The Union has rejected a proposal, put forward by numerous scientists, to replace the existing spousal splitting system (“Ehegattensplitting”) with a restricted real splitting method. According to the newspaper “Tagesspiegel”, Fritz Güntzler, the economic policy spokesperson for the CDU/CSU parliamentary group, insisted on the status quo, stating, “We stand by it”. He argued that the institution of marriage should not be compromised against the family unit. In his view, marriage constitutes a community of economic support, where partners assume mutual obligations, and this must be reflected in the tax code.
Güntzler also explained that the current spousal splitting system reflects the constitutional protection afforded to marriage and family. It ensures that married couples and non-married cohabiting partners with comparable economic income are taxed equally. He argued that the proposed alternatives offer no solutions to this particular issue.
Leading German economic researchers recently attempted to influence the long-standing debate over the spousal splitting system by submitting an open letter to Chancellor Friedrich Merz (CDU) and Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil (SPD). Their concept suggests maintaining the tax recognition of marriage but directing incentives more specifically toward families with children and strengthening overall work motivations.
The Union does not agree with this approach. Güntzler commented that “the hidden tax increase in this proposal will not create any incentives for second earners to work”. From his perspective, the fundamental problem is not tax policy itself, but rather the inability of many women to expand their working hours due to a lack of adequate childcare provisions or unreliable daycare hours. The CDU politician noted that if there were a nationwide shortage of about 300,000 daycare spots, this would represent the largest obstacle to mothers increasing their participation in the workforce.
He concluded that the federal government, the states, and local municipalities must first address this infrastructural challenge-for instance, by providing reliable childcare or smoother pathways for individuals moving from minimum-wage jobs to social insurance-mandated employment. “Tax policy symbol debates help little in this regard” Güntzler asserted.
