• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Ask Liz Weston

Get smart with your money

  • About
  • Newsletter
  • Liz’s Books
  • Speaking
  • Disclosure
  • Contact

homeownership

Q&A: Why marriage can reduce taxes on a home sale

August 3, 2026 By Liz Weston

Dear Liz: We are a heterosexual couple who are registered domestic partners in California. We have owned our primary residence for decades. Obviously, its value has increased and is well past the $500,000 home sales exemption limit for couples.

When one of us passes away, how is the basis and the appreciation of the residence calculated for federal and state taxes? Does the step-up basis come into play for both federal and state taxes when calculating capital gains? We do not have any children and are leaving the bulk of our estate to charity.

Answer: California offers the valuable double step-up in tax basis to registered domestic partners, but the federal government does not.

In most states, one half of a couple’s jointly owned property gets a new value for tax purposes when the first partner dies. This step-up in value eliminates capital gains taxes on any appreciation that happened during the deceased partner’s ownership.

In community property states, however, both halves of jointly owned property can get the step-up in value when the first spouse dies. California generally treats registered domestic partners the same as married couples, but IRS Revenue Ruling 2013-17 and Regulation 301.7701-18(c) specify that “marriage” and “spouse” do not include registered domestic partnerships for federal tax purposes, according to Wolters Kluwer Tax & Accounting.

Let’s say you bought the house for $300,000 in the 1980s, invested $100,000 in upgrades over the years and it’s worth $2 million today. The current tax basis would be $400,000 (the sales price plus the upgrades). That’s the amount the two of you would subtract from the sales price to determine the potentially taxable capital gain. You could exempt $500,000 of the home sale proceeds ($250,000 per owner) since you’ve owned and lived in the property at least two of the past five years. That leaves a taxable gain of $1.1 million.

If one of you died tomorrow, only half of the property would get stepped up to the current market value for federal tax purposes while the other half would retain its $200,000 basis for a total basis of $1.2 million. For state tax purposes, both halves would get the step-up so the new tax basis for state taxes would be $2 million.

Something else to consider: a federal law allows the full $500,000 exclusion for surviving spouses if they sell the home within two years of the death. That provision is not extended to registered domestic partners.

As you can see, a marriage certificate could make an enormous difference if the survivor wanted or needed to sell the home after the first death.

Marriage confers a number of other benefits under federal law. A spouse can receive Social Security spousal and survivor benefits, for example, but registered domestic partners aren’t eligible for benefits on a partner’s earnings record. Spouses also have special rights with IRAs and employer retirement plans, such as being able to treat an inherited IRA as their own. Non-spouse beneficiaries, including domestic partners, generally must empty the accounts within 10 years.

Your mileage may vary, but the benefits are numerous and valuable enough to make marriage worthwhile in many cases. Please talk to your tax pro and estate planning attorney for individualized advice.

Filed Under: Q&A, Taxes Tagged With: capital gains tax, community property, Estate Planning, homeownership, step-up in basis

Q&A: Shake, rattle and … roll the dice without earthquake insurance?

August 7, 2024 By Liz Weston

Dear Liz: I live in Southern California and my homeowners insurance renews at the end of August. Should I consider buying earthquake insurance?

Answer: Insurance is meant to protect against catastrophic losses that we couldn’t easily pay out of pocket.

If you don’t have much equity in your home, or you’re willing to walk away from the equity you do have, then you can forgo earthquake insurance. Otherwise, you need the coverage.

The same is true for flood insurance, which is also not covered by the typical homeowners policy.

Filed Under: Insurance, Q&A Tagged With: earthquake, earthquake insurance, flood, flood insurance, homeowners insurance, homeownership

Q&A: Newlyweds wonder if it’s the time to buy a home

May 20, 2024 By Liz Weston

Dear Liz: My husband and I are newlyweds and looking into purchasing a home. However, many homes in our area sell for $50,000 and more over the asking prices, which already are pretty high. We have stable jobs, but our dilemma is whether we should go into the market now or continue to save and wait a year or two.

Answer: The best time to buy a home is when you can afford to do so. It’s hard to time any market, but that’s especially true for real estate. If you put off buying a home hoping for a correction, you could be waiting a long time.

The supply of houses for sale is low in many areas. Often homeowners are reluctant to sell, even if they want to trade up, downsize or move, because they don’t want to give up their low-rate mortgages. A drop in mortgage rates likely will induce more people to put their homes on the market, but also could increase competition as buyers get access to more affordable loans.

Also, many homes for sale in tight markets are deliberately underpriced. Sellers hope to spark a frenzy of offers over asking price. You’d be smart to get clear on how much you can afford to pay — consider consulting a fee-only financial planner — and to enlist the services of a good real estate agent who understands your local market.

Filed Under: Q&A, Real Estate Tagged With: buying a home, home affordability, home buying, homeownership, rent vs own, rent vs. buy

Friday’s need-to-know money news

July 26, 2013 By Liz Weston

Wire cutterWhy would should wait to go school shopping, avoiding overdraft fees, how to prepare yourself for the joys of homeowning and reasons why you’ll drop cable soon.

Hold Off on Back-to-School Shopping
Those great deals could be even greater in August.

Four Ways to Avoid Hefty Overdraft Fees
Don’t let a $10 check become a $35 fee.

How to Protect Yourself Against Credit Card Discrimination
What to do when your rejection has nothing to do with your credit score.

So You Wanna Be a First-Time Homebuyer?
Mistakes to avoid when taking the leap.

5 More Reasons You’ll Be Cutting Your Cable TV Cord Next Year
Dropping your cable company is becoming easier.

Filed Under: Liz's Blog Tagged With: back to school, banking, cable, cable television, Credit Cards, cutting the cord, first-time homebuyer, home buying, homeownership, overdrafts, renting

Friday’s need-to-know money news

June 28, 2013 By Liz Weston

HertzThe best place to rent a car for your summer road trip, six surprises that could ruin your retirement and how baby boomers can keep their identities safe both online and off.

The Best Car Rental Agency in America
Before you hit the road this summer, find out who has the best rental policies.

Insider Shopping Tips From a Grocery Store Cashier
How to get more for your dollar at the supermarket.

Don’t Let These Six Surprises Ruin Your Retirement
Rule No. 1: Expect the Unexpected

Homeowner Tax Breaks Not as Great as You Think
Tax breaks always sound good, but they don’t always pay off.

How Boomers Can Keep Their Identities Safe
Simple tips to protect your identity.

Filed Under: Liz's Blog, Saving Money Tagged With: car rental, homeownership, Identity Theft, Retirement, saving money, Taxes, travel

Homeownership isn’t for everyone

March 18, 2013 By Liz Weston

Dear Liz: I’ve gone back and forth over whether to buy property to live in. I would only consider a condo, because I don’t think it’s ecologically responsible for a single person to live in a stand-alone house, plus I have no interest in or aptitude for maintenance. But through family and friends’ experiences, I’m worried that condos can be a nightmare to own. That leaves me stuck with renting, which gives me flexibility. I also live in an extremely expensive area (Boston) and do contract work, so purchasing something I would want to live in might be tricky. But I feel I’m being barraged by people telling me that renting is a losing proposition and that buying is great for my future. I’d rather keep putting money away in my retirement funds, but I wonder if I’m just refusing to “be responsible” as others say. I have no debt at all, so I feel responsible.

Answer: You would think the recent economic unpleasantness would have cured people of the idea that homeownership is right for everyone all the time.

Real estate investors often tout the benefit of “leverage”–using borrowed money to control an asset that can appreciate in value. As we learned, though, leverage can work both ways and can leave you owing more than a property is worth.

In reality, much of the financial benefit of homeownership comes from the “forced savings” aspect of paying down a mortgage. Homes do tend to appreciate in value over time, but on average the appreciation usually doesn’t exceed the overall inflation rate. Plus homes are expensive to own and maintain, which can dramatically reduce the return on your investment. Investments in stocks and stock mutual funds probably will give you a better return over the long haul, and you’ll never have to buy a new roof for them.

Homeownership can be a good idea if you can afford all the costs, plan to stay put for several years and truly want to be a homeowner. Otherwise, renting gives you freedom and flexibility. That’s neither irresponsible nor a losing proposition.

Filed Under: Credit & Debt, Q&A, Real Estate Tagged With: first-time homebuyer, home buying, home purchase, homeownership, mortgages

Primary Sidebar

Search

Copyright © 2026 · Ask Liz Weston 2.0 On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in