A new study from the U.S. Treasury has revealed the most detailed picture to date of same-sex marriages across the country—with some interesting observations about same-sex spouses with kids.
The U.S. Treasury’s Office of Tax Analysis—which could contend for most boring-sounding government agency—released what is in fact a very interesting study of same-sex couples who married in 2013 or 2014, after the U.S. Supreme Court’s Windsor decision that gave them federal recognition. Unlike previous national studies of same-sex spouses, which relied on Census data, this one used tax returns, linking them to Social Security records to determine people’s genders. The authors claim this method is more accurate that the survey-based Census approach.
In 2013, they estimate, about 0.25 percent of all joint filers were same-sex couples, or about 131,080 couples. In 2014, the number rose 40 percent to about 183,280 (0.35 percent of all joint filers). These couples are “generally younger, higher income, less likely to claim dependent children (especially for male couples), and disproportionately located in metropolitan areas and costal [sic] states.”
Different-sex couples are still more likely to have kids, with 49 percent of different-sex couples claiming dependent children, versus 7 percent of male couples and 28 percent of female ones.
And while it seems same-sex couples are doing well financially, we need to be careful here. The study found that male couples were almost twice as likely to earn more than $150,000 than different-sex ones; female couples were somewhat more likely. The average income of male couples with children is almost $275,000, with more than half of them earning over $150,000. Why the differences? The paper explains, “Same-sex couples are more likely to be of working age and … to live in major metropolitan areas and coastal states where incomes (and costs of living) are high.”
A somewhat different picture emerges for female couples, however, when one compares different-sex couples to female couples in the same three-digit zipcode. Then, the average income of different-sex couples is about $132,360 versus only $121,220 for female couples in the same age range. “In other words,” the authors explain, “while FF couples appear to be higher income than different-sex couples nationwide, relative to MF couples in their local neighborhoods their income is somewhat lower.” Doing the same geographic comparison for male couples and different-sex couples, however, shows that their average income is still higher: about $180,525, versus about $154,265 for different-sex couples in the same age range and three-digit zipcode.
The study missed one big reason for the income differences, which economist Lee Badgett adroitly notes in the New York Times: the gender wage gap, which favors male couples. The NYT also noted that female couples are four times as likely to have kids as male couples, leading to more trade-offs between work and family.
None of this should blind us, either, to the high rates of poverty within the LGBTQ community. Just because some of us are doing well doesn’t mean we all are.
Another interesting finding from the study: The highest rates of male same-sex marriage are “in the central areas of San Francisco, Washington DC, New York, and in other major cities like Seattle, Boston, Atlanta, Chicago, Portland, and Minneapolis.” Female same-sex couples, are more likely to be in “relatively small cities and towns like Springfield, MA, Madison, WI, Santa Fe, NM, Durham, NC, Burlington, VT, and those on the coast of Delaware.”
We’re here, we’re queer, and we are everywhere, big and small.
