Although they are not scheduled to submit recommendations to the Treasury for two more months, the nine experts serving on the President's Advisory Panel on Tax Reform publicly announced their first suggestion on reforming the tax code to make it simpler, fairer, and more pro-growth. Following a public meeting last Wednesday, during which reform options were discussed rather than testimony being given by tax experts (as was the case at all previous meetings), the panel announced their recommendation to repeal the alternative minimum tax (AMT). How the federal government will replace the $1.2 trillion the Treasury expects to collect from the tax over the next ten years was not indicated by the panel. Congress enacted the alternative minimum tax in 1969 to snare affluent tax dodgers; however, in recent years, the tax has affected an increasing number of taxpayers, many of whom are not affluent by today's standards. The AMT currently affects approximately 4 million families; however it is expected that as many as 21 million families will pay the tax next year, and as many 51 million families in the coming decade. A number of lawmakers, such as Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA), have outspokenly opposed the AMT for this reason; however, many tax experts believe that reform, not repeal, is the fiscally responsible solution. Repeal of the AMT would be a significant hit to federal revenue sources, especially if combined with possible extension of Bush's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, and repeal of the estate tax, which could reach the Senate floor as early as next week. Tax Policy Center analysts note that repeal of the AMT would be more costly by the end of the decade than repeal of the regular income tax. Those in favor of preserving the AMT argue that reform is needed instead of repeal, in order to preserve this valuable source of revenue, keep the tax code progressive, and ensure that wealthy taxpayers are not able to avoid paying taxes completely. Panel member Elizabeth Garrett, a public policy professor at the University of Southern California, voiced her disapproval with the panel's recommendation, calling the decision to recommend repeal "not fair," and noting that taxpayers lose confidence in a system that allows people to escape taxation -- a situation the AMT was created to prevent. Options other than repeal include indexing the AMT for inflation, which would reduce the number of taxpayers subject to the AMT in 2010 by 82.5 percent overall and would allow 98 percent of the middle-class to avoid the tax all together. Implementing provisions such as dependent personal exemptions and nonrefundable credits would also help ease the burden on middle-class taxpayers who might otherwise currently pay the AMT. In recent years, Congress has chosen to address the AMT problem with temporary fixes to prevent the number of taxpayers it affects from growing as fast as experts have anticipated. It is likely that another temporary fix will be passed this year, despite bipartisan efforts in the Senate to do away with the tax altogether. Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) and 20 cosponsors introduced legislation (S. 1103) on May 23 that would permanently repeal the tax but does not include any provisions to offset the huge cost of the bill.