Kirsten Gillibrand on Tax Reform Democrat

Extend Bush-era tax cuts, except earners over $250K

Voted YES on extending AMT exemptions to avoid hitting middle-income.

1. increase and extend through 2008 the alternative minimum tax (AMT) exemption amounts;
2. extend through 2008 the offset of personal tax credits against AMT tax liabilities; Reference: Alternative Minimum Tax Relief Act; Bill H.R.6275 ; vote number 2008-455 on Jun 25, 2008

   Voted YES on paying for AMT relief by closing offshore business loopholes.

   H.R.4351: To provide individuals temporary relief from the alternative minimum tax (AMT), via an offset of nonrefundable personal tax credits. [The AMT was originally intended to apply only to people with very high incomes, to ensure that they paid a fair amount of income tax. As inflation occurred, more people became subject to the AMT, and now it applies to people at upper-middle-class income levels as well. Both sides agree that the AMT should be changed to apply only to the wealthy; at issue in this bill is whether the cost of that change should be offset with a tax increase elsewhere or with no offset at all. -- ed.]

   Proponents support voting YES because:

   Rep. RANGEL: We have the opportunity to provide relief to upward of some 25 million people from being hit by a $50 billion tax increase, which it was never thought could happen to these people. Almost apart from this, we have an opportunity to close a very unfair tax provision, that certainly no one has come to me to defend, which prevents a handful of people from having unlimited funds being shipped overseas under deferred compensation and escaping liability. Nobody, liberal or conservative, believes that these AMT taxpayers should be hit by a tax that we didn't intend. But also, no one has the guts to defend the offshore deferred compensation. So what is the problem?

   Opponents recommend voting NO because:

   Rep. McCRERY: This is a bill that would patch the AMT, and then increase other taxes for the patch costs. Republicans are for patching the AMT. Where we differ is over the question of whether we need to pay for the patch by raising other taxes. The President's budget includes a 1-year patch on the AMT without a pay-for. That is what the Senate passed by a rather large vote very recently, 88-5. The President has said he won't sign the bill that is before us today. Republicans have argued against applying PAYGO to the AMT patch. In many ways PAYGO has shown itself to be a farce.

   Reference: AMT Relief Act; Bill HR4351 ; vote number 2007-1153 on Dec 12, 2007

   50-25-25 budget formula for debt-tax cuts-spending.

   Gillibrand adopted the Blue Dog Coalition press release:

   The 33 member Blue Dog Coalition applauds Senator Joe Lieberman (D-CT) for his commitment to fiscal responsibility. In a floor speech today, Senator Lieberman called for a budget framework that would devote half of the budget surplus to debt reduction, a quarter of the remaining funds to tax cuts, the final quarter to targeted spending increases in America’s priority programs. Senator Lieberman touted a mantra long held by the Blue Dogs that “our top priority must remain debt reduction.”

   Senator Lieberman’s position closely reflects the “50-25-25” equation for responsible budgeting long advocated by the Blue Dog Coalition. The Blue Dogs’ formula would extract the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds from the projected budget surplus and use half of the remaining funds to pay down the national debt. After committing 50 percent to debt reduction, 25 percent would be allocated to tax cuts and the remaining 25 percent would fund increases in priority programs, such as education, agriculture, defense, and health care. “The 50-25-25 budget framework is a common sense, fiscally conservative approach that will provide for a healthy economy, lower taxes, and reduction of our national debt. I am pleased that Senator Lieberman stressed the need for fiscal discipline,” said Blue Dog Budget Task Force Co-Chairman, Rep. Dennis Moore (D-KS).

   “Senator Lieberman got it exactly right,” said Blue Dog Co-Chairman Rep. Jim Turner (D-TX). “We need a budget that meets our commitments and lives up to our responsibilities. Most importantly, we need a budget that adds up. The 50-25-25 framework is a smart, conservative, approach that prioritizes paying down the debt and still leaves room for real tax relief.”

   Source: Blue Dog Coalition press release 01-BDC3 on Feb 8, 2001

   Supports more federal taxes & keeping marriage penalty.

   Gillibrand supports the CC survey questions on increasing taxes

   The Christian Coalition voter guide [is] one of the most powerful tools Christians have ever had to impact our society during elections. This simple tool has helped educate tens of millions of citizens across this nation as to where candidates for public office stand on key faith and family issues.

   The CC survey summarizes candidate stances on the following topics:
   • Increase in federal income tax rates
   • Elimination of the federal marriage tax penalty [vs. keeping the federal marriage tax penalty]
   Source: Christian Coalition Survey 10-CC-q11 on Aug 11, 2010

   Click here for definitions & background information on Tax Reform. Click here for a profile of Kirsten Gillibrand. Click here for SenateMatch answers by Kirsten Gillibrand. Agree? Disagree? Voice your opinions on Tax Reform in The Forum. Click here for a summary of Kirsten Gillibrand's positions on all issues. Click here for issue positions of other NY politicians.
   Other candidates on Tax Reform:		Kirsten Gillibrand on other issues:
   NY Gubernatorial: Andrew Cuomo NY Senatorial: Charles Schumer NY politicians Retiring as of Jan. 2013: AZ:Kyl(R) CT:Lieberman(D) HI:Akaka(D) ND:Conrad(D) NM:Bingaman(D) TX:Hutchison(R) VA:Webb(D) WI:Kohl(D)	Senate elections Nov. 2012: AZ:Flake(R) CA:Feinstein(D) vs.Holbrook(R) CT:Bysiewicz(R) vs.Murphy(R) vs.Shays(R) DE:Carper(D) FL:Nelson(D) vs.LeMieux(R) HI:Hirono(D) vs.Case(D) IN:Lugar(R) vs.Mourdock(R) vs.Donnelly(D) MA:Brown(R) vs.E.Warren(D) vs.Khazei(D) vs.Massie(D) vs.S.Warren(D) MD:Cardin(D) vs.Wargotz(R) vs.Capps(R) ME:Snowe(D) vs.D`Amboise(R) MI:Stabenow(D) vs.Hekman(R) vs.Konetchy(R) vs.Hoekstra(R) MO:McCaskill(D) vs.Akin(R) vs.Steelman(R) MT:Tester(D) vs.Rehberg(R) ND:(D) vs.Berg(R)	NE:Nelson(D) vs.Flynn(R) vs.Stenberg(R) vs.Bruning(R) NJ:Menendez(D) vs.Linker(R) NM:Bingaman(D) vs.Balderas(D) vs.Sanchez(R) vs.Wilson(R) NV:Heller(R) vs.Berkley(D) NY:Gillibrand(D) vs.Noren(D) OH:Brown(D) vs.Coughlin(R) vs.Pryce(R) PA:Casey(D) vs.Scaringi(R) RI:Whitehouse(D) vs.Hinckley(R) TN:Corker(R) TX:Cruz(R) vs.Jones(R) vs.Leppert(R) UT:Hatch(R) vs.Chaffetz(R) VA:Kaine(D) vs.Allen(R) vs.Donner(R) vs.Radtke(R) WA:Cantwell(D) WI:Schiess(R) vs.Neumann(R) vs.Thompson(R) vs.Kagen(D) vs.Kind(D) vs.Baldwin(D) WV:Manchin(D) WY:Barrasso(R)	Abortion Budget/Economy Civil Rights Corporations Crime Drugs Education Energy/Oil Environment Families Foreign Policy Free Trade Govt. Reform Gun Control Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Jobs Principles Social Security Tax Reform Technology War/Peace Welfare Other Senators Senate Votes (analysis) Bill Sponsorships Affiliations Policy Reports Group Ratings
   Contact info: Email Contact Form Fax Number: 202-228-0282 Mailing Address: Senate Office SR-478, Washington, DC 20510

   
   Page last updated: Nov 04, 2011