A Page One article on April 23 mischaracterized a statement by John Irons, director of tax and budget policy at the Center for American Progress. Irons said that Democrats may not get much credit for overhauling the alternative minimum tax, but that they will face significant political danger if they do not overhaul it.
| Page 2 of 2 < |
Democrats Craft New Tax Rules, New Image
|
Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
|
"Most middle-class people aren't being hit with it, and they still think of it as a tax for the wealthy," she said.
Some rank-and-file Democrats have similar concerns. Rep. Allyson Y. Schwartz, who represents a suburban Philadelphia district, said she was among those who argued successfully that any AMT change should provide relief to some of the 4 million families who already pay the tax. That way, she said, "real people will be able to stand up and say, 'I don't have to pay it next year because Democrats understood that it was unfair.' "
To make the AMT work as a campaign issue, however, Democrats recognize that they will have to raise its profile among the approximately 97 percent of families who do not pay it. Emanuel is putting together a strategy.
The AMT is a flat tax with two brackets, 26 and 28 percent, and virtually no deductions. Taxpayers must compute their returns under the regular tax rules with regular deductions, then do it again under the AMT and pay whichever amount is higher.
Its impact is harshest on taxpayers who are married, have children and live in high-tax jurisdictions, including Maryland and the District. Van Hollen's district in suburban Maryland is among the hardest hit. In recent years, the truly rich have been less affected because their regular tax rates are higher than rates under the AMT.
For years, Congress has blunted the impact of the AMT by enacting laws that provide temporary inflation adjustments. The tax has nonetheless grown to ensnare millions of people for whom it was never intended. The most recent of those "patches" expired in December and, unless Congress acts, the number of people hit by the AMT is poised to explode.
Borrowing a page from the Republican playbook that produced the "death tax" and the "marriage penalty," Emanuel rechristened the AMT the "parent penalty" in a recent national radio address. "If you have three kids," he told listeners, "you'll be nearly four times more likely to pay this parent penalty than a childless taxpayer. Is that fair, being penalized for having children?"
Emanuel also noted that President Bush's signature tax cuts have increased the number of potential AMT payers by lowering people's regular tax rates. "Middle-class families making between $75,000 and $100,000 are now more likely to pay the tax than those making more than a million dollars," Emanuel told listeners, adding that Democrats have made the tax "our top priority for tax reform."
Emanuel also has plans to publicize a breakdown of AMT payers by district, so that lawmakers can see how many of their constituents face thousands of additional dollars in taxes. Still to come: Vigorous speeches by House Democrats at Rotary clubs and community centers about the looming threat.
Paul Weinstein, a senior fellow at the Progressive Policy Institute, an arm of the Democratic Leadership Council, says Emanuel is wise to try to define the issue before Republicans can. "If you say we're cutting taxes for the middle class, that is a powerful message," Weinstein said.
Democrat Rep. Earl Pomeroy said the message will resonate even in his home state of North Dakota, where fewer than an estimated 3,000 families paid the AMT this year.
"It's not largely known," Pomeroy conceded. But awareness is growing, he said, and the tax is no longer just "some wacky acronym out of Washington, D.C."
People need to know, he said, that "millions of American families would be getting tax increases as the AMT creeps up and clobbers them. And we're not going to allow that."



