Tax panel leans toward AMT repeal

Members of President Bush's advisory panel on tax reform largely agree that the individual alternative minimum tax, or AMT, should be fully repealed the committee's chairman said Wednesday.

"I think the obvious consensus was on the AMT on the individual side. We didn't end up with a consensus on the corporate side, even though I think it's fair to say that I think all panel members felt the corporate AMT was really not an effective way to tax," Chairman Connie Mack, a former Republican senator from Florida, told reporters after a public meeting of the committee.

The AMT is a parallel tax system created in 1969; it was enacted after it was revealed that a handful of extremely wealthy Americans paid no income tax. But thresholds for the AMT were never indexed for inflation. As a result, it has encompassed or threatened a growing number of middle-income taxpayers over the years. Lawmakers and administrations have responded by temporarily pushing up the threshold, but have yet to come up with a complete fix.

It's also become a substantial revenue source. Full repeal would reduce revenues by more than a trillion dollars over 10 years.

During the panel discussion, committee member Bill Frenzel said he agreed that it was time to "bite the bullet" and press for full repeal, but warned that doing so will put a "huge burden" on the panel to find a way to make up the lost revenues.

The panel's vice chairman, former Democratic Sen. John Breaux, said that while he's not a fan of the AMT, the panel must examine whether the full repeal of the system would allow some of the nation's highest earners to get away with paying no tax at all.

Mack replied that if that were the case, the committee would have to make adjustments in order to maintain roughly the same tax burden on the upper quintile of earners that is now in place.

The panel members agreed that changes to the corporate AMT would best be tackled as part of a broad corporate tax reform, Mack noted.

The committee, formally known as the President's Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform, must present the Treasury Department with a set of tax-reform proposals in September.

Bush has set a number of ground rules for the panel, however. The proposals must be revenue-neutral. Also, future tax measures can't touch the code's most sacred cows -- mortgage interest deduction and charitable giving.

"Y'all do have a Fanboy playbook. Why else would everyone one of you continually accuse people of saying things but then not want to 'waste your time' finding the specific posts?"

Ok, ok, you asked for it.

12/24/2004 Why Seniors Support the FairTax.

To: Your Nightmare

"I believe all options are on the table, but it seems obvious that the Bush Admin is leaning heavily toward modifying the current system. Bush got hammered the only time he mentioned a NRST. He's not going there again."

As for all options being on the table, I don't think that is technically correct. I have heard of no one but you say that "nothing" is an option. If there are other proponents of that approach, would you mind identifying them?

As to Bush getting "hammered", and being too intimidated to pursue the sales tax option, you are once again incorrect. When questioned at a campaign stop in Florida before the election, when specifically asked about hr25, he said that it was an interesting idea that ought to be studied. When subsequently asked if he was proposing that, he said that he had a process in mind and that it would be premature to short cut that process. He did NOT contradict himself by saying that he no longer considered it an idea worth studying, nor did he say in Florida when responding to the initial question that it was his preferred approach. The fact that the mainstream media tried to spin it as a reversal of course does not make it so, any more than your attempts to reinforce that view. According to an independent media analysis, the press coverage in this election was the most one-sided since they have been tracking it, and it was NOT in Bush's favor. Those with another agenda spin that sequence as backpedaling on Bush's part; more objective observers know otherwise.

Secretary Snow's comments last Sunday on Chris Wallace's morning talk show reinforced that interpretation. In that interview, Wallace tred to get Snow to rule out some of the more "radical" alternatives, such as a sales tax or flat tax and the Secretary very pointedly refused to do so. I posted that exchange on a previous thread and no reasonable person would interpret that as the administration ruling out a sales tax at this point. These are the public statements that the administration is making; I have no idea what they are actually thinking and, contrary to your arrogant pronouncements to the contrary, neither do you.

As to the President getting "hammered" for saying that a sales tax is worthy of study and consideration, what do you think the public response would be if the administration publicy adopted your preferred approach - "nothing"?

610 posted on 12/24/2004 9:37:00 AM MST by phil_will1
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1304708/posts?page=610#610

"No, only in fair taxers threads, since fair taxers are by far the worst name-callers on this forum."

I would say that a casual review of this thread would contradict that point.

In addition, I find it interesting that you and your SQL buddies use screennames like "Your Nightmare", "Final Authority" and "Always Right" and then get offended if someone pokes fun at your arrogance and condescension. What is the old southern saying "It's a dog eat dog world and I'm wearing milkbone underwear"? I'm sure that it seems that way to you guys many times.

Show some respect for those who don't immediately adopt your opinions as their own and you might see a shift in tone.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.