Alternate Minimum tax

[mattpegher]

Tax time again and I'm really annoyed. AMT is eliminating my wifes home office expenses (she is an employee who works primarily from home) and thousands of dollars of my state mandated educational and licensing expenses. These are legitimate deductions but AMT just wipes them away. I can deduct donations of old underwear but not a $3000 of licenses require to practice in these states. It makes no sense to me.

Anyone else with the AMT blues?

 

[MovingTarget]

AMT? I don't come anywhere close to being affected by it. I do see the problems with it though. It should've been indexed to inflation or median income or something. Far too often it is hitting middle class folks when it was never intended to.

 

[winnar111]

Basically every 2 income family around where I live pays the AMT. Thank Clinton.

The Democrats know this, of course, so they shout out about 'tax cuts' for the middle class that these people won't be able to claim.

It's a blue state tax. Those people reaped what they sowed.

 

[Genx87]

AMT is an example of govt inaction that fucks people in the ass in action. A tax that was enacted to hit 123 familes 35 years ago is projected to affect nearly 20 million familes by 2012.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: mattpegher
Tax time again and I'm really annoyed. AMT is eliminating my wifes home office expenses (she is an employee who works primarily from home) and thousands of dollars of my state mandated educational and licensing expenses. These are legitimate deductions but AMT just wipes them away. I can deduct donations of old underwear but not a $3000 of licenses require to practice in these states. It makes no sense to me.

Anyone else with the AMT blues?

Yep, my software triggered that crap this year. It took me a good couple hours today reading through the BS to know if I could check the box that basically says it shouldn't affect me or not. What a PITA.

 

[IronWing]

Originally posted by: winnar111
Basically every 2 income family around where I live pays the AMT. Thank Clinton.

The Democrats know this, of course, so they shout out about 'tax cuts' for the middle class that these people won't be able to claim.

It's a blue state tax. Those people reaped what they sowed.

Fixing it requires offsetting the loss of revenue either through other taxes or spending cuts. Neither party has any interest in spending cuts and the Reps won't go for increasing other taxes (like taxing capital gains as regular income or re-introduce more progressive income tax bracketing) so the stalemate continues and the upper middle class gets to pay the bill. Thank Mitch.

 

[Ozoned]

I like to think of it as the middle class take it in the ass twice tax

Of course, all of the experts here will tell you that if your paying it, you are doing it wrong.

 

[GroundedSailor]

The Senate passed a giant tax package Tuesday that saves more than 20 million taxpayers from the bite of the alternative minimum tax.

http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_10541422

The AMT patch for tax year 2008 is in the senate bill but not the house version. It will probably be in the final version when it goes to conference.

 

[bctbct]

Tell your wifes employer to provide her with and an office.

 

[blackangst1]

Its my understanding normal tax brackets are adjusted for inflation, and AMT isnt. Thus, as income levels rise, more people fall into AMT. Also, with the last couple of tax cuts, AMT tax rates remained unchanged. It needs to be re-evaluated. Sorry man

 

[mattpegher]

What I don't understand is why legitimate business expenses are eliminated under AMT

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: mattpegher
What I don't understand is why legitimate business expenses are eliminated under AMT

The AMT was put in place partially because those kinds of things were abused by the most wealthy (and/or unscrupulous) under the regular system.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: mattpegher
What I don't understand is why legitimate business expenses are eliminated under AMT

Because chances are that your home office isn't a legitimate business expense.

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: ironwing

Originally posted by: winnar111
Basically every 2 income family around where I live pays the AMT. Thank Clinton.

The Democrats know this, of course, so they shout out about 'tax cuts' for the middle class that these people won't be able to claim.

It's a blue state tax. Those people reaped what they sowed.

Fixing it requires offsetting the loss of revenue either through other taxes or spending cuts. Neither party has any interest in spending cuts and the Reps won't go for increasing other taxes (like taxing capital gains as regular income or re-introduce more progressive income tax bracketing) so the stalemate continues and the upper middle class gets to pay the bill. Thank Mitch.

Yeah, because the Senate minority leader with a President of the opposing party has SOOO much influence.

Doesn't matter to him much; not many people in Kentucky pay AMT anyway.

If you dont like the AMT, don't vote Democrat.

 

[IronWing]

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: ironwing

Originally posted by: winnar111
Basically every 2 income family around where I live pays the AMT. Thank Clinton.

The Democrats know this, of course, so they shout out about 'tax cuts' for the middle class that these people won't be able to claim.

It's a blue state tax. Those people reaped what they sowed.

Fixing it requires offsetting the loss of revenue either through other taxes or spending cuts. Neither party has any interest in spending cuts and the Reps won't go for increasing other taxes (like taxing capital gains as regular income or re-introduce more progressive income tax bracketing) so the stalemate continues and the upper middle class gets to pay the bill. Thank Mitch.

Yeah, because the Senate minority leader with a President of the opposing party has SOOO much influence.

Doesn't matter to him much; not many people in Kentucky pay AMT anyway.

If you dont like the AMT, don't vote Democrat.

Short memory ^^^. Reps controlled all three branches for most of the Bush II years and yet the AMT is still here.

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: ironwing

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: ironwing

Originally posted by: winnar111
Basically every 2 income family around where I live pays the AMT. Thank Clinton.

The Democrats know this, of course, so they shout out about 'tax cuts' for the middle class that these people won't be able to claim.

It's a blue state tax. Those people reaped what they sowed.

Fixing it requires offsetting the loss of revenue either through other taxes or spending cuts. Neither party has any interest in spending cuts and the Reps won't go for increasing other taxes (like taxing capital gains as regular income or re-introduce more progressive income tax bracketing) so the stalemate continues and the upper middle class gets to pay the bill. Thank Mitch.

Yeah, because the Senate minority leader with a President of the opposing party has SOOO much influence.

Doesn't matter to him much; not many people in Kentucky pay AMT anyway.

If you dont like the AMT, don't vote Democrat.

Short memory ^^^. Reps controlled all three branches for most of the Bush II years and yet the AMT is still here.

That's what happens when the Democrats in the Senate don't want to provide tax relief to their own state.

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: winnar111
That's what happens when the Democrats in the Senate don't want to provide tax relief to their own state.

Yep... always the Democratic party's fault :roll:

How about they are both at fault because they both continue to do nothing except put a band-aid or two on the problem? I'm sure there are a few politicians in both parties interested in fixing the underlying issue of the AMT, but they are drowned out by the rest of their parties. Or is that too much for your small brain to wrap around? (If so, just forget I said anything and keep moaning about Obama and the rest of the Democrats).

 

[her209]

I can't deduct the interest paid on my student loans because I make too much.

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Originally posted by: winnar111
That's what happens when the Democrats in the Senate don't want to provide tax relief to their own state.

Yep... always the Democratic party's fault :roll:

How about they are both at fault because they both continue to do nothing except put a band-aid or two on the problem? I'm sure there are a few politicians in both parties interested in fixing the underlying issue of the AMT, but they are drowned out by the rest of their parties. Or is that too much for your small brain to wrap around? (If so, just forget I said anything and keep moaning about Obama and the rest of the Democrats).

Which party is in power? Which party was in power in 1993 when the AMT was hiked? Which party represents the states that suffer from AMT taxation the most?

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Originally posted by: winnar111
That's what happens when the Democrats in the Senate don't want to provide tax relief to their own state.

Yep... always the Democratic party's fault :roll:

How about they are both at fault because they both continue to do nothing except put a band-aid or two on the problem? I'm sure there are a few politicians in both parties interested in fixing the underlying issue of the AMT, but they are drowned out by the rest of their parties. Or is that too much for your small brain to wrap around? (If so, just forget I said anything and keep moaning about Obama and the rest of the Democrats).

Which party is in power? Which party was in power in 1993 when the AMT was hiked?

winnar, the problem isn't that the tax was hiked. People aren't bitching about that. What they ARE bitching about is that the threshold wasn't indexed to inflation or some other metric. It was flawed to begin with that way. Eventually, EVERYONE will fall under the AMT given time. If it had been indexed to inflation to begin with, it would be a non-issue. BOTH parties had the opportunity to fix this, but sat on their thumbs.

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Originally posted by: winnar111
That's what happens when the Democrats in the Senate don't want to provide tax relief to their own state.

Yep... always the Democratic party's fault :roll:

How about they are both at fault because they both continue to do nothing except put a band-aid or two on the problem? I'm sure there are a few politicians in both parties interested in fixing the underlying issue of the AMT, but they are drowned out by the rest of their parties. Or is that too much for your small brain to wrap around? (If so, just forget I said anything and keep moaning about Obama and the rest of the Democrats).

Which party is in power? Which party was in power in 1993 when the AMT was hiked?

winnar, the problem isn't that the tax was hiked. People aren't bitching about that. What they ARE bitching about is that the threshold wasn't indexed to inflation or some other metric. It was flawed to begin with that way. Eventually, EVERYONE will fall under the AMT given time. If it had been indexed to inflation to begin with, it would be a non-issue. BOTH parties had the opportunity to fix this, but sat on their thumbs.

The tax rates on the AMT schedule were hiked in 1993.

http://online.wsj.com/article/...OLLECTION=wsjie/6month

In addition to raising gas taxes and Medicare payroll taxes and income tax rates, the Democratic Congress that year also raised the AMT: from a 24% flat rate to a dual tax rate of 26% on AMT income up to $175,000 and 28% on AMT income above that amount.

A Joint Tax Committee (JTC) analysis requested last year by Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa shows that about 11 million more Americans will have to pay the AMT next year thanks to the higher post-1993 AMT rates.

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Originally posted by: winnar111
That's what happens when the Democrats in the Senate don't want to provide tax relief to their own state.

Yep... always the Democratic party's fault :roll:

How about they are both at fault because they both continue to do nothing except put a band-aid or two on the problem? I'm sure there are a few politicians in both parties interested in fixing the underlying issue of the AMT, but they are drowned out by the rest of their parties. Or is that too much for your small brain to wrap around? (If so, just forget I said anything and keep moaning about Obama and the rest of the Democrats).

Which party is in power? Which party was in power in 1993 when the AMT was hiked?

winnar, the problem isn't that the tax was hiked. People aren't bitching about that. What they ARE bitching about is that the threshold wasn't indexed to inflation or some other metric. It was flawed to begin with that way. Eventually, EVERYONE will fall under the AMT given time. If it had been indexed to inflation to begin with, it would be a non-issue. BOTH parties had the opportunity to fix this, but sat on their thumbs.

The tax rates on the AMT schedule were hiked in 1993.

http://online.wsj.com/article/...OLLECTION=wsjie/6month

In addition to raising gas taxes and Medicare payroll taxes and income tax rates, the Democratic Congress that year also raised the AMT: from a 24% flat rate to a dual tax rate of 26% on AMT income up to $175,000 and 28% on AMT income above that amount.

A Joint Tax Committee (JTC) analysis requested last year by Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa shows that about 11 million more Americans will have to pay the AMT next year thanks to the higher post-1993 AMT rates.

Dodge...

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: MovingTarget

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Originally posted by: winnar111
That's what happens when the Democrats in the Senate don't want to provide tax relief to their own state.

Yep... always the Democratic party's fault :roll:

How about they are both at fault because they both continue to do nothing except put a band-aid or two on the problem? I'm sure there are a few politicians in both parties interested in fixing the underlying issue of the AMT, but they are drowned out by the rest of their parties. Or is that too much for your small brain to wrap around? (If so, just forget I said anything and keep moaning about Obama and the rest of the Democrats).

Which party is in power? Which party was in power in 1993 when the AMT was hiked?

winnar, the problem isn't that the tax was hiked. People aren't bitching about that. What they ARE bitching about is that the threshold wasn't indexed to inflation or some other metric. It was flawed to begin with that way. Eventually, EVERYONE will fall under the AMT given time. If it had been indexed to inflation to begin with, it would be a non-issue. BOTH parties had the opportunity to fix this, but sat on their thumbs.

The tax rates on the AMT schedule were hiked in 1993.

http://online.wsj.com/article/...OLLECTION=wsjie/6month

In addition to raising gas taxes and Medicare payroll taxes and income tax rates, the Democratic Congress that year also raised the AMT: from a 24% flat rate to a dual tax rate of 26% on AMT income up to $175,000 and 28% on AMT income above that amount.

A Joint Tax Committee (JTC) analysis requested last year by Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa shows that about 11 million more Americans will have to pay the AMT next year thanks to the higher post-1993 AMT rates.

Dodge...

Truth hurts, eh?

It's true that the 1993 bill slightly increased the AMT's family income exemption, but Democrats refused to index those exemptions for inflation.

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: winnar111
Truth hurts, eh?

No. You're just a moron. The issue isn't the amount of the AMT, it's who falls under it because the cut-off line for AMT vs. not AMT has not been indexed for inflation. And this hasn't been changed by EITHER party. Stop dodging the true issue, which is indexing the AMT for inflation.

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: winnar111

/snip

Truth hurts, eh?

It's true that the 1993 bill slightly increased the AMT's family income exemption, but Democrats refused to index those exemptions for inflation.

dodge again...

Yeah, the Dems screwed up in not indexing it properly. But you fail to remember that the dems lost power shortly after that. The Republicans held power in Congress for another decade after that.

Again, both parties had the chance to change it and did not. If it had been properly indexed so it would serve its original purpose, then we wouldn't be having this discussion despite the Dems raising the rates in 1993. Remember to whom the AMT was targeted back during its inception. Many Americans would still agree that it was well-intentioned, and would've worked well if not for a proper indexing, rates be damned.