Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Employers, Employees Still Confused Over DOMA Rules
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: September 2, 2013
Key Contacts
Back
Nearly two months after the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional, employers and employees alike are still confused about how the court’s decree will affect them.
Employee Benefit News recently reported that many employers are unsure about whether they need to change their policies for same-sex couples immediately, and which policies need to be altered. Employees have some confusion as well about whether the Internal Revenue Service will consider where same-sex couples live when making benefit determinations or where they were married. This question could have large implications on health insurance costs.
For instance, Kaiser Health News recently noted that some employers offered health insurance to same-sex couples prior to the DOMA strike down. In these cases, employees who utilized this health insurance benefit were required to pay federal income tax on the value of that coverage, which is considered imputed income. Following the court’s ruling, same-sex couples who live in states that allow marriage will no longer be required to pay this income. However, the issue gets more complex for couples who live outside these states.
“If the IRS decides to follow its standard practice and recognize marriages based on where a couple lives, these couples could still be responsible for paying income tax on the value of a spouse’s health insurance,” the analysis read. “But if the IRS goes with the place of celebration standard, couples living in states that don’t recognize their marriages could avoid paying federal income tax on the spouse’s health insurance.”
Non-health related financial issues are also up in the air, with employers confused about whether they must provide benefits to same-sex workers retroactively. Couples are also on the fence about whether they can legally seek out refunds from prior returns if it falls within the three-year statute of limitations for amending returns. As these tax law issues remain unresolved, employers are being urged to seek legal advice and proceed with caution.
- Practices: Tax and Trusts & Estates, Sophisticated Estate Planning & Wealth Preservation
- Locations: Red Bank, NJ, New York City, Little Falls, NJ
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Related Posts
See all
New York NDA Requirements for Businesses
Non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) remain a critical tool for protecting sensitive business information. However, New York NDA requirements have evolved, and businesses must ensure these agreements are carefully drafted to remain enforceable. In a competitive market like New York City, NDAs are commonly used to protect proprietary information, client relationships, and strategic plans. At the same […]
Author: Dan Brecher
New Jersey Will Contest Grounds Explained
How Courts Evaluate Testamentary Capacity and Undue Influence Will contests in New Jersey are difficult to win, given the strong presumption that a properly executed will reflects the testator’s intent. However, challenges based on lack of testamentary capacity and undue influence remain common, particularly where there are concerns about mental capacity or the involvement of […]
Author: Marc J. Comer
Legal Issues Before Bringing on Investors
Bringing on outside investors can provide the capital and strategic support a business needs to grow. However, raising capital also introduces important legal, financial, and operational considerations. Before bringing on investors, businesses should address key legal issues to reduce risk, streamline investor due diligence, and position the company for long-term success. Early preparation signals that […]
Author: Dan Brecher
SECURE 2.0 RMD Planning Strategies
How the Updated Law Shapes Retirement and Estate Planning The SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022 materially reshapes the required minimum distribution (RMD) landscape, extending tax deferral opportunities while accelerating distribution requirements for many beneficiaries. For high-net-worth individuals and families, these changes are not merely technical. They require a reassessment of retirement income strategies, beneficiary planning, […]
Author: Marc J. Comer
Buying Commercial Property in New Jersey: Legal Guide for Small Businesses
Small businesses considering buying commercial property in New Jersey must evaluate a range of legal, financial, and operational factors. While ownership can offer long-term value and control, it also introduces significant risks if not properly structured. This guide outlines key considerations to help New Jersey business owners make informed decisions, minimize legal exposure, and successfully […]
Author: Robert L. Baker, Jr.
The SEC’s Latest Guidance on Applying Federal Securities Laws to Tokenized Securities
On January 28, 2026, staff of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s Divisions of Corporation Finance, Investment Management, and Trading and Markets issued a joint statement clarifying how existing federal securities laws apply to tokenized securities. The SEC’s “Statement on Tokenized Securities” does not establish new law, but it does provide greater clarity on the […]
Author: Dan Brecher
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.