IAP Political Forum
December 01, 2008, 11:20:19 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to the new "IAP 2.0" -- please re-register before continuing to post.
 
   Home   Blog Forum   Help Search Chat Login Register  
Digg This!
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Republicans Reject Fiscal Responsibility  (Read 93 times)
jpn of Seattle
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +241/-233
Posts: 2,021



View Profile
« on: November 22, 2007, 12:00:54 PM »

Since a long-term solution to the Alternative Minimum Tax was not reached again this year, it needs yet another one-year "patch." This patch will prevent the AMT from reaching some 20 million lower-upper class Americans.

The patch will be costly, about $50 billion. The Democrats want to pay for it by raising taxes on investment managers in the private equity, hedge fund and real estate industries. Right now these managers receive their income in a manner that allows them to be taxed at lower rates, like 15 percent, instead of the normal income tax rate the rest of us pay. But this is unacceptable to the Republicans.

Rather than paying for the patch, they prefer to do what they've been doing all along--borrow it.
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/senate-gop-coordinates-amt-attack-2007-11-10.html
Logged

What you got is everything-and I mean everything—run by the political arm. It’s the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis. --John DiIulio, former White House official
Opmod
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +58/-64
Posts: 729



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: November 22, 2007, 12:53:55 PM »

OK so best I can figure is that the AMT affects rich people but is increasingly going to afect upper middle class as well. So what needs fixed? People making 100k to 500k are going to pay abit more taxes? I would think the Dems would be celebrating this. And either way its not going to keep me up at night.

Now I will admit freely that I may have misinterpreted the situation so please, feel free to set me straight.

I would say it is far more serious that we have large sectors that get a pass onalot of taxes becuase the tax code is fucked. Like the investment guys mentioned in the OP. Or many methods that alot of big corporations and upper class people use to "hide" thier incomes.
Logged

\\\"Something witty\\\" Some self impotant blowhard
thief
Full Member
***

Karma: +13/-8
Posts: 142



View Profile
« Reply #2 on: November 22, 2007, 01:24:49 PM »

Does anyone know if that is 100K combined or single?
Logged

Marines or Martyrs-- Who Do You Think Will Get The Virgins?
Dog Face 11B
Sr. Member
****

Karma: +31/-359
Posts: 403



View Profile
« Reply #3 on: November 22, 2007, 04:38:53 PM »

jpn and libtards like him reject common sense as usual.
Logged

Sorry Dog Face 11B, you are banned from posting or sending personal messages on this forum.
Racist comments

Really BBW? Show me where I said one racist comment. But I can show you where a mod at this board has and nothing was done about it.
jpn of Seattle
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +241/-233
Posts: 2,021



View Profile
« Reply #4 on: November 22, 2007, 06:13:58 PM »

Does anyone know if that is 100K combined or single?

I think that who gets hit by the AMT and who doesn't is a factor of a lot of different things. If you have a big home mortgage deduction, a lot of credits (i.e. a lot of kids), and other items then the income level at which you can be hit gets lower. So there's no particular level at which you can say everyone will be under the tax--it depends on the individual circumstances.
I understand that income tax preparation software routinely checks for the AMT.
Logged

What you got is everything-and I mean everything—run by the political arm. It’s the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis. --John DiIulio, former White House official
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.4 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC
Joomla Bridge by JoomlaHacks.com
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.128 seconds with 26 queries.