Of course, "shift the burden" to higher-income households is not the same as "lift the burden" from upper middle-class households.

If the overall tax burden on the economy is not going down, then there is nothing "Yes!" about it.

this is the worst thing ever. the AMT is about the only good thing this country has.

Kip, It's a "yes!" if you have five children. Plus I am quite fond of measures that simplify the filing/calculation process, and exempting me from AMT would do that.

2L, the "worst thing ever"!? Law school is really playing with your mind.

Unfortunately, this appears to be a legislative effort to define the "middle class" as those who make $250,000 or less, and the "upper middle class" as those who make between $250,001 and $500,000. This sort of idiotic and arbitrary line-drawing has no plance in federal tax legislation, and utterly ignores significant differentials between households in Manhattan, for example, and Des Moines in terms of nominal dollar earnings. Everyone acknowledges that the AMT came into being almost 40 years ago as the supposed "millionaire's tax." So why can't Congress draft some responsible legislation that applies the AMT to bona fide millionaires, instead of penalizing what arguably is the most productive class of citizens in America?

Let's go back to the 1986 Code as originally enacted. Two tax brackets, no idiotic phaseouts, and an AMT that actually targeted persons most able to pay it. At the time, it was the greatest idea in taxation in decades, and, now, it looks even better than ever.