2/28/2013 4:15 PM ET|
Are high earners getting the shaft?
Tax changes for 2013 limit exemptions and deductions for high-income taxpayers. Here are a few ways to ease the pain.
Two of the lesser-known and least-understood provisions of the fiscal cliff legislation will raise taxes on high-income taxpayers by phasing out personal exemptions and the amount of itemized deductions wealthy taxpayers are allowed in 2013.
The set of rules, dubbed personal exemption phaseout and Pease (named after former U.S. Rep. Donald Pease, D-Ohio, who helped create it), were originally passed in the early 1990s, and remained in place until the Bush-era tax cuts of 2001 gradually eliminated them. The new fiscal cliff bill restores the limitations in 2013. By limiting the number of exemptions and deductions a high-income taxpayer is allowed, the taxes effectively raise a filer's taxable income.
The fiscal cliff deal raised federal income taxes on married households who earn more than $450,000, or single filers who earn more than $400,000, but the new PEP and Pease limits on the value of personal exemptions and itemized deductions apply for married taxpayers who earn $300,000 or $250,000 for single filers.
"It's a sneaky rate increase once you get above the thresholds," says Matthew LePley, a tax manager at Brighton Jones.
While taxpayers will not have to deal with the tax changes this filing season, experts recommend planning ahead, as a number of tax-saving strategies can be put into action now.
Personal exemption phaseout
Beginning in 2013, the personal exemption phaseout limits the value of personal exemptions for taxpayers who earn more than $300,000 (married filing jointly), or $250,000 (single) by 2% for each $2,500 earned above the thresholds.
The personal exemption, or the amount of income the IRS designates as "exempt" from being taxed at the federal level, is indexed for inflation, so the personal exemption amount is $3,800 for 2012, and rises to $3,900 in 2013.
On their 2013 tax return, for example, a married couple with two children earning $425,000, or $125,000 over the threshold, would lose 100% of their personal deductions ($125,000/$2,500 = 50 and 50 x 0.02 = 1, for a 100% loss). Assuming one spouse doesn't earn, the household would lose all four personal exemptions of $3,900 each, adding up to a $15,600 increase in taxable income for the 2013 tax year.
Using that same scenario, a family of four who earns $375,000, or $75,000 over the threshold, would lose only 60% of their allowable personal exemptions, or $9,360, leaving the family with a deduction of $6,240.
"If you make that kind of money, you will not be allowed to take all of your itemized deductions, and your personal exemptions also will be reduced," said Harvey Frutkin, senior counsel at Frutkin Law Firm. "The impact will be pretty significant."
For the 2013 tax year, the Pease limitations cap deductions on everything from state taxes to mortgage interest to charitable deductions for tax filers who earn more than $250,000 (single) or $300,000 (married, filing jointly). A recent JPMorgan Chase note to clients estimated this rule will result in a tax hike of about 1.2% for taxpayers who live in states with high income taxes.
The restored limits reduce allowable deductions and can be calculated two ways: either 3% of adjusted gross income above the threshold, or 80% of the amount of the itemized deductions allowable for the taxable year -- whichever calculation lets a taxpayer deduct a higher amount is the one they'll want to use. For most high-income earners, the 3% calculation gives them the highest deduction.
For example, assume a married couple has an adjusted gross income of $500,000 ($200,000 over the limit) and total itemized deductions of $45,000. The deductions are broken down as follows:
- Mortgage interest deduction: $10,000.
- Charitable deduction: $20,000.
- State income tax deduction: $10,000.
- Property tax deduction: $5,000.
By using the 3% deduction calculation (3% x $200,000), the couple's itemized deductions would be reduced by $6,000, leaving a total deduction of $39,000.
On the other hand, using the calculation of 80% of the total itemized deductions would reduce the couple's itemized deductions by $36,000, leaving a deduction of only $9,000.
Since the first option is the lesser of the two limitations, the couple's deductions would be reduced to $39,000.
More from The Fiscal Times:
VIDEO ON MSN MONEY
But then that's exactly why I'm never getting married. I don't get why married people get so shafted when it comes to income taxes.
I hate that our society has made it a bad thing to succeed. Why do people want to punish others for working hard and getting paid well?
no shi- low information voters always "THINK"... the wealthy have never paid more of the tax bill than they are now... the top 1% make 13% of the income BUT ARE PAYING 37% of the tax bill.
stupid useless dysfunctinal people are destroying this country with their "thinking"
Why is everyone so surprised? It has been reported by so called "radicals" for years that they are trying to bring us to the standards of the a third world country. Only the ultra ultra wealthy and powerful will be comfortable and all of us other scmucks will be their slaves. Wake up, food has tripled in price, utilities have sky rocketed and gasoline is ridiculous. Hello!!!!!!!!!!
Taxes on wages (or a flat tax) are the greatest evil of our American Republic. When government is free to steal from you, there are no limits to waste and abuse in government. If a person chooses to work extra hours or two jobs in order to better provide for themselves or their family, they should not be penalized, but that is what happens. The more you make by working harder and longer, the more money is stolen from you, and given to those who spend their lives living off the hard work of others.
The revenue the government needs to provide legitimate constitutional services should be obtained primarily from a national sales tax instead of a tax on wages. All would pay based on consumption, the more you spend the more you pay. The more luxury you surround yourself with, the more you pay. Your choice. A national sales tax system would capture money spent by criminals and by illegal aliens who currently pay near zero in taxes. There would of course need to be exemptions: Cars (already have a federal excise tax) Primary Residence/Rental Properties (vacation homes would be subject to tax/rental profit would be taxed) Fresh Food (Preprocessed foods and prepared meals would be taxed – only fresh/fresh frozen/canned goods would be exempt) Insurance Premiums, Health Care & Certified Education.
Adding another layer of tax to a business would not be fair. Businesses would need to be compensated by keeping a portion of the tax to cover the expense of collection and reporting. A percentage of .20 to .05 would be fair.The Truth about Percent versus Dollars
Everyone wants the rich ($250,000 is not rich) to pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes because they don’t think it’s enough. Well, how much is enough? If someone is paying hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars in taxes already, why should they pay more? So what if it’s only 10, 12, or even 5% of their income. Why should someone who works harder and sacrifices more, pay more? It’s wrong, it’s unfair. Those paying millions are supporting those paying only a few hundred dollars. If that’s 20% of your income, maybe you just need to work harder? The rest of us are tired of supporting you. Would you rather have 10% of $100,000 or 5% of $250,000?
Announcing new tax plan.
Line 1: How much did you make?
Line 2: Send it in!
Oh No--------High earners aren't getting the shaft -----------It's called paying their fair share whatever
that means//////////// And remember you can never give enough of your hard earned money to the
government because they always want and need MORE/////////// Thank you Obama and my check is
in the mail-----------
The majority of you people voted for this.
Now reap what you have sown.
Now THAT is what I call FAIR.
Copyright © 2014 Microsoft. All rights reserved.
Fundamental company data and historical chart data provided by Morningstar Inc. Real-time index quotes and delayed quotes supplied by Morningstar Inc. Quotes delayed by up to 15 minutes, except where indicated otherwise. Fund summary, fund performance and dividend data provided by Morningstar Inc. Analyst recommendations provided by Zacks Investment Research. StockScouter data provided by Verus Analytics. IPO data provided by Hoover's Inc. Index membership data provided by Morningstar Inc.