» 
Arabic Bulgarian Chinese Croatian Czech Danish Dutch English Estonian Finnish French German Greek Hebrew Hindi Hungarian Icelandic Indonesian Italian Japanese Korean Latvian Lithuanian Malagasy Norwegian Persian Polish Portuguese Romanian Russian Serbian Slovak Slovenian Spanish Swedish Thai Turkish Vietnamese
Arabic Bulgarian Chinese Croatian Czech Danish Dutch English Estonian Finnish French German Greek Hebrew Hindi Hungarian Icelandic Indonesian Italian Japanese Korean Latvian Lithuanian Malagasy Norwegian Persian Polish Portuguese Romanian Russian Serbian Slovak Slovenian Spanish Swedish Thai Turkish Vietnamese

definition - Domestic_partnership_in_the_United_States

definition of Wikipedia

   Advertizing ▼

Wikipedia

Domestic partnership in the United States

                   
Legal recognition of
same-sex relationships
Marriage

Argentina
Belgium
Canada
Denmark
Iceland
Netherlands

Norway
Portugal
South Africa
Spain
Sweden

Performed in some jurisdictions

Mexico: Mexico City, ROO
United States: CT, DC, IA, MA, NH, NY, VT, Coquille, Suquamish

Recognized, not performed

Aruba, Curaçao and Sint Maarten (Netherlands only)
Israel
Mexico: all states (Mexico only)
United States: CA (conditional), MD, RI
Uruguay

LGBT portal

In the United States of America, domestic partnership is a city-, county-, state-, or employer-recognized status that may be available to same-sex couples and, sometimes, opposite-sex couples. Although similar to marriage, a domestic partnership does not confer any of the 1,138 rights afforded to married couples by the federal government. Domestic partnerships in the United States are determined by each state or local jurisdiction, so there is no nationwide consistency on the rights, responsibilities, and benefits accorded domestic partners.

Couples who live in localities without civil unions or domestic partnerships may voluntarily enter into a private, informal domestic partnership agreement, specifying their mutual obligations; however, this involves drawing up a number of separate legal documents, including wills, power of attorney, healthcare directives, child custody agreements, etc., and is best done with the guidance of a local attorney.

In any case, without legislation to enforce the agreement, all such provisions of the partnership may be ignored by hospitals, healthcare professionals, or other persons, and may be held invalid by state courts in disputes over child custody or over a deceased partner's estate.

Contents

  Terminology

As currently (2008) understood in the United States, a civil union is a legally recognized status almost identical to marriage, whereas domestic partnership often connotes a lesser status that may or may not be recognized by local law. However, the terminology is still evolving; the exact level of rights and responsibilities of domestic partnership depends on the particular law of a given jurisdiction.

Since 1999, the West Coast states of California, Oregon, Washington, and Nevada have all passed domestic partnership statutes; in contrast, most legislatures in the New England region and New Jersey have preferred the term civil unions. However, as a result of the 1996 federal Defense of Marriage Act, a state may decline to recognize same sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions.

In many other countries, the equivalent legal status is referred to as registered partnership, and domestic partnership refers to cohabitation, rather than a legal status.

  Legal rights

The legal rights afforded to partners depends on the location. State-level recognition of partners is, generally, significantly stronger and can help partners secure benefits such as leave similar to that provided under the Family and Medical Leave Act. The range of benefits is generally greater in such cities as San Francisco, New York City, and Washington, D.C.

  Potential legal conflicts

Potentially serious legal issues arise from the conflict between state domestic partnership and same-sex-marriage laws, and the structure of U.S. federal law, which, under the Defense of Marriage Act, explicitly does not extend Federal law recognition to those unions. This means that, for example, though they may considered as spouses under the laws of some states, domestic partners do not have spousal rights to Social Security benefits, to spousal benefits in the other partner's pension from a private employer (if that pension is governed by Employee Retirement Income Security Act, ERISA), and will not be treated as spouses for purposes of any Federal tax law.

  Employment benefits

Some public- and private-sector U.S. employers provide health insurance or other spousal benefits to same-sex partners of employees, although the employee receiving benefits for his or her partner may have to pay income tax on the value of the benefit.

  Laws regarding same-sex partnerships in the United States
  Same-sex marriage1
  Unions granting rights similar to marriage1,2
  Legislation granting limited/enumerated rights1
  Same-sex marriages performed elsewhere recognized1
  No specific prohibition or recognition of same-sex marriages or unions
  State statute bans same-sex marriage
  State constitution bans same-sex marriage2
  State constitution bans same-sex marriage and some or all other kinds of same-sex unions
1May include recent laws or court decisions which have created legal recognition of same-sex relationships, but which have not entered into effect yet.
2Same-sex marriage laws in California are complicated; please see the article on same-sex marriage in California.

Partner benefits are more common among large employers, colleges and universities than at small businesses. The qualifications for and benefits of domestic partnership status vary from employer to employer; some recognize only same-sex or different-sex couples, while others recognize both.[1]

According to data from the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, the majority of Fortune 500 companies provided benefits to same-sex partners of employees as of June 2006.[2][3] Overall, 41 percent of HR professionals indicate that their organizations offered some form of domestic partner benefits (opposite-sex partners, same-sex partners or both).[4]

The San Francisco Human Rights Commission maintains a list of health insurance providers that offer insurance plans that cover domestic partners, or employee+1 coverage online: Domestic partner insurance provider search. The Human Rights Campaign Foundation offers best practices on how to implement them (see: Domestic partner benefits).

  Taxation of benefits

Because the U.S. Federal Government does not recognize same- or opposite-sex partners, tax benefits provided to opposite-sex spouses are generally not available to same-sex partners and spouses or opposite-sex partners.[5] IRS Regulation Section 1.61-21(b)(1) generally requires that the imputed value of the benefit be considered taxable income. For example if an employee covers his or her partner under an employer health insurance plan, the estimated amount the employer pays to cover the partner will be added to the employee's salary for tax purposes, unless the employee's partner is a qualifying dependent under Section 152. The same is not true for married couples.[6] There are some exceptions that allow for tax-free domestic partner benefits, such as for a domestic partner that qualifies as a dependent under Internal Revenue Code Sections 152(a)(9) through 152(b)(5), a certification and annual recertification that the support and relationship tests of section 152(a)(9) are met, and the relationship between the employee and domestic partner does not violate local law.[7]

The proposed Tax Parity for Health Plan Beneficiaries Act would remove these tax inequities.

  Cities and counties with domestic partnership registries

  Map of counties that offer domestic partner benefits either county-wide or in particular cities
  County or city offers domestic partner benefits1
  State-wide partner benefits through same-sex marriage, civil unions, domestic partnership, or designated beneficiary agreements
  County or city does not offer domestic partner benefits
1Michigan bans domestic partner benefits for unmarried public employees

Some U.S. cities offer domestic partnership registries. Some private employers use domestic partnership registrations for the purpose of determining employee eligibility for domestic partner benefits.[1] The following are some examples of such registries.

For a full list of cities and counties see the following page: Cities and counties in the United States offering a domestic partnership registry

  New York City

Domestic partnerships in New York City[8] exist for same sex couples and opposite sex couples in which both are above the age of 18 and are New York City residents (or at least one party to the partnership is an employee of the City of New York). The status provides essentially three benefits: (1) the ability to remain in a “rent controlled” apartment after the domestic partner lease holder dies, (2) the ability to visit the domestic partner in a city hospital or jail and (3) the ability of city employees to obtain subsidized health insurance for their partners and to obtain the benefits of the Family Medical Leave Act.[9]

Signed into law by Rudolph Giuliani on July 7, 1997, the law codified executive orders by the previous two administrations. Other communities provide similar benefits; however one town, Eastchester, which had provided domestic partner benefits, has withdrawn the plan.[10] State employees have received similar benefits under executive orders of the Governor and have been given priority over bodily remains of Domestic Partner as enacted into law by Gov. George Pataki in February 2006. For a discussion of both the history and implementation of New York Domestic partnerships see the June 2003 report of an official New York City Council study.[11]

  San Francisco

In 1982, a domestic partnership law was adopted and passed by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, but Dianne Feinstein, mayor of San Francisco at the time, came under intense pressure from the Catholic Church and subsequently vetoed the bill. Not until 1989 was a domestic partnership law adopted in the city of San Francisco.[12] As of December 2006, the city still offers a domestic partnership status separate from that offered by the state; city residents can apply for both.[13]

  Cities in Ohio

The first city to offer domestic partnerships in that state was Cleveland Heights in 2003, which was passed by voter referendum.[14] In 2007, Toledo, OH became that state's second city to offer domestic partnerships.[15] In 2008, the Cleveland City Council voted to enact a domestic partner registry.[16] In 2011, the Athens, OH City Council established a domestic partner registry.[17] In 2012, the Dayton, OH City Commission, the Cincinnati, OH City Council, and the Columbus, OH City Council all approved ordinances creating domestic partnership registries.[18][19][20]Yellow Springs, OH also passed a domestic partnership registry.[21]

  States offering domestic partnership status

  California

Domestic partnerships in California exist for same-sex couples, and for opposite-sex couples in which one person is above the age of 62. The state of California first offered domestic partnerships in 2000. The Domestic Partner Rights and Responsibilities Act, which added nearly all the state rights and responsibilities of marriage to domestic partnerships was signed in 2003 and took effect in 2005. Couples in state registered domestic partnerships prior to 2005 who remained registered on January 1, 2005 became entitled to the rights and responsibilities of the new law. Paid Family Leave covers registered domestic partners. In 2007, domestic partnerships were allowed to change their surnames and jointly file state income taxes - eliminating the last piece of discrimination in the domestic partnerships laws at the state level.

  Colorado

Since July 1, 2009, both opposite sex and same sex couples have been able to enter a designated beneficiary agreement which will grant them limited rights.[22]

  District of Columbia

Domestic partnership in the District of Columbia have been recognized since 1992. Effective since 1 March 2002 and expanded further to "near spousal level" rights which were given by a district vote in 2003, 2005, 2007, 2008 and in 2009.

  Hawaii

Reciprocal beneficiary registration was enacted in 1997. The law took effect on 1 June 1997. Civil unions became available to same- and opposite-sex couples on 1 January 2012.

  Maine

Domestic partnerships in Maine, enacted in 2004, exist for all couples, regardless of sex. The law took effect on 1 January 2005.

  Maryland

Two bills, providing some limited domestic partnership rights for same-sex and different-sex couples, were passed by the 2008 General Assembly and came into effect on July 1 of that year.

Maryland now recognizes out of state same sex marriages.

  Nevada

A bill put forth creating a domestic partnership registry with the State attorney's office, passed by both chambers of the Nevada Legislature in early May 2009, but was vetoed by Gov. Jim Gibbons. On May 31, 2009, the Legislature overrode the governor's veto, thus putting domestic partnerships into effect. In 2002, Nevada voters approved Question 2 -- the referendum banning state recognition of same-sex marriages. The domestic partnerships are not officially marriages, but may be elevated to the status of a marriage if the couple involved wishes to proceed thus far (just like California). Heterosexual couples may also apply for a domestic partnership under Nevada law. The law took effect 1 October 2009.

  New Jersey

Domestic partnerships in New Jersey have been available since July 30, 2004 for same-sex couples, and for opposite-sex couples in which one person is above the age of 62. However, on October 25, 2006, the Supreme Court of New Jersey ruled that under the New Jersey state constitution, the state could not deny the benefits of marriage to same-sex couples, although the court left it up to the legislature whether to call such relationships marriage or to use a different term. Complying with the court's ruling, on December 14, 2006, the New Jersey Legislature passed a bill establishing civil unions for same-sex couples, which was signed into law by the governor on December 21 and came into effect on February 19, 2007.

  Oregon

House Bill 2007, the Oregon Family Fairness Act, created legal recognition for same-sex couples and their families through domestic partnerships. The bill was signed by Governor Ted Kulongoski on May 9, 2007,[23] and was due to come into effect on the following January 1. However, on December 28, 2007, a federal judge delayed implementation of the law pending a hearing on the legality of a petition drive to overturn the law. On February 1, the judge lifted the injunction on the law. Same-sex couples were able to register beginning February 4.

  Wisconsin

The Wisconsin legislature passed its 2009-2010 Budget on June 26, 2009. Governor Jim Doyle included language in the bill to allow for domestic partnership registrations for all unmarried persons, that will provide certain and limited rights and obligations of marriage. Wisconsin is the first state to offer such domestic partnership benefits despite having a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage and comparable alternatives, like civil unions. A legal analysis found on May 15, 2009, that adding such language to the budget despite the bans was likely legal. The law took effect 3 August 2009.

  Washington

The Washington State Legislature approved a bill establishing domestic partnerships in the state during the 2007 (expanded further in 2008 and 2009) legislative sessions. All domestic partnership bills were signed by Governor Christine Gregoire.

Referendum 71 sought voter confirmation of the 2009 domestic partnership extensions (SB 5688) in the 2009 elections. The bill was approved by 53 percent of the voters and became law.

  Failed domestic partnership legislation

  Alaska

Domestic partnerships in Alaska have been ordered by the Alaska Supreme Court for same-sex partners of state employees. It was set to become law October 2006. The court has not gone so far as to make any specific policies but has instructed the state legislature to pass a bill to the same effect. If this happens, it would make Alaska the first determinedly red state to enact same-sex benefits. It would also be the only state with a specific same-sex marriage ban to enact such benefits.

As of December 2006, legislative efforts to overturn or nullify the Supreme Court's ruling are underway, and the outcome is uncertain.

  Colorado

The Colorado House of Representatives and Senate both passed a domestic partnership bill that was referred to voters in the November 2006 elections as Referendum I. In the general election, the proposal was defeated by a margin of 47% for, 53% against. If it had passed, the bill would have allowed same-sex couples many benefits that opposite-sex couples enjoy in the state.

  Maryland

The Maryland General Assembly approved a bill establishing a limited form of domestic partnership in its 2005 session. The main effect of the law would have been to allow same-sex partners to have hospital visitation and medical decision-making rights for one another equivalent to those recognized for married couples. However, the bill was vetoed by Governor Robert L. Ehrlich, who reportedly objected to the bill's use of the phrase "life partner". The veto was not overridden.

  Similar legal status classifications

  See also

  References

  1. ^ a b "Human Rights Campaign - Defining Domestic Partners for Benefits Purposes". http://www.hrc.org/issues/4826.htm. Retrieved 2008-03-06. 
  2. ^ Human Rights Campaign Foundation - State of the Workplace for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Americans, 2005-2006
  3. ^ "Human Rights Campaign - GLBT Equality at the Fortune 500". http://www.hrc.org/issues/fortune500.htm. Retrieved 2008-03-09. 
  4. ^ "Employees Undervalue Benefits, SHRM 2007 Survey Finds". http://www.shrm.org/rewards/library_published/benefits/nonIC/CMS_022074.asp. Retrieved 2008-03-09. 
  5. ^ "What the Defense of Marriage Act Does". Human Rights Campaign. http://www.hrc.org/issues/5443.htm. [dead link]
  6. ^ "Taxation of Domestic Partner Benefits". Human Rights Campaign Foundation. http://www.hrc.org/issues/4820.htm. [dead link]
  7. ^ "Ruling 200339001" (pdf). Internal Revenue Service. September 26, 2003. http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-wd/0339001.pdf. Retrieved July 10, 2012. 
  8. ^ NYCmarriagebureau.com
  9. ^ NYCmarriagebureau
  10. ^ GLBT Couples Law | news | NY Town Drops DP Benefits
  11. ^ Domestic but not equal: Domestic partner benefits inconsistently applied at public agencies
  12. ^ Bishop, Katherine (May 31, 1989). "San Francisco Grants Recognition To Couples Who Aren't Married". The New York Times. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=950DEFD9163DF932A05756C0A96F948260. Retrieved May 1, 2010. 
  13. ^ Office of The County Clerk: Filing a Domestic Partnership Agreement
  14. ^ http://www.clevelandheights.com/index.aspx?page=339
  15. ^ http://www.ci.toledo.oh.us/ToledoCityCouncil/DomesticPartnerships/tabid/466/Default.aspx
  16. ^ Blog.Cleveland.com
  17. ^ City to start registering domestic partners
  18. ^ http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/dayton-news/dayton-opens-domestic-partner-registry-1384793.html
  19. ^ http://www.ontopmag.com/article.aspx?id=11851&MediaType=1&Category=26
  20. ^ http://www.plunderbund.com/2012/07/31/columbus-city-council-creates-domestic-partner-registry/
  21. ^ http://www.ontopmag.com/article.aspx?id=11851&MediaType=1&Category=26
  22. ^ "Ritter signs bill that will help gay couples". Associated Press (The Denver Post). 2009-04-09. http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_12109357. Retrieved 2009-04-10. 
  23. ^ Gay News From 365Gay.com
   
               

 

All translations of Domestic_partnership_in_the_United_States


sensagent's content

  • definitions
  • synonyms
  • antonyms
  • encyclopedia

Dictionary and translator for handheld

⇨ New : sensagent is now available on your handheld

   Advertising ▼

sensagent's office

Shortkey or widget. Free.

Windows Shortkey: sensagent. Free.

Vista Widget : sensagent. Free.

Webmaster Solution

Alexandria

A windows (pop-into) of information (full-content of Sensagent) triggered by double-clicking any word on your webpage. Give contextual explanation and translation from your sites !

Try here  or   get the code

SensagentBox

With a SensagentBox, visitors to your site can access reliable information on over 5 million pages provided by Sensagent.com. Choose the design that fits your site.

Business solution

Improve your site content

Add new content to your site from Sensagent by XML.

Crawl products or adds

Get XML access to reach the best products.

Index images and define metadata

Get XML access to fix the meaning of your metadata.


Please, email us to describe your idea.

WordGame

The English word games are:
○   Anagrams
○   Wildcard, crossword
○   Lettris
○   Boggle.

Lettris

Lettris is a curious tetris-clone game where all the bricks have the same square shape but different content. Each square carries a letter. To make squares disappear and save space for other squares you have to assemble English words (left, right, up, down) from the falling squares.

boggle

Boggle gives you 3 minutes to find as many words (3 letters or more) as you can in a grid of 16 letters. You can also try the grid of 16 letters. Letters must be adjacent and longer words score better. See if you can get into the grid Hall of Fame !

English dictionary
Main references

Most English definitions are provided by WordNet .
English thesaurus is mainly derived from The Integral Dictionary (TID).
English Encyclopedia is licensed by Wikipedia (GNU).

Copyrights

The wordgames anagrams, crossword, Lettris and Boggle are provided by Memodata.
The web service Alexandria is granted from Memodata for the Ebay search.
The SensagentBox are offered by sensAgent.

Translation

Change the target language to find translations.
Tips: browse the semantic fields (see From ideas to words) in two languages to learn more.

last searches on the dictionary :

5212 online visitors

computed in 0.109s

   Advertising ▼

I would like to report:
section :
a spelling or a grammatical mistake
an offensive content(racist, pornographic, injurious, etc.)
a copyright violation
an error
a missing statement
other
please precise:

Advertize

Partnership

Company informations

My account

login

registration

   Advertising ▼