HRC is celebrating tax season with their “7 Days to a Better Financial You” campaign, and kicks it off with the video of two lesbian moms talking about the financial difficulties of raising children under the unfair burdens faced by same-sex couples. HRC hits the high points here, but doesn’t discuss the fact that it can be harder for a same-sex couple to have one partner stay at home to take care of their children.

When one partner leaves paid employment, the working partner must pay income tax on any medical benefits her employer provides to her partner, if she is even lucky enough to work for a company that offers such benefits. A few companies “gross up” salaries to compensate for the extra tax burden, but they are rare. This problem isn’t exclusive to parents, but has to factor in when a couple analyzes the impact of one parent staying home, especially if that person has had her own employer coverage.

The non-employed partner’s IRA can also no longer take in new contributions. A married couple filing jointly, however, can have the working spouse contribute as much as $4,000 to his/her own IRA, plus $4,000 to the non-working spouse’s IRA. (It’s a little more complicated than that, really; the IRS has details.) Same-sex couples need to consider this when evaluating the long-term impact of a non-employed partner on their financial plans.

Federal law rules both of the above, so even we same-sex couples lucky enough to be married in Massachusetts have the same problems.

Whether to have one parent leave paid employment is a decision couples must make for themselves. Those who feel that doing so is the best way to raise their children, however, should not be disadvantaged because both partners happen to be the same gender.

Here’s the HRC couple (whose IKEA Effektiv bookcase indicates they are money-conscious in other ways, too):

(Yes, we own the same bookcase. Three of them, in fact.)