Not Rich? You'll Pay Anyway

Washington Post ^ | 11/02/03 | Kevin Adler and Annette F. Simon

[Pokey78]

Here's an idea: Let's devise a politically inept income tax policy. We'll begin by eliminating tax breaks people have been accustomed to for decades, such as those for qualified retirement accounts, and state and local taxes. Next, we'll negate the child tax credit so that families with young children will be hit especially hard. Then, we won't adjust for inflation, so that our tax will affect more people each year as their incomes grow along with the economy and inflation. We'll tell people that they must calculate their taxes twice, using two different formulas -- and finally we'll add insult to injury by requiring them to pay whichever amount is higher.

Think we're just making this up? We're not. Welcome to the very real world of the Alternative Minimum Tax, or AMT. Designed more than three decades ago to ensure that the handful of people in America who earn CEO-class incomes would be certain to pay some amount of federal taxes each year, the AMT will be the de facto income tax for about 3 million not-especially-super-wealthy American households this year. For many of them, it will negate the tax cuts that President Bush has signed into law, and could mean that their taxes will go up rather than down. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that by 2010, 35 million households, or one-third of the public, will pay the AMT instead of the lower tax generated by the traditional income-tax formula.

[taxcontrol]

I'm an AMT payer.

Single income, wife 3 kids, live in a 4 bedroom house with two older cars. Kids go to public school. Yes I make 6 figures, but I'm a LONG way away from CEO or even VP level.

[LurkedLongEnough]

I have an idea. Let's tax journalists depending on how much hot air blows out their rear ends.

Or, charge each media outlet with a "cut-the-cheese" license fee, appraised by "news" item. The liberals would end up paying most of the taxes, and maybe they would start to print facts instead of "scare-the-public" rhetoric.

[Jim Robinson]

I recommend eliminating the AMT. Of course, I also recommend eliminating the income tax altogether, so this is nothing new.

[Cicero]

The AMT is deeply biased against people with families. I too pay AMT, not because of capital gains or anything like that, but because I have a lot of children, and they are treated by the AMT as tax loopholes. For that reason, Bush's tax cuts really haven't done me much good.

[netmilsmom]

>>$49,000 if you are married filing a joint return,<<

Oh Boy! A big 1000 put us in the club! No wonder we're broke.

[Amerigomag]

I've never appreciated that the poor have little or no income tax obligations toward our society. I've never bought into the concept that the wealthy must take one on the chin for the team.

With the advent of the EIC the poor even began to get a direct transfer of wealth from the "more fortunate". Let's go to a flat or consumption tax scheme. Let the poor participate.

[proxy_user]

Actually, the AMT does target liberals in a way. Two-income couples living paying a lot of state income tax and high mortgage interest are hit hard. This sounds like the upper crust in California, New York, and Massachusetts.

Maybe this is why Bush isn't pushing to end this tax.

[Arkie2]

You don't believe the AMT exists? Conservative pundits have been talking about this for years.

[churchillbuff]

As long as Bush remains a "big government Republican," and spends, spends, spends, the money will have to come from somewhere. That's why the middle class is not going to see real tax relief - - the big-spenders in Washington couldn't afford to allow that to happen.

[Panzerfaust]

I may run afoul of this for 2003. Got a severance package from my employer after a coprporate buyout, and walked into a new job the following week. I was proud of my maneuvering until I thought about the tax boogeyman. I guess I better set aside extra cash to pay the piper.

[LurkedLongEnough]

You don't believe the AMT exists?

No need for a slapdown. Many "rich" conservatives pay the AMT. It doesn't matter which political party you're in.

I see the AMT as class warfare, disguised. Whether or not someone pays the AMT depends on an arbitrary judgment of who is "rich" enough to pay a special tax. Class warfare. Hillary and her ilk love it.

[LurkedLongEnough]

Maybe this is why Bush isn't pushing to end this tax.

Hey, "Blame Bush" for something that is legislated by the people's representatives?

We could contact our Congress critters, the legislators... oh, sorry, I see now... we're both out of luck in that regard.

Executive vs. legislative branch of government. We're responsible for the mess in the legislative branch. The executive branch can approve or veto the laws we send to it but beyond that, Bush can "push" or not, it doesn't really count.

[proxy_user]

Well, look at Congress then. Hilary and Schumer from NY, Boxer and Feinstein from California, Ted Kennedy from Massachusetts--they're all for higher taxes on the two-income couples in these high-cost states. The Democrats are socking it to themselves.

Maybe the voters will wise up and start to silently leave the room?

[taxcontrol]

Words of wisdom from a AMT payer - get a tax professional involved NOW. Dont wait till tax season. By then it is too late to make any changes. Do it now while you still have a chance to change how some of that money is disbursed.

[Dead Corpse]

HR25. Tell your Congress Critter to get it out of the Ways and Means Committee and get a floor vote.

[longtermmemmory]

Which is also why democrats want to discourage self employment. It yields too many write offs.

The only way the leftists can get a handle on controlling income and taxation is to eliminate cash.