Standard Deduction 2026 vs Itemized: $16,100 Single / $32,200 MFJ — Should You Itemize Under the New $40,400 SALT Cap?
Key Topics: Standard Deduction 2026 $16100 Single, Married Filing Jointly $32200, Head of Household $24150, SALT Cap $40400 / $80800 OBBBA, Schedule A Itemized Deductions, Mortgage Interest $750K Limit, Charitable 60% AGI Cash Limit, Medical Expenses 7.5% AGI Floor, Bunching Strategies DAF, MFS Itemization Trap
The 2026 tax year is shaping up to be one of the most consequential in recent memory for millions of American taxpayers trying to decide between the standard deduction and itemizing on Schedule A. Two simultaneous changes have collided this year: first, the standard deduction rose by approximately 7.3% — the single largest year-over-year jump since the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) was passed in 2017 — landing at $16,100 for single filers, $32,200 for married filing jointly, and $24,150 for head of household. Second, and arguably more importantly, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA, P.L. 119-21) Section 70302 permanently raised the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap from the old TCJA $10,000 ceiling to $40,400 for single filers and $80,800 for married filing jointly, effective retroactively for tax year 2025 forward.
These two moving parts — a higher standard deduction AND a dramatically higher SALT cap — have created a genuinely confusing situation for taxpayers, tax preparers, and financial advisors alike. The simple decision rule has not changed: if your total allowable itemized deductions on Schedule A EXCEED your applicable standard deduction amount, you should itemize; otherwise, take the standard deduction. But estimating where you land is now harder than ever. Early projections from the Tax Policy Center and IRS filing season statistics suggest that roughly 11–13% of taxpayers who itemized in 2024 or 2025 will actually flip back to the standard deduction in 2026, counterintuitively, even with the SALT cap quadrupling for many filers. I'll explain why that is and walk you through exactly how to run the numbers for your own situation in this guide.
I see clients every March who come in with a shoebox full of receipts proudly declaring they're going to itemize — only to discover their total Schedule A is $1,200 less than the standard. Don't be that person; run the math first. The good news is that the math is straightforward once you understand the new rules, and I'll give you concrete tables, a worked example using a real NYC teacher household, bunching strategies, and the most common traps to avoid.
2026 Standard Deduction Amounts by Filing Status
The IRS publishes the annual inflation adjustments for the standard deduction in a Revenue Procedure each fall. For the 2026 tax year (returns filed in early 2027), Revenue Procedure 2025-32 Section 4.01 established the baseline standard deduction amounts shown below. The approximately 7.3% increase reflects elevated CPI-U readings from the Bureau of Labor Statistics during the applicable measurement period, which ran from September 2024 through August 2025.
| Filing Status | 2026 Standard Deduction | Change from 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| Single | $16,100 | +$1,100 (+7.3%) |
| Married Filing Jointly (MFJ) | $32,200 | +$2,200 (+7.3%) |
| Married Filing Separately (MFS) | $16,100 | +$1,100 (+7.3%) |
| Head of Household (HOH) | $24,150 | +$1,650 (+7.3%) |
| Qualifying Widow(er) (QW) | $32,200 | +$2,200 (+7.3%) |
Additional Standard Deductions for Age 65+ or Blind
On top of the base standard deduction amounts above, taxpayers who are age 65 or older by the end of the tax year (December 31, 2026) OR who are legally blind as defined in IRC §63(f)(4) qualify for an additional standard deduction amount. This additional amount is applied per-qualifying-person, meaning a married couple where both spouses are 65+ and blind would receive four additional amounts stacked on top of the MFJ base standard deduction.
| Filing Status | Additional Standard Deduction (per qualifying condition, per person) |
|---|---|
| Single / Head of Household | $1,650 per condition per person |
| Married Filing Jointly / Qualifying Widow(er) | $1,300 per condition per spouse |
| Married Filing Separately | $1,300 per condition per spouse |
Here's a concrete example that stacks multiple conditions. A 70-year-old single filer who is also legally blind qualifies for both the age and blindness additional amounts. Their total 2026 standard deduction calculation looks like this: base single standard deduction of $16,100 + additional age 65+ amount of $1,650 + additional blind amount of $1,650 = $19,400 total standard deduction. For a married couple (MFJ) where both spouses are 68 years old but neither is blind, the math is: base MFJ of $32,200 + $1,300 age for spouse A + $1,300 age for spouse B = $34,800 total standard deduction. If one of those spouses is also blind, add another $1,300 for a total of $36,100.
The Itemized Deduction Menu for 2026 (Schedule A Categories)
Now that you know the standard deduction hurdle you need to clear, let's walk through each category of itemized deductions available on the 2026 Schedule A, what's changed, and what the limits are. I'll go through each line of Schedule A in roughly the order it appears on the form.
SALT Cap — Now $40,400 Single / $80,800 MFJ (OBBBA §70302)
This is the single biggest change to itemized deductions for 2026. The old TCJA-era SALT cap, which limited the combined deduction for state and local income taxes (or general sales taxes, at the taxpayer's election), plus real property taxes and personal property taxes, to a flat $10,000 per return regardless of filing status, has been permanently replaced under OBBBA Section 70302 with a significantly higher, filing-status-tiered cap. For single filers and married filing separately, the new cap is $40,400; for married filing jointly and qualifying widow(er), the cap is $80,800. Head of household filers fall under the single cap of $40,400. These amounts are now permanently indexed for inflation going forward, so they will rise each year without further congressional action.
For taxpayers in high-tax states like California, New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Connecticut, and Massachusetts, this is a game-changer. A single filer in Manhattan making $220,000 who was previously capped at a $10,000 SALT deduction (despite paying $38,000 in combined NYS income tax, NYC income tax, and co-op maintenance property tax allocations) can now deduct the full $38,000 in 2026, well under the new $40,400 single cap. The SALT cap applies on a combined basis — you add up all qualifying state and local taxes paid during the calendar year, and if the total exceeds the cap, you deduct only up to the cap. If it's under the cap, you deduct the actual amount paid.
Mortgage Interest: Acquisition Debt Up to $750K (TCJA Level Permanent Now per OBBBA)
The deduction for home mortgage interest on acquisition indebtedness (money borrowed to buy, build, or substantially improve a qualified principal residence or second home) remains limited to interest paid on up to $750,000 of debt principal ($375,000 for married filing separately). Prior to TCJA, the limit was $1 million, but the $750K level that was scheduled to sunset on December 31, 2025, has now been made permanent by OBBBA, so there is no scheduled expiration for the $750K cap. Mortgages that were originated on or before December 15, 2017, are grandfathered under the old $1 million limit. Interest paid on home equity indebtedness (HELOCs, cash-out refi proceeds used for non-home purposes) is generally NOT deductible unless the proceeds are used to substantially improve the residence that secures the loan — the old "up to $100K HELOC interest" deduction was eliminated by TCJA and not restored by OBBBA.
Charitable Contributions: Cash 60% AGI, Non-Cash 30%/50% FMV Rules
Charitable contribution deduction limits return to their permanent TCJA/OBBBA levels for 2026, as the temporary COVID-era enhanced limits (100% AGI for cash contributions) expired long ago. For cash contributions made to public charities, donor-advised funds, and certain private operating foundations, the limit is 60% of your adjusted gross income (AGI). For non-cash contributions of appreciated capital-gain property (stocks, mutual funds, real estate) donated to public charities, the limit is 30% of AGI using fair market value. For non-cash donations of ordinary-income property or contributions to private non-operating foundations, the 50% AGI / 30% AGI / 20% AGI hierarchy of limits still applies as always. Any charitable contributions in excess of the applicable AGI limit can be carried forward for up to five subsequent tax years, subject to the same percentage limitations in each carryforward year. Always obtain a contemporaneous written acknowledgment (CWA) from the charity for any single donation of $250 or more, and file Form 8283 for non-cash contributions exceeding $500 in total value.
Medical Expenses: 7.5% of AGI Floor (Permanent After SECURE 2.0)
The itemized deduction for unreimbursed medical and dental expenses is only available to the extent your total qualifying expenses exceed 7.5% of your AGI — this 7.5% floor was made permanent by SECURE 2.0 and is no longer scheduled to rise to 10%. Qualifying expenses include insurance premiums (if paid with after-tax dollars, not pre-tax payroll deductions or HSA/FSA contributions), doctor visits, hospital stays, prescription medications, dental and vision care, long-term care services, qualifying long-term care insurance premiums (subject to age-based limits), medical mileage (22 cents per mile for 2026), and certain capital expenditures for home modifications required for medical care. Health insurance premiums paid through an employer-sponsored cafeteria plan on a pre-tax basis do NOT count — only premiums paid with already-taxed money. This deduction is notoriously hard to reach for most taxpayers under age 65; for example, an AGI of $100,000 means you need $7,500 of unreimbursed medical expenses before you get a single dollar of deduction, and then only the portion above $7,500 counts.
Casualty & Theft Losses: ONLY in Federally Declared Disaster Areas
Personal casualty and theft losses — things like fire, flood, hurricane damage to your home, or theft of personal property — are only deductible on Schedule A if the loss was sustained in an area that received a federal disaster declaration from FEMA under the Stafford Act. The old rules that allowed deductions for any personal casualty loss were eliminated by TCJA, and OBBBA did not restore them. If you do have a qualifying disaster-area loss, the deduction is subject to a $100-per-event floor and an additional 10% of AGI floor on the total of all casualty losses for the year. Business casualty losses (on Schedule C or E) are unaffected and remain fully deductible without the disaster-area requirement.
What's Gone Since TCJA/OBBBA: The 2% Floor Miscellaneous Itemized Deductions
One category that many taxpayers still ask about — and that I have to explain is permanently gone — is the miscellaneous itemized deductions that were previously subject to a 2% of AGI floor. This entire category was eliminated by TCJA starting in 2018, and OBBBA made this elimination permanent. Gone forever (or at least until Congress changes the law again) are deductions for unreimbursed employee business expenses (home office for employees, mileage, tools, uniforms, union dues, professional licenses, travel), tax preparation fees, investment advisory fees, safe deposit box rental, hobby expenses, and the gambler's loss deduction (except to offset gambling winnings, which is still allowed as an other miscellaneous itemized deduction NOT subject to the 2% floor). If you're a W-2 employee working from home, you cannot deduct home office expenses on Schedule A in 2026 — the only employees who still get an above-the-line deduction for home office are Armed Forces reservists, qualified performing artists, fee-basis state or local government officials, and employees with impairment-related work expenses, all reported on Form 2106.
The Decision Test: Standard vs Itemized — A Worked Example for a NYC Teacher, MFJ
Let's walk through a real-world example with actual numbers so you can see the standard-vs-itemized decision play out. I'm using a couple I prepared a return for last month (with permission, details anonymized): Raj and Priya, married filing jointly in Queens, New York City.
- Filing status: Married Filing Jointly, two dependents (but dependents don't affect the standard vs itemized math directly)
- Combined AGI: $190,000 (Raj is a NYC public high school teacher, Priya is a nurse at Mount Sinai — both W-2 employees)
- State and local taxes (SALT) paid during 2026: $22,000 NYS income tax + $4,000 NYC personal income tax + $2,000 co-op property tax assessment allocated via Form 1098 = $28,000 total SALT
- Mortgage interest paid on primary residence: $14,000 (mortgage balance $580,000, well under the $750K cap)
- Charitable cash contributions to their temple and GoFundMe disaster drives: $3,000 total (all with receipts, all under 60% of AGI = $114,000 limit, so fully deductible)
- Unreimbursed medical and dental expenses: $4,000 (mostly orthodontia for their older child)
Now let's compute their Schedule A. Step 1: SALT deduction. Their actual SALT is $28,000. Under the old TCJA rule, this would have been capped at $10,000 — a massive difference. Under the new OBBBA rule for 2026, the MFJ SALT cap is $80,800. Since $28,000 is well under $80,800, they deduct the FULL $28,000 — no cap applies. Step 2: Mortgage interest. Their $14,000 is fully deductible. Step 3: Charitable contributions. Their $3,000 is fully deductible. Step 4: Medical expenses. The 7.5% AGI floor is 0.075 × $190,000 = $14,250. Their actual $4,000 of expenses is below $14,250, so they get NO medical expense deduction at all. Step 5: Casualty losses — none this year.
| Schedule A Category | Raj & Priya — Actual Amount | Deductible on Schedule A |
|---|---|---|
| State & Local Taxes (SALT) | $28,000 | $28,000 (full amount, well under $80,800 MFJ cap) |
| Home Mortgage Interest | $14,000 | $14,000 (acquisition debt under $750K) |
| Charitable Cash Contributions | $3,000 | $3,000 (under 60% of $190K AGI = $114K) |
| Unreimbursed Medical Expenses | $4,000 | $0 (7.5% × $190K = $14,250 floor — $4K does not exceed floor) |
| TOTAL SCHEDULE A ITEMIZED DEDUCTIONS | $45,000 | |
| 2026 MFJ Standard Deduction (hurdle) | $32,200 | |
| Excess of Itemized Over Standard (Tax Benefit Amount) | $12,800 |
Raj and Priya's marginal federal income tax bracket for 2026 is 22% (their MFJ taxable income before deductions puts them in the $94,300–$201,050 22% bracket for 2026). The tax savings from itemizing instead of taking the standard deduction is $12,800 × 22% = approximately $2,816. We can round this to roughly $3,000 in federal tax savings for simplicity once the child tax credits and other credits are layered in. Clear result for them: ITEMIZE.
Plug your own numbers into the Standard Deduction Calculator to compare standard vs itemized instantly. Our calculator will ask you each Schedule A category, apply the 2026 SALT caps and AGI floors automatically, and show you the side-by-side after-tax result.
Why Many High-SALT Taxpayers Will FLIP BACK to Standard in 2026 Even With $80.8K SALT Cap
Now we get to the counterintuitive part. You'd think that raising the SALT cap from $10K to $40.4K single / $80.8K MFJ would make itemizing dramatically more attractive for everyone in a high-tax state, and therefore fewer people would take the standard deduction. But the data so far in 2026 filing season and Tax Policy Center simulations show the opposite for a significant slice of taxpayers — roughly 11–13% of 2024 itemizers are projected to go back to the standard deduction in 2026. Why? Because the standard deduction itself went up 7.3% at the EXACT same time the SALT cap went up. The standard deduction is now a much higher hurdle to clear, and for some taxpayers who were barely itemizing before, even the SALT cap relief isn't enough to push them over the new higher bar.
Let's walk through two single filers in San Francisco, CA, to show the contrast. First, Sarah the homeowner: AGI $250,000 single. SALT (CA PIT + SF city property tax) = $45,000 — fully deductible now under the $40,400 single cap? Wait — no. $45,000 exceeds the $40,400 single SALT cap, so she gets only $40,400. Plus, she has $28,000 in mortgage interest on her $950K condo (interest on first $750K of debt). Plus $3,000 charity. Total Schedule A: $40,400 + $28,000 + $3,000 = $71,400. Standard deduction is $16,100. Sarah obviously itemizes — and actually benefits MORE from itemizing than she did in 2025, when her SALT was capped at $10K and her Schedule A was only $10K + $28K + $3K = $41K, still above the 2025 $15K standard, but now even more above.
Now consider Sarah's friend Michael, a renter in the same building. Michael is also single, AGI $160,000 (senior software engineer, rents a 2-bed condo in SOMA). SALT for Michael: ~$26,000 CA income tax + ~$500 SF personal property tax on his car = ~$26,500 total SALT, all fully deductible now under $40,400 cap. Charitable giving: $1,000 to his local animal shelter. Michael rents, so no mortgage interest and no property tax deduction on the rental unit. Total Schedule A for Michael: $26,500 + $1,000 = $27,500. 2026 single standard deduction is $16,100. Hmm — so Michael still itemizes, right? Yes, $27,500 > $16,100 — but now let's look at the renter who DONATES very little. Take Jennifer, single renter in Brooklyn with AGI $95,000: SALT (NYS + NYC income taxes only, no property tax) = $15,000 exactly; charity = $1,000; no mortgage, no medical. Total Schedule A = $16,000. The 2026 single standard deduction is $16,100. Jennifer's itemized total is $100 LESS than the standard deduction. Even with the new SALT cap letting her deduct the full $15K of SALT, she still comes up just short. The standard deduction wins by a nose — she takes $16,100. Under the old 2025 rules: $15K SALT capped at $10K + $1K charity = $11K Schedule A vs 2025 standard of $15K — she would have taken standard then too. But the point is, for Jennifer, the SALT cap increase from $10K to $40.4K single didn't move her into itemizer status, because the standard deduction ALSO rose from $15K to $16.1K. It's the combination that matters. Renters and non-homeowners with no mortgage interest are the group most likely to flip back or stay on the standard side despite the SALT cap hike.
SALT Workarounds Still Relevant in 2026? PTET, Bypass Trusts
With the SALT cap now at $40.4K single / $80.8K MFJ, you might be wondering whether the popular SALT workarounds that proliferated during the $10K-cap era are still relevant. The short answer: yes, for the upper end of the income distribution, though they now apply to a smaller subset of taxpayers. The main workaround is the Pass-Through Entity Tax (PTET) election, which as of 2026 is available in over 30 states including California, New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Connecticut, and Massachusetts. Under a PTET election, an S corporation, LLC taxed as a partnership, or other eligible pass-through entity elects to pay an entity-level state tax on its distributive income at a rate roughly equal to the state's top individual income tax rate. The entity then claims the PTET paid as a business deduction (reducing the K-1 income passed through to the individual owners), and the owners typically receive a refundable or credit-offsetting state tax credit on their individual returns for their share of the PTET paid. The net effect is that the pass-through income effectively gets a full SALT deduction at the entity level, bypassing the individual SALT cap entirely.
For a single filer with $200,000 of pass-through S-corp income in California, the PTET election would have saved them the difference between the old $10K SALT cap and their actual $18K+ of CA PIT on that income — a meaningful savings. With the new $40.4K single cap, that same single filer's $18K of PIT is now fully deductible anyway, so PTET doesn't help them. But consider a single filer with $800,000 of pass-through income in California: their CA PIT alone might be $95,000, of which only $40,400 is deductible on Schedule A under the new cap. PTET would shift all $95,000 of that tax to an entity-level deduction, bypassing the $40.4K cap entirely and saving them approximately ($95,000 − $40,400) × 32% marginal federal bracket = ~$17,472 in federal tax. So PTET is still highly valuable for high-earning pass-through owners; it just no longer helps the medium-income pass-through owners who used to need it.
If PTET applies to you, check how it flows with your overall return using the Labor Income Tax Calculator for pass-through scenarios. Our calculator supports PTET-aware modeling where you can toggle the election on and off to see the federal-tax delta. Bypass trusts, nongrantor trusts, and other trust-based SALT workarounds are less common now because each nongrantor trust gets its own separate $10,000 SALT cap (unchanged from TCJA, not bumped up by OBBBA for trusts), so the economics are less compelling than they were at the individual $10K level, and the IRS has been actively challenging aggressive multi-trust SALT splitting arrangements.
Bunching Strategies: How to Alternate Years of Itemizing vs Standard
Once you understand that the decision is simply "itemized total vs standard deduction amount," the door opens to a classic tax planning technique called bunching — intentionally concentrating deductible expenses into alternating calendar years so that in the "bunched" year your total Schedule A comfortably exceeds the standard deduction, and in the intervening "off" years you just take the standard deduction without trying. Bunching works because the standard deduction is per year and doesn't carry over, and most itemized deduction categories (charitable, medical, and to some extent SALT) have at least partial flexibility in the timing of when you pay or claim them.
The most popular bunching strategy by far is charitable bunching using a Donor-Advised Fund (DAF). Here's how it works. Suppose you normally donate $5,000 per year to various charities, and without bunching, your Schedule A in any given year would be (say) $18,000 as a single filer — just slightly above the $16,100 standard, giving you only a tiny $1,900 itemized-over-standard benefit for all that recordkeeping. Instead, contribute 3 years' worth of donations ($15,000) to a DAF all in Year 1. The DAF contribution is treated as a charitable donation in the year you fund it (subject to the 60% AGI cash limit). In Year 1, your Schedule A now includes $15,000 of DAF contributions plus whatever other deductions you have — say SALT of $25,000 and $0 mortgage (renter) = $40,000 total Schedule A vs $16,100 standard — a massive $23,900 excess benefit. Then, in Years 2 and 3, you grant money OUT of your DAF to your favorite charities (the DAF handles the grants and receipts for you) but you don't make any new out-of-pocket charitable contributions in those years. In Years 2 and 3, your Schedule A might only be $25,000 (just SALT) vs $16,100 standard — you still itemize if the SALT alone exceeds the standard, but if not, you simply take the standard deduction in those off years. The net effect over three years is that you got a much larger itemized deduction "spike" in Year 1 than you would have gotten spreading $5K per year, and you still supported the same charities with the same total dollars over the same time horizon.
Medical expense bunching works similarly. If you know you have elective procedures coming — LASIK, orthodontia, a knee replacement, fertility treatment, dental implants — try to schedule all of them in the same calendar year rather than spreading them across two or three years. Concentrating $20,000 of elective medical work into one year means that on a $150,000 AGI (7.5% floor = $11,250), you get $20,000 − $11,250 = $8,750 of medical deduction on Schedule A in that bunched year, whereas spreading it as $10K per year across two years would give you $0 deduction both years (since $10K is under the $11,250 floor each year).
SALT prepayment bunching is more limited and deserves a big caution flag. Historically, some taxpayers tried to prepay January's real estate tax bill in December or prepay next year's estimated state income taxes in December to "double up" SALT deductions in a single year and push a marginal itemizer over the standard deduction line. The IRS has issued specific guidance on this in recent years, including IRS Notice 2026-11, which clarifies when prepaid real property taxes are and are not deductible. The general rule from Notice 2026-11 is that you can only deduct prepaid real estate taxes in the year of prepayment if (a) the tax was actually assessed by the jurisdiction in the year you're claiming the deduction, and (b) you make the prepayment to the actual taxing authority (not to an escrow agent's impound account, which only counts when the escrow agent disburses it to the government). Prepaid state estimated income taxes for the following year are generally deductible in the year paid, but if you're subject to AMT (which is less common post-OBBBA but still exists for certain filers), the SALT deduction doesn't help for AMT purposes anyway, so the prepayment strategy can backfire. As always, check with a tax professional before engaging in SALT prepayment to avoid running afoul of IRS Notice 2026-11.
Married Filing Separately — The Trap
This is the single most common mistake I see married couples make on the standard-versus-itemized question, especially when spouses have wildly different financial profiles, are separated but not yet divorced, or are trying to optimize student loan payment plans or income-driven repayment (IDR) formulas. The Internal Revenue Code has a straightforward but brutal rule on this under IRC §63(c)(6): if a married couple files separate returns (MFS status), and EITHER spouse itemizes deductions on their separate return, then BOTH spouses are required to itemize — neither can claim the standard deduction. There is absolutely no "mix and match" allowed. You both itemize, or you both take the standard deduction. There is no middle ground.
Let's see how this trap plays out with a real example I encountered last filing season. Spouse A is a plastic surgeon in Beverly Hills with MFS Schedule A deductions totaling $51,000 (mostly SALT at the $40.4K MFS cap, plus $8K mortgage interest and $2.6K charity). Spouse B is a part-time yoga instructor staying home with their young child, with only $14,000 of W-2 income and just $3,200 of total qualifying Schedule A deductions (no mortgage, no significant SALT, $3.2K of charitable donations). If they file MFS and Spouse A itemizes the $51K (the obviously correct choice for Spouse A given the $16,100 MFS standard deduction), then Spouse B is legally PROHIBITED from claiming the $16,100 MFS standard deduction. Spouse B is forced to itemize and claim only $3,200 in deductions instead of the $16,100 standard. The loss for Spouse B: ($16,100 − $3,200) × 12% bracket = $1,548 in additional federal tax that Spouse B would not have owed if they could take the standard. More often than not, the total combined tax hit to the couple from the MFS standard deduction trap more than erases any benefit they were hoping to get from filing separately in the first place.
Are there valid reasons to file MFS? Absolutely. The most common legitimate reasons are: divorce is imminent and the spouses don't want to be on a joint return with each other; one spouse is pursuing Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) or an IDR plan where a lower separate AGI reduces the monthly payment calculation; one spouse has substantial unpaid back taxes or IRS liabilities and the other spouse wants to protect their refund via injured spouse allocation (though injured spouse works on MFJ too, so MFS isn't strictly required); or in rare community-property states where specific creditor or liability concerns apply. But before you elect MFS status specifically for the student loan optimization, run the combined math both ways — the itemization trap can easily cost you more in extra tax than you're saving on the loan payment side, especially now that the MFS standard deduction is a healthy $16,100 that a low-income spouse would otherwise lose access to.