Summary
cohabitating_spouses is a no-formula input defaulting to False, so a married-filing-jointly couple living together is treated as not cohabitating. For the Arizona property tax credit (Form 140PTC) this selects the wrong statutory table, roughly quartering the credit.
Originating TAXSIM comparison: PolicyEngine/policyengine-taxsim#983
Legal basis
ARS §43-1072(A)(3) defines two categories: a claimant who "did not live with a spouse or any other persons" uses Table 1 (§43-1072(B)(1)); one who "lived with a spouse or one or more persons" uses Table 2 (§43-1072(B)(2)). A married couple living together falls under Table 2.
For Table 2, ARS §43-1072(B)(2) gives household income 3,551–3,700 → $323.
Root cause
az_property_tax_credit selects the table via tax_unit("cohabitating_spouses"), but cohabitating_spouses has no formula and defaults to False. So a joint couple uses the living-alone Table 1.
Reproduction (AZ MFJ, both age 75, $3,638 household income, $9,059 rent, TY2025)
|
cohabitating_spouses |
az_property_tax_credit |
| Current default |
False |
$78 (Table 1) |
| Correct (spouse present) |
True |
$323 (Table 2) |
$323 is confirmed three ways: ARS §43-1072(B)(2) table, PE's own Table 2 parameter, and the reporter's filled 2025 Form 140PTC. The credit is capped by property tax + rent ($9,059), which exceeds $323, so $323 binds.
Suggested fix
Either make cohabitating_spouses default to True when a spouse is present in the tax unit, or have az_property_tax_credit check spouse presence directly rather than relying on the unset input.
Integration test
- name: AZ property tax credit uses the cohabitating (Table 2) schedule for a married couple
period: 2025
input:
people:
head: {age: 75, taxable_interest_income: 3_637.87, rent: 9_059.32}
spouse: {age: 75}
tax_units: {tax_unit: {members: [head, spouse]}}
households: {household: {members: [head, spouse], state_code: AZ}}
output:
az_property_tax_credit: 323
Summary
cohabitating_spousesis a no-formula input defaulting toFalse, so a married-filing-jointly couple living together is treated as not cohabitating. For the Arizona property tax credit (Form 140PTC) this selects the wrong statutory table, roughly quartering the credit.Originating TAXSIM comparison: PolicyEngine/policyengine-taxsim#983
Legal basis
ARS §43-1072(A)(3) defines two categories: a claimant who "did not live with a spouse or any other persons" uses Table 1 (§43-1072(B)(1)); one who "lived with a spouse or one or more persons" uses Table 2 (§43-1072(B)(2)). A married couple living together falls under Table 2.
For Table 2, ARS §43-1072(B)(2) gives household income
3,551–3,700 → $323.Root cause
az_property_tax_creditselects the table viatax_unit("cohabitating_spouses"), butcohabitating_spouseshas no formula and defaults toFalse. So a joint couple uses the living-alone Table 1.Reproduction (AZ MFJ, both age 75, $3,638 household income, $9,059 rent, TY2025)
cohabitating_spousesaz_property_tax_creditFalseTrue$323 is confirmed three ways: ARS §43-1072(B)(2) table, PE's own Table 2 parameter, and the reporter's filled 2025 Form 140PTC. The credit is capped by property tax + rent ($9,059), which exceeds $323, so $323 binds.
Suggested fix
Either make
cohabitating_spousesdefault toTruewhen a spouse is present in the tax unit, or haveaz_property_tax_creditcheck spouse presence directly rather than relying on the unset input.Integration test