The AMT: What's wrong and how to fix it

Leonard Burman, William G. Gale, Greg Leiserson, Jeffrey Rohaly

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The alternative minimum tax (AMT) is a complex, unfair, and inefficient shadow tax system that threatens to affect 32 million taxpayers by 2010, many of them solidly middle class. Under current law, repealing the AMT without offsets would cost more than $850 billion through 2017. This paper summarizes the current and projected effects of the AMT and considers options to finance repeal. One attractive option we consider would be to combine AMT repeal with a four percent tax on AGI in excess of $200,000 for married couples and $100,000 for others.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)385-405
Number of pages21
JournalNational Tax Journal
Volume60
Issue number3
StatePublished - Sep 2007
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Tax
Tax system
Middle class
Finance
Costs

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Accounting
  • Economics and Econometrics
  • Finance

Cite this

Burman, L., Gale, W. G., Leiserson, G., & Rohaly, J. (2007). The AMT: What's wrong and how to fix it. National Tax Journal, 60(3), 385-405.

The AMT : What's wrong and how to fix it. / Burman, Leonard; Gale, William G.; Leiserson, Greg; Rohaly, Jeffrey.

In: National Tax Journal, Vol. 60, No. 3, 09.2007, p. 385-405.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Burman, L, Gale, WG, Leiserson, G & Rohaly, J 2007, 'The AMT: What's wrong and how to fix it', National Tax Journal, vol. 60, no. 3, pp. 385-405.
Burman L, Gale WG, Leiserson G, Rohaly J. The AMT: What's wrong and how to fix it. National Tax Journal. 2007 Sep;60(3):385-405.
Burman, Leonard ; Gale, William G. ; Leiserson, Greg ; Rohaly, Jeffrey. / The AMT : What's wrong and how to fix it. In: National Tax Journal. 2007 ; Vol. 60, No. 3. pp. 385-405.
@article{e48e85cadfd84f6dad8ba1425ee09483,
title = "The AMT: What's wrong and how to fix it",
abstract = "The alternative minimum tax (AMT) is a complex, unfair, and inefficient shadow tax system that threatens to affect 32 million taxpayers by 2010, many of them solidly middle class. Under current law, repealing the AMT without offsets would cost more than $850 billion through 2017. This paper summarizes the current and projected effects of the AMT and considers options to finance repeal. One attractive option we consider would be to combine AMT repeal with a four percent tax on AGI in excess of $200,000 for married couples and $100,000 for others.",
author = "Leonard Burman and Gale, {William G.} and Greg Leiserson and Jeffrey Rohaly",
year = "2007",
month = "9",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "60",
pages = "385--405",
journal = "National Tax Journal",
issn = "0028-0283",
publisher = "National Tax Association",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The AMT

T2 - What's wrong and how to fix it

AU - Burman, Leonard

AU - Gale, William G.

AU - Leiserson, Greg

AU - Rohaly, Jeffrey

PY - 2007/9

Y1 - 2007/9

N2 - The alternative minimum tax (AMT) is a complex, unfair, and inefficient shadow tax system that threatens to affect 32 million taxpayers by 2010, many of them solidly middle class. Under current law, repealing the AMT without offsets would cost more than $850 billion through 2017. This paper summarizes the current and projected effects of the AMT and considers options to finance repeal. One attractive option we consider would be to combine AMT repeal with a four percent tax on AGI in excess of $200,000 for married couples and $100,000 for others.

AB - The alternative minimum tax (AMT) is a complex, unfair, and inefficient shadow tax system that threatens to affect 32 million taxpayers by 2010, many of them solidly middle class. Under current law, repealing the AMT without offsets would cost more than $850 billion through 2017. This paper summarizes the current and projected effects of the AMT and considers options to finance repeal. One attractive option we consider would be to combine AMT repeal with a four percent tax on AGI in excess of $200,000 for married couples and $100,000 for others.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=36348997661&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=36348997661&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:36348997661

VL - 60

SP - 385

EP - 405

JO - National Tax Journal

JF - National Tax Journal

SN - 0028-0283

IS - 3

ER -