. 

Taken from the General Register Office Ireland website.
Getting married 
Civil partnership

Anything else you wish do as regards the wedding/ civil partnership will cost more, but the bare minimum is exactly the same.

For what it's worth, I did get married for tax purposes and it's saved us a fair amount  over the last ten years.


----------



## mandelbrot (13 Jan 2012)

Dachshund said:


> There is no discrimination in terms of the notification fees for a civil wedding or a civil partnership. It costs €150.00.
> 
> Taken from the General Register Office Ireland website.
> Getting married
> ...



WHOOOOOOOOSH!

That's the point of my argument going over your head (unless you're just trolling!)

So in case you're not trolling, I'll reiterate:

Homosexual couples can't get married. This is discrimination on grounds of sexuality.
Heterosexual couples can't enter civil partnership. This is also discrimination on grounds of sexuality.


----------



## ClubMan (13 Jan 2012)

It's new legislation. I'd expect at some point in the future the two will become much more closely aligned. Issues relating to children's rights/adoption etc. will not doubt be contentious though.


----------



## Dachshund (13 Jan 2012)

I'm not trolling and I resent the implication. I posted as a point of information.

As a further point of information, anyone who is in an intimate hetrosexual relationship has legal rights under the [broken link removed]

If they are a "qualified cohabitant" (see Section 172 of the Act above for definitions) i.e in a relationship for two or more years with a child or children or if childless five or more years and are financially dependent on the other partner there are significant legal rights in relation to maintenance, property disposal, pensions etc. that accrue when the relationship breaks down.

Everybody is subject to this law, and it is possible to have a cohabitation agreement, like a pre-nup, concerning these relationships. See Section 202 of the Act.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (13 Jan 2012)

I assume that the original question has been answered? 

Please remember to take off topic discussions to a new thread and link back to the thread which inspired it.


----------

