The AMT can be traced to the end of the Lyndon Johnson presidency and the beginning of Richard Nixon’s in 1969. The theme of the AMT resonates to this day, though, as the tax is characterized as a way to ensure that all taxpayers pay fair share toward the operations of the Federal government. Is not the presence of an AMT itself an admission by Congress that it cannot design a tax law that accommodates the circumstances of all taxpayers?

If a soak-the-rich approach is desired, a number of popular tax deductions and credits would need to be repealed, but this would also raise the taxes of those in the middle- and lower-income classes. If various deductions and credits are “good for the economy,” in that they increase the disposable income of U.S. citizens, should not wealthy taxpayers also benefit from these tax incentives?

Could you support a system that would assess one type of income tax on low- and middle-income taxpayers and a completely different system that would apply to those of significant wealth?

 Is it discriminatory to assess higher taxes from those of greater means, as an AMT does? Or is it unfair that wealthier taxpayers can reduce their effective tax rates with tax planning techniques, thereby forcing Congress to use an AMT as a corrective device? 

Can’t Congress fix the Federal income tax so that an AMT is not needed?