bigq
10-11-2007, 07:06 AM
Ok so I guess making over 100k you are rich and will be taxed more according to Charles Rangels new plan, oh and single too.
Repealing the AMT would reduce federal tax revenue by more than $800 billion over the next 10 years and thats assuming the Bush tax cuts expire in 2010. With the tax cuts in place, the costs would near $1 trillion.
Robin Hoods expect Rangel to swap the AMT for a new tax targeted exclusively at the highest-income payers. One often-mentioned idea, proposed by Leonard Burman, director of the Urban Institutes Tax Policy Center, would impose a 4 percent surcharge on unmarried taxpayers making more than $100,000 a year and couples making more than $200,000.
The 4 percent tax proposal is more progressive than the AMT, Burman said, as it would place more of the tax burden on the wealthy. Almost 58 percent of the tax would be paid by taxpayers with incomes over $1 million. Under the current AMT law, the same group will pay only 8 percent of the AMT in 2010 again, assuming the expiration of the Bush tax cuts.
Someone please explain to me how taxing the richer people ( the business owners) more is a good idea? Over a million and you kick in 58% of the tax...talk about a Robin Hood story.
I am not in the category, but work hard for my money and have a few friends that do own a business and work even harder so how is this faqir? I would think this is going to kill incentives to reach new goals when all you do is support the government and lame tax laws?
Repealing the AMT would reduce federal tax revenue by more than $800 billion over the next 10 years and thats assuming the Bush tax cuts expire in 2010. With the tax cuts in place, the costs would near $1 trillion.
Robin Hoods expect Rangel to swap the AMT for a new tax targeted exclusively at the highest-income payers. One often-mentioned idea, proposed by Leonard Burman, director of the Urban Institutes Tax Policy Center, would impose a 4 percent surcharge on unmarried taxpayers making more than $100,000 a year and couples making more than $200,000.
The 4 percent tax proposal is more progressive than the AMT, Burman said, as it would place more of the tax burden on the wealthy. Almost 58 percent of the tax would be paid by taxpayers with incomes over $1 million. Under the current AMT law, the same group will pay only 8 percent of the AMT in 2010 again, assuming the expiration of the Bush tax cuts.
Someone please explain to me how taxing the richer people ( the business owners) more is a good idea? Over a million and you kick in 58% of the tax...talk about a Robin Hood story.
I am not in the category, but work hard for my money and have a few friends that do own a business and work even harder so how is this faqir? I would think this is going to kill incentives to reach new goals when all you do is support the government and lame tax laws?