City scraps plan to offer 'allowance' to gay workers
SEATTLE -- Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn is scrapping plans to offer some gay city workers a cash allowance to pay a specific federal tax.
Same sex couples can officially get married in Washington on Sunday, and the city originally planned on giving some of those couples a controversial wedding gift.
Despite being legally married in Washington, same sex couples will not be getting the same federal tax break offered to heterosexual couples.
In most cases, an employee can add a spouse to a medical plan and the employer will pay a portion of the spouse's monthly medical premium. But because the IRS does not recognize same sex marriages, their spousal medical benefit is considered taxable income.
The same benefit of a heterosexual married couple is not considered taxable income, which means married gay couples will pay more federal income tax.
McGinn and other city leaders say that's not fair, so they came up with a plan to give gay city workers a cash allowance to cover the difference in federal taxes.
"If the federal government has an unjust law, I don't think it's fair to punish our workers who are following all the rules," McGinn said.
The plan was to give those workers $90 a month to pay the tax, which could cost the city as much as $162,000 next year. While many agreed with the plan, others are calling the allowance a "pay raise for being gay."
"If the mayor is now in the position of determining the city is going to justify, provide justice for tax inequities, then I think that's a precarious position to put the city of Seattle in," said Joseph Backholm of the Family Institute of Washington.
Backholm, who campaigned against Washington's same sex marriage initiative, said by selectively paying so-call "unjust" tax liabilities for city workers, the city is opening the door for other employees who believe they are being unfairly taxed.
"I do not believe it's a wise decision to open up the taxpayers for liability to pay for the individual tax liabilities of city employees," he said.
McGinn said the city just wants to be fair to all of its employees, but word came late Tuesday that the city was scrapping -- at least temporarily -- the allowance plan.
In a written statement, McGinn said a Tuesday afternoon email from the city's law department forced him to cancel a planned Wednesday news conference to officially announce the allowance.
"The law department informed us that this effort would be in violation of state law and that we should not host a press conference with councilmembers. Based on this latest advice, we are not holding a press conference on this work tomorrow and are now evaluating our options for next steps in our work to help address these inequalities," the statement read.
McGinn said the same department had previously advised the city that the plan would be legal.
Same sex couples can officially get married in Washington on Sunday, and the city originally planned on giving some of those couples a controversial wedding gift.
Despite being legally married in Washington, same sex couples will not be getting the same federal tax break offered to heterosexual couples.
In most cases, an employee can add a spouse to a medical plan and the employer will pay a portion of the spouse's monthly medical premium. But because the IRS does not recognize same sex marriages, their spousal medical benefit is considered taxable income.
The same benefit of a heterosexual married couple is not considered taxable income, which means married gay couples will pay more federal income tax.
McGinn and other city leaders say that's not fair, so they came up with a plan to give gay city workers a cash allowance to cover the difference in federal taxes.
"If the federal government has an unjust law, I don't think it's fair to punish our workers who are following all the rules," McGinn said.
The plan was to give those workers $90 a month to pay the tax, which could cost the city as much as $162,000 next year. While many agreed with the plan, others are calling the allowance a "pay raise for being gay."
"If the mayor is now in the position of determining the city is going to justify, provide justice for tax inequities, then I think that's a precarious position to put the city of Seattle in," said Joseph Backholm of the Family Institute of Washington.
Backholm, who campaigned against Washington's same sex marriage initiative, said by selectively paying so-call "unjust" tax liabilities for city workers, the city is opening the door for other employees who believe they are being unfairly taxed.
"I do not believe it's a wise decision to open up the taxpayers for liability to pay for the individual tax liabilities of city employees," he said.
McGinn said the city just wants to be fair to all of its employees, but word came late Tuesday that the city was scrapping -- at least temporarily -- the allowance plan.
In a written statement, McGinn said a Tuesday afternoon email from the city's law department forced him to cancel a planned Wednesday news conference to officially announce the allowance.
"The law department informed us that this effort would be in violation of state law and that we should not host a press conference with councilmembers. Based on this latest advice, we are not holding a press conference on this work tomorrow and are now evaluating our options for next steps in our work to help address these inequalities," the statement read.
McGinn said the same department had previously advised the city that the plan would be legal.
now THIS i certainly did not vote for....sheesh.
This man is so generous with taxpayer money. The people in the state of Washington are already being taxed beyond what would be considered reasonable. How's about the government at least leave us enough of our own money to live on. Now that would be a great idea. I'm beginning to think that as long as the taxpayer has any money left at all they will keep finding ways to get it all and spend it.
yea, I agree that same sex marriage couple has same benefit with normal couple, but you guys have to know that you are ruining this world..!!Â
I don't have a horse in this race.But I do have money in it. I wonderd how long it would take this population to become a special group requiring subsidy. Everyone with their hand out asking for more. True equality means not getting a dime from someone elses wallet. How many votes can be bought?
 @Bowhunter So then you agree that married couples shouldn't get special deductions on their federal income taxes?Â
Can't deal with the core issue, then those in opposition simply obfuscate and dilute. Overall taxation fairness/unfairness has always been a hot topic button. But the main contention right now is the Mayors proposal, not single w/wout children taxation, etc. A number of folks simply don't like taxes at any point. However, they also then turn around and demand more police protection, better road systems/maintenance, and all the rest of the government services, they just don't want to actually pay for it themselves.
Â
I now notice one plaintiff here, with children, no spousal support, claims to be earning too much to qualify for any other assistance, and whines about tax levels they face. Hows it feel to be caught in the cracks of life? Now if the spouse is truly incapable of physical labor, even though you say he actually is capable, then you are guilty of aiding and abetting his ripping off other taxpayers with a phony disability, and also of allowing him to use the system to deny you and the children support. So you want a little tax relief being single with children? I pay taxes that go to support a lot of things that I do not have, or can use since my kids are all grown and on their own.
 @WSims007 Well, why doesn't the city put this $90.00 cash allowance toward more police protection and road improvement, might be a lot less demand for police protection and bitching about paying taxes.
 @SJÂ
Ask them, or rather, so far, the Mayor at least, why. "Married couples get a separate tax status than that of singles. But that is as per the federal taxes, and the state has nothing to do with that matter. The Mayor should send his concern to the IRS, Congress, whomever, and complain to them. Several states currently recognize same gender marriages, but the issue has not passed into a national law. State taxpayers should not be footing the bill when the bill should be by the feds.
@WSims007 I'm not stupid and I can read righ thru your post. My sons father was incarcerated and now claims he has issues (mental) because of his incarceration and because of that he was approved for GAU. I explained to the state when I filed for child support that it is complete BS and that there is absolutely nothing wrong with him but they said there was nothing they could do since it would be impossible for me to prove that he is mentally fine. So you really shouldn't be so quick to accuse someone of something illegal when you do not know the details of the situation.
 @tkyed Â
Love these folks who game the system against their own responsibility. But if you accept that the "state" cannot prove this, then you had a valid counter about the state incarcerating a criminal with claimed mental disability, and then to declare them "competent" later for a trial. You failed to describe your situation earlier, which left me to offer what I stated just above, and that statement does fit in many cases, perhaps not yours as to how you now have put it clearer. If you do not disclose any, even a little bit of the details, then you allow for things to get said that may not apply. I still agree that the life of a single parent who gets no support from the other is definitely not a life of ease, and congratulate you for working through it. And I also feel, and have written into the state before, that any single parent getting no support, should at least get some from the state, tax relief, support, whatever. But this is still a separate issue from what is the core of the article. You're not the first one I have come across who is in your situation.
Next it will be quotas, be careful what you wish for.
I'm not taking a position on this, but I'd just like to point out how hilarious it is that the federal government will subsidize things like the state sales tax deduction, but when a state government goes to subsidize the costs associated with a federal law, people have a problem with it.
Â
We love the deductions afforded to us as residents of Washington by the Feds which we all pay for, but don't want to help out the people in our neighborhoods. Interesting.  Â
Â
Â
Fair or not, it is, for now, the law. Let us just hope the Supreme Court strikes down DOMA this year.
 @mhungry So, what...???  Like there isn't any stupid laws???? THOUSANDS of them.
The slippery slope that started with "everything but the name" didn't last long, did it?
Â
The ONLY solution to incomes taxes, which are inherently unfair, is a FLAT tax on EVERY earned income - no ifs, ands or buts, NO exemptions, NO deductions. NO social engineering with revenue. No married or single filing, just filing.Â
Â
Everyone pays the same percentage, everyone has skin in the game. Until we achieve a flat tax so fair that you can file your return on a postcard, there will be no justice and no equity.Â
Â
Â
I voted for 74 and support gay marriage, but do not think it is the city's position to be subsidizing same sex couples like this. I do not think it would be the city's position to subsidize hetero couples either. The government has no business subsidizing anyone based on their sexual orientation or preference.
While I applaud the mayor and city council's intent, I don't think it is a good idea now. Yes, the current legal situation is unfair and unjust. As a soon to be married gay man, I think the extra money is a bandaid and detrimental toour overall goal. Thanks to Washington's residents, we can get married here. I hope the time will soon come when federal laws will recognize our marriages. I think federal recognition will happen as more and more states recognize our marriages. Seattle is the only employer I've heard of that would offer this bonus and that would be unfair to other gay couples. We need to be patient. Thanks Washington for supporting us.
 @smokey307 As a gay man, I disagree. This would put the City of Seattle, like Amazon and Microsoft and other companies that have leveled the playing field, into the unique position of being able to speak out about the costs to governments, organizations and corporations (who have more power to lobby Congress than any one of us) that come with inequality. Let them help us, not only by leveling the playing field and sharing our burden but by giving themselves standing to take this to the public and to our Federal elected officials. Now is the time. Why wait?
@horseknuckle @smokey307 - Sorry, but that's not what Microsoft and Amazon are in business to do. They are not in business to right social wrongs and it is not right to put that burden on them. Do it yourselves. You vote and you get the government you voted for, which includes very unfair tax laws.
@smokey307 -- When do you think this will be a good idea?Â
A pay raise for being gay? Well, isn't that precious. Straight couples have been compensated for being straight forever under the Federal law that gives them a tax break that gay couples don't get. So, this isn't a pay raise for being gay. This is actually equal pay for equal jobs for equal people. I am disappointed that someone at the City, especially the Mayor, didn't stand up to that nonsense. Why on earth can I read this article and, within 2 minutes, have an answer to post in these comments, but no one at City can answer the question or refute the lies that religious conservatives manufacture to attempt--over and over--to keep LGBT people in a 2nd class position?
Â
By the way, Joseph Backholm, you lost, so you don't get to speak any longer in the state of Washington. You have always been part of the problem, and Washington voters rejected you and your particular brand of intolerance by 7.4% of the votes on Nov. 6. There is no question in this state that LGBT people are now equal, both from a marriage equality standpoint and from a non-discrimination standpoint. People like Backholm, who continue to look for any way to discriminate against us, have been silenced by those enactments and do not deserve space or time in this state because what they advocate is now illegal.Â
Â
KOMO, stop giving him a platform for intolerance and hate. You certainly wouldn't give a coke dealer the space to advertise cocaine on your website or over the airwaves, so why do continue to allow Backholm to sell his drug of choice (hate), which is also against the law in Washington?
@horseknuckle -- "This is actually equal pay for equal jobs for equal people." Actually, it is not. Equal pay would be everyone making the same amount. Your tax burnden is your burnden, not mine or anyone elses.Â
 @Bianca I wouldn't expect a right wing hag to be able to spell, but it is "burden", NOT burnden. LOL
@Bianca    Your right. It isn't "equal pay for equal jobs for equal people," because "equal pay would be everyone making the same amount." As it stands now, married hetero couples will be getting a tax break that married gay couples won't be receiving because the federal government doesn't recognize gay marriage. So even though gays are allowed to get married, they are still not be treated equally.
Â
And your wrong when you say that "your tax burnden (sic) is your burnden (sic), not mine or anyone elses." Tax breaks and BURDENS affect everyone else, regardless if you are single, hetero married, divorced, widowed, rich or poor.
Did I say that the State should be paying for it? Nope, don't believe I did. I was merely pointing out the fact that married gay couples won't be receiving the same tax breaks as married hetero couples. So technically the stipend gay couples would have received is the cover what they are going to have to pay out.
Â
Biana said, "This is actually equal pay for equal jobs for equal people." Actually, it is not. Equal pay would be everyone making the same amount." However that is the whole point to this stipend. It isn't extra income. It is a replacement for what they shouldn't be having to pay out because its federal and their marriages aren't recongnized.
 @Tattooed_Angel So are you saying it is up to the city of Seattle to make that happen? the burden falls directly in their lap to make sure there is equality in paying or getting tax breaks?
 @Bianca  @horseknuckle True, Bianca, but that wouldn't be FAIIIIRRR!
Wah, sniff.
 @horseknuckle Don't forget that all single folks need to be compensated extra as well because tax law b/slaps them ten ways from April 15th! Oddly enough, that also includes (up to now) most gays! So maybe the city can pay extra to single people?  Straight or gay. And folks that drive cars to work because they have to pay gas tax and tabs and the like. Let's pay them more. The money will be coming from that other guy.
 @Getov Mylon You make no sense. Effective Sunday when the first gay couples actually marry in Washington, the City of Seattle will treat straight married couples differently than gay married couples. That is tax inequality among SIMILARLY SITUATED EMPLOYEES of the City of Seattle. By definition, single people (gay or straight) are not similarly situated from a tax parity standpoint--in fact, there is inherently no tax parity issue at all BECAUSE THEY ARE SINGLE. So your argument is the proverbial apples and oranges argument. Equality has arrived in the state of Washington. Unless you know what you're talking about (and you clearly do not), sit back and let those of us who are experts in these matters address the problem.
Â
And by the way, I should remind you and the rest of the people reading and commenting that we aren't talking about gas in the car or car tabs. We are talking about health care for human beings and access thereto. This tax parity issue might actually make it impossible for a gay spouse to cover his or her spouse with HEALTH INSURANCE! Not a gallon of gas. Not license and registration for a car. HEALTH COVERAGE. You know, that thing that can mean the difference between financial stability and bankruptcy or worse, life and death?
@horseknuckle @Getov Mylon - The City of Seattle does not decide how much income tax you or anyone else does.
 @horseknuckle Oh, ok, so YOU are the only one who has a right to voice an opinion on the KOMO comment boards? do us all a favor, go back to your closet..
 @SJ I didn't say a word about the comment board, genius. And wouldn't you like it if LGBT people like me would just go back in the closet. It's never going to happen, and my advice to you would be to stop fighting our rights so that we might stop demanding them.
 @horseknuckle You said: "KOMO, stop giving him a platform for intolerance and hate" is the KOMO comment boards not a platform to comment on whatever you want? genius, wake up there, you are on the comments section of KOMO news 4, remember? How do you figure I'm fighting your rights? I don't even vote, as far as the closet goes, not everyone needs to go back, just you....I wish you the best and hope you get everything you deserve.
 @horseknuckle  @SJÂ
Â
Point taken. I could have been less harsh.
Â
+1 Internets.
@horseknuckle @Poisonous Giraffe @SJÂ - Now wait a minute . . . "I'm not really one of those who is happy to sit ont he sidelines and let others fight on my behalf?"Â Didn't you just post above that you thought Amazon and Microsoft should fight on your behalf?
@SJ @horseknuckle ...with horseknuckles entitlement attitude I would think they already are in politics.....
 @horseknuckle Well lets elect you Governor or Mayor and just see how equal things will be, yea?
 @Poisonous Giraffe  @SJ Never will I chill about inequality until it no longer exists. I'm not really one of those who is happy to sit on the sidelines and let others fight on my behalf, and I'm certainly not happy to sit by and watch others hold people down. My hunch based on your previous posting history, Poisonous Giraffe, is that you and I agree on a whole lot of things. You should be happy to have to me get worked up and call people out on this type of nonsense. Otherwise, it will continue to propagate. After all, too many commenters on KOMO have an ignorant, ill-informed opinions about matters such as these. Those of us with expertise or who have a dog in the fight, so to speak, would do well to take them on, lest other people who stumble across these comments fall into the trap of believing they are right by the lack of response.
 @SJ  @horseknuckleÂ
Â
Geesh, Horseknuckle... Didn't get your Krispy-Kream donuts today or something? Chill dude...
 @horseknuckle I don't give a flying leap if he is from mars, he's still in Washington State and he has a right to his opinion concerning State issues, and if KOMO, Evergreen keep asking him for an interview..........so be it, the world does not revolve around you and what you do or don't like or what others say, this whole gay issue is a hot topic right now, just look on this comment board, so what is wrong with asking him his opinion? if you want to be heard off here, call Evergreen or KOMO and make an appointment to be interviewed.
 @SJ KOMO interviews him all the time on LGBT issues. From Ref. 74 to transgender rights at Evergreen College to this tax parity issue. An issue unique to the City of Seattle. WHERE BACKHOLM DOESN'T EVEN LIVE (he lives in Brier)! I'd be much happier if KOMO relegated him to the comment section, where I could more effectively tear him apart.
Â
And on the closet offer, the answer is still no. Good day.
As a matter of fact I am raising my son all on my own and have never received a $ in child support and according to the state i make too much money for any assistance. I work my ass off and I do not receive any extra $. So now I would like to know where my single parent handout is??
What happened to everyone being treated equal!! Now if you are a minority, gay and a man you damn near have it made.
So, let me get this straight, the Mayor wants to give tax payer money to gay married couples because the feds currently do not recognize gay marriage. So, basically, the Mayor wants to take money from the people and give it to gay couples. Yeah, good call. Everyone, gay or straight, should be outraged by this joker.
 @Bianca I don't agree with the mayor, but I am more outraged by stupid people. Yes Bianca, I mean you.
After reading this story, can I assume Mike is not running for re-election? This is just as crazy at what's going on in the town of Pacific.
I am starting to think that it really sucks being a straight hard working white woman
 @tkyed And your color has do with what?
@WSims007 @tkyed --- Really? It has everything to do with it.
@OHREALLY??? NO i do not get earned income because I earn too much money and NO I do not get child support because my sons father is on something called GAU (General assistance for the unemployable) even though there is absolutely nothing wrong with him exvept for being too lazy to work.
@tkyed "I want an allowance for being a single mom." I'm sorry but don't you get earned income, head of household allowances, and untaxed child support money (I know you SAID you didn't) for being a single white woman with child(ren)? Men that don't have full custody of their child(ren) do not get them allowances.
 @SJÂ
There are ways to reduce one's tax liabilities, and that it would also include a single person raising children should allow for more tax reduction liabilities. I'm not a tax expert, and don't know all the in's and out's so to speak. However, I am only addressing the matter of what the Mayor of Seattle proposed, not all the rest of the tax issues.
Â
But this is still not about race, nor about being single with or without children. This is about what the Mayor has proposed, and even though it would be an issue deserving of support overall, it is not for the state to do of and by itself. The proble lies with the federal tax law.
 @tkyed Â
So you would want an allowance because you're a "single Mom"? Tell you what, I could easily support that as it is not an easy job to work and raise children at the same time, nor certainly not cheap.
Â
But this is actually not an "allowance because of orientation". It is an allowance for married same gender couples which would fall in line for the allowance for married opposite gender. Problem with the Mayor's concern is that he, on behalf of the city/state, is attempting top align a "federal" tax situation through a local solution, and I can't support that. Heterosexual couples, as you know, get tax considerations. But in same gender marriages, they will not get that consideration...but as I said, it is a federal problem, not our states problem.
 @WSims007 You know what's really scary about this tax business? a single person. trying to work and raise children gets taxed so much  just because they checked the single box, never mind if they have a kid or two, maybe helping support an elder/disabled parent etc. because they checked that single box they are being made to pay more taxes than a married person, not right, equal taxing justice for all..and that includes the single person, taxing  and tax breaks is not just a gay issue.
@WSims007 Actually it is all about homoseuxals possibly getting an allowance. I want an allowance for being a single mom who works my ass off. personally I think that is more justifiable than someone getting extra $ because of their sexual orientation. So if someone is gay that makes them extra special and they deserve more $?? Please...
 @WSims007 It's called BEING SINGLE tax, as a matter of fact the single person is discriminated against when it comes to taxing, they pay threw the nose, and why? because they are SINGLE, no tax breaks for them, and why? why should gay marrieds be give special tax treatment, more so than a single person?
 @SJÂ
Any denial of rights to one American, is a denial of rights to anyone else. And if you're concerned about tax rates, is that federal or what? Is it gender taxes? Is it sexual orientation taxes? Is it a matter of what race one is about taxes?
 @Bianca Â
General statement? Sure it is. And you're right, I am not single, and haven't been for the past 37 years either. And also right that I am not a woman. So now the question is to you...so what? This an issue on whether or not the Mayor of Seattle would institute the policy as written about in the article in concern to homosexuals who marry and some sort of tax rebate matter. It is not about one or the other gender, nor about one or another racial character.
 @WSims007 Please...how many times have we heard about the gay community being discriminated against like the blacks were, still are? what's wrong with her saying she's white and single? single people are the highest taxed around.
@WSims007 -- It's a general statement. Clearly you are not single, white or a woman.Â
 @Bianca Â
There is nothing about "color" of anyone in this. So it has absolutely nothing to do with anything.