Interest in this question is financial, and rather complex. There are fiscal pluses and minuses to both revenues (e.g. marriage income tax penalties, inheritance taxes, SS benefit taxation w/higher outside income, etc.) and benefits (spousal insurances, SS, Medicaid, other public assistance). Controversial assumptions are important in gauging the overall impact of Scotus ruling. Most of what I've read suggests a net fiscal gain for US gov't (inc revenue & benefits), although the numbers vary widely from insignificant to huge. Of course, time will tell over the next several years.
One related legal matter I read about over the past week was a lesbian couple in NY, where one of the women died, and the surviving woman sued for the $300,000+ in inheritance taxes the estate was forced to pay because she couldn't claim the unlimited spousal deduction on inheritance taxes.
Here's a brief article from CNN on it:
Victory for lesbian, years after her partner's death - CNN.com
This does bring up an interesting, legitimate question (and one which I am not at all attempting to troll with, given the recent legal precedent) : if two people of the same sex can legally get married and utilize the unlimited marital deduction for estate tax purposes...how would the court rule on two brothers or two sisters (or any two "close relatives" of the same gender) who's family has significant wealth and does the same thing? The gov't could argue that a brother and sister (or similar related opposite sex couple) who are too close on the family tree are not permitted to legally marry for reasons of too much similarity in the gene pool...but that would not be the same 'concern/justification' for denying two relatives of the same gender from marrying.
The gov't could try and claim that it's a sham marriage only intended to skirt the estate tax laws - but what would be the dividing line between a 'sham same sex arrangement' and a 'legitimate' one when it involves people close to each other on the family tree? What legal precedent is there involving an opposite sex couple marrying "for love" when one spouse is older and/or has a terminal illness, versus it being considered a "sham"?
I realize it would never amount to a significant minority of situations involving the estate tax...but the % of gay/lesbians is a small minority to begin with as well. Just one case involving an estate of $20MM+ could end up setting an interesting precedent.
Think: family business and/or significant family wealth involving a single person and close trusted relatives that they could pass on significant wealth to, far in excess of the standard $5MM estate tax exemption. A $20MM estate would be taxed on $15MM. Given current estate tax rates, that's roughly a cool $5MM in estate taxes that would either be owed or avoided if the unlimited marital deduction were utilized.
And given that 679 people gave up their US citizenship in 1Q 2013 alone, (
679 people renounced their US citizenship in 1st quarter of year, IRS says | Fox News) I surely wouldn't be surprised if this situation came up in the not-too-distant future given potentially tens of millions of $ for a significant estate. Sure, many of that 679 aren't doing it solely to save millions in taxes...but I'm sure that a significant minority are.
