protect the AMT

[hfojvt]

Lobby your senators and house members on this.
The Senate version of the stimulus bill includes a Bush-like provision to get rid of the AMT for high income families. Let's not have any more welfare for the rich.

"On the same day, the Senate Finance Committee passed its portions of the package by 14 to 9. That included one $69.8 billion amendment to the bill, a measure designed to protect more than 30 million households, mainly with incomes between $100,000 and $500,000, from the alternative minimum tax this year. Other amendments included tax credits for broadband in rural areas and more tax credits for investment in renewable energy."

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/stimulus/2009/01/28/stimulus-bill-grows-to-887-billion-as-it-moves-through-senate-committees.html


That article does not sound right to me, since my data shows only 10.8 million households with incomes between $100,000 and $200,000, and only 2.74 million making between $200,000 and $500,000. That second groups make more money that 97% of the rest of us. They are not middle class and should pay the AMT. Especially since the Bush tax cuts have not be reversed.

[musette_sf]

1. sorry but

$100K in some areas is not exactly "rich". in Kansas it may seem that way, but in areas like NYC and the SF Bay Area, $100K just about gives 2 people a little bit of breathing room. the AMT needs to go away and realistic, no-loopholes progressive taxation needs to be reinstated - for those who are REALLY "rich".

[hfojvt]

2. that's why I said $200,000.

I am well aware of the DU "$180,000 a year isn't rich" whine. $400,000 is pretty damn rich no matter where you are, and for all I know they totally eliminate the AMT in the name of stimulus and thus give benefits to even higher income families. The AMT is just something that closes loopholes for higher incomes, so I don't see how taking it away helps anything in a progressive sense.