Mary Altaffer/Associated Press Morgan Stanley plans to extend a health benefit to its gay and lesbian employees.
The Cost of Being Gay
A look at the financial realities of same-sex partnerships.
Another financial titan has decided to extend a benefit that will put its gay and lesbian employees on equal footing with their heterosexual co-workers.
Beginning Jan. 1, Morgan Stanley will begin reimbursing employees for the extra taxes they pay on health insurance for their same-sex partners. The news follows a similar announcement last week from Bank of America, which makes Morgan Stanley the sixth financial services firm to adopt the policy, joining Barclays, Goldman Sachs, Credit Suisse and BNP Paribas.
The new policy has also spread relatively quickly among big consulting companies, law firms and handful of big technology companies. We’ve been keeping close track of who’s doing what on a scorecard. (You can see if your company made the list here.)
For those of you who haven’t been following the issue closely, here’s some background: Under federal law, employer-provided health benefits for domestic partners are counted as taxable income, if the partner is not considered a dependent. On top of that, the employees cannot use pretax dollars to pay for their premiums — unlike their opposite-sex married counterparts.
Since gay unions are not recognized by the federal government, same-sex couples can not avoid the extra costs by getting married. So while many large employers offer health insurance coverage for domestic partners, these employees must pay more to use it.
Like several other firms, Morgan Stanley is covering the costs only for same-sex partners and their dependents. Eligible employees will be reimbursed with a lump sum once a year, a company spokeswoman said.
Let us know if you’ve heard of any other companies that have adopted the policy, and we’ll add them to our chart. And if you have asked your company to adopt the policy, let us know in the comment section below what kind of response you received.
Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=aca3683ada76b1ff56ab37f3cf8ff6ef