Commentary
2011 may be a very taxing year for same-sex couples, regardless of marital status
Onerous federal estate tax set to return
Congratulations, you assembled your friends and family and got married in Washington DC. Now it is recognized in both DC and Maryland. It’s the moment of a lifetime and a moment you’ve been waiting for.
Well, guess what? The IRS doesn’t care! That’s right, to the IRS, you are still strangers according the law. If your estate and retirement plans include leaving your partner your estate, next year may well prove to be a expensive year to die regardless of marital status!
Thanks to the Defense of Marriage Act, even though same-sex couples can now get married in Washington DC and have it recognized in the state of Maryland, the IRS still does not recognize the validity of that marriage. As a result, unlike heterosexual married couples who can pass an unlimited amount of assets between spouses at death, same-sex couples can be hit with the Federal estate tax, regardless of marriage status. Understanding how the Federal estate tax rules work and following a couple of action items could significantly reduce or entirely eliminate this tax.
The Federal estate tax is due when a person leaves assets above a certain dollar amount to someone other than a heterosexual married spouse. Straight married couples get a free pass called the unlimited martial deduction. In 2010 only, there is an unlimited exemption. But, you may owe capital gains tax on any appreciation. Each estate can exempt $1.3 million of gains from the carryover basis rule. Another $3 million exemption applies to assets inherited from a spouse.
In 2011, however, unless Congress acts, Federal estate tax rules change. As a result, same-sex couples could witness a significant tax bite if a partner dies next year. Straight married couples won’t have this problem since the IRS continues to give them a free pass with the unlimited martial deduction.
Next year, at the death of a partner, the value of any estate above $1 million will be taxed at 55%.
Think you don’t have a $1 million, well think again!
How the IRS calculates your gross estate for Federal estate tax purposes probably includes some items you likely wouldn’t count. It also means that many more gay and lesbian couples will feel this tax bite, if you don’t plan properly. The largest impact will likely be felt by older gay and lesbian couples, who are nearing retirement and have built up retirement assets over the course of their life. This becomes an issue as they rely on their partner’s asset to maintain financial independence.
How the IRS calculates the Federal Estate Tax:
To determine whether an estate is hit by the Federal estate tax, it is important to understand how the IRS calculates the Federal Estate Tax. For the purposes of the estate tax calculation, the IRS includes almost everything. Yep, add up all the assets, including personal assets, cars, collections, art, etc. The biggest ticket items usually include the following:
• savings and checking accounts, CDs;
• brokerage or investment accounts;
• retirements accounts like IRAs, Roth IRAs, 401(k)s, 403(b)s or TSP plan assets;
• personal property such as boats, paintings, collections, etc.;
• real estate titled in the decedent’s own name or the percentage portion that is titled • as tenants in common;
• the gross value of life insurance proceeds in the decedent’s own name;
• property that is titled as joint tenants with rights of survivorship (which allows the property to pass automatically to a partner at death, the way many gay and lesbian couples have their homes titled).
The last two bullets are important and frequently overlooked. Most people know that life insurance passes INCOME tax free, but if it is owned by the person who dies, the IRS includes the entire amount of the life insurance proceeds in the total amount of the ESTATE tax calculation. As a result, if you own a $500,000 life insurance policy in your name and have your partner as the beneficiary, your estate increases by $500,000
The IRS also includes the gross value, less any mortgages on property titled as Joint Tenants with Rights of Survivorship (JWROS) in the estate of the first person to die UNLESS payments or contributions can be proven.
Let’s take a look at a hypothetical example: Mark age 55 and Max age 60 are looking to retire in 5 years. They own a $550,000 home with a $50,000 mortgage titled as joint tenants with rights of survivorship. Max has been paying the mortgage, while Mark has been paying all the living expenses. Max also owns two life insurance policies: one from work which is worth $250,000 and a personal policy worth also $250,000. His 401(k) has taken a hit with the market but is still valued at $425,000 and he has a rollover IRA with $25,000. He also has a brokerage account worth $25,000 and a $25,000 CD.
While drinking a martini in Rehoboth, Max accidently chokes on an olive and dies. Unless Congress acts, here’s how the IRS will calculate the estate in 2010 versus 2011.
Note that because Max made all the contributions, the IRS adds the home to his estate, even though it is titled jointly. Mark could not show that he contributed to the mortgage payments. He was paying for the utilities, car payments, etc.
In 2011, Mark has to pay $275,000 in Federal estate taxes. Again, straight married couples pay zilch, zero, nada! Mark still walks away with a cool $1,225,000, right?
Well, not exactly. Because Mark will continue to live in the home that part of the estate is not liquid or immediately accessible. If the value of the house is removed, the actual cash amount that he receives from the estate is reduced to $725,000 or ($1,500,000 less $500,000 (the value of the home) less $275,000 (the estate taxes)).
Mark, like any heterosexual married beneficiary, is going to have to pay legal/probate fees. In addition, Mark will also have to pay Federal income taxes on the 401(k) and IRA money when he starts taking distribution. In the worse case scenario, if he pulled out all those funds in a lump sum, the tax could be taxed up to 35%.
The question then becomes will Mark, who has a life expectancy of an additional 24.37 years according to Social Security table, have enough assets to live at least that long without running out of money.
The estate tax is often considered a voluntary tax because with proper advanced planning, Max and Mark could have significantly reduced their overall estate tax burden. By re-structuring some of their assets today, they could reduce their estate size to potentially pay zero Federal estate taxes. That’s right, zero, zilch, nada!
The question then becomes, where is a good place to spend the $275,000 that would otherwise have gone to estate taxes, a problem we would all like to have!
What to do:
• Calculate the gross estate including all your assets. Be sure to calculate it the way the IRS does.
• Review your estate planning documents and beneficiary designations.
• Review the titling of all your assets to determine in to whose estate the asset falls.
• Review the ownership of your life insurance including both your personal and work. The current ownership structure of the life insurance could simply be increasing the amount you will be paying to the IRS. By retitling the ownership of the life insurance to either a trust or putting it in your partner’s name you may be able to remove it from your estate. Use caution, however, because retitling assets incorrectly could trigger a costly current gift tax if not done correctly.
• Review how your home is titled and who is making payments on the mortgage. It is common for one partner to pay the mortgage while the other pays for other expenses. This could cause an estate trap because it may be difficult to substantiate payments into a jointly owned home. Retitling your home incorrectly could trigger a costly current gift tax of 55% if not done correctly. In some jurisdictions, even if it is done correctly, it may trigger a local transfer tax.
• Consult a professional to determine what is the best way to structure your estate and minimize your estate taxes.
The information provided is for general information. It is not intended to be all-inclusive on estate taxes.
Nicholas Burkholder and Joseph Kapp ([email protected]) are registered representatives and investment advisor representatives with Lincoln Financial Advisors Corp., a broker/dealer (member SIPC) and registered investment advisor, offering insurance through Lincoln affiliates and other fine companies. This information should not be construed as legal or tax advice. You may want to consult a legal or tax advisor regarding this material as it relates to your personal circumstances. The content of this material was provided to you by Lincoln Financial Advisors for its representatives and their clients. CRN201004-2040969
Commentary
Protecting the trans community is not optional for elected allies and candidates
One of oldest political tactics is blaming vulnerable group for societal woes
Being an ally to the trans community is not a conditional position for me, nor should it be for any candidate. My allyship doesn’t hinge on polling, focus groups, or whether courage feels politically convenient. At a time when trans people, especially trans youth of color, are under coordinated attack, elected officials and candidates must do more than offer quiet support. We must take a public and solid stand.
History shows us how these moments begin. One of the oldest political tactics is to single out the most vulnerable and blame them for society’s anxieties — not because they are responsible, but because they are easier to blame than those with power and protection. In Nazi Germany, Jewish people were primarily targeted, but they were not the only demographic who suffered elimination. LGBTQ people, disabled people, Romani communities, political dissidents, and others were also rounded up, imprisoned, and killed. Among the earliest acts of fascistic repression was the destruction of Berlin’s Institute for Sexual Science, a pioneering center for gender-affirming care and LGBTQ research. These books and medical records were among the first to be confiscated and burned. It is not a coincidence that these same communities are now the first to suffer under this regime, they are our canaries in the coal mine signaling what’s to come.
Congress, emboldened by the rhetoric of the Donald Trump campaign, recently passed HR 3492 to criminalize healthcare workers who provide gender-affirming healthcare with fines and imprisonment. This bill, sponsored by celebrity politicians like Marjorie Taylor Greene, puts politics and headlines over people and health outcomes. Healthcare that a number of cis-gendered people also benefit from byway of hair regeneration and surgery, male and female breast augmentation, hormone replacement therapy etc. Even when these bills targeting this care do not pass, they do real damage. They create fear among patients, legal uncertainty for providers, and instability for clinics that serve the most marginalized people in our communities.
Here in D.C., organizations like Planned Parenthood and Whitman-Walker Health are lifelines for many communities. They provide gender-affirming care alongside primary care, mental health services, HIV treatment, and preventative medicine. When healthcare is politicized or criminalized, people don’t wait for court rulings — they delay care, ration medication, or disappear from the system entirely.
As a pharmacist, I know exactly what that means. These are life-saving medications. Continuity of care matters. Criminalizing and politicizing healthcare does not protect children or families — it puts lives at risk.
Instead of centering these realities, political discourse has been deliberately diverted toward a manufactured panic about trans women in sports. Let me be clear: trans women deserve to be protected and allowed to compete just like anyone else. Athletics have always included people with different bodies, strengths, and abilities. Girls and women will always encounter competitors who are stronger or faster — that is not a gender or sports crisis, it is the nature of competition.
Sports are meant to teach fairness, mutual respect, and the shared spirit of competition — not suspicion or exclusion. We should not police young people’s bodies, and we should reject attempts to single out trans youth as a political distraction. Families and doctors should be the authority on sex and gender identity.
This narrative has been cynically amplified by the right, but too often Democrats have allowed it to take hold rather than forcefully rejecting it. It is imperative to pay attention to what is happening — and to push back against every attempt to dehumanize anyone for political gain.
Trans people have always been part of our communities and our democracy. Protecting the most vulnerable is not radical — it is the foundation of a just society. My work is grounded in that commitment, and I will not waver from it. I’m proud to have hired trans political team Down Ballot to lead my campaign for DC Council At Large. We need more ally leaders of all stages to stand up for the LGBTQ+ community. We must let elected detractors know that when they come for them, then they come for all of us. We cannot allow Fox News and social media trolls to create a narrative that scares us away from protecting marginalized populations. We must stand up and do what’s right.
Anything less is not leadership.
Rep. Oye Owolewa is running for an at-large seat on the D.C. Council.
Commentary
America is going in the wrong direction for intersex children
Lawmakers are criminalizing care for trans youth, while permitting irreversible harm to intersex babies
I live with the consequences of what America is willing to condone in the name of “protecting children.”
When I was young, doctors and adults made irreversible decisions about my body without my informed consent. They weren’t responding to an emergency. They were responding to discomfort with innate physical differences and the social and medical pressure to make a child’s body conform to a rigid female-male binary. That’s the part people like to skip over when they talk about “child welfare”: the harm didn’t begin with my identity. It started with adults deciding my healthy body needed fixing.
That’s why the hypocrisy unfolding right now from statehouses to Capitol Hill feels so familiar, and so dangerous.
While harmful medical practices on intersex children, the nearly 2 percent born with differences in one or more of their physical sex characteristics, have been ongoing in the U.S. for decades, until recently, there was no law specifically condoning it.
This month, House Republicans passed one of the most extreme anti-trans bills in modern American history, advancing legislation that would criminalize gender-affirming medical care for transgender youth and threaten doctors with severe penalties for providing evidence-based treatment. The bill is framed as a measure to “protect children,” but in reality, it weaponizes the criminal legal system against families and providers who are trying to support young people in surviving adolescence.
At the same time, the administration has proposed hospital and insurance policies designed to choke off access to affirming care for trans youth nationwide by making providers fear loss of federal funding, regulatory retaliation, or prosecution. This is a familiar strategy: don’t just ban care outright; instead, make it so risky that hospitals stop providing it altogether. The result is the same everywhere. Young people lose access to care that major medical associations agree can be lifesaving.
All of this is happening under the banner of preventing “irreversible harm.”
But if America were genuinely concerned about irreversible harm to minors, the first thing lawmakers would address is the medically unnecessary, nonconsensual surgeries still performed on intersex infants and young children, procedures that permanently alter healthy tissue, often without urgent medical need, and long before a child can meaningfully participate in the decision. Human rights organizations have documented for years how these interventions are justified not by medical necessity, but by social pressure to make bodies appear more typically “female” or “male.”
Here is the uncomfortable truth: all of the state laws now banning gender-affirming care for transgender youth explicitly include exceptions that allow nonconsensual and harmful intersex surgeries to continue.
A recent JAMA Health Forum analysis found that 28 states have enacted bans on gender-affirming care for minors that carve out intersex exceptions, preserving doctors’ ability to perform irreversible “normalizing” procedures on intersex children even while prohibiting affirming care for trans adolescents.
This contradiction is not accidental. It reveals the real priority behind these laws.
If the goal were truly to protect children from irreversible medical interventions, intersex kids would be protected first. Instead, these policies target one group of children, transgender youth, while continuing to permit permanent interventions on another group whose bodies challenge the same rigid sex and gender binary that lawmakers are trying to enforce.
Intersex people are routinely erased from American policy debates, except when our bodies are invoked to justify harmful laws, warning that intersex children are being used as legal loopholes rather than protected as human beings. This “protect the children” rhetoric is routinely deployed to justify state control over bodies, while preserving medical practices that stripped intersex children like me of autonomy, good health, and choice. Those harms are not theoretical. They are lifelong.
What makes this moment even more jarring is that the federal government had finally begun to recognize intersex people and attempt to address the harms suffered.
In 2024, at the very end of his term, the Biden administration released the first-ever intersex health equity report — a landmark admission that intersex people have been harmed by the U.S. health care system. Issued by the Department of Health and Human Services, the report documents medically unnecessary interventions, lack of informed consent, and systemic erasure and recommends delaying irreversible procedures until individuals can meaningfully participate in decisions about their own bodies.
This should have been a turning point. Instead, America is moving in the opposite direction.
On day one, President Trump issued an executive order defining “sex” in a way attempting to delegitimize the existence of transgender Americans that also erased the existence of many intersex people.
When medicine is used to erase difference, it is called protection, while care that supports self-understanding is treated as a threat. This is not about medicine. It is about control.
You cannot claim to oppose irreversible harm to children while legally permitting surgeries that intersex adults and human rights experts have condemned for decades. You cannot claim to respect bodily autonomy while denying it selectively, based on whose bodies make lawmakers uncomfortable.
Protecting children means protecting all children, transgender, intersex, and cisgender alike. It means delaying irreversible interventions when they are not medically necessary. It means trusting and supporting young people and families over politicians chasing culture-war victories.
America can continue down the path of criminalizing care for some children while sanctioning harm to others, or it can finally listen to the people who have lived the consequences.
Intersex children deserve laws that protect their bodies, not politics that hurt and erase them.
Kimberly Zieselman is a human rights advocate and the author of “XOXY: A Memoir”. The author is a co-author of the JAMA Health Forum article cited, which examined state laws restricting gender-affirming care.
Today, on World AIDS Day, we honor the resilience, courage, and dignity of people living with HIV everywhere especially refugees, asylum seekers, and queer displaced communities across East Africa and the world.
For many, living with HIV is not just a health journey it is a journey of navigating stigma, borders, laws, discrimination, and survival.
Yet even in the face of displacement, uncertainty, and exclusion, queer people living with HIV continue to rise, thrive, advocate, and build community against all odds.
To every displaced person living with HIV:
• Your strength inspires us.
• Your story matters.
• You are worthy of safety, compassion, and the full right to health.
• You deserve a world where borders do not determine access to treatment, where identity does not determine dignity, and where your existence is celebrated not criminalized.
Let today be a reminder that:
• HIV is not a crime.
• Queer identity is not a crime.
• Seeking safety is not a crime.
• Stigma has no place in our communities.
• Access to treatment, care, and protection is a human right.
As we reflect, we must recommit ourselves to building systems that protect not punish displaced queer people living with HIV. We must amplify their voices, invest in inclusive healthcare, and fight the inequalities that fuel vulnerability.
Hope is stronger when we build it together.
Let’s continue to uplift, empower, and walk alongside those whose journeys are too often unheard.
Today we remember.
Today we stand together.
Today we renew hope.
Abraham Junior lives in the Gorom Refugee Settlement in South Sudan.
-
National4 days agoWhat to watch for in 2026: midterms, Supreme Court, and more
-
District of Columbia5 days agoTwo pioneering gay journalists to speak at Thursday event
-
a&e features5 days agoQueer highlights of the 2026 Critics Choice Awards: Aunt Gladys, that ‘Heated Rivalry’ shoutout and more
-
Colombia4 days agoBlade travels to Colombia after U.S. forces seize Maduro in Venezuela

