- Apr 5, 2010
- 80,463
- 32,437
- 2,300
MartyBegan, due to the alternative minimum tax, Donald Trump's federal 2005 taxes were increased in excess of 588%. That's why he's so opposed to the AMT?ToddsterPatriot, no; the it's not fine! The alternative minimum tax's purpose was to prevent granting the wealthy favorable effective income tax rates of great disparity; i.e. to not tolerate the more wealthy being granted obscene, indecent, inequitably favoring tax rates.eliminating the alternative minimum tax would be contemptible.
Kill the AMT. ... It should be conceivable that some millionaires will be obliged to pay an effective income tax rate of less than 11%, (i.e. 10.7%)?
So what?
If there is a particular deduction you find egregious,
let's discuss it, but if the deductions are fine, so is the effective rate.
Many of the working-poor cannot afford medical insurance for themselves and/or their dependents; all employees, (including the working poor) will continue paying 7.65% FICA upon their entire wages; the proposed reduced income tax bracket rates are to be 12%/ 25%/ 35%/. But a millionaire's effective income tax rate could conceivably be less than 11% and you ask, “so what”?
Since you find the need to ask, there's apparently no reason for us to discuss the Alternative Minimum Tax.
Supposn
The AMT as currently set up really only impacts upper middle/lower upper people, and mostly in high cost Blue States.
My Brother and Sister-in-law, both lawyers, but hardly rich, always have to deal with it, and they were never the intended target.
Respectfully, Supposn
Why is that fair?