CCH Logo
Contact Us | CCH Online Store | Site Map    

navigation tabnavigation tab Home 
navigation tabnavigation tab About Us 
navigation tabnavigation tab Order Products 
navigation tabnavigation tab Press Center 
navigation tabnavigation tab Customer Service 
navigation tabnavigation tab Career Opportunities 
navigation tab

CCH can assist you with stories, including interviews with CCH subject experts. Also, the 2009
CCH Whole Ball of Tax
is available in print. Please contact:
Leslie Bonacum
(847) 267-7153
Neil Allen
(847) 267-2179

Visit the CCH Whole Ball of Tax site often as new releases and other updates will be posted throughout the tax season.

CCH provides special CCH Tax Briefings on key topics at:

2009 CCH Whole Ball of Tax
Release (17) | Back to WBOT

2009 CCH Whole Ball of Tax

Leslie Bonacum
, 847-267-7153,
Neil Allen, 847-267-2179,

Still No Permanent Fix for AMT

(RIVERWOODS, ILL., January 2009) – The AMT, or alternative minimum tax, is the one part of the tax system that everyone loves to hate. Democrats and Republicans alike say that the AMT has got to go. However, getting rid of the AMT will not be easy. A last-minute rescue kept millions of taxpayers from the clutches of the AMT on their 2008 returns, but a permanent solution to the alternative minimum tax dilemma is still elusive, according to CCH, a Wolters Kluwer business and a leading provider of tax, accounting and audit information, software and services (

Quite simply, the AMT is an alternate way of figuring your income tax. It’s the legacy of an era when tax rates went as high as 91 percent and the tax code was full of loopholes for the wealthy.

“At that time, every tax season brought news accounts of fabulously wealthy individuals who paid no tax whatsoever. The system that eventually was devised is basically a parallel tax universe. Things that are deducted in figuring regular tax are often added back in figuring the AMT, and things that are added for regular tax purposes may be subtracted,” said CCH Principal Federal Tax Analyst Mark Luscombe, JD, LLM, CPA.

Doing Taxes Twice

For taxpayers, it means doing your taxes twice: You figure your regular federal tax, then calculate the AMT and pay whichever is greater. Many items can trigger an AMT liability – and change character when you leave the “normal” 1040 world and enter the world of the alternative minimum tax.

For example, the standard deduction and personal exemptions disappear. The itemized deduction for state taxes isn’t subtracted from income in figuring AMT, so residents of high-tax states – such as New York or California – are more likely to find themselves subject to the tax.

“Miscellaneous” itemized deductions aren’t allowed in figuring the AMT, either. This can affect taxpayers with large amounts of unreimbursed business expenses.

Special rules apply to medical expenses, home mortgage interest and investment interest deductions in calculating the AMT. For example, an itemized deduction for the interest on a mortgage that pays for your home or for home improvements is deducted for both regular tax purposes and the AMT, but if you borrowed against your home to buy something else or pay down your credit card balance, the interest is not deductible on the AMT form.

Stock Options Can Trigger AMT

During the stock market bubble years, the AMT brought extra anguish for those who saw their dot-com stock option fortunes disappear. When a company awards incentive stock options to employees, the recipients have to treat the value of the stock as income for AMT purposes as of the date they exercise the option. If the stock plunges in value before the holder can actually sell it and realize the hypothetical windfall, that’s too bad – the AMT bill still has to be paid.

“There undoubtedly have been people who escaped from the market owning just their home, only to find out that they had to sell it to pay the tax bill on ‘income’ they never actually saw,” Luscombe said.

No single factor may be decisive. As they approach higher income levels, taxpayers must discover for themselves if the AMT applies. To somewhat ease that burden, the IRS placed an “AMT Assistant” on its web site – an electronic version of a worksheet that tells taxpayers whether they might be subject to the alternative minimum tax. But the AMT Assistant for the 2008 tax year still had not appeared by year-end, due to the late date of congressional action.

Indexing, Nonindexing Increase AMT Exposure

The AMT has its own exemption amounts and tax brackets, but unlike their counterparts in the regular tax rules, numbers associated with the AMT have not been indexed for inflation. In fact, the indexing of various items for the purpose of regular tax – such as tax brackets, the standard deduction and personal exemptions – has a downright perverse effect on AMT liability, according to Luscombe.

“Indexing means that at any given level of income – say, $90,000 – you’ll owe less regular tax next year than you did this year,” Luscombe said. “But since AMT computations generally don’t use indexed figures, the AMT on that same level of income would stay the same. This means that the excess of your regular tax over AMT – the cushion that protects you from having to figure and pay the AMT – gets less and less at any given level of income, until you could find that you owe the AMT.”

The series of tax reductions that started in 2001 actually expose more people to the AMT, precisely because they lower regular taxes.

Temporary Relief

To delay the date when the AMT might start to eat away at the tax cuts for many people, Congress temporarily increased the exemption amount used in figuring the AMT beginning in 2001, then boosted the exemption again for the 2003 and 2004 tax years, then extended the relief for the 2005 tax year.

In 2006, Congress upped the exemption once again for that year only, put in a one-year “fix” once more for 2007 and last October it finally agreed on the exemption amounts for tax year 2008: $46,200 for single taxpayers, $69,950 for married couples filing jointly and $33,975 for married filing separately. But as things stand today, the exemptions for 2009 have fallen back to the levels of seven years ago: $33,750 for single taxpayers; $45,000 for joint filers and surviving spouses; $22,500 for married taxpayers filing separately.

Over the same stretch of time, Congress has repeatedly allowed taxpayers to offset their AMT liability with a number of personal tax credits, but, once again, this “relief” has largely been enacted on a temporary basis.

Last year, Congress added yet more AMT relief. Those hit with AMT liabilities due to incentive stock options had their unpaid taxes prior to 2008 abated and were allowed to accelerate the use of credits based on taxes, interest and penalties already paid due to AMT on the options.

Numbers Tell the Story

For the last several years, the temporary fixes have indeed kept the AMT at bay. But if the AMT exemption amounts go back to their pre-tax cut levels, returns with an AMT liability will be soaring up to 30 million in 2010.

The Joint Committee on Taxation forecast that in 2011, the number affected by the AMT will be roughly cut in half – but only because the tax cuts that began in 2001 are scheduled to come to an end. If those provisions live on beyond their current expiration date, the Congressional Research Service estimates that 41 million taxpayers – 37 percent of all the returns filed – will be affected by the AMT in 2012.

Abolish the AMT?

One obvious way to end the perceived inequities of the alternative minimum tax would be to eliminate it once and for all. But the 2008 AMT exemption passed in October is estimated to cost the Treasury nearly $62 billion for a single tax year of AMT “relief.”

“If there were no AMT, budget deficits in future years would be larger than they’re currently projected to be and would extend further into the future,” Luscombe said.

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Representative Charles Rangel has proposed ending the AMT but has coupled AMT abolition with a variety of tax increases to generate replacement revenue.

President-elect Barack Obama has proposed indexing the AMT, but it is not clear whether that will be a first-year priority, given the size of the current deficit.

“We may be in for another short-term fix this year,” Luscombe observed. “But that will expand the breadth and deepen the bite of the AMT in the future, when it either comes back in force or revenues have to be found to replace it.”

About CCH, a Wolters Kluwer business

CCH, a Wolters Kluwer business ( is a leading provider of tax, accounting and audit information, software and services. It has served tax, accounting and business professionals since 1913. Among its market-leading products are The ProSystem fx® Office, CCH® TeamMate, CorpSystem®, CCH® Tax Research NetWork™, Accounting Research Manager® and the U.S. Master Tax Guide®. CCH is based in Riverwoods, Ill.

Wolters Kluwer is a leading global information services and publishing company. The company provides products and services globally for professionals in the health, tax, accounting, corporate, financial services, legal and regulatory sectors. Wolters Kluwer has annual revenues (2007) of €3.4 billion ($4.8 billion), maintains operations in over 33 countries across Europe, North America and Asia Pacific and employs approximately 19,500 people worldwide. Wolters Kluwer is headquartered in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. For more information, visit

-- ### --




   © 2020, CCH INCORPORATED. All rights reserved.   

  Back to Top | Print this Page