Marriage

===Taxation===
In some countries a married person or couple benefits from various taxation advantages not available to a single person. For example, spouses may be allowed to average their combined [[income tax|incomes]]. This is advantageous to a married couple with disparate incomes. To compensate for this, countries may provide a higher [[tax bracket]] for the averaged income of a married couple. While income averaging might still benefit a married couple with a stay-at-home spouse, such averaging would cause a married couple with roughly equal personal incomes to pay more total tax than they would as two single persons. In the United States, this is called the [[marriage penalty]].<ref>{{Cite web|title=What are marriage penalties and bonuses?|url=https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/what-are-marriage-penalties-and-bonuses|access-date=2021-06-28|website=Tax Policy Center|language=en}}</ref>

When the rates applied by the tax code are not based income averaging, but rather on the ''sum'' of individuals' incomes, higher rates will usually apply to each individual in a two-earner households in a [[progressive tax]] systems. This is most often the case with high-income taxpayers and is another situation called a marriage penalty.<ref>Renacci, James B. "Simplifying America's Tax System." ''Simplifying America's Tax System'' (2016): 1–11. ''Renacci.house.gov''. July 2016. Web. 26 Feb. 2017.</ref>

Conversely, when progressive tax is levied on the individual with no consideration for the partnership, dual-income couples fare much better than single-income couples with similar household incomes. The effect can be increased when the welfare system treats the same income as a shared income thereby denying welfare access to the non-earning spouse. Such systems apply in Australia and Canada, for example.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Hanegbi |first=Rami |date=2023-12-15 |title=INCOME SPLITTING IN AUSTRALIA: TIME FOR A PRINCIPLED APPROACH? |url=https://dro.deakin.edu.au/articles/journal_contribution/INCOME_SPLITTING_IN_AUSTRALIA_TIME_FOR_A_PRINCIPLED_APPROACH_/24123492/1 |journal=Adelaide Law Review |language=en |publisher=University of Adelaide |volume=44 |issue=2}}</ref>