More AMT News – Where will the blame fall now?

This isn’t really estate planning – its probably more pure taxation news or may be tax planning, but its a topic of some import anyways:

Jim Gust writes here about the House recently passing another fully “paid for” AMT patch.

“Paid for” in the sense that the projected 10-year increase in revenue from changes to, for example, the taxation of nonqualified deferred compensation plans paid to offshore hedge fund managers (among other similar esoterica) will be equal to the one-year “cost” of not imposing an AMT on the middle class that we never intended to impose on the middle class in the first place. Does anyone think that those deferred compensation plans won’t be revised within weeks to avoid paying any such new tax?

The White House has threatened a veto, but more importantly the bill seems unlikely to gain much traction in the Senate, given the 88-5 expression last week that a simpler plan of one-year relief is the better way to go. That bill was also nearly blocked by Senate Republicans, until Max Baucus issued a blistering press release on the consequences of their failure to take yes for an answer. The press release made crystal that Republicans would get—and deserve—all of the blame for the increased AMT if they didn’t drop their intransigence. So they did.

At least they did in the House. We’ll see…

Thanks Jim!

0 Responses to “More AMT News – Where will the blame fall now?”


  • No Comments

Leave a Reply