So…the federal income tax will be around $6,000?
That’s a federal income tax rate of 8 percent.
A single dad with 5 kids, making 75K in NYS? He’s paying over 7K in Medicare and FICA taxes, plus New York State taxes, already. Bless his heart, I’m fine with that poor dad paying zippo in federal.
If he loses all exemptions for the kids and the state tax deduction? And only $54ish is exempted from AMT? He could have an additional amt bill at 26% of that amount too. Poor guy.
AMT is just a mistake that turned into a cash cow. Now the cow is too fat to kill.
From the example. 75,000 -53,600 = 21,400
21,400 X .26 = 5,564 tax under amt
Tax without amt
75,000 - exemptions of 5 kids and one father is 24,000.
75,000 - 24,000 = 51,000.
51,000 -standard deduction of 6,300 = 44,700.
Standard deduction is a little more than NY state tax. If He lives in NYC that would probably change.
Federal Income Tax on 44,700 for 2015 is…
10 percent bracket up to 9225. Tax is 922.50+
15 percent bracket between 9225 and 37450. Tax is 4,233.75
25 percent bracket between 37450 and 44700. Tax is $1812.50
Federal income Total tax 922.50 + 4233.75 + 1812.50 = $6968.75
Amt is $5,564.
No AMT.
There might be a small earned income tax credit under the regular federal income tax. I’m not sure.
Federal income tax would still be higher than AMT.
EDIT :
The Amt exemption decreases as income rises. For every dollar earned the exemption decreases. I dont think this changes much. Might make the AMT similar to the regular income tax.
If a CPA wants to step in and finish this up, that, fine. 
He is filing as a head of household and his standard deduction is $9,250.
Ok… Nevermind on the phase out of the amt exemption in the example… Income is too low for a phase out of the exemption.
Ok if the standard deduction is 9250, that would cut the federal income tax 737,50. The tax would be 6,231… Stll more than amt.
Why do three people like HRSMom’s post #42 when the Amt is lower and won’t come into play?
People like to believe in fantasies.
Some of you fellow posters worry me…but not too much. 
How much would the single dad with 5 kids, living in NYS, have to make so that AMT would come into play?
Damn it. I didn’t use head of household brackets. The guy probably is paying Amt. I’m getting old.
“Why do three people like HRSMom’s post #42 when the Amt is lower and won’t come into play.”
I liked it for this, “AMT is just a mistake that turned into a cash cow. Now the cow is too fat to kill.”
I have no idea if the data on the single dad is correct, and it’s not important enough to me to run the numbers. But I totally agree that the AMT is a cash cow that they won’t give up. It was installed to prevent the rich from paying little taxes because of their deductions, and it is hitting far more people than it ever was intended. You don’t index it for inflation, you catch far more people. According to Wikipedia, it was enacted to target 155 high income households who paid no taxes, now it hits millions. And, “A total of 27% of households that paid the AMT in 2008 had adjusted gross income of $200,000 or less”.
So, yeah, a tax to make sure the rich pay enough taxes? Not any more. A cash cow, like HRSMom says.
Ok…AMT is $5564.
Regular tax…head of household…$5005.
AMT cost the father $559.
Me too. Gave extra points for strong metaphor. 
If a 7.4% income tax rate is too much for you ladies, (and it is probably less than that if the guy is getting employer backed health care or retirement benefits) , it’s a good thing you ladies are not running this country.
Everything should be free.
"If a 7.4% income rax rate is too much for you ladies, (and it is probably less than that if the guy is getting employer backed health care or retirement benefits) , it’s a good thing you ladies are not running this country.
Everything should be free"
Free…ha! Maybe for some. However, I think if someone is already paying 7.65% of their income, plus local and state taxes, and raising five children by themselves in a high cost area, while making a fairly low salary, perhaps that is enough. I can’t imagine how difficult and expensive it would be to raise five children alone. I don’t think it’s better for someone to be on public assistance, getting massive amounts of benefits, and not paying any tax, as opposed to working. Though that person and the Dad paying out 15%+ of his income, childcare, and not getting benefits, might be in the same overall situation.
Nice…again. The NEED to prove each other wrong even when they are not. It was just a rough example for pity’s sake. I’m out of this conversation.
So you think the poor man should pay more? It’s easy to think other ppl should pay more. Everyone thinks someone else should pay more…
A 7.4 percent income tax rate is not something I spend much time thinking about or worrying about. It’s a pretty low number.
I think more about the lack of wage growth in this country. Stocks have returned 4.5 percent a year for 15 years and the ten year treasury note yields about 2 percent. How are people going to save enough to live as they age?
We’ll just deal. I agree it is harder to figure out retirement when you can’t rely on fixed income securities anymore. My plan? Just keep piling it up until I think I won’t outlive it:(
Yeah… We have to save a lot more with these returns.