Public To Congress: Don’t Repeal the Estate Tax
Public To Congress: Don’t Repeal the Estate Tax
The debate over the estate tax has started to kick into high gear. In an effort to boost their dwindling political fortunes, Sen. Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) and his allies may force a vote on the estate tax next month in the hope they can return to an issue that played to their strengths with the public.
Groups on the right are already mobilizing, but some new polling seriously calls into question conservatives’ conventional wisdom that regular Americans can’t wait for the government to spend hundreds of billions of dollars to shield the wealth of a fraction of our wealthiest estates.
What do the new numbers show?
- A stunning shift against repeal since Katrina: Unlike older polling showing the public would only turn against repeal after they learned about its ramifications, the new polling shows that just 23% of the public supports repeal based on what they already know.
- Estate tax repeal is America’s LOWEST priority on tax issues. When asked what tax reforms Congress should consider, shielding the very wealthiest estates is most often ranked “not a priority†by every group—men, women, independents, Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike.
- When forced to choose between estate tax repeal and basically ANY issue, the public always opposes repeal: Deficit reduction, veterans care, a better Medicare drug benefit, education, rainy day savings, all beat repeal by a two (and sometimes three) to one margin.
Why is support for repeal so weak? One reason: almost no one actually pays the tax. The new poll drew heavily from states whose Senators were key votes on the issue, like Ohio and Maine. In these two states, 99.9% of estates wouldn’t pay even a penny in taxes under reasonable reform, and only one in every one thousand families would stand to gain from repeal.
I guess it shouldn’t be too surprising people aren’t scrambling to spend a trillion dollars on the Paris Hilton Tax Cut.
– Josh Lynn
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
There is no substitute for hard work and ingenuity… except inheriting millions from your relatives tax-free.
April 13th, 2006 at 4:23 pmRepealing the Estate Tax is an effort to create an American Royalty, something our founding fathers firmly opposed. That’s why there is a tax on estates, to prevent American Dynasty and to promote the idea that if you made your fortune here, you should share part of it with the country that made it possible.
April 13th, 2006 at 4:24 pmBush doesn’t want any of Grandpa Prescott’s Nazi money taken by the US Government.
April 13th, 2006 at 4:25 pmBut Paris just must have the that trendy $250K Prada purse to match her $25K diamond studded hair barrett or I’ll simply be beside myself…. Why aren’t the peasants willing to eat cake to accommodate American royalty? (sarcasm off… I need to go vomit now)
April 13th, 2006 at 4:27 pm“David Walker, the head of the Government Accountability Office, official bookkeeper for Congress, said at a briefing last week that the $760 billion accrual deficit “amounts to $156,000 of debt for every man, woman and child in America. For a family, it’s like having a $750,000 mortgage — and no house.”
From David Broder: Red Ink Run Amok in today’s W Post.
April 13th, 2006 at 4:28 pmhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/12/AR2006041201726.html
Hummph. I guess that means we’ll be getting a heavy dose of Bill O’Really on Faux lamenting on the “Death Tax” and misleading the rednecks like me on how the government wants to take their pickups and trailer houses away from their kids when they die.
April 13th, 2006 at 4:29 pmFix the AMT! That is the tax issue the deal with.
April 13th, 2006 at 4:36 pm#6 – Right in one, Joe!
April 13th, 2006 at 4:37 pmBill has not finished with the attack on easter. Hey…this could be a tie in with the death of Jesus….
April 13th, 2006 at 4:45 pm#6 It is called the “Paris Hilton” tax. Geez Sixer, get it together.
April 13th, 2006 at 5:03 pmPoor tinkerbell, have to wait on the new diamond collar. ‘You people are not HOT!….so there. Paris Hilton.
April 13th, 2006 at 5:05 pmThese guys didn’t get where they are by listening to voters, they got where they are by growing their own in little electronic boxes called ‘voting machines’.
–
April 13th, 2006 at 5:19 pmhttp://griperblade.blogspot.com – grumblings from the heartland
#11 *giggle*
April 13th, 2006 at 5:21 pmMy Grandparents lived the American Dream. They started with nothing (think: Depression), but managed to sock away a couple million over their lifetime. These people were hard-working and THRIFTY. And you know what? Even though it affects me this year (they both passed away in the last 12 months, and my dad, their son, is long deceased), I still support the estate tax. Strongly. Inherited wealth corrupts people. I have enough crackpot relatives (on both sides of the family) to prove it. So while I could think of some fine things to do with the money I’m not getting, I’m really not all bent out of shape about it. Esp. if the money goes to veterans affairs- returning Iraq veterans need serious help. Of course, it’s not going there in sufficient quantity, but that’s another issue entirely…
April 13th, 2006 at 5:37 pmA simple way to frame this debate:
April 13th, 2006 at 5:48 pmEstate Tax or Dynasty Dividend?
#2
“That’s why there is a tax on estates, to prevent American Dynasty and to promote the idea that if you made your fortune here, you should share part of it with the country that made it possible.”
Mandatory sharing? That should be an INDIVIDUAL’S decision not the government’s. Those who helped build your fortune over the years WERE payed for their time and effort already and that isn’t EVERYONE in the country. The estate tax is basically taking your life savings and giving a little piece to everyone who benefits from government programs even though they might not have had a single thing to do with the accumulation of that wealth.
April 13th, 2006 at 6:00 pm#7
Absolutely! That would solve alot of ambiguity in our BS tax code
April 13th, 2006 at 6:05 pm“Mandatory sharing? That should be an INDIVIDUAL’S decision not the government’s. Those who helped build your fortune over the years WERE payed for their time and effort already and that isn’t EVERYONE in the country. Tracy”
Wealth isn’t created just by individuals, but by society as well. While it’s true that investors make the bulk of wealth, it is society, our laws, our infrastructure, our labor, our military and our civil order that makes all of those things possible.
“The estate tax is basically taking your life savings and giving a little piece to everyone who benefits from government programs even though they might not have had a single thing to do with the accumulation of that wealth. Comment by Tracy”
Everyone through our voting, our own paying of taxes and infrastructure and courts and education system all make it possible for people to obtain and produce wealth. If you don’t believe that the greater society makes wealth possible, I suggest you travel to sub saharan africa and see the difference.
April 13th, 2006 at 6:15 pmAnd Tracy,
If it makes you feel better, don’t think of it as the dead person who’s getting taxed, it’s the people RECEIVING the money. Income is taxed, and anyone getting an inheritance is receiving income. Now was that so hard?
April 13th, 2006 at 6:16 pmTracy said,…Mandatory sharing?
yes we do that with peoples lives in the defense of this country(even though the vast majority come from low middle class and lower economic people)
Tracy said,…That should be an INDIVIDUAL’S decision not the government’s.
Says you, but taxes are not an individual decision they are a collective decision that we all try to make to decide the best way to pay for the servic3es that the government provides, the republican answer to that question today seems to be spend the money and let the children and grand-children “inherit” the bill.
Tracy said,….,Those who helped build your fortune over the years WERE payed for their time and effort already and that isn’t EVERYONE in the country.
The Estate tax is taxing a person for INCOME they are receiving that they actually did little or no actual work for, and All income should be taxed in this country including Dividend income .
Tracy said,… The estate tax is basically taking your life savings and giving a little piece to everyone who benefits from government programs even though they might not have had a single thing to do with the accumulation of that wealth.
Or not taxing the inheritance is giving people who have little or nothing for the money a Free windfall income that they do not pay into the collective we call a government but they still get to use the services…..You see Tracy the person paying the TAX is not working their whole life for the money, they happened to be in somebodies else’s (thus the m0oney they are paying taxes on are not actually THEIR life savings, but new income for them)will who did, and when money moves from one individual to another especially when it is in the millions of dollars(which is where the estate tax actually applies) then the government has the duty to tax the transfer of funds for the collective good of all.
April 13th, 2006 at 6:20 pmMandatory sharing? That should be an INDIVIDUAL’S decision not the government’s.
Comment by Tracy — April 13, 2006 @ 6:00 pm
I agree with you Tracy… Fuck that sharing shit!
I say every man for themselves.
NO MORE TAXES!!!
We can all just pave the roads out in front of our houses, take turns policing our neighborhoods, home school our kids, and turn our old tool sheds into hospitals and jail cells.
Fuck Yeah!
USA! USA! USA! USA! USA!
April 13th, 2006 at 6:26 pmDoes anyone know what % is actually taken when the inheritance is passed down?
April 13th, 2006 at 6:31 pm#16 Tracy –
why do you feel so mean? Jesus, my father, taught that the poor shall inherit the earth and that a camel will fit through the eye of a needle before a rich person gets into heaven (he learned that one from Budda).
Besides, you don’t have to worry about poor people benefiting from any taxes collected from the inheritance tax. All our tax dollars are being diverted to the Halliburtons and all of the other rich friends of Bush&Co while money for medicare, medicaid, college loans, returning Iraq veterans etc… is being reduced. So, the money collected from the rich folks inheritance tax is going right back to the rich folks.
April 13th, 2006 at 6:32 pm#22 – Kranzy
I think that it is 50%.
April 13th, 2006 at 6:36 pmPay no attention to traci. (s)he comes in here from time to time to try and rile up liberals.
Not worth the time.
note to traci – you didn’t see the 23% support for repeal figure in the article, did you. No, I didn’t think so. Learn to read. Welcome to the 23% club. Soon you’ll have all of bushco’s supporters to talk to….all 23% of them.
April 13th, 2006 at 6:39 pmMy thought would be that the estate tax needs to be adjusted for inflation. and maybe bring the % taken out down. I think that 50% is a lot. I would think a more moderate 15-25% would be better or maybe a scale system based upon how much is actually transfering. A complet abolishiment would be a mistake however.
April 13th, 2006 at 6:44 pmMoney and assets that are in an estate are not kept in a big cookie jar and buried in the backyard to be drawn on by the owners. I seriously think that alot of people think this an accurate analogy. The money is almost always in some type of money market account, i.e. invested in the economy. Assets are taxed each year on their appreciation and would be continued even when the money is passed to heirs.
April 13th, 2006 at 6:56 pm#18
“Wealth isn’t created just by individuals, but by society as well.”
Individuals make up society.
“If you don’t believe that the greater society makes wealth possible, I suggest you travel to sub saharan africa and see the difference.”
Greater society didn’t work for free while that wealth was created.
April 13th, 2006 at 7:00 pmTracy you are MISSING the point the assests are changing hands from one person to another, and in cases where a new person has income (which an inheritance is, call it unearned income because most do not work directally for it, like interest or dividends) the collective thinking in the country is for the person collecting the income should pay taxes for the common good for all just as every other tyransfer of funds whether the funds are earned income, profits from investments, sale of real property, asale of investments, the repugs played a shell game calling it a death tax, but the tax is actually on the transfer of funds or real property which in the law of the land is taxable……stop being so dishonest like the repugs heve been on this issue.
April 13th, 2006 at 7:04 pm#19
“Income is taxed, and anyone getting an inheritance is receiving income.”
Exactly and the tax on the transfer is seperate an apart from the taxes that will have to be payed at the end of the year. If you were to receive an inheritance it is up to YOU to pay the taxes on the inital transfer as well as the additional taxes that will be owed as a result of your increased income and asset accumulation. This MANY time forces heirs to sell assets in order to pay the taxes unless the estate has a trust fund set up that will be used to pay the bill.
April 13th, 2006 at 7:18 pmThis MANY time forces heirs to sell assets in order to pay the taxes unless the estate has a trust fund set up that will be used to pay the bill.
Comment by Tracy — April 13, 2006 @ 7:18 p
AND? Many people have to do mabny things they wouldn’t like to pay the taxes the owe also, so why should Rich people, remember the tax is on estates over 2 million if I remember it right, have a special provision about paying taxes they owe. and ending the tax means that poorer people have to pick some of the tab for those rich people who inherite millions……..is that fair in your view?
April 13th, 2006 at 7:22 pmThe executor of the estate files a final return to the IRS and the tax is due at that time (except under an agreed payment plan) based on the value of the estate. The dead person is the one “paying” the tax. Gift taxes are due if the donee receives value exceeding the limits which are generally $10,000 per individual (if both parents gave the max,the donee could receive $20,000 from them tax free).
April 13th, 2006 at 7:25 pmParis Hilton received her money after dad’s estate (or mom’s,who knows) paid the estate tax. Kind of ironic in a way,TP calls it the Paris Hilton tax when she got the money after the estate tax was paid. Well,I think it’s funny.
Tracy – you are cheap and greedy – just like all the other hollow republicans.
April 13th, 2006 at 7:33 pm#25
It’s funny that the poll information doesn’t state whether those polled were registered Democrats or Republicans. BTW this BRITISH owned firm was nailed for releasing exit poll data before polls were closed in Venezuela in 2004.
http://caracaschronicles.blogspot.com/2004/08/exit-poll-results-show-major-defeat.html
April 13th, 2006 at 7:35 pm“This MANY time forces heirs to sell assets in order to pay the taxes unless the estate has a trust fund set up that will be used to pay the bill. Comment by Tracy”
We wouldn’t want to inconvenience the rich by forcing them to set up a trust fund, would we…
And how many times would that be? Especially when you consider that the previous cap was high enough that VERY FEW americans ever crossed the barrier.
CAP has done a thorough review of this, please check it out.
http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=860671
Well if you compare a few hundred people out of almost 300 hundred million – MANY, then yeah, you’re right. But from where I sit, that’s NOT MANY.
April 13th, 2006 at 7:49 pm“BTW this BRITISH owned firm was nailed for releasing exit poll data before polls were closed in Venezuela in 2004. Tracy”
Actually they’re american owned. And they were contracted 3 days before the election, and admitted that in their rush they hadn’t used proper methodologies in their initial exit poll numbers in Venezuela. Polling has a SCIENTIFIC basis, and the poll providers generally make that information available when asked, and that’s why corrections occur in cases like this. Considering the numbers were FLIPPED from their actual values, maybe they counted the results on Diebold ;)
April 13th, 2006 at 7:55 pm32 WRONG the tax is paid as the assests are transferred, just as Las Vegas winnings or lottery winnings have the Taxes removed before the “winner” is paid…the casino or lottery does not pay the tax they just collect and foward the funds just as the estate lawyer is requires to do before dispersing the assests to those who have never paid taxes on the assests or oncome they recieve.
April 13th, 2006 at 7:58 pmClif, it would help if you looked at the primary source for information on taxes,the IRS. If you were to go to the web-site,you might find Form 706. That’s the form for calculating the tax due based on the size of the estate and is filed on behalf of the deceased. If you were to then look very carefully at that form you would possibly be able to discern that line 20 on that form is where one would place the amount of tax due from the deceased. I realize that actually checking with the IRS (it’s the governmnet and we all know how you feel about them) seems to be a good idea for normal people,but someone special like you will just pull opinions out of your a@@,as usual.
April 13th, 2006 at 8:32 pmClif,
EXACTLY. It’s called a windfall gains tax. You’re taxed on the transfer of the money.
This isn’t taxing the dead person, it’s taxing the transfer. That’s why TRUSTS are handled differently, the transfer of a trust is not a transfer of windfall income and assets.
April 13th, 2006 at 8:39 pmRyan,same for you,go to the IRS and see what they say,seriously,try it.
April 13th, 2006 at 9:00 pmYou just don’t get it…
GEORGE BUSH HIMSELF WOULD MAKE SERIOUS COIN WITH A REDUCED ESTATE TAX…
You can expect this to be the President’s number one goal (juat after he starts a war with Iran to get some “wartime president” mojo back).
George Bush doesn’t really get things that don’t affect/benefit him personally.
April 13th, 2006 at 9:56 pmTJM how does a DEAD person pay or not pay and what do they do if he refused, see how ludicrous your position becomes, the IRS document you site is done before the assets are dispersed and just because the document says filed upon the deceased, the estate is taxed as it is transferred. and that is the way this society has dete4rmined how to levy taxes, transferal of capital or assets from one person, the deceased(you can’t take it with you so it seems GOD has a 100% death tax after all..) to those the deceased has determined to RECIEVE the inheritance.
Actually GOD has determined the DEATH TAX to be 100%, why don’t you take it up with him, he is the one who originally set up the death system right?
April 13th, 2006 at 9:56 pmClif,if you were any dumber,you’d be a politician. The form 706 is self explanatory. The return (a final return in the truest sense) is filed on behalf of the deceased. The estate (note the similarity between the definition of the collection of assets owned by the deceased and the name of the tax) is usually handled by an executor,one of whose duties is to file the return. If you (could?) read the form 706, the assets are valued,deductions are calculated,the exemption is subtracted and the resulting estate has tax owed,paid by the executor from the assets of the estate.
April 13th, 2006 at 10:18 pmIf,by chance the deceased died without a will (intestate) the assets if identified are ofted claimed by the state (escheat law). I suspect this is,perhaps, the eventuality most common in your family?
There is a gift tax (part of the estate calculation is to determine whether the deceased,aware of his impending demise,sought to transfer assets in order to evade taxes due on the estate.
One is always advised to avoid taxation,but one should never evade taxes.
Seriously, the IRS form 706 is really simple to read,do yourself a favor and read it since you are utterly and completely wrong about this issue.
Ryan Neat -
Why should anyone in a competitive free market be given an artificial head start based solely on some birthright? What’ll happen to that person’s incentive to be productive?
Large sums of wealth = concentrated power = *the* bane to the free market system
No one should be able to inherit concentrated power; one should have to earn, based on merit, and merit alone.
Warren Buffett has it right — nearly all of his massive wealth is going to a foundation (upon his death); his kids will get squat, relatively speaking. As Buffett himself put it, “enough so they can do anything, but not everything.”
April 13th, 2006 at 10:20 pmTJM this is right out of the US code that the IRS uses for determining the “estate” f the deceased, and notice the Funeral expenses, now if someone has had a funeral and is buried in the ground they might “OWN” somethiing on paper, but that person is no longer able to show up in court but the probate who acts upon their final wishes does, so tha TAX on the estate is for final taxing upon transfer to other individual tax payers.
TITLE 26 > Subtitle B > CHAPTER 11 > Subchapter A > PART IV > § 2053
For purposes of the tax imposed by section 2001, the value of the taxable estate shall be determined by deducting from the value of the gross estate such amounts—
(1) for funeral expenses,
(2) for administration expenses,
(3) for claims against the estate, and
(4) for unpaid mortgages on, or any indebtedness in respect of, property where the value of the decedent’s interest therein, undiminished by such mortgage or indebtedness, is included in the value of the gross estate,
as are allowable by the laws of the jurisdiction, whether within or without the United States, under which the estate is being administered.
BTW here is the title of the tax form…United States Estate (and Generation-Skipping Transfer) Tax Return
NOTICE the word “transfer” seems that is what they are taxing, the transfer of the estate
April 13th, 2006 at 10:24 pmBTW TJM, when my youngest brother died in 2001 we went throught the probate which my mother agreed to do for him so your slander is appreciated and EXPECTED.
April 13th, 2006 at 10:26 pm“Clif,if you were any dumber,you’d be a politician. The form 706 is self explanatory. The return (a final return in the truest sense) is filed on behalf of the deceased. TJM”
And yet you have to explain it – how ironic huh?
The reason is because upon death the role of the executor is to TRANSFER the money to the respective parties. That TRANSFER is what’s taxed.
DUhhhhhhh
For someone who accuses others of being STUPID, you sure are STUPID.
I guess you didn’t know that when lotteries are one the taxes are FILED BY the LOTTERY. That’s right, just like the EXECUTOR, this money is taxed by the LOTTERY EXECUTOR (an analogy) that files the paperwork and extracts the money before you ever see it.
It’s called a TRANSFER WINDFALL TAX you INDOLENT DOLT.
April 13th, 2006 at 10:27 pmI just responded to the wrong person. Oops.
My previous post was intended for Tracy, not for Ryan Neat.
April 13th, 2006 at 10:27 pmI meant to write “when lotteries are WON, the paperwork is filed by the lottery”.
April 13th, 2006 at 10:28 pmClif,
I think GOP now means “Gathers up Only Putzes”.
These guys are as dumb as rocks, and just as useful without the help of someone else to move them.
April 13th, 2006 at 10:29 pmBTW TJM when I joined the US Army and recieved my signing bonus the Army collected the taxes on the bonus and paid it to the US treasury before they gave me the rest so a third patry collector is not as unusual as you dishonestly would like to make us believe..
April 13th, 2006 at 10:31 pmTghe same as when I sold my previous house the lawyer for the lending ibnstitution made sure the proper IRS forms were filed BEFORE the transferr was allowed to take place,
BUT thanks to Bill Clinton I did not have to pay any taxes on the 40,000 profit I realised in the property while I lived in the house…
April 13th, 2006 at 10:33 pmSeems the government has many taxes collected at the BEGINING of a transfer of capital or assets between seperate entities TJM so who looks STUPID now?
April 13th, 2006 at 10:35 pmBTW the law in this case IS NOT the IRS forn 706 but actually TITLE 26 > Subtitle B > CHAPTER 11 US Code. and the code mentions transfer MANY times and how to deal with Transferrs which are created to prevent the tax from being collected, thus the tax is a transfer tax on capital and real properties between seperate individuals responsible for taxes in seperate ways, the government just ensures all taxes are collected in the most expediant way by making the authority which has the legal obligation in transferring the capital and property from the estate to the new Owner that he collectsa the taxes from the transferring wealth just as your boss collects money from yopur wages before giving the rest to you…..same theroy don’t ya thunk….
April 13th, 2006 at 10:41 pmFrom the IRS,”If you give someone money or property during your life,you may be subject to federal gift tax. The money and property you own when you die (your estate) may be subject to federal estate tax.,,,It explains how much money or property you can give away during your lifetime or leave to your heirs at your death before any tax will be owed.”
A generation skipping transfer tax-which is separate and apart from income,estate and gift taxes-is to trap transfers of property within each successive generation.It is designed to allow transfers to spouses or children but tax transfers going to grandchildren and those two or more generations below. Those who transferall of their property to someone who is deemed to be in the same or one generation below do not have to worry about this tax. No tax is imposed at this level.
I realize that myths can be hard to dispel or abandoned by those who cling so tightly to them but let’s try this. You are the scion of a middling wealthy person who has an estate of $2 million which you receive. How much tax do you owe?
April 13th, 2006 at 10:48 pmNow, let’s assume you received $3 million from the estate. How much tax do you owe?
(Hint:the answer is the same in each case and when multiplied by any other number yields the same result.)
See, I didn’t have to use caps except where they belong. Only a commenter who is so arrogant as to believe himself infallible would need them since if you have to shout during an argument,you’ve already lost.
TJM, the title if the form 706 is;
United States Estate (and Generation-Skipping Transfer) Tax Return
And that is the form YOU were quoting…..
April 13th, 2006 at 11:03 pmClif,
TJM is having a cognitive dissonance. He quotes a form, uses that as the EXCLUSIVE basis of his argument, and them claims that using that form isn’t related to the estate tax.
Duhhh TJM, you’re one DUMB MOFO.
April 13th, 2006 at 11:45 pmAnd TJM, the LAW (which I quoted) and not the tax form (which you quoted) is the DEFINITIVE document.
You’re wrong, admit it, and stop acting like a retarded fool.
April 13th, 2006 at 11:47 pmJUST SPEND YOUR KIDS INHERITENCE. IF YOU RAISED THEM RIGHT THEY WONT NEED YOUR MONEY. IF YOU RAISED THEM WRONG THEY DONT DESERVE IT…….. Well my morning coffee is done. Now I have to get on my $30,000 Harley and go to the marina. My $70,000 Parker is waiting for me. PRACTICE WHAT YOU PREACH.
April 14th, 2006 at 8:09 amClif,sorry I didn’t stay up to respond but once again,you aren’t reading the from correctly (or the law) since the tax is based on the size (value) of the estate not the value in the transferee’s hand. The genreation skipping transfer tax is designed to put back into the estate value which was transferred to grandchildren,for example,in order to evade taxes due on the estate. It seems like an easy to understand concept,but one which has you baffled.
April 14th, 2006 at 8:35 amGo read the law as well as the IRS explanations. The tax is due on the size of the estate. Your example of the house sale would have one believe that at the closing,the title compay or lawyer would have a tax form and payment instruction for the tax due on the gain. But that’s not what happens. You file your income taxes and include the gain in your income. Contrast that to the recepient of a distribution from the estate. He/she would not report that distribution as income since the tax was collected from the estate. It’s a funny thing that the tax is called an estate tax and not an inheritance tax.
You likely won’t read this but that’s ok.
#20
“Says you, but taxes are not an individual decision they are a collective decision that we all try to make to decide the best way to pay for the servic3es that the government provides”
And considering we are all taxed TOO much because the government spends TOO much (yes, I blame EVERYONE in Congress) there shouldn’t be a need and a DESIRE for the government to go out and try to tax EVERYTHING.
“The Estate tax is taxing a person for INCOME they are receiving that they actually did little or no actual work for, and All income should be taxed in this country including Dividend income”
Not right off the top considering the person the is receiving the money doesn’t usually have the financial capability of paying that tax. I have no problem with the taxes being collected once that person’s income increases but having to sell assets in order to pay a BS bill is just plain wrong.
“…then the government has the duty to tax the transfer of funds for the collective good of all.”
So heirs are getting money taken away from them that their parents or who ever PERSONALLY made the decision to give them. TOTAL BS! As for collecting money for the collective good of all…yes, but that can be done thru taxation on the increased income of that person receiving the money at the end of the year. Again where is the person receiving the estate suppose to come up with the money to pay the tax BILL.
April 14th, 2006 at 9:09 am#35
“We wouldn’t want to inconvenience the rich by forcing them to set up a trust fund, would we…”
They SHOULDN’T have to.
“Especially when you consider that the previous cap was high enough that VERY FEW americans ever crossed the barrier.”
I don’t care if it was ten people with estates, it doesn’t make it right.
April 14th, 2006 at 9:15 am#36
“Actually they’re american owned.”
Actually they are BRITISH owned.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Penn%2C_Schoen_%26_Berland
“And they were contracted 3 days before the election, and admitted that in their rush they hadn’t used proper methodologies in their initial exit poll numbers in Venezuela”
So what? The fact that the took the job knowing full well that they didn’t have enough time to use the proper methodology say that they were looking for the fact buck and shouldn’t be relied upon to conduct accurate polling.
Diebold? Of course let’s blame someone else for our mistake.
April 14th, 2006 at 9:22 amThe problem that the “No Estate Tax” crowd has is that the estate tax affects less than 3% of the population.
Another is the fake argument that “people had to sell their property to pay the tax”. Not one single instance has been offered as evidence.
Not one single estate HAD to be sold to pay the estate tax. there have been times in which the receivers sold the estate because they didn’t want to take it over, but it never had to do with the amount owed for the estate tax.
Another claim is “Bouble Tax”.
“Both the radio and TV ads call the estate tax a “double tax,” which is only partly accurate. It is true that some portion of a taxable estate might be made up of cash that was taxed before, when it was earned as income. But many estates are made up of stocks, bonds, real estate or other holdings that have appreciated greatly in value over the lifetime of the person who owned them. The owner didn’t pay taxes on that profit during his or her lifetime because they weren’t sold and the profits weren’t turned into cash, or “realized.” Furthermore, heirs who inherit such appreciated assets won’t have to pay tax on that unrealized profit either. The estate tax is the only tax that applies to such unrealized capital gains.”
http://www.factcheck.org/article328.html
I just wish that people would research the issues, and not just shoot off their stupid mouths over a subject they know little, if anything, about.
April 14th, 2006 at 9:25 am#63 – Looks like I can’t type today! It should read “Double Tax”.
April 14th, 2006 at 9:27 amTracy wrote, Those who helped build your fortune over the years WERE payed for their time and effort already and that isn’t EVERYONE in the country.
Absolutely false.
A large fraction of wealth in this country, inherited or otherwise, comes from returns to land.
Those who collect these returns do so in exchange for absolutely nothing. What’s worse, they collect this income with the backing of the government.
Of course, many libertarian types either don’t understand this; or they do understand it and actively despise freedom. There are at least a few, however, who still love it.
April 14th, 2006 at 9:29 amTracy wrote, Greater society didn’t work for free while that wealth was created.
In many cases, yes it does.
The income in (Ricardian) land rent is generated by many agents. However, it is (aside from the fraction of property taxes falling on land) collected by landowners, even though those landowners (in their role of landowners) did nothing in exchange for that income. The agents who generated the rent don’t collect it.
Here’s what some of the world’s greatest thinkers had to say about this matter:
April 14th, 2006 at 9:38 am
Second quote is from noted Communist Adam Smith.
April 14th, 2006 at 9:40 am#19 It is most definately income. This IS the American way. Hell, it’s only taxed after, what is it now…$1M? I think that is more than fair that the first mil is free and clear.
The drumbeat of the greedy. It is totally unpatriot and certainly NOT what our Constitutional Authors had in mind.
April 14th, 2006 at 9:53 am#29
“…the collective thinking in the country is for the person collecting the income should pay taxes for the common good for all just as every other tyransfer of funds whether the funds are earned income, profits from investments, sale of real property, asale of investments”
This type of transfer is NOT a sale, i.e. the person receiving the money is not paying out anything in order to acquire. This is actually a big GIFT. Up to a certain amount, I think it’s $10k is not taxed, a person may give a gift to another, so why should the amount make a difference? I look at this a personal private matter between two individuals..one person who IS NOT selling something to another and one who is not paying to accuire something. Again I have absolutely no problem with taxing heirs when their income increases, they should be just like everyone else the get a raise. The amount of this raise should be irrelevant.
April 14th, 2006 at 10:07 am#67
“The income in (Ricardian) land rent is generated by many agents.”
The person or person’s paying to rent the land is USING the land in some way, i.e. running cattle for example.
“However, it is (aside from the fraction of property taxes falling on land) collected by landowners, even though those landowners (in their role of landowners) did nothing in exchange for that income”
The landowner is not exempt from the up keep of that land whether it be utilities serving that land, water, electricity, erosion, waste disposal, ect…. So this idea that landowners don’t have to expense anything in order to collect rent is nonsense. The only thing that I can see where a landowner would collect a “royalty” would be where a mining or oil company payed them to drill or mine on their property. In this case the company would be responsible for the operation in all respects. This however is a basic American benefit from owning private land.
April 14th, 2006 at 10:19 amTracy wrote, Again I have absolutely no problem with taxing heirs when their income increases, they should be just like everyone else the get a raise.
Muddled thinking.
People who pay income taxes on their wages are not only taxed when they get a raise.
April 14th, 2006 at 10:19 am#68
A great thinker he wasn’t then.
April 14th, 2006 at 10:21 amTracy wrote, The person or person’s paying to rent the land is USING the land in some way, i.e. running cattle for example.
So? The land itself still has value, and the landowner in his role of landowner did not create that value.
The landowner is not exempt from the up keep of that land whether it be utilities serving that land, water, electricity, erosion, waste disposal, ect…. So this idea that landowners don’t have to expense anything in order to collect rent is nonsense.
If you actually read what I wrote, I clearly referred to land rent net of e.g. property taxes.
And you’re wrong—”land rent” doesn’t refer to improvements like the ones you refer to. Those are capital.
This however is a basic American benefit from owning private land.
It’s also pure evil. Everyone is entitled to the fruit of their labor. No one is entitled to the fruit of the land (apart from that fraction stemming from their labor, or from capital).
Read the article I linked to above: Are you a REAL libertarian or a ROYAL libertarian? and you’ll see why those who believe that collection of land rents is just are evil, just like those who previously argued on behalf of slavery were evil.
April 14th, 2006 at 10:25 amTracy wrote, A great thinker he [Adam Smith] wasn’t then.
LOL! As compared to…you?
And if he wasn’t a great thinker, why do economists, libertarians, etc, love to quote him?
April 14th, 2006 at 10:26 amWhy many libertarians hate freedom (first two paragraphs of Are you a Real Libertarian, or a ROYAL Libertarian?):
April 14th, 2006 at 10:30 am
As was pointed out earlier, not one example of someone having to seel their assets to pay the estate tax
And since semantics will come into play here, “The Death Tax”, I like retorting with something I heard-would sure love to take credit for the catchy phrase, but I can’t
To counter the “Death Tax” blather, just retort with “Grateful Heirs tax”
April 14th, 2006 at 11:01 am#72
“People who pay income taxes on their wages are not only taxed when they get a raise.”
Maybe I didn’t state it clearly for a obvious communist. Of course heirs pay taxes before they get a raise and when their incomes increase as well. I didn’t realize I had to state such an obvious fact.
April 14th, 2006 at 11:09 am#66
“A large fraction of wealth in this country, inherited or otherwise, comes from returns to land.”
The people who helped person who work his or her entire life to build a personal fortune were payed in the form of an hourly wage or a salary.
April 14th, 2006 at 11:14 am#76
So as Americans we should give up our private property rights and let the use of our land be free and clear to anyone who wan’t to use it?
April 14th, 2006 at 11:17 am#74
“So? The land itself still has value, and the landowner in his role of landowner did not create that value.”
The landowner pays for the up keep of the land and pays the taxes.
“It’s also pure evil.”
That’s your OPINION. Pure evil is when the government can confiscate your property even if you don’t want to sell and give it to a private developer in order to expand the tax base in order to buy votes.
April 14th, 2006 at 11:35 am#75
“And if he wasn’t a great thinker, why do economists, libertarians, etc, love to quote him?”
To point out the BS philosophy called communism and or Marxism.
April 14th, 2006 at 11:36 amHardworking americans deserve to be able to give their money to whomever they choose without the government taking it away from them.
April 14th, 2006 at 11:39 am#77
http://www.palmbeachtrust.com/case-study.html
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4704919
“This campaign of misinformation is being financed by wealthy individuals that will never pay the death tax. Their money has long been hidden by accountants and tucked away in trusts. Yet, the small businessmen or family farmers, who lack the resources needed to accomplish these tax code tricks, are being forced to sell assets that took an entire lifetime to build. This is a major reason why 70 percent of small businesses do not survive in the second generation.”
April 14th, 2006 at 11:42 amBush wants this so he won’t have to pay taxes on the BILLIONS of dollars of war profits he is set to inherit when his father kicks the bucket.
Frist wants it so he won’t have to pay taxes on the health-care ripoff his father is pulling on hospital patients.
All these repukes make money off of misfortune and the deaths of regular Americans!
April 14th, 2006 at 12:00 pmHear are some basic estate tax facts:
April 14th, 2006 at 12:22 pm- In 2006 the exemption is $2 million per spouse/$4M for a couple
- The top tax rate in 2006 is 46%, but because all money going to a spouse or a charity is completely tax exempt, the average EFFECTIVE RATE is under 19%.
- United for a Fair Economy has been working for years for a reformed estate tax and has lots of useful info, as well as actions you can take, including the on-line petition, the Call to Preserve the Estate Tax (signed by Bill Gates Sr. and 5000+ others) at http://www.faireconomy.org/estatetax/index.html BTW, chuck Collins and Gates Sr. wrote an op-ed titled “Grateful Heirs†so I think they get credit for the phrase.
- I hope that folks will take the time to call their Senators, and ask friends and relatives, especially in red states, to call their Senators. Maybe also write a letter to the editor of a newspaper, so that more people can hear some facts on the estate tax before the May Senate vote.
Thanks for that, and thanks to them for the great phrase
April 14th, 2006 at 12:50 pmTracy, your obession with communism is so 80s. Get in touch with reality and at least this decade. You are living in an alternate universe, man. So what about Rummy? Are in the troll camp that believes all these generals are wimps? I notice people like don’t post on some threads. I wonder why? You seem to fancy yourself quite bright; let’s hear from you on every thread.
I hope to see you, IRI, NeD (whoever he is today), Aphro and Lyle on the Rummy Resignation thread. Or would you rather pick and choose the very few topics that you have any opinion about? C’mon, join us elsewhere and let’s debate. Isn’t that why you are here? Huh?
April 14th, 2006 at 1:56 pm[...] Keep the Estate Tax [...]
April 14th, 2006 at 3:09 pmTo be honest with all of you guys, it really doesn’t matter whether they get rid of the estate tax or not. If you are wealthy and obviously can afford to go through the process, an estate can be passed on tax free. Yes, tax-free. I am a financial advisor with one of the largest companies in the world and that is what we do everyday for business. It is amazing how if you put your money in the right places and use proper investment vehicles, your money will grow tax-deferred and will go to your heirs without being taxed. It isn’t cheap, but I do it as much as I can.
April 14th, 2006 at 3:17 pmClif,sorry I didn’t stay up to respond but once again,you aren’t reading the from correctly (or the law) since the tax is based on the size (value) of the estate not the value in the transferee’s hand.
Comment by TJM — April 14, 2006 @ 8:35 am
Correctamundo , because the entire estate is about to be transferred, because GOD has a “you can’t take it with you policy”.
We left here on earth amoung the living are the only ones available to “inherite” the estate, somebody is going to end up with an asset.
ALL assets are going to be transferred, so the government is simply taxing the transfer of assets in one of the simplist ways possible.
Where does the logic of the earthly assets being transferred to other living beings fail you, or do you know of somebody taking their bank account or real property with them?
April 14th, 2006 at 4:26 pmClif,the net result is the same,except that the tax is due on the total assets of the estate,not on theindividuals who receive the money. If you had an aunt who left you $2 million from her estate,you would owe zero tax. The estate of your aunt would owe what ever the calculations yielded. If there was enough in the estate to make 10 such distributions each of the 10 would owe zero tax. The taxes are due on the total value not on the recipients;your analogy to lottery or Las Vegas winnings is wrong.
April 14th, 2006 at 5:24 pmAfter a good day on the links,nice to check in on you.
You don’t get it THE ENTIRE estate is going to be transferred and as such the transfer is taxable, except for the parts that are tax deductible like the funeral expenses, lawyer fees etc, all transfers are taxable and due to GODS “you can not take it with you policy” all estates must be transferred at death. Keep ignoring this simple truth and I will keep posting it….
April 14th, 2006 at 5:47 pm“Clif,the net result is the same,except that the tax is due on the total assets of the estate,not on theindividuals who receive the money. If you had an aunt who left you $2 million from her estate,you would owe zero tax. The estate of your aunt would owe what ever the calculations yielded. If there was enough in the estate to make 10 such distributions each of the 10 would owe zero tax. The taxes are due on the total value not on the recipients;your analogy to lottery or Las Vegas winnings is wrong. TJM”
WOW YOU’RE STUPID.
The analogy of a lottery is EXACTLY the same. If multiple people win the lottery, the tax is removed from the PURSE before it’s transferred to any of the participants – just like estate. It is the PURSE and the TRANSFER OF THE PURSE that is taxed. They don’t wait for you to pay taxes on the purse after you receive it – they take the money out of the purse as it’s being transferred, no matter how many people receive it.
This means that despite your IGNORANT CLAIMS IT’S EXACTLY THE SAME. That doesn’t change, even if you’re TOO STUPID to read a simple english sentence and understand this.
April 14th, 2006 at 6:06 pm“Hardworking americans deserve to be able to give their money to whomever they choose without the government taking it away from them. Comment by Ryan ”
That’s good, because that’s exactly the situation we have. You can give money to whoever you want – but the transfer of that money is TAXED, whether you’re alive, or whether your dead and the estate is transferred.
You reichwinger sure are STUPID as a lot.
April 14th, 2006 at 6:10 pmTo be honest with all of you guys, it really doesn’t matter whether they get rid of the estate tax or not. If you are wealthy and obviously can afford to go through the process, an estate can be passed on tax free. Yes, tax-free. I am a financial advisor with one of the largest companies in the world and that is what we do everyday for business. It is amazing how if you put your money in the right places and use proper investment vehicles, your money will grow tax-deferred and will go to your heirs without being taxed. It isn’t cheap, but I do it as much as I can.
Comment by Travis — April 14, 2006 @ 3:17 pm
So in other words only those TOO poor to afford your services should pay taxes?
A good reich winger, pass the buck on to the poor, just as Bush has done with his tax cuts and deficits which will be paid for by poorer people when every rich person does the “intelligent” thing and hides their wealth in tax havens, right?
April 14th, 2006 at 6:43 pmNo,Ryan,lottery winnings are ordinary income for the winner. Taxes are withheld on the basis of an expected tax rate which may differ when the winner files their return at the end of the year. Gambling losses,fpr example, may be deducted from such winnings as well as other expenses that could result in the winner owing less tax or, depending on the amount withheld, could owe more. The donee or inheritor gets the money after the tax has been paid by the estate and owes no tax,individually.
April 14th, 2006 at 7:27 pmSo,despite your use of the caps lock,you are not just wrong,but monumentally so. In your case,of course,that’s normal so I can see why you just can’t understand this issue. And your use of reich-wing as a marker is as trite and banal as the rest of your writing.
TJM you have failed to answer the fundamental question, does the entire estate get transferred in some form or other or does the deceased get to “keep†some portion for use in the afterlife?
April 14th, 2006 at 8:20 pmClif, you seem to think that your inquiry is some sort of gotcha. The discussion at hand is whether the tax is paid by the individual,ala lottery winnings or whether the estate pays the tax from assets available (oddly this is why it is called an estate tax). It seems fundamental to me,but seems to have you at sea,that the assets which remain after the tax is paid (or simultaneously as would be the cae in most things,cosmically)are distributed to the heirs.
April 14th, 2006 at 9:20 pmThe stories which supporters of the repeal use most often is the case where the tax owed far exceeds the liquid assets available in the estate. This situation would require that the assets be sold in order to pay the tax. Therein lies the answer you seemingly struggle to deny. The assets in the estate must be liquidated in order to pay the tax. Under your scenario,each individual recipient or heir, would pay only their share. Given the acrimony which can often surround the disposition of an estate,your scenario would make it worse.
Clif,the estate owes the tax and the situation is in no way similar to lottery or Las Vegas winnings.Oh,and by asking your “fundamental” question,you show why professional tax advice would be in your future when you stop being able to use the 1040A.
Oh,and to be clear,I do not support the repeal of the estate tax. I’m sure you inferred other wise and that would make you 0 for 2.
April 14th, 2006 at 9:21 pm#1 I never inferred whether you did or did not support the tax, thus your victory on that point is a strawman victory enjoy it……
As for your argument about liquid vs real assets well I mention both several times and if the real assets must be sold to ensure the law is complied with so be it. I for one do not see the problem. As for the crystal ball reference about future, well I am simply stating that the estate is being transferred in FULL so taxes must be paid on all that is proprtly taxable just what the law requires….
thus you are actually 0 for 2 but keep the straw victoriies,, if that makes you feel better about yourself.
April 14th, 2006 at 10:15 pm#88
That poster who called themselves Liberal was most definately a defender of communism, which is an indefenseable system considering there isn’t one example where it has worked. I was just pointing that out.
“So what about Rummy?”
I think it’s time for someone new.
“You seem to fancy yourself quite bright; let’s hear from you on every thread.”
I don’t have as much time to devote to posting on every thread. You seem to have a HUGE amount of time on your hands.
April 14th, 2006 at 10:32 pmRyan,that’s some life you have to be commenting at such an early hour. You never did answer any of the questions I asked,which is your standard m.o. If estate distributions are just the same as lottery winnings,then the top marginal tax rate must be 33%,right? If not,then why not? Show your work.
April 15th, 2006 at 7:56 amI’ve worked very hard all my life. Hard manuel labor, as I have only elementry ( 8th grade) education. I’ve paid taxes on what I’ve earned already. What I saved should go to MY family, not the liberal welfare system.
April 15th, 2006 at 11:58 pmI’ve paid taxes on what I’ve earned already.
Comment by Larry — April 15, 2006 @ 11:58 pm
You paid taxes on that money, your heirs haven’t.
What I saved should go to MY family, not the liberal welfare system.
From the IRS’ website:
Q: What is the Estate Tax?
The Estate Tax is a tax on your right to transfer property at your death.(…)
only total taxable estates and lifetime gifts that exceed $1,000,000 will actually have to pay tax. In its current form, the estate tax only affects the wealthiest 2% of all Americans.
Estate Tax Questions
With all due respect, I doubt you are in that 2%, and so you have no reason to fret.
April 16th, 2006 at 3:54 amRyan, once again you have assiduously avoided addressing the issue. And by the way,exercising stock options,in a cashless exchange,results in ordinary income to the holder.I happen to know that not just from the tax code but because I’ve done it. So,wrong again.
April 16th, 2006 at 6:00 amFind the comment where I inferred,implied or stated that I opposed the estate tax because I thought it unfair. You can’t because I didn’t say it.
Here’s another exercise for you. A wealthy man worth $10 million dies in Dec. of 2002. The will is probated in Jan. of 2003. A series of disputes arise over the “transfers” and as a result,the heirs sue the estate and each other. The value of the estate is agreed amongst all the parties but the lawsuit lasts 5 years and consumes virtually all the value. When is the tax due and how much (estimate) is it?