Talk:LGBT rights in Washington (state)

Federal income tax
I just modified this paragraph. I'm an experienced tax preparer but I missed the first season to which the IRS's community property ruling applied. I'm working primarily in an office in Seattle's gayest neighbourhood, and most of my customers are unfamiliar with this ruling; I know it wasn't applied to a high-end client last year whose returns for the previous three years I'd done, and whose high income would probably have meant community property would've helped.

The sentence about how people in same-sex marriages are now subject to the community property rules is a logical deduction from the April 2011 law previously described (based on a news report) and the IRS publication (a reference I added). However, the statement that most WA couples are ignoring the IRS ruling amounts to original, well, anecdote, not even research. The conservative fallback would retain the fact that the IRS allows the rules to be disregarded (though not everyone disregarding them has the right to!), and the IRS reference, but not the claim about most couples disregarding them. The claim that community property precludes e-filing actually comes partly from internal company material I can't cite, but is corroborated by a prominent story in USA Today on, um, Wednesday, February 15, 2012, which I guess I should now try to cite properly.

Joe Bernstein joe@sfbooks.com not a registered Wikipedian, but you can see work of mine in "Judiciary Act of 1793" and in "State income tax". 70.97.20.190 (talk) 07:52, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Um, OK, I tried to clean it up myself. I suppose the reference to error code 0139 is still original research - I dug it up myself. I didn't look for the other obviously relevant error code - the one that says the wages in the W-2s should add up to the wages in the 1040 itself (and not twice as much, as in a community property return). Anyway, I have no idea why not, but the IRS ***NOWHERE*** admits that community property and e-filing don't go together, not in Pub 555, where they should, nor in all their press releases ballyhooing the 2010 ruling, nor anywhere else I can find.

Joe Bernstein again 70.97.20.190 (talk) 08:25, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on LGBT rights in Washington (state). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120214131618/http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2017497028_gaymarriage14m.html to http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2017497028_gaymarriage14m.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:55, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on LGBT rights in Washington (state). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121214021549/http://vote.wa.gov/results/current/Referendum-Measure-No-74-Concerns-marriage-for-same-sex-couples.html to http://vote.wa.gov/results/current/Referendum-Measure-No-74-Concerns-marriage-for-same-sex-couples.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111202055752/http://www.wwwebtax.com/general/community_property.htm to http://www.wwwebtax.com/general/community_property.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120311062750/http://www.hrc.org/laws-and-legislation/entry/washington-non-discrimination-law1 to http://www.hrc.org/laws-and-legislation/entry/washington-non-discrimination-law1
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120204074607/http://www.hrc.org/laws-and-legislation/entry/washington-hate-crimes-law to http://www.hrc.org/laws-and-legislation/entry/washington-hate-crimes-law

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:55, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Proposing to Merge the Arlene's Flowers lawsuit into this article, and looking for consensus.
In my view the Arlene's Flowers lawsuit, as a case never taken up by the U.S. Supreme Court (certiorari denied) and purely limited to Washington State, should have its content merged into this article and that article then get deleted. If anyone has any comments please respond here, as the Arlene's Flowers Lawsuit has never had any questions on its talk page. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 22:10, 6 January 2024 (UTC)