Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Estate Tax
Ed Schultz Message Board > Message Forums > Ed Head World > PROGRESSIVES ONLY
Bird
So Congress is going to cut the estate tax next decade. Let's see... The rich try to cut the potential for estate taxes by doing things like making provisions for charity in their wills. Will cutting the estate tax cut the amount of money that charities receive? Since the estate tax does not affect the vast majority of people why is congress helping those who have enough help already?

To cut off the arguement that it is double taxation let us look at it. The money that is being given to heirs is the money that was left after the person who died earned it and was taxed on that income. The heirs are receiving this money and it is therefore income and as such is subject to taxation. Perhaps there is a better way to do it but calling it double taxation and cutting or eliminating it are not the answer. Perhaps if it just included in the heirs income at tax time (I'm not sure since I have not had to deal with an inheritance).
Dr Morbius
I make income. I pay an income tax.
I buy food or products. I pay a sales tax. That's double taxation.
I buy cigarettes or beer. I pay a vice tax in addition to the sales tax. Triple taxation.

My response to the complaint that the estate tax is "double taxation":

Ya want cheese to go with your whine?
adeshell
QUOTE(Dr Morbius @ Jun 22 2006, 05:52 PM)

My response to the complaint that the estate tax is "double taxation":



But if follow any money long enough, of course its going to be a victim of 'double-taxation'.
aleman
QUOTE(Jeff Croll @ Jun 22 2006, 04:43 PM)
So Congress is going to cut the estate tax next decade. Let's see... The rich try to cut the potential for estate taxes by doing things like making provisions for charity in their wills. Will cutting the estate tax cut the amount of money that charities receive? Since the estate tax does not affect the vast majority of people why is congress helping those who have enough help already?

To cut off the arguement that it is double taxation let us look at it. The money that is being given to heirs is the money that was left after the person who died earned it and was taxed on that income. The heirs are receiving this money and it is therefore income and as such is subject to taxation. Perhaps there is a better way to do it but calling it double taxation and cutting or eliminating it are not the answer. Perhaps if it just included in the heirs income at tax time (I'm not sure since I have not had to deal with an inheritance).
*


Good insight. That's why the right rejects it. To them, if it makes sense it must be something to fight against. I heard that the measure that was enacted will only benefit around 7500 Americans. Why isn't congress spending its time doing something for the majority that put them there?
migueldd45
QUOTE(Jeff Croll @ Jun 22 2006, 02:43 PM)
So Congress is going to cut the estate tax next decade. Let's see... The rich try to cut the potential for estate taxes by doing things like making provisions for charity in their wills. Will cutting the estate tax cut the amount of money that charities receive? Since the estate tax does not affect the vast majority of people why is congress helping those who have enough help already?

To cut off the arguement that it is double taxation let us look at it. The money that is being given to heirs is the money that was left after the person who died earned it and was taxed on that income. The heirs are receiving this money and it is therefore income and as such is subject to taxation. Perhaps there is a better way to do it but calling it double taxation and cutting or eliminating it are not the answer. Perhaps if it just included in the heirs income at tax time (I'm not sure since I have not had to deal with an inheritance).
*



In fact most of the money has NOT been taxed....! Most of it is appreciation on assets that the estate has enjoyed.. The exemption for a single taxpayer estate is 3.5 million, a couple gets 7 million $$.... Fewer than 1/2 0f 1% pay any inheritance tax at all, and many estates have put the bulk of their assets in TRUSTS that can live on indefinately distributing its earnings to the heirs.... Calling it a Death Tax and that the impression given in Television ads is that everyone will be subject to its maximum 55% tax rate is not only misleading but in actuality a distortion and bordering on an outright lie....
Bird
QUOTE(aleman1948 @ Jun 22 2006, 06:16 PM)
Good insight. That's why the right rejects it. To them, if it makes sense it must be something to fight against. I heard that the measure that was enacted will only benefit around 7500 Americans. Why isn't congress spending its time doing something for the majority that put them there?
*


Actually, they are doing something for the majority that put them there. The majority of MONEY that put them there. Of course that relates back to campaign finance and we know how changing that has been going...

mad.gif
aleman
QUOTE(Jeff Croll @ Jun 23 2006, 01:34 PM)
Actually, they are doing something for the majority that put them there. The majority of MONEY that put them there. Of course that relates back to campaign finance and we know how changing that has been going...

mad.gif
*


Of course these clown always take care of their own; that is to be expected. The average Joe/Jane gets shafted while the rich have unfettered access and reap all the benefits.
dimbear
QUOTE(migueldd45 @ Jun 23 2006, 12:24 PM)
In fact most of the money has NOT been taxed....!  Most of it is appreciation on assets that the estate has enjoyed.. The exemption for a single taxpayer estate is 3.5 million, a couple gets 7 million $$....
*



I've heard that the Dems offered to compromise, by moving the exemption up to 100 million-------the Reps wouldn't go for it.

Sincere people, those Republicans.
robert thel liberal
In public, I wish people would stop calling it an estate tax or a death tax. Call it the Pria Hilton tax. That's a more accurate description of who is effected by it.

Why should a bunch of useless yuppie larvae be let off the hook for the expenses of the infrastructure that let their parents accumulate trunks full of money, usually off the backs of working people like me?

I have to agree that it is unfair that less than 10% of the population pay more than 75% of the taxes. Those rich bastards need to stop whining and start paying their fair share.
Big-D
QUOTE(Jeff Croll @ Jun 22 2006, 03:43 PM) *

So Congress is going to cut the estate tax next decade. Let's see... The rich try to cut the potential for estate taxes by doing things like making provisions for charity in their wills. Will cutting the estate tax cut the amount of money that charities receive? Since the estate tax does not affect the vast majority of people why is congress helping those who have enough help already?

To cut off the arguement that it is double taxation let us look at it. The money that is being given to heirs is the money that was left after the person who died earned it and was taxed on that income. The heirs are receiving this money and it is therefore income and as such is subject to taxation. Perhaps there is a better way to do it but calling it double taxation and cutting or eliminating it are not the answer. Perhaps if it just included in the heirs income at tax time (I'm not sure since I have not had to deal with an inheritance).



You are wrong about the double taxation issue. Most income in large estates has never been taxed. Instead it is mostly capital gains which have never been realized. Some will then argue that the corporations in which they own stocks have paid taxes, but that too is not really true. Most of the capital gains are not the result of corportate earnings, but rather the Goodwill that the company has earned by their growth expectations. The difference between the book assets minus liabilities and the total market capitalization is all capital gains that have not been taxed at all.
dimbear
QUOTE(robert thel liberal @ Jul 2 2006, 02:39 AM) *



I have to agree that it is unfair that less than 10% of the population pay more than 75% of the taxes. Those rich bastards need to stop whining and start paying their fair share.



Bout sums it up!
Big-D
QUOTE(aleman1948 @ Jun 22 2006, 07:16 PM) *

Good insight. That's why the right rejects it. To them, if it makes sense it must be something to fight against. I heard that the measure that was enacted will only benefit around 7500 Americans. Why isn't congress spending its time doing something for the majority that put them there?



The estate tax elimination does impact almost all Americans. There used to be a tax-free step-up in basis, so that all of your unrealized capital gains on assets during your lifetime were passed to your hiers free of tax and the new basis was the fair market value on the date of death. If the total net market value of the estate was under the exemption amount there was no estate tax. If they make the elimination of the estate tax permanent, your basis will transfer to your hiers. Your heirs will have to pay tax on the total gain from the time you purchased the asset. By eliminating the Estate Tax, they will have ended the Dynasty Tax for the 1-2% that used to pay it, and they have actually created a Death Tax for the other 98% of American Families.

This is the Republican Leadership philosopy of governance: Say what people want to hear, do the opposite and brag about how wonderful they are for having cared enough to act. In the case of the estate tax elimination, the 97% of people who voted for Republicans that will not only not benefit from the elimination, but will now actually be taxed on all the gains of their parents', will eventually realize that they were duped, again.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2008 Invision Power Services, Inc.