Go Back   This Blue Marble, a Global Current Events Discussion Forum > Main Floor > Economy

Economy Economy discussion forum. Discuss the politics and effects of the general economy and global economic collapse here. Please keep all politics out of the Finance and Investment subforum.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 07-19-2010, 06:40 PM   #26
sandyd
Beach Fun
 
sandyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: SoCal
Posts: 6,805
Thanks: 341
Thanked 197 Times in 168 Posts
So, why not incorporate 06? Or some form of partnership with the heirs with rights of survivorship?

Don't really big companies owned by families end up giving their kids stock shares in some form of trust to avoid some of the death taxes?


Thanks rc. I remembered some paralegal classes in Cali in the 90's and thought there were quite a few ways around it.

And some, if I remember, expected some taxes and set aside money to help cover it.
__________________
"The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern: every class is unfit to govern." Lord Acton

The only way to win is to not play...(like global thermal nuclear war).
sandyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2010, 06:57 PM   #27
Ought Six
Dismember
 
Ought Six's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 35,164
Blog Entries: 15
Thanks: 176
Thanked 390 Times in 326 Posts
Arrow

There are strategies you can use.

http://www.inc.com/magazine/20040801...alfinance.html

However, people should not have to play these games and pay attorneys to avoid grotesquely unfair taxes. Those that fail to do this kind of thing lose their business.
__________________
* I have the right to live, thus I have the right to defend my life from attackers who would take it from me.
* I have the right to my private property, thus I have the right to defend my property from thieves who would take it from me.
* I have the right to self-determination, thus I have the right to defend my liberty from tyrants who would take it from me.
* The only usable tools for these tasks are guns, and thus I have the right to shoot anyone who would take my guns from me.
Ought Six is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2010, 07:15 PM   #28
sandyd
Beach Fun
 
sandyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: SoCal
Posts: 6,805
Thanks: 341
Thanked 197 Times in 168 Posts
I can't argue with that. I think a lot of the way things are, are rather unfair. If you don't figure it out and pay others to help ya, you pay.
__________________
"The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern: every class is unfit to govern." Lord Acton

The only way to win is to not play...(like global thermal nuclear war).
sandyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2010, 10:30 PM   #29
Fiddlerdave
Not Active
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,847
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by dharma View Post
1) The money they receive has already been taxed.
This is often repeated by those who know much better.

Much of the money is NOT "already taxed". Much of the wealthy's money is earned by capital gains, and until they sell an asset, you do not pay any taxes. So, $100,000 mansion and grounds grandpa bought in the 30's is now worth $50,000,000. Not a penny of tax has been paid on that gain, but when each owner dies, that asset is revalued to current value and passed on to the heirs. BTW, If your Daddy left you that 50,000,000 mansion, or stocks or whatever, and you sell it for 55 million, you pocket the 50 million and pay capital gains on the 5 million. Sweet! Taxes are NEVER paid on the income!

Quote:
2) It is freely given, as opposed to stolen.
What does that have to do with the price of liver? I can freely give someone who works for me $1000, and he has to pay taxes on that, why not taxes on the money you freely give to your adult relatives, friends or dog?

Quote:
3) They are not the victims; the people whose choice what do to do with their own money is taken away are. The money I have at the end of my life is mine to do with as I choose, not yours or the welfare mother down the street's or Barry Soetoro's. If I choose to pile it all up the backyard and burn it, that is my prerogative. If I choose to give it to my children: same thing. If anyone else thinks they have a right to make that decision, they are welcome to sod right off.
Certainly it is yours and you can give it to anyone you like. The point is, why should that be a tax free transaction to the recipients?

The true problem here is almost semantic one. Inheritance should be simply treated as a form of income, and income taxes be levied to each recipient of the money, just like gift taxes. A deductible to shield smaller transfers (gift taxes let you give $10,000 before any taxes) is provided, but large sums involve the recipient paying their share of taxes just like every other working stiff.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 06
The death tax is theft, plain and simple. The Constitution is supposed to ban direct unapportioned taxes such as that, but the courts have shredded and sh*tcanned that document, so that is a moot issue.
Just like every other tax is. When working people pay no tax, I will happy to support the extremely wealthy paying no tax on this income.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Auburn Boy
The converse of the problem is that inheritance taxes create a disincentive to build wealth, and to "spend it before you die."
With a 3.5 million or more likely 5 million deductible, which is what is about right as far as inflation, etc., there is plent of incentive to "build wealth". Which should also consider, as a society, the disincentive of probably numerous hopeful slackers who want to get on Daddy's gravy train and profit from his hard work. With the best education, loans, investments and connections from successful parents, a few million tax free and 60% of whatever is over that should allow ANYBODY to build quite an empire of their own, either on the family farm or business or on their own, thereby providing incentive for future generations instead of deadly entitlement attitudes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flourbug
The inheritance tax will do the same thing. It will create a glut on the market of businesses and farms that will never again be owned by an individual or a family. They will be owned by the government, who will either collect it's 55% or take 100% for failure to pay. Then they will be sold at auction or for sweetheart deals like we see the Feds doing for BoA with Wachovia.

All those babies born on a level playing field will be living in rented homes and working in businesses owned by large corporations that keep the government well greased.
The recent inheritance tax levels touched only a small amount of businesses, of which the small businesses have been disappearing anyway.

But here is a nice current proposal that makes a lot of sense:http://wealthforcommongood.org/campa...te-tax-reform/
Quote:
In the Senate, we support the Responsible Estate Tax Act (S.3533) which was introduced on Thursday, June 24, 2010 by Sens. Bernard Sanders (I-VT), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI).
The features of the legislation include:
* Exempts the first $3.5 million of wealth in an estate from federal taxation ($7 million for couples), the same exemption that existed in 2009. The tax is only paid by multi-millionaires and billionaires, fewer than one in 350 estates.
* Institutes a progressive graduated rate structure so that the super wealthy pay more. As Theodore Roosevelt called for, this legislation has higher graduated rates for larger estates. An estate between $3.5 million and $10 million would pay a 45 percent rate, the same as the 2009 level. The rate on the value of estates above $10 million and below $50 million would be 50 percent, and the rate on the value of estates above $50 million would be 55 percent, the top rate in 2000.
* Includes a billionaire’s surtax of 10 percent. The bill also imposes a 10 percent surtax on the value of an estate above $500 million ($1 billion for couples). According to Forbes Magazine, there are only 403 billionaires in the United States with a collective net worth of $1.3 trillion. Clearly, the heirs to these multi-billion fortunes have a greater capacity to pay than others.
* Closes all of the Estate and Gift Tax Loopholes requested in President Obama’s Fiscal Year 2011 budget. These loophole closers include requiring consistent valuation for transfer and income tax purposes; a modification of rules on valuation discounts; and a required 10-year minimum term for Grantor Retained Annuity Trusts (GRATS). OMB has estimated that closing these loopholes that benefit the super-wealthy, would raise at least $23.7 billion in revenue over 10 years.
* Protects family farmers by allowing them to lower the value of their farmland by up to $3 million for estate tax purposes. Under current law, the value of farmland can be reduced up to $1 million for estate tax purposes under 2032(a) of the Internal Revenue Code (Special Use Valuation). This bill increases this level to $3 million and indexes it to inflation.
* Benefits farmers and other landowners by providing estate tax relief for conservation easements. This bill provides tax relief to farmers and other landowners by amending estate tax rules for conservation easements through an increase in the maximum exclusion amount to $2 million and increasing the base percentage to 60 percent.
Fiddlerdave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2010, 10:58 PM   #30
Ought Six
Dismember
 
Ought Six's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 35,164
Blog Entries: 15
Thanks: 176
Thanked 390 Times in 326 Posts
Arrow

Fd:
Quote:
"Much of the money is NOT "already taxed". Much of the wealthy's money is earned by capital gains, and until they sell an asset, you do not pay any taxes. So, $100,000 mansion and grounds grandpa bought in the 30's is now worth $50,000,000. Not a penny of tax has been paid on that gain, but when each owner dies, that asset is revalued to current value and passed on to the heirs. BTW, If your Daddy left you that 50,000,000 mansion, or stocks or whatever, and you sell it for 55 million, you pocket the 50 million and pay capital gains on the 5 million. Sweet! Taxes are NEVER paid on the income!"
This is a completely wrong reading of the situation. The statement "taxes are never paid on the income" is a false premise from the outset. There is no income until an asset is sold. The fact that the asset gains value is not taxable while the person is alive, because there is no asset tax in America. That is widely considered fair. So the death tax is a direct tax on assets, not income; something that is obviously an abomination. But that is what you want. Tax them when they earn it, tax them when they buy anything, tax the thing when it grows in value, tax them when they sell it, tax them when they die, tax them when they breathe. You want their money at gunpoint.

Further, that only applies to assets like property and unsold stocks. Businesses are taxed heavily throughout their operation. The death tax clearly double-taxes a family business.
----------
Quote:
"I can freely give someone who works for me $1000, and he has to pay taxes on that, why not taxes on the money you freely give to your adult relatives, friends or dog?"
---
"The point is, why should that be a tax free transaction to the recipients?"
Because the right of inheritance has been acknowledged as a protected right since time immemorial. That is in no way, legally or morally, the same as a gift to a stranger.
----------
Quote:
"Inheritance should be simply treated as a form of income, and income taxes be levied to each recipient of the money, just like gift taxes."
That would be yet another way to attack and destroy familial ties in our society. It would also be theft.
----------
Quote:
"When working people pay no tax, I will happy to support the extremely wealthy paying no tax on this income."
The rich are already getting raped. It is never enough, it is? This is pure class warfare, which is merely the actualization of the petty envy and jealousy of those who do better than you.
----------
Quote:
"When working people pay no tax, I will happy to support the extremely wealthy paying no tax on this income."
But you just said that you wanted it all to be taxed as straight income. So you would rip off workers as well when they die, or their parents die.
----------
Quote:
"With a 3.5 million or more likely 5 million deductible, which is what is about right as far as inflation, etc., there is plent of incentive to "build wealth". Which should also consider, as a society, the disincentive of probably numerous hopeful slackers who want to get on Daddy's gravy train and profit from his hard work. With the best education, loans, investments and connections from successful parents, a few million tax free and 60% of whatever is over that should allow ANYBODY to build quite an empire of their own, either on the family farm or business or on their own, thereby providing incentive for future generations instead of deadly entitlement attitudes."
You know the truly rich will pay noithing, Dave, because they can afford the best lawyers. The only people your cheering for being raped here is the small family business that has a business with value, but not enough to hire a really good lawyer to bypass the rules. The death tax hurts only them. It raises unemployment, and in the final analysis, by destroying small businesses it reduces revenues. The business would keep paying perhaps for several more generations. Instead it is destroyed for a quick one-time payoff. That is obviously a stupid and counterproductive strategy; killing the goose that lays those golden eggs.
----------
Quote:
"The recent inheritance tax levels touched only a small amount of businesses, of which the small businesses have been disappearing anyway."
Got a link to back up that claim? And I am sure the people who have had the same ranch or corner grocery store in their family for five generations, then get it stolen by the looters would have their spirits buoyed by such compassion.
----------
Quote:
"But here is a nice current proposal that makes a lot of sense:"
I have a better one. Bring us back within the bounds of the Tenth Amendment, repeal the Sixteenth Amendment, and replace it with an amendment that allows only a 10% VAT for the fedgov, a 5% VAT for the states, and a 2% VAT for cities and counties. Create a few exemptions for basic food, clothing, medical supplies and textbooks. All other fees, taxes and levies would be outlawed.
__________________
* I have the right to live, thus I have the right to defend my life from attackers who would take it from me.
* I have the right to my private property, thus I have the right to defend my property from thieves who would take it from me.
* I have the right to self-determination, thus I have the right to defend my liberty from tyrants who would take it from me.
* The only usable tools for these tasks are guns, and thus I have the right to shoot anyone who would take my guns from me.

Last edited by Ought Six; 07-20-2010 at 11:08 PM.
Ought Six is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2010, 11:35 PM   #31
Fiddlerdave
Not Active
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,847
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ought Six View Post
Fd:This is a completely wrong reading of the situation. The statement "taxes are never paid on the income" is a false premise from the outset. There is no income until an asset is sold. The fact that the asset gains value is not taxable while the person is alive, because there is no asset tax in America. That is widely considered fair. So the death tax is a direct tax on assets, not income; something that is obviously an abomination. But that is what you want. Tax them when they earn it, tax them when they buy anything, tax the thing when it grows in value, tax them when they sell it, tax them when they die, tax them when they breathe. You want their money at gunpoint.

Further, that only applies to assets like property and unsold stocks. Businesses are taxed heavily throughout their operation. The death tax clearly double-taxes a family business.
Absolutely not. A business itself may pay taxes if it is a corporation and has income, but this happen prior to being paid to stock owners, living or dead.

But the real untaxed wealth from a business is the increased value from its stock or simply intrinsic value due to its earnings, and that is never taxed until sold. The heirs will receive it at the current value at the time of the owner's death and never pay tax on the previous, untaxed increase. Free money to forebears and heirs.

Quote:
----------Because the right of inheritance has been acknowledged as a protected right since time immemorial. That is in no way, legally or morally, the same as a gift to a stranger.
That is why there are enormous exemptions for inheritance to children.
Quote:
----------That would be yet another way to attack and destroy familial ties in our society. It would also be theft.
Familial ties are based on tax free money from Daddy??? Wow, that is sure a new form of literal "Family Values" but I imagine the wealthy believe this, at least the slacker kids.
Quote:
----------The rich are already getting raped. It is never enough, it is? This is pure class warfare, which is merely the actualization of the petty envy and jealousy of those who do better than you.
The rich are paying no tax at all on much of their wealth, as I pointed out. But the maximum is now in the upper 30%, much lower than in the "good old days " when our country grew incredibly after WWII.
Quote:
----------But you just said that you wanted it all to be taxed as straight income. So you would rip off workers as well when they die, or their parents die.
If workers paid no taxes on their income, then the wealthy would pay no taxes either. I know this is a horrible thought to the wealthy, I fully expect the concept to be rejected out of hand!
Quote:
----------You know the truly rich will pay noithing, Dave, because they can afford the best lawyers. The only people your cheering for being raped here is the small family business that has a business with value, but not enough to hire a really good lawyer to bypass the rules. The death tax hurts only them. It raises unemployment, and in the final analysis, by destroying small businesses it reduces revenues. The business would keep paying perhaps for several more generations. Instead it is destroyed for a quick one-time payoff. That is obviously a stupid and counterproductive strategy; killing the goose that lays those golden eggs.
Few to no small businesses are destroyed by a reasonable estate tax, the recent 3.5 million dollar exemption along with various other deductions left almost all small businesses utterly alone. A small payments for any excess is something that is manageable for receiving 3.5 million plus! Remember, if the state owed loans or mortgages, then that is all deducted from the value, This would be taxes on 4 or 5 million PLUS of clear estate value. Debts, loans depreciation all apply FIRST!

Quote:
----------Got a link to back up that claim? And I am sure the people who have had the same ranch or corner grocery store in their family for five generations, then get it stolen by the looters would have their spirits buoyed by such compassion
A 4 or 5 million dollar free and clear corner grocery store! Yeah, stores like that are everywhere! There is not one rational example presented in all this fantasy rhetoric. Since you didn't like my other information, try this....http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=2655
Quote:
----------I have a better one. Bring us back within the bounds of the Tenth Amendment, repeal the Sixteenth Amendment, and replace it with an amendment that allows only a 10% VAT for the fedgov, a 5% VAT for the states, and a 2% VAT for cities and counties. Create a few exemptions for basic food, clothing, medical supplies and textbooks. All other fees, taxes and levies would be outlawed.
That would be nice! Implement that and then we could look at estate taxes or anything else. But, sadly, it sounds like another "thought proposal" put forth by the Right while passing themselves bennies and reduced taxes, like their "health care reform proposals" were only mentioned when Obamacare started to be real.

From the above link:
Quote:
Myth 2: The estate tax forces estates to turn over half of their assets to the government.
Reality: The few estates that pay any estate tax generally pay less than one-fifth of the value of the estate.
Today, more than 99.7 percent of estates owe no estate tax at all, according to the Urban Institute-Brookings Tax Policy Center. Among the few estates that owe any tax, the "effective" tax rate — that is, the percentage of the estate’s value that is paid in taxes — is less than 20 percent on average. That is far below the top estate tax rate of 45 percent.
Why is the effective tax rate so much lower than the 45 percent top tax rate? For several reasons. First, estate taxes are due only on the portion of an estate’s value that exceeds the exemption level for the tax, not on the entire estate. At today’s exemption level of $3.5 million, a $4 million estate would owe estate taxes on $500,000 at most. Second, a large portion of an estate’s remaining value often can be shielded from taxation through various deductions. (http://www.cbpp.org/6-14-06tax.htm)
Fiddlerdave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2010, 02:51 AM   #32
Ought Six
Dismember
 
Ought Six's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 35,164
Blog Entries: 15
Thanks: 176
Thanked 390 Times in 326 Posts
Arrow

Fd:
Quote:
":But the real untaxed wealth from a business is the increased value from its stock or simply intrinsic value due to its earnings, and that is never taxed until sold. The heirs will receive it at the current value at the time of the owner's death and never pay tax on the previous, untaxed increase. Free money to forebears and heirs."
Again, completely false. Net protit is a business is taxible, as you know, either as corporate profits or taxible income for the sole proprietor. A business that is not profitable does not gain in value. And even if the business gains in value, the family continues to operate it and pay taxes on the money they earn. There is no huge untaxed windfall for them. They just keep doing business as they have been all along. Your whole premise here is obviously wrong.
----------
Quote:
"Familial ties are based on tax free money from Daddy??? Wow, that is sure a new form of literal "Family Values" but I imagine the wealthy believe this, at least the slacker kids."
So a family doing business together for generations that is forced to go their separate ways to find work have not been harmed by the death tax theft that destroyed their family business? Their bonds are not weakened at all when their way of life disappears thanks to a voracious, greedy, blaoted government?
----------
Quote:
"The rich are paying no tax at all on much of their wealth, as I pointed out."
Yes, but what you pointed out is BS. The rich, as we know, pay the majority of the taxes in this country. You llike to purposely muddle the two classes; the superrich, who have the best tax lawyers on the planet and who can afford to move their money offshore, and those who are well off enough to get raped, but not to afford those kinds of finanaical wizards and tax avoidance strategies. You like to lump them all together as if they are all the same, which we know they are not.
----------
Quote:
"If workers paid no taxes on their income, then the wealthy would pay no taxes either. I know this is a horrible thought to the wealthy, I fully expect the concept to be rejected out of hand!"
Dave, it is you and your type that reject that out off hand. You need revenues for your socialist welfare state. I am all for a straight VAT tax. The rich could not possibly enjoy their wealth without consuming. After all, is that not your stereotype> Obscene conspicuous consumption? So such people would pay more, and us middle class would pay less. With the exemptions for bascis, as I outlined, the poor would pay next to nothing. But I expect you will reject that out of hand. You already have in the past.
----------
Quote:
'Few to no small businesses are destroyed by a reasonable estate tax...."
Ahh, so you refuse to provide any evidence for this claim? Then it is rejected as false; disproven by your inability to support it in any way.
----------
Quote:
"A 4 or 5 million dollar free and clear corner grocery store! Yeah, stores like that are everywhere! There is not one rational example presented in all this fantasy rhetoric."
A ranch, a corner pharmacy, a hardware store; all are worth several million. But as usual, you pick out one example and try to falsely use it to dismiss the ones you know to be valid. That tactic does not fly. You are wrong on this one, and the fact you refuse to address those other examples proves you know it. Busted!
----------
Quote:
"Since you didn't like my other information, try this..."
Let me use your own tactics on you. You dismiss sources you brand 'conservative think tanks', such as the Heritage Foundatation or the Cato Institute. So I dismiss your liberal Center On Budget and Policy Priorities think tank. It is funded by the leftist Democracy Alliance, which is a political action group that promotes 'progressive' causes. The COBPP is their creature, and obviously has a pro-tax slant.
----------
Quote:
"That would be nice! Implement that and then we could look at estate taxes or anything else."
If we implemented that, there would be no other taxes. Read what I said again. But of course liberals want a VAT on top of the income tax, corporate taxes, capital gains tax, sin taxes, gasoline taxes, energy taxes, airport taxes, and all the rest. That idea is being floated right now. It is never enough for them. There is always more to steal from somebody, somewhere.....
__________________
* I have the right to live, thus I have the right to defend my life from attackers who would take it from me.
* I have the right to my private property, thus I have the right to defend my property from thieves who would take it from me.
* I have the right to self-determination, thus I have the right to defend my liberty from tyrants who would take it from me.
* The only usable tools for these tasks are guns, and thus I have the right to shoot anyone who would take my guns from me.
Ought Six is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2010, 10:55 AM   #33
rc
Senior Level 2
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,047
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I knew there was hope for him. It looks like we're finally bringing FD around:

Quote:
Quote:
The death tax is theft, plain and simple.
......

Just like every other tax is.
rc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2010, 01:13 AM   #34
Ought Six
Dismember
 
Ought Six's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 35,164
Blog Entries: 15
Thanks: 176
Thanked 390 Times in 326 Posts
Arrow



Unless Congress acts to extend its repeal, the death tax is scheduled to return in 2011-- a tax that liberals and conservatives alike seem to agree is designed only to attack the “pockets” of the wealthy.

A moratorium on the tax expires after Dec. 31, 2010, and the tax will return in 2011 taxing inheritances at a rate of 55 percent with only a $1 million exemption unless Congress changes the tax law.

On a 39-59 vote, the Senate on Wednesday rejected a measure sponsored by Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) that would have permanently repealed the tax.

DeMint’s measure, which came in the form of an amendment to a small business bill, would have made permanent the repeal of the federal estate tax, which is set to expire on Dec. 31.

Wesley Denton, a spokesman for DeMint, told CNSNews.com that the death tax is an “immoral double tax on property and assets that people have already paid taxes on throughout their lives,” and hurts small businesses.

Denton, quoting his boss, called the tax “terrible public policy," and said that the vote is sure to be an electoral issue.

“I think it will separate those who are serious about creating jobs and those who are just hiding behind rhetoric,” Denton said.

In 2001, Congress passed the Economic Growth and Tax Reconciliation Act, which gradually lowered the death tax rate over the next 10 years and repealed it altogether for 2010. From a top rate of 55 percent in 2001 on estates worth $675,000 or more, it dropped to 50 percent in ’09 on estates worth $3.5 million or more. The tax was repealed for 2010.

But, unless Congress extends the law, the estate tax will return in 2011, and estates over $1 million will be taxed at a rate of 55 percent.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), a self-described socialist, is sponsoring legislation that would restore the estate tax in 2011 with a $3.5 million exemption level, boosting the tax rate for what he calls the “super wealthy” to 65 percent.

On the floor of the Senate on Tuesday, Sanders attacked a few of the “rich” specifically, pointing out, with the help of a visual aid, that repealing the tax would give the Walton family, owners of the retail chain Wal-Mart, a $32.7 billion tax break. He also said repealing the tax would provide $11 billion in tax breaks for the family that owns Mars candy company, $9 billion for the Cox cable family, and $2.5 billion to the family that founded Campbell’s Soup.

Sanders, a self-professed socialist who caucuses with Senate Democrats, listed places where he wants to send revenues taken from inheritances through the death tax.

“It seems to me that a time when this country has a $13-trillion national debt -- at a time when 22 percent of our children are living in poverty, the highest rate of child poverty in the industrialized world, at a time when our infrastructure is crumbling, at a time when we have a desperate need to transform our energy system, and by doing that we can put millions of people to work rebuilding America, transportation, infrastructure, energy -- it is beyond comprehension, literally beyond comprehension, that anyone can come down to the floor of this United States Senate and argue with a straight face that we should provide hundreds of billions of dollars of tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires,” Sanders said.

Liberals want the death tax re-imposed precisely because it “discourages the concentration of wealth and power, which undermine our democratic institutions,” according to Chuck Collins, co-founder of Wealth for the Common Good.

“The original vision of an estate tax was to slow accretions, slow concentrations of wealth and power,” Collins told CNSNews.com. “I actually would make the case it’s the fairest tax because it’s essentially taxing for the most part accumulated assets, land, property, stocks, and appreciated assets that have never been subject to any tax.”

But Ryan Ellis of Americans for Tax Reform, a conservative taxpayer group, scoffed at the idea that the tax on inheritances and estates is fair.

“It doesn’t raise a lot of money, and it’s not tied to anything in particular, and it’s not a particularly efficient tax,” Ellis said in an interview with CNSNews.com. “The only reason left that you would ever support it is because you want to kick perceived rich people in the nuts when they die.”

Adam Nicholson of the American Family Business Institute told CNSNews.com that the liberal claim that re-imposing the estate tax will make the rich pay their “fair share” is an affront to the American dream.

“They are appealing to a class warfare argument that really has no cache among Americans as a whole,” Nicholson said. “Sixty-eight percent of Americans support permanent death tax repeal. Many Americans will not technically pay the estate tax, but I think that Americans recognize that the tax primarily is an affront to achieve the American dream.”

“They also recognize that socking the rich might be the worst thing you can do to encourage small business owners,” said Nicholson.

A congressional Joint Economic Committee report in May 2006 concluded that the estate tax is a drag on the economy.

“The estate tax exerts a negative effect on the economy by generating extremely high compliance costs, introducing economic inefficiencies, and by reducing the stock of capital in the economy,” the report stated.

In fact, the study estimated that the estate tax “has reduced the stock of capital in the economy by approximately $847 billion.”

The report also said the estate tax “has a negative influence on entrepreneurial activity by hindering entry into self-employment and by breaking up family-run businesses.”

Family-run firms and farms particularly feel the pinch of the estate tax, the committee said, because they are less “likely to have the liquid resources needed to meet their estate tax liabilities.”

The report also concluded that the estate tax hinders upward income mobility.

“One study estimates that the estate tax will consume 11 to 13 percent of African-American wealth over the next 50 years. With the number of minority-run businesses surging in recent years, the estate tax will come to affect more and more such firms,” the report added.
__________________
* I have the right to live, thus I have the right to defend my life from attackers who would take it from me.
* I have the right to my private property, thus I have the right to defend my property from thieves who would take it from me.
* I have the right to self-determination, thus I have the right to defend my liberty from tyrants who would take it from me.
* The only usable tools for these tasks are guns, and thus I have the right to shoot anyone who would take my guns from me.
Ought Six is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2010, 03:09 AM   #35
Glenn 50
Member Level 5
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 950
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Luckily in NZ there are no capital gains or death duties despite being a fairly heavily taxed country. There used to be death duties until the '60s and it wasn't unknown for thriving family businesses to fold or suffer much hardship when one of the partners popped off suddenly.
Death Taxes are immoral. They produce tax avoidance schemes etc.
The original reason they were brought in in NZ in the late 1800s was because descendents of the large sheep station owners were with the accumulation
of previous generations buying up more and more of the surrounding countryside. Giving little employment and industry to these areas.
As a measure to break this it was good. As a means of increasing government wealth or govts reducing their mispent wealth it's bad.
Glenn 50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
deadly, death, impact, tax

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.