Disclaimer

The information on this website is presented as a service for our clients and Internet users and is not intended to be legal advice, nor should you consider it as such. Although we welcome your inquiries, please keep in mind that merely contacting us will not establish an attorney-client relationship between us. Consequently, you should not convey any confidential information to us until a formal attorney-client relationship has been established. Please remember that electronic correspondence on the internet is not secure and that you should not include sensitive or confidential information in messages. With that in mind, we look forward to hearing from you.

 Skip to Content

Married Same-Sex Couples Should File Protective Claims for Tax Refunds Now
April 10, 2013

By William D. Rohrer

When the Supreme Court ultimately decides United States v. Windsor, it could strike down the portion of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) that prohibits married same-sex couples from receiving the federal benefits provided to married opposite-sex couples. It is expected that if the Supreme Court strikes down DOMA, it will not set a specific date on which DOMA would become unconstitutional, allowing married same-sex taxpayers to receive refunds on federal income, estate and gift taxes, and Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) taxes as far back as 2009.

To preserve their rights to a refund of federal taxes, married same-sex couples should file protective claims for tax refunds. Taxpayers who were married as of 2009, should file protective claims for tax refunds before the statute of limitations for 2009 refund claims expires on April 15, 2013. Employers can also file for refunds on their portion of FICA taxes paid on benefits for same-sex married couples.  Both employers and employees can file protective claims for refunds by citing United States v. Windsor, but employers are not obligated to do so.

Even if the Supreme Court finds DOMA unconstitutional, same-sex married couples who reside in states that do not recognize same-sex marriage may not receive the benefit of a refund. However, by filing a refund claim now, they can protect their claims if the Supreme Court rules broadly in United States v. Windsor, or if there is a future challenge to Section 2 of DOMA, which allows states not to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.

If the IRS denies the refund claim, taxpayers will still have two years from the date of the denial to file a protest.  Additionally, there is no need to put a dollar amount on the protective refund claim when filed, so taxpayers would be able to adjust the dollar amount of their refund depending on the Supreme Court’s ruling.

Carlton Fields has the experience and expertise to assist clients with the tax implications of the Supreme Court’s expected decision. If you have questions regarding this alert, please feel free to contact us.
Related Practices
Business Transactions
©2024 Carlton Fields, P.A. Carlton Fields practices law in California through Carlton Fields, LLP. Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our Contact Us form via the link below. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites.