Posted on 07/20/2005 12:51:23 PM PDT by Your Nightmare
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Bush's advisory panel on tax reform largely agree that the individual alternative minimum tax, or AMT, should be fully repealed the committee's chairman said Wednesday.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.
Guess that means the Nightmare tax is out, then.Tired.
I really don't see much there that qualifies either of your "plans" (which aren't anything but hypothetical theories anyway).And the FairTax isn't hypothetical? You Fanboys are delusional.
You think the 75 economists endorsing the FairTax are from the Mustang Ranch???Same league, different ranch.
Talk about pure fantasy, the artificially-inflated FairTax rates you quote are obviously out of whack ... maybe they should be called (im)pure fantasy. Sounds like the old liberal "cut out as much of the base as possible to boost the rate" trick.
Once details of the Panel "staff" projections become available for perusal, the truth will come out. In the meantime, don't hold your breath. They're obviously leaving out stuff.
I wonder ... do you suppose these "staff" work for Treasury??? Isn't Treasury the bunch that operates to $10B, 115,000 - man department called the IRS??? Could that influence any Treasury types to NOT want to see their budget (read political clout) cut??? Whaddya' thimk (and, yes, that's spelled "thimk"), Nightie???
Naw, Nightie, the FairTax is before both houses of Congress in bill form right now. Well fleshed-out and ready for passage.
Your Nightmare tax (ahem!) "plans" aren't even on paper anywhere and have no details that do not constantly change with your arguments ad hoc.
Talk about pure fantasy, the artificially-inflated FairTax rates you quote are obviously out of whack ... maybe they should be called (im)pure fantasy. Sounds like the old liberal "cut out as much of the base as possible to boost the rate" trick.You refuse to admit that the AFT/FairTax rate is artificially deflated by having the federal government give themselves money and calling it revenue, but not calling it an expenditure.
I wonder ... do you suppose these "staff" work for Treasury??? Isn't Treasury the bunch that operates to $10B, 115,000 - man department called the IRS??? Could that influence any Treasury types to NOT want to see their budget (read political clout) cut??? Whaddya' thimk (and, yes, that's spelled "thimk"),That's right. You and the AFT got it all figured out and if anyone disagrees with you they must be a trying to protect the status quo. As if Treasury is going away if the FairTax were passed.
Naw, Nightie, the FairTax is before both houses of Congress in bill form right now. Well fleshed-out and ready for passage.That doesn't mean they aren't hypothetical. Do you even know what "hypothetical" means?
Your Nightmare tax (ahem!) "plans" aren't even on paper anywhere and have no details that do not constantly change with your arguments ad hoc.There are two Flat Tax plans before Congress right now. So what? They are still just like the FairTax...hypothetical.
It may be that the Panel Staff is from the Looey League judging from their arithmetic.
So you believe the Fairy Tail that fictitious legal entities actually pay taxes?
The flat tax plans before Congress right now that you cite DO exist but are going nowhere. Neither of your Nightmare Tax notions are like the two flat tax bills - which as I recall you have repeatedly backed away from supporting but merely cited as examples of "flat tax".
Look in the mirror to see more untruth.
Well Nightie - "hypowhatever" means something like your Nightmare Tax notions - nonexistent in the real world.Maybe you would like to tell me where a NRST, let alone the FairTax, exists in the real world.
A really good joke on your part Nightie ... someone else (apart from yourself) being untruthful.This is the part of our show where I ask you to show an example of when I have been untruthful and you are unable to provide it.
You seem to equate "reporting losses" with "not paying taxes". Did you know that is not necessarily the case?
If you like paying the taxes when you "... buy their products/services ..." you'd LOVE the FairTax. That's exactly the way it operates - and you get to keep your gross wages too (and get a prebate, too).
If line 26 is less than line 22 but more than line 19 - enter line 25 plus 10% of line 12 if your youngest dependant has more than one musical instrument but brown bags his/her school lunch.
The flat tax plans before Congress right now that you cite DO exist but are going nowhere.LOL! Just like the FairTax.
The FairTax exists in bill form before both houses of Congress - the Nightmare Tax (whichever kind) exists in ...???
As for examples of your untruths, Nightie, just a few threads back I counted (only some of) your untruths - lies - and came up with 10 in one thread I believe it was (or maybe it was 11) - and none were hypothetical. Each was pointed out in the thread - seems your memory conveniently fails on something like that, eh???
So you believe the Fairy Tail that fictitious legal entities actually pay taxes?YEP! If you don't believe me ask your cubicle coworkers there at fairtax why else they would want to eliminate them.
Is "Fairy Tail" a proper name?...just wondering.
By the time the tax reform panel finishes, and they make their proposals, chances are the result will be more complicated and convoluted than the existing system.
One could point out that that's greatly more support than the Nightmare Tax has.
And, let's see the flat tax bill in the Senate (s812) has ... (drum roll) 0 cosponsors - or have they added one after the Panel Staff report???
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.