Subscribe

Cases affect planning for gays

The Supreme Court could throw out the federal law that bans gay marriage as early as today in…

The Supreme Court could throw out the federal law that bans gay marriage as early as today in one of two decisions due from the nation's top court in the coming days involving same-sex marriage.

The 1996 federal Defense of Marriage Act, which states that a marriage must be between one man and one woman, makes it impossible for same-sex couples who were legally married by their state to receive federal income and estate tax deductions that married couples enjoy, as well as other benefits, such as Social Security spousal and survivor benefits.

PROPOSITION 8

The second case revolves around the question of whether a state has the authority to allow or ban gay marriage, centering on California's Proposition 8 law: a voter initiative that requires that a marriage be between a man and a woman.

Supporters of gay rights had hoped this California case would result in the outlawing of state provisions banning same-sex marriage, but most legal experts believe that the justices are not ready to take the issue that far.

If the court rules in favor of same-sex marriage, financial planning options could change for same-sex couples, and most legal and financial experts think the decisions will provide about 1,100 federal benefits just for those who live in the 12 states and Washington, D.C., where gay marriage is legal. The Census Bureau estimated that there were 646,000 same-sex-couple households across the country in 2010.

“For couples who got married in one of the 12 states [that allow same-sex marriage] or D.C., they could now do estate planning like heterosexual couples,” said Janis Cowhey McDonagh, an estate and trust specialist, and East Coast leader of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender practice for Marcum LLP.

Gay marriage is legal in Connecticut, Delaware, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Washington, D.C. Most other states prohibit it in their constitution or have passed laws against it.

[email protected] Twitter: @skinnerliz

Related Topics: ,

Learn more about reprints and licensing for this article.

Recent Articles by Author

Celebration of women fostering diversity in the financial advice profession

Honoring the 2020 and 2019 InvestmentNews Women to Watch for their achievements and dedication to improving the financial advice profession.

Merrill Lynch veteran Michelle Avan dies

Avan recently became SVP and head of global women's and under-represented talent strategy, global human resources for Bank of America.

Finalists for Women in Asset Management Awards announced

More than 100 individuals were named on the short list for awards in 16 categories; the winners will be announced on Sept. 9.

Rethinking advisory fees means figuring out value

Most advisers still charge AUM-based fees, but that's not likely to be the case in 10 years, according to Bob Veres. Some advisers are now experimenting with alternative fee models.

Advisers need focus on growth and relationships, especially now

Business development expert Robyn Crane believes financial advisers need to be taking advantage of this unique time.

X

Subscribe and Save 60%

Premium Access
Print + Digital

Learn more
Subscribe to Print