Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dems Mull Surcharge On Rich, But Another AMT Patch Likely
Investor's Business Daily ^ | 15 October 2007 | JED GRAHAM INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY

Posted on 10/15/2007 5:57:32 PM PDT by shrinkermd

Democrats have never been shy about criticizing the Bush tax cuts, but they’ve been reluctant to push for broad tax hikes since retaking control of Congress.

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel could soon break the ice. The New York Democrat has spent months formulating a plan to raise taxes on the rich to shield most taxpayers from the alternative minimum tax and offer some goodies to the working poor and married couples.

Rangel hasn’t tipped his hand on his plan for coming up with at least $800 billion in revenue over the next decade, but reports earlier this year said that he was considering a surtax of 4% or more on high earners.

Time is running out for Rangel to step forward. If Congress doesn’t act in the next several months, as many as 23 million taxpayers could feel the bite of the AMT.

The tax hike would be as steep as eliminating 20% of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, says the Urban Institute. Households making $100,000 to $500,000 are set to lose between one-third and more than one-half of their Bush tax cuts this year if no action is taken.

Tax filers must pay whichever is greater — their regular income tax liability or their liability under the AMT. Created to keep higher earners from avoiding taxes, the AMT disallows most of the deductions in the regular tax code. But because its exemption and rate brackets don’t automatically rise with inflation, the tax has become a growing threat to the middle class.

(Excerpt) Read more at epaper.investors.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Extended News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 110th; alternate; minimum; tax; taxincrease

1 posted on 10/15/2007 5:57:36 PM PDT by shrinkermd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd

Perhaps this has something to do with their most enthusiastic supporters and contributors being in the $100-300K bracket. It is all very well to soak the rich, but not if they’re your buddies.


2 posted on 10/15/2007 6:01:36 PM PDT by proxy_user
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd

Hey, Charlie! Before you start hammering the rich, ask yourself what percent of the population pays the most in taxes right now. (Hint: the “rich”. I think the top 10% pay almost 50% of federal receipts). Then consider: The rich start businesses, increase employment and jobs, enhance capital formation, give to charities, etc. Now ask yourself: What have the poor done for you lately? I can’t think of a thing other than suck the tax system dry.


3 posted on 10/15/2007 6:04:19 PM PDT by econjack ("You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd

How about a tax on Democrats that make over a million a year?


4 posted on 10/15/2007 6:05:29 PM PDT by yldstrk (My heros have always been cowboys--Reagan and Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk
How about a flat tax of 17% on earned income and we do away with the IRS and Charlie Rangel?
5 posted on 10/15/2007 6:10:46 PM PDT by econjack ("You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd

What’s needed is a surcharge on liberals and leftists. They’re the ones that demand these government programs, then expect the rest of us to pay for it.

We should march on Washington the way the Parisians marched on the Bastille, and tear the old rotten edifice down.


6 posted on 10/15/2007 6:19:53 PM PDT by popdonnelly (Get Reid. Salazar, and Harkin out of the Senate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: econjack
How about a flat tax of 17% on earned income and we do away with the IRS and Charlie Rangel?

The subsequent economic boom would disprove socialism...therefore it would be unfair to try it. ;)

7 posted on 10/15/2007 7:03:34 PM PDT by Mr. Jeeves ("Wise men don't need to debate; men who need to debate are not wise." -- Tao Te Ching)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: proxy_user

Isn’t the EIC a big enough goody for the working poor?


8 posted on 10/15/2007 7:10:27 PM PDT by tbw2 (Science fiction with real science - "Humanity's Edge" - on amazon.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd
A part of me wants the AMT to stay in place (even though it kills me and has for many years) b/c then when everyone else is getting hit by the stupidest, class envy crap of a tax then just maybe the sheople will stand up and see how socialist this country has become and they will demand tax reform NOW! Many more need to actually feel the taxes they pay in order for them to put down the remote long enough to revolt and demand that the Congresscritters fix the 60K page joke of a tax code.

Actually the Dims will probably try and do something about the AMT b/c the last thing they want is for a majority to be hit by taxes, to have the sheople realize just how much they pay and how much is wasted by Washington....much better to keep the tax payer numbers low b/c then the class envy- pandering for votes gig is more likely to continue to work.
9 posted on 10/15/2007 7:17:16 PM PDT by socialismisinsidious ( The socialist income tax system turns US citizens into beggars or quitters!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd

DEMOCRATS = HIGHER TAXES AND HIGHER SPENDING!


10 posted on 10/15/2007 8:32:32 PM PDT by WOSG (I just wish freepers would bash Democrats as much as they bash Republicans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: econjack
You're just about right with the % of all federal taxes paid by the top 10%... of course, they also make a pretty hefty % of all pretax income, too....

Income bracket % of all pretax income % share of all federal taxes paid
Lowest Quintile 4.2% 1%
Second Quintile 9.1% 4.5%
Middle Quintile 14.3% 10%
Fourth Quintile 21% 18.4%
Highest Quintile 52.1% 65.8%
top 10% 37.2% 50.4%
Top 5% 27% 39%
Top 1% 14.3% 22.9%


So yes, the top 10% pay 50.4% of all federal taxes. The real measure to look at would be effective tax rates, though......
11 posted on 10/17/2007 2:32:16 PM PDT by eraser2005
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson