Opposite-sex couples who want their relationship to be legally recognized outside of the institution of marriage will now be able to register as domestic partners after legislation by state Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, was signed into law.
Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Wiener’s legislation, Senate Bill 30, into law Tuesday. Under current law, only same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples 62 and older were able to register domestic partnerships. SB 30 ends
that restriction.
California’s domestic partnership registry was originally created to allow same-sex couples to have their relationships recognized at a time when they were not legally allowed to marry.
The bill will go into effect Jan. 1, 2020.
Opposite-sex couples were originally excluded from the registry because of their access to marriage. Opposite-sex seniors were included because of issues related to Social Security.
There are several reasons couples may choose to register as domestic partners instead of marrying. Domestic partnership is financially beneficial for some couples because the federal government does not recognize
it.
Couples may avoid the federal “marriage penalty,” when the incomes of a couple are taxed higher than two individuals would be, or preserve certain benefits or tax credits.
The historic and cultural connotations of marriage are also undesirable for some, and domestic partnership provides an alternative, according to Wiener’s office.
“In modern society, couples define their relationships in many different ways, not only through marriage,” Wiener said in a news release.
“Couples should be able to protect their relationships under the law by registering as domestic partners, without being forced to marry. SB 30 brings long overdue parity to same sex and opposite sex couples.”
46 comments
Yay?
Does this guy ever think of something that would be beneficial? Just get married and stop messing around.
I agree. If you want the rights of marriage, get married…otherwise you’re gaming the system.
Get married and then get a divorce like 50+ people do then you can fight over all you assets.
This article explained the disadvantages but what are the advantages of registering as domestic partners?
The legal concept of “marriage” includes financial issues such as community property, that assets and debts are co-mingled. It also includes automatic inheritance of property should one of the partners die. I haven’t looked into the details but apparently there is something in criminal law where spouses can’t be forced to testify against the other. I’m sure there’s more to “marriage.” How much of this is will also be applicable to “domestic partnerships?”
I’ve always thought it was strange but California, and I assume most, if not all states, recognize “marriage” that happened outside of California and/or outside the USA. It’s strange because there is a long list of legal things associated with “marriage” that are not the same from state to state nor from country to country.
Very good questions! I immediately wondered the same things including is it legally recognized as soon as one registers (regardless of how long they’ve lived together)?
An advantage to a domestic partnership, especially for seniors, is that if a person is receiving a pension from their former spouse-now deceased, they would not lose that benefit. If the person remarries, they lose the pension, often leaving them with extremely limited or non-existent income. My 80+ yo mother, who receives a pension from my late father’s employment, “married” another 80+ gentleman several years ago. They couldn’t actually GET married so they had a “commitment ceremony”, but it would have been nice if they could have registered as domestic partners because then she would have had SOME rights as his “spouse”. As it was, she had none and received nothing when he passed away last year.
Thanks to Mimi, I now understand why this is important. I had not thought of that difficulty
@Mimi: I feel for your situation, but one can’t have it both ways. She wanted the benefits of marriage but not the negatives, which meant giving up her pension of her past husband. Did she get Social Security on her own or husband’s record, or SSI?? What about her new husband’s income??
wait so domestic partnership is a tax loophole
here we go ….
and what not everyone defines themselves by marriage …
what is happening to this state and country
there is a universe out there with wonderous things and even our planet has not been fully discovered ….and yet banning straws and invoking a domestic tax loop hole is what the dems are most proud of
japan is …blowing holes in asteroids and landing on them and then departing …..and the us dems are worried about domestic partnership and legalizing crime and transferring of aids ….
while the world progresses at a expedited rate exploring new ideas and expanses ….even north korea has developed rockets
us dems baning manhole covers and straws is their coup de grace
now wonder why socialist communist china is becoming so powerful
the us has given into entitlement and sloth lifestyle and a pansy strategy to control the populous
Transferring of AIDS? What does that even mean? Is that your way to take a jab at gay people?
We have a lot of problems in this country. The president in the White House is only concerned with building his stupid wall and giving tax cuts to his billionaire buddies.
I agree that some of the parties a politician’s are little bit of skewed. However in 20 years when most of Florida is underwater a lot of Republicans are going to find themselves wishing they would have been more supportive of doing more to stop climate change.
You can deny it all you want but it is fact not fiction.
Also you should consider learning how to use the shift button so you can capitalize words that should be capitalized.
“You can deny it all you want but it is fact not fiction”
You sure triggered Mike RT. See? Omly Mike has the “facts.”
See the problem Mike?
ps: regarding our President, declass is coming, maybe today. Check back with me then OK Mike?
@ Mike:
“Transferring of AIDS? What does that even mean?”
Try to keep up:
https://tinyurl.com/y5heqszd
@ Mike-
20 years? It’s going to be 10 or 12 years.
I know it is true because I saw the Democrats say it at last night’s debate!
Wonder how much money this wasted of tax payers throwing these papers around, signed, approved, voted on.. etc.. What a waste of money!!! If you truly love each other then that should be enough. Stop looking for validation from others and validate yourself, love yourself and move on with your life and support yourselves as a couple no mater your same sex, opposite sex whatever!
Sounds like a gift to attorneys. The financial entanglements will fill the courts with civil actions.Whatamess!
Nice job Weenie and Gavin “Any Twosome” Newsom.
I guess dogs are next.
Boy what a piece of work is our governor. Never really doing anything of value but waste our time and tax dollars, almost forgot collecting votes form the entitlement crowd. Amazing as everyone I know did not vote for him.
I am in the securities industry, and have yet to meet anyone who voted for Mr. Newsom. That is rather telling, isn’t it?
I remember when gay people fought for the right to have Domestic Partnerships when gay marriage was illegal.
Back then the same Conservatives who fought against gay marriage – also fought against the simple legal option of a Domestic Partnership.
I think it is hysterically funny watching people who fought like hell for so many decades to keep gay people from having any form of legally recognized relationship now on the other side of the coin and finding they have no game left.
Oh yeah – and for you straight married folks who told us that gay marriage would destroy the institution did you get divorced when gay marriage was legalized? Or did you somehow find a way to survive the destruction of marriage? LOL
Since you are attacking straight people allow me to say Gay marriage is a joke. For a man to call another man his husband is crazy. You may think that is OK but it just sounds ridicules. Gay people can form whatever they want to call their union but not marriage. Not husband and not wife. Think of your own names.
I agree, Richsrdoh. Apparently not creative enough to come up with their own institutions, gays had to co-opt straight ones … because they wanted to be treated just like everybody else … they just didn’t want to behave like everybody else. Yes, it sounds ridiculous to call a man a wife and a woman a husband.
And, have you noticed how gays can’t seem to keep their hands off each other in public. We start to wonder if they’re really trying to convince us it’s authentic… or, each other. Gay or straight, I’ve never seen that kind of touchy, feelly demonstrative public display in a relationship that lasted for any length of time.
Weiner is furiously passing “gay friendly” legislation before the whole movement goes bust and fizzles out like a wet firecracker. Because, historically it always has. Going to look really stupid in the rearview mirror, I’m afraid.
So, can you be married AND under certain circumstances have a third person be a “domestic partner?” Will this make it feasible for the “omar” persons of the world to register as Domestic Partner with their brothers, sisters, uncles, etc. to bring them into the country. I see a lot of gaming issues, with taxes being only a small part.
As the article says – domestic partners are not recognized by the federal level. You will need another way to get your mad-bomber buddy Omar into the USA.
These are the requirements for a domestic partnership in Caliornria. They preclude polygamy and marriage to a sibling:
https://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2018/12/04/california-domestic-partnership-bill/
“Neither person is married to someone else or is a member of another domestic partnership with someone else that has not been terminated, dissolved, or adjudged a nullity.
The two persons are not related by blood in a way that would prevent them from being married to each other in this state.
Both persons are at least 18 years of age, except as provided in Section 297.1.
Both persons are capable of consenting to the domestic partnership.”
Yippee! The marriage penalty is real and is pretty high. Would cost me over $10k/year if we were married. You can look at it as a disincentive to have two working spouses in the same household.
A lot of government tax and benefit policies are in place to drive behavior.
Marriage penalty. Mortgage interest deduction. Deductions for children and then child care tax write offs…
Let’s not get started on “entitlement programs”, most of which are in place to prevent inner city riots and buy vast voting blocks.
Don’t get too excited because the next step will probably be to tax domestic partnerships the same as marriage. Yay for equality!
so everyone is …sorry democrats and their lemmings are up in arms …
over the dem rhetoric of 1%ers
yet seem ok that of the 25 million illegals only 4 million are paying their taxes
and that includes the tax loop hole for illegals to claim any and all dependents in their original country
so in essence an individual can claim they have 10 children and get $1000 dollars per child no questions asked ….but you say well then they don’t get anything from social security when they retire ….well for you entitled they don’t care they are sending their money back to their country without penalty and the dems claim they are fleeing from something to come here for their safety and yet when they are done fleecing America they go back …
which is why the dems have not tried to legalize them …they don’t want to be legal then they won’t be able to fleece and avoid paying taxes and getting 1k per child not in the country and the irs does not verify ….then they go back to their country rich and sending the next one over to do the same
seems socialism works only if your illegal
nice work lemmings ….you cry about the 1% and yet illegals are stealing with the gov consent ….wow
So how does this work in a community property state like California?
In California, if domestic partners break up, they are treated as married:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2014/06/05/are-domestic-partnerships-a-way-for-heterosexual-couples-to-avoid-the-marriage-tax-penalty/#43ad4a664d43
“California: Domestic partnerships are permitted for all same-sex couples and for opposite-sex couples who are 62 and older. Domestic partners have same state rights and responsibilities as married couples.”
I just don’t understand what situations arise to make married filing jointly different than from filing separately unless one or both persons have income genuinely derived from separate property because anything you earn from working while married is community even if you file separately (each party reports half of total). Does this new law affect community property?
I am not a lawyer or accountant, but from what I know, the IRS only cares about your income when filing, not assets. How couples divide the income among themselves is their own business. In a divorce, the income counts as community property.
Some people get divorced so they can qualify for Medicaid. If they are married, their total income puts them over the threshold, but as singles, one or both may qualify.
Also, two individuals not married get more in SSI benefits than if married.
Years ago, my mothers had an income from her SS disability and also her Chevron retirement pension that precluded her from getting Medi-Cal benefits. Her husband was a deadbeat, 17 younger than her, and he hadn’t worked in 10 years. She had to give him money for everything since he had no income. Eventually, she told him if you are going to be lazy and not work, you need to go apply for welfare, like Medi-Cal and SNAP. So he did, but they said since he was married, his wife’s income would have to be factored in, which would disqualify him.
If they had been just living together and not married, he would have qualified for SNAP, but not Medi-Cal at the time, since was not not disabled or a parent or a senior. (Now, under the Affordable Care Act and Expanded Medicaid in California, he would have qualified for Medicaid had he not been married).
My point is there are financial benefits for living together and not being married.
So can I register my adult children as domestic partners and then add them to my health plan and use them as dependents on my taxes?
Uh, no. Read the text
You claim your adult children as dependents if you provide a certain percentage of their support. They then can’t file for themselves.
A domestic partnership to a blood relative is prohibited by California law, as I mentioned above.
The Gov is ruining California one signature at a time…….just ask his ex wife
His ex-wife’s boyfriend is a jerk
Sorry to be posting a lot here. I am fascinated by this article on Claycord since I was unaware people 62 and over could opt for a domestic partnership instead of marriage.
So I researched the topic more. This is a good summary from Forbes (four paragraphs below, but you can go tot the link to read the rest if you want):
https://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2014/06/05/are-domestic-partnerships-a-way-for-heterosexual-couples-to-avoid-the-marriage-tax-penalty/#43ad4a664d43
“In their zeal to provide a legal alternative to banned marriage for same-sex couples, some states may have created a new tax shelter for heterosexual couples. By choosing domestic partnership or civil union over marriage, opposite-sex couples are able to avoid paying a federal income tax marriage penalty, just as same-sex couples can.
Over the past decade, domestic partnerships and civil unions became a popular alternative in many states. Same-sex marriages were broadly prohibited until last year, when the Supreme Court declared key provisions of the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional. As of May 22, according to Governing magazine, gay marriage was legal in 19 states and the District of Columbia. But the domestic partnership and civil union laws enacted over the past decade remain on the books in at least a dozen states.
There are vast differences in these state laws. Some make alternatives to marriage available to same-sex couples only. Others permit them for heterosexual couples as well, while others grant the options only to opposite-sex couples who are 62 or over (Social Security has its own marriage penalties for some people who are divorced or married couples getting SSI).
And some states, such as California, require domestic partners to file jointly for state tax purposes even if they file separately on their federal 1040s.”
Strangely, California has adopted a conservative approach, making domestic partners who file separately on IRS forms to avoid the marriage penalty file jointly on CA tax forms, which forces them to incur the marriage penalty and pay more.
@Mimi about “As it was, she had none and received nothing when he passed away last year.”
If the intent of a relationship is that the surviving partner get the assets then you write a will. Messes and large upsets have been created when people with children get married. One of the married couple then dies without a will. The spouse gets 100% of the property and the deceased’s children get nothing. The other person then dies without a will. That person’s children get 100% of the property.
The important message is that everyone should have a will. It allows
you to spell out how you want your assets to be distributed. You can also state if you want to be buried, cremated, etc. For most people, they can do it themselves using what’s available in the Nolo Press book. The public library has copies. “Quick & legal will book” by Denis Clifford. https://catalog.ccclib.org/?section=resource&resourceid=1170836228&view=fullDetailsDetailsTab
Actually, a Trust is a better way to transfer the wealth then a will.
Wills are a public document. Trusts are not. If you don’t want other people to see “what you have” then go for a trust.
Wills have to go through probate. Trusts do not. This means that if your estate is over $150,000 in CA, then the heirs need to hire a lawyer and deal with the courts. Very costly and time consuming.
It is much harder and more expensive to contest a Trust vs. a Will.
There are big potential tax breaks with a Trust for estates over $11 million (per person). Not usually applicable (and definitely not applicable to me) to the average person.
Essentially, setting up a Trust is like what the old Fram oil filter commercial said. “You can pay me now or you can pay me later”. A basic Trust for the average Joe should run around $1,500 with a reputable attorney.
Sorry to get off topic!
I enjoyed renting because I liked to move a lot when I was younger. There were a lot of cute, unique little rentals in Lafayette, Walnut Creek, Oakland, and Berkeley. If I found something I liked better, or it was closer to work, I moved. It was lighthearted and carefree.
But, I had landlord problems. One guy was in my place, drunk, (smelled it when I unlocked the door — he had locked himself in) when I got home from work one day. He was installing a mirror in the bathroom. No warning. Didn’t ask if it was ok. It’s his property. He didn’t have to ask … although it would have been a courtesy.
When I went in to see what he had done after he left, he had put the mirror up so high, I would have had to be six feet tall to see myself in it. Yep. He was high as a kite. Gave me the creeps, for sure. Another one in Oakland, as I think I’ve mentioned before, refused to fumigate for cockroaches until his wife found out the building was infested. She had it taken care of immediately. And, so on.
I prefer to own because it’s nobody’s business but mine if I hang pictures on the wall, Or have a cat. Or sunbathe on my patio. Or, leave my personal stuff lying around. And, theoretically, there should be NOBODY in the place when I’m not home, without my express permission, subtlety terrorizing me, thinking they’re doing me some kind of favor. I own it … or half of it … I pay taxes on it … I kill myself keeping up the yard, doing maintenance I should never be doing, and meticulously cleaning house.
My life has been devoted to this house and its upkeep for 35 years. It’s exhausting to be a single homeowner, and it’s expensive. But, I prefer it to finding cockroaches and drunk creeps in my house when I get home. I’ve had stalkers both places, renting and owning, by the way. I seem to attract them for some reason. It’s why I’m not “friendly” anymore.
It’s beyond me how this comment got posted over here on this thread. I usually read the comments and then post one, so generally they are posted the same place I’m reading, like this one I thought I was posting in the Water Cooler for the day. Amazing.
Does anyone really care, just write up a good will, spend some money on it. Marriage/domestic partner thats for people who are not bonded or feel like they need someone to make sure it will workout. Its for people who , underneath all do reall belive in each other.
Then why doesn’t the state just make common law marriage legal for Californians? The state will recognize such common law marriages that are legal in other states. But will not recognize them if you try to say you are in a California common law marriage. Why should they have to go through whatever expense involved to register as domestic partners or get “legally” married when simply living together for a certain amount of time will do the same? The state does have a palimony law for separation of unmarried/unregistered domestic partners. But no legal common law. marriage.
Comments are closed.