my income and wife

zygurat789

mumps wrote: »

Looks like it was possible a decade earlier.

Maybe but I've not seen anything else to support that date
Found it. 1972 for earned income and 1990 for unearned income.
But this only applied to married couples, the deed of covenant applied to singles who became married and ceased to be effective from date of marriage.
The separate taxation election was only effective if both husband and wife were high earners which didn't apply to the majority of newly married couples.

mumps

zygurat789 wrote: »

Maybe but I've not seen anything else to support that date

I definitely wouldn't have needed it in the early 70s, much too poor and struggling to pay the rent/mortgage but I think we might have started to use it by the late 70s. I must ask my husband if he remembers, he will certainly remember his promotion dates which would give us a clue, I think he was an Inspector before this would have mattered to us and even then probably wasn't an issue before Edmund Davies.

zygurat789

mumps wrote: »

I definitely wouldn't have needed it in the early 70s, much too poor and struggling to pay the rent/mortgage but I think we might have started to use it by the late 70s. I must ask my husband if he remembers, he will certainly remember his promotion dates which would give us a clue, I think he was an Inspector before this would have mattered to us and even then probably wasn't an issue before Edmund Davies.

Not quite sure what you are referring to when you say "it"

mumps

zygurat789 wrote: »

Not quite sure what you are referring to when you say "it"

The opportunity to elect to be taxed separately, we weren't earning enough to need that option.

zygurat789

mumps wrote: »

The opportunity to elect to be taxed separately, we weren't earning enough to need that option.

Too late to go back now:rotfl:

mumps

zygurat789 wrote: »

Maybe but I've not seen anything else to support that date
Found it. 1972 for earned income and 1990 for unearned income.
But this only applied to married couples, the deed of covenant applied to singles who became married and ceased to be effective from date of marriage.
The separate taxation election was only effective if both husband and wife were high earners which didn't apply to the majority of newly married couples.

I don't get what you mean about only applied to married couples, opting out of being taxed as a married couple could only apply to married couples couldn't it? Why would single people need a deed of convenant? Wouldn't single people automatically be taxed as single people?

I wasn't a particularly hgh earner and my husband wasn't earning enough to be in a higher tax bracket, it only became a problem if my earnings were added to his and then he had to pay tax on some of his earnings at the higher rate.

mumps

zygurat789 wrote: »

Too late to go back now:rotfl:

I wouldn't like to go back to the financial position we were in in the early 70s, two babies, mortgage at very high rate, did it hit 15%, and a baby and a toddler. Some weeks I wasn't sure if we could eat and Sunday dinner at mothes and another night at MILs was what kept us going.

zygurat789

mumps wrote: »

The opportunity to elect to be taxed separately, we weren't earning enough to need that option.

Too late to go back and claim the election if beneficial.

mumps

This book is interesting https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Ac6hAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA119&lpg=PA119&dq=finance+act+1971+and+married+couples+being+able+to+be+taxed+separately&source=bl&ots=mBnI16b9IY&sig=ChJN-_fc9Xw9HO-hoHZW2r-r3Tg&hl=en&sa=X&ei=NvvpVLjFG-jk7AbV1oHwBg&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=finance%20act%201971%20and%20married%20couples%20being%20able%20to%20be%20taxed%20separately&f=false

If it is correct it says married couples could elect for separate assessment from 1914, interestingly either spouse could ask for this whereas the 1971 act it requires both to request it.

I wonder if the 1914 was still in force in 1971? The difference was that the 1914 act didn't change how much tax was owed just that each spouse had to submit separate tax returns and the wife became responsible for paying her own tax. The big difference in the 1971 and 1990 acts regarding the wife's income is relating to earned and unearned income.

If you read through the information in the link it does say it was important to calculate the loss of the married mans allowance but of course if you wanted to be taxed separately that was a decision you made. We made the decision as it saved us money but if it was a principle you could have done it even if you lost the advantage of the married mans allowance, which seems fair to me as you can't say you want the advantages of being taxed and a couple, the additional allowance, but you don't want the disadvantages, higher rate tax if appropriate when incomes are added together.

I haven't read all the information yet, fascinating though and makes you wonder what the tax office were not telling MargaretClare, unless the law and been changed again in the meantime.

zygurat789

mumps wrote: »

This book is interesting https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Ac6hAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA119&lpg=PA119&dq=finance+act+1971+and+married+couples+being+able+to+be+taxed+separately&source=bl&ots=mBnI16b9IY&sig=ChJN-_fc9Xw9HO-hoHZW2r-r3Tg&hl=en&sa=X&ei=NvvpVLjFG-jk7AbV1oHwBg&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=finance%20act%201971%20and%20married%20couples%20being%20able%20to%20be%20taxed%20separately&f=false

If it is correct it says married couples could elect for separate assessment from 1914, interestingly either spouse could ask for this whereas the 1971 act it requires both to request it.

I wonder if the 1914 was still in force in 1971? The difference was that the 1914 act didn't change how much tax was owed just that each spouse had to submit separate tax returns and the wife became responsible for paying her own tax.

I haven't read all the information yet, fascinating though and makes you wonder what the tax office were not telling MargaretClare, unless the law and been changed again in the meantime.

1914, now that was before my time