Sucks for the higher-earning spouse

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Fools on here !!!
The law is not retroactive, so all existing divorce settlements remain as-is (the payor takes the deduction).

As to new divorce settlements, the tax will be factored into the settlement. The payor will pay much less. Keep in mind alimony in general is a very rare thing these days, and even then it’s usually limited to a very short timeframe.

You get old ones recalculated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Fools on here !!!
The law is not retroactive, so all existing divorce settlements remain as-is (the payor takes the deduction).

As to new divorce settlements, the tax will be factored into the settlement. The payor will pay much less. Keep in mind alimony in general is a very rare thing these days, and even then it’s usually limited to a very short timeframe.

Good to see there are one or two rational people reading and posting to DCUM. I understand now what Trump means by "fake news".

Judges know what the tax rules are. They also know women don't pay taxes on their alimony even though they are supposed to. This change in the tax law saves the Treasury money, and won't increase the burden on divorcing husbands.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fools on here !!!
The law is not retroactive, so all existing divorce settlements remain as-is (the payor takes the deduction).

As to new divorce settlements, the tax will be factored into the settlement. The payor will pay much less. Keep in mind alimony in general is a very rare thing these days, and even then it’s usually limited to a very short timeframe.

Are you the tax guy on the other thread who is too busy to do his own laundry or cooking, that’s has to have his AP do it for him?

Nasty woman. She isn't an AP, she's his girlfriend (monogamous partner).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This tax bill is about as anti-family as it gets. We are currently engaged. We will see a much bigger tax bill after we get married later this year (I make $130K, DW makes $150K).

You are so so wrong, and obviously have no clue about the tax code. At you and your wife's income (which is similar to what my DH and I make, so I've done these calculations), the new tax bill will result in a substantial cut for you. Pre-tax bill you would have paid a major marriage penalty (now eliminated at your income) and you would have likely paid AMT (unlikely to now). AMT would have wiped out most of your SALT deduction anyways, but won't do so now. If you have a kid, you will get a $2K tax credit per child at your income. Again, pre tax-bill, your deduction for the kid would have been mostly wiped out due to AMT. At a a similar AGI, the new tax bill is saving us about $8K annually. If you want to hate the tax bill because you don't think taxes should have been cut, fine. But don't lie about the bill being anti-family, because eliminating the marriage penalty and adding a refundable $2K per child credit is actually very pro-family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fools on here !!!
The law is not retroactive, so all existing divorce settlements remain as-is (the payor takes the deduction).

As to new divorce settlements, the tax will be factored into the settlement. The payor will pay much less. Keep in mind alimony in general is a very rare thing these days, and even then it’s usually limited to a very short timeframe.

Good to see there are one or two rational people reading and posting to DCUM. I understand now what Trump means by "fake news".

Judges know what the tax rules are. They also know women don't pay taxes on their alimony even though they are supposed to. This change in the tax law saves the Treasury money, and won't increase the burden on divorcing husbands.

I think it would be hard to avoid doing this as the alimony is reported on the Husband's tax return. If the wife doesn't claim it the IRS is going to ask questions. The amount of things you can hide from the IRS is much smaller now with form matching and this isn't one of those things you can hide.

As a lawyer I think your final statement is questionable. There are ways to structure the distribution of assets such that some of it goes through as alimony to take advantage of the delta between a significantly higher earning spouse vs. a lower earnings spouse. Whether this is a good social policy or not is debatable but Congress clearly thought this favorable method of structuring asset distributions should be eliminated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Divorce shouldn't be a reward. Tax Breaks should go to married couples with children. These are to be promoted.

Actually it would be better if marriage was independent of money aspect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fools on here !!!
The law is not retroactive, so all existing divorce settlements remain as-is (the payor takes the deduction).

As to new divorce settlements, the tax will be factored into the settlement. The payor will pay much less. Keep in mind alimony in general is a very rare thing these days, and even then it’s usually limited to a very short timeframe.

You get old ones recalculated.

No. Only if the divorce case goes back to court for some other reason, at which point the new law becomes part of the recalculation. Jeez people please don't post on threads you know nothing about.

[Anonymous]

Rich liberals whining about their taxes again. And you say conservatives are greedy selfish bastards! LOL