US Federal and California state taxes: phaseout nightmare!

My income doubled in 2006, because of, essentially, a kind of deferred bonus-type payment, which all had to be paid in

2006. It was treated as wage income. This caused the net wage income for me and my wife to be 400K. Other income (interest, divident), etc., is about 10K. Deductions are just California state taxes (35K), property taxes (4K), mortgage interest (10K). Most of this income is taxes in the highest California tax bracket, 9.3%, and and the two highest federal tax brackets, 33% and 35%. And, this being wage, paid medicare taxes on the whole thing. But the kicker is the AMT and phsaeouts.

At Federal level:

  1. First of all, my federal itemized deduction is limited.
  2. Next, the personal exemptions are phased out by 2/3rd.
  3. High California state taxes causes AMT for Federal. But the exemption amount fo AMT is phased out, meaning I have to pay the highest rate starting with the 1st dollar.
  4. Completely phased out of child tax credit.
  5. Completely phased out of traditional IRA deduction, or even a Roth contribution.

State level:

  1. California state itemized deduction limited.
  2. State equivalent of personal deduction (tax credits) completely phased out.
  3. Statey child tax credit completely phased out

The list just goes on an on.... it's a phaseout nightmare. I realize my incoime for 2006 is big, but I worked so hard. First the highest tax brackets, and then all these phaseouts. It's as if I should forget everything and file just a 1040 ez, with 0 deduction, and 0 exemption. Arghhh WSJ just reported that Ray Irani was paid $400 MILLION last year; a thousand times what I have. I wonder if there is anything that is not phased out for him... Why don't we have honest tax laws, higher rates reflecting true rates, no phseout gimmicks? At the very margin, my rates due to many phseouts may be well over 50%!

> > > > > > > > >
Reply to
citizen_average
Loading thread data ...

Congress passes the tax laws. Talk to your CongressCritter about this, but don't hold your breath. The party presently in control of congress would like to _increase_ the tax load on the "rich" and by definition your income qualifies you as on of those rich folks that they want to take even more money from. So look for the tax in the highest bracket to increase, the phase outs to become even lower and no changes in the AMT in the foreseeable future.

--

-Ernie-

Reply to
Ernie Klein

Welcome to tax simplification

How to raise taxes by doing anything and everything except actually changing the rate

___________________________________

-----> real address on hobokeni or hobokenx

Reply to
Benjamin Yazersky CPA

Yes, inflation, among other things, is the politician's friend.

Stu

Reply to
Stuart A. Bronstein

Probably the main reason is that Congress already tried that and people got mad at them. ;) There was a time when the marginal rate structure looked something like this:

=========== =========== =============>

====== This was known as the infamous "bubble" in the rate structure, but it did exactly what you wish for. Unfortunately, it was too obvious and understandable, so talk radio among other sources was able to rally opposition to it.

The result is that the rate structure was modified, and much the same effect achieved by introducing various phaseouts, each with a different threshold and reduction rate. That was then so mind-numbingly complex that it could not be explained in the required number of words to rally opposition. And so it remains today.

Reply to
Tom Russ

Actually, I heard an interesting editorial on (of all places) NPR over the weekend. The point was that we already have a pretty flat, simple federal tax. It's also the tax more and more people are loving to hate: It's called AMT! The suggestion is not to eliminate the AMT, it's to eliminate everything BUT the AMT, and then adjust the rates so that the same level of revenue is achieved. Interesting suggestion.

Reply to
NoSuchPerson

That'ss my reaction when people talk about a flat tax.

To what extent does the AMT have an effect on business taxes? I'd think that personal taxes are a small part of the problem, and the complexity and politics of business taxes is the larger problem. Stu

Reply to
Stuart A. Bronstein

BeanSmart website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.