401(k) Blues

Out of all the benefits that are available to people, I always thought that 401(k) was the most fair. For gay couples, I knew that property, inheritance, child custody, health coverage, and all the rest, was not automatically available to gay couples. We have to go through a lot of effort to protect ourselves, or at least try.

We have to craft wills in such a way that we hope they won't be challenged, because our relationships do not have the blessing of law.

We have to hope that the home we leave to our partners, a home that was purchased together, won't be sold to satisfy the whims of the family of the deceased partner.

We have to hope that the courts will treat our relationships with some sort of dignity, although we know that historically they have not.

Through all of this, I had thought that the 401(k) beneficiary designation was a sure bet. On all the other forms that you fill out for company benefits, you can add your "spouse", and "dependents". You cannot add your partner. It's just not an option. And my company has told me they have no plans to do that because "they can't afford it". Honestly, it's insulting because there aren't that many gay couples that work in my company. We all know the real reason behind it. I could sit here and say that my company is run by fat, wealthy, white, heterosexual men who have only one interest, to get richer. But that would make me sound bitter and whiny, wouldn't it? So, I won't say that. I'm sure the good old boys club at least got a good laugh out of me asking for the benefits, in writing no less.

The 401(k) I thought was different, because it didn't ask if the beneficiary is your "spouse". It didn't seem to care. Well, I was wrong.

I have Kent as my soul beneficiary to my 401(k). If we were legally married, upon my death, he would be able to roll my 401(k) over into an existing IRA, and pay no taxes on it until it is withdrawn.

Since we are not married, what Kent will end up with is the lump sum of my IRA, less 20% in taxes taken out before he sees a dime. In addition, Kent will not be able to roll my IRA into his to tax-defer it until his retirement.

Why? Because that is a benefit afforded by the Federal Government that will not honor gay marriages.

And just when I was starting to think that there was some sense of decency in this mess.

Social Security is even worse. When I die, Kent will never see one penny from my Social Security because he's not my spouse. I paid for that out of every single pay check I earn. Where will it go when I die? It will go to the Social Security fund to pay for other people's spouses who can get legally married.

Are you getting pissed off yet?

The word "spouse" is so pervasive in the state's Home Care policies that you can’t search the system using only that word. Hospitals and nursing home staff must be forced by an attorney to recognize the right of a domestic partner to visit or get information. Same-gender couples don't have the right to die in the same nursing home.

Pension plans aren’t required to pay anyone but a legal spouse after the death of the participant. A gay man can leave his 401K to his partner. But the partner will wind up with 20% less than if he were a she, and the couple had a legal relationship. By the way, the surviving gay or lesbian partner will not be able to take that 20%-less-helpful 401K and roll it over into an IRA. The widow next door can do that. But a 60-year-old who just buried his or her partner will be forced to shut everything down, pay the taxes, and figure out retirement plans anew.

The families we leave behind don't get Social Security spousal and survivor benefits. Same-gender families are, by the way, very helpful to the Social Security balance sheet. They call us "unmarrieds." We "unmarrieds" pay our fair share in, and our families can't get anything out. Our lifetimes of work are used to subsidize other people’s grieving kids and spouses. (source)