Started By
Message

re: 65% Estate Tax Proposal

Posted on 9/29/14 at 11:59 am to
Posted by MMauler
Member since Jun 2013
19216 posts
Posted on 9/29/14 at 11:59 am to
quote:

So you would be in favor of replacing an income tax with an estate tax?


Absof*ckinglutley.

But again, I would want to put all taxes on the table and look at a combination to see what's "most" fair. Of course, everyone would have their own definition of fairness. But, I think most people would come down on the side of the person that actually EARNS the money should be the least taxed on that money.
This post was edited on 9/29/14 at 12:01 pm
Posted by SpidermanTUba
my house
Member since May 2004
36128 posts
Posted on 9/29/14 at 12:00 pm to
quote:

Why should the kids have to pay for inheriting what their parents worked their lifes to amass?



They aren't paying it. Their parent's estate is paying it.

Posted by Tiger n Miami AU83
Miami
Member since Oct 2007
45656 posts
Posted on 9/29/14 at 12:02 pm to
quote:

As opposed to an oligarchic form of society where almost all the power rests with the political class?


I think we have and currently are trending in that direction - an oligarchy. The power isn't so much with the politicians as it is the super wealthy who fund them and are the real shot callers and lawmakers in our country.
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89518 posts
Posted on 9/29/14 at 12:04 pm to
ballers

quote:

shot callers


brawlers
Posted by Tigah in the ATL
Atlanta
Member since Feb 2005
27539 posts
Posted on 9/29/14 at 12:05 pm to
Smoke and mirrors.

If you own enough to be taxed on your estate you have ways to keep it from being a problem.
Posted by Jax-Tiger
Port Saint Lucie, FL
Member since Jan 2005
24741 posts
Posted on 9/29/14 at 12:05 pm to
quote:

They aren't paying it. Their parent's estate is paying it.


Nice to hear you say that. Now have the parents not already paid taxes on the estate?
Posted by Jax-Tiger
Port Saint Lucie, FL
Member since Jan 2005
24741 posts
Posted on 9/29/14 at 12:09 pm to
quote:

Let's say the government gave us a choice of keeping ALL the money we earned during our lifetimes, but having to pay an 85% estate tax on ALL of our assets when we die.



I don't think anybody would knowingly die with any assests. Anybody with a fatal disease would give it away or spend all their money on hookers and blow before they died (assuming they don't die suddenly).
Posted by MMauler
Member since Jun 2013
19216 posts
Posted on 9/29/14 at 12:11 pm to
quote:

I don't think anybody would knowingly die with any assests. Anybody with a fatal disease would give it away or spend all their money on hookers and blow before they died (assuming they don't die suddenly)


First, using the current estate and gift tax regime, you can't just give it all away. You get $14,000/year per donee. After that you have to pay gift taxes currently. Same would apply.


As far as blowing it, think about what that would do for the economy!!!
Posted by Jax-Tiger
Port Saint Lucie, FL
Member since Jan 2005
24741 posts
Posted on 9/29/14 at 12:14 pm to
quote:

First, using the current estate and gift tax regime, you can't just give it all away. You get $14,000/year per donee


I can't leave it all to a tax exempt organization?
Posted by MMauler
Member since Jun 2013
19216 posts
Posted on 9/29/14 at 12:18 pm to
quote:

I can't leave it all to a tax exempt organization?


Well, you can certainly do that now.

In my perfect world, I would put a limit on it -- much like charitable deductions in the current income tax regime. But, overall I would build in incentives to give a certain amount to charity -- maybe not all 501(c)(3)'s (e.g., the TAF), but some.
This post was edited on 9/29/14 at 12:19 pm
Posted by lsuroadie
South LA
Member since Oct 2007
8396 posts
Posted on 9/29/14 at 12:23 pm to
quote:

why would anybody (except the top 1%) oppose this if the limit is only for 10 million dollars or above?






quote:

BECAUSE ITS NOT THE GOVERNMENTS frickING MONEY IN THE FIRST PLACE




this and only this is the correct answer. americans today walk around as if the govt is owed and entitled to our wealth. it doesn't matter if it's 1 billion, 1 million, or 1 dollar...it's the principle.


give 'em a billion today, in 5 yrs they'll lower it to 1 million and after it's ON!!!!!
Posted by Jim Ignatowski
Louisiana
Member since Jul 2013
1383 posts
Posted on 9/29/14 at 12:24 pm to
He is out of his fricking mind !!!
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
57223 posts
Posted on 9/29/14 at 12:27 pm to
quote:

For me, it's strictly an issue of "fairness".
How is having different sets of morals, based on wealth "fairness"?

quote:

We can all agree that government needs tax revenues.
I think so.

quote:

So, what is the fairest way to achieve that level of revenue.
Fairest? Everyone should pay the same share.

quote:

Let's say the government gave us a choice of keeping ALL the money we earned during our lifetimes, but having to pay an 85% estate tax on ALL of our assets when we die.

I think all but the MOST wealthy would choose the estate tax.
Well Duh. You think that most would choose the form of taxation that would have them pay the least amount? Brilliant! That doesn't seem fair though. That seems more like "let the other guy pay" to me.
Posted by SpidermanTUba
my house
Member since May 2004
36128 posts
Posted on 9/29/14 at 12:27 pm to
quote:

Now have the parents not already paid taxes on the estate?



In the case of most capital assets, no.

Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89518 posts
Posted on 9/29/14 at 12:30 pm to
quote:

In the case of most capital assets, no.


Except that they have, in almost all cases, paid a transaction tax, and, potentially ad valorem taxes thoughout their ownership of the asset - there are some deductions they can take off their income taxes, but don't pretend that capital isn't taxed - it absolutely is.
This post was edited on 9/29/14 at 12:31 pm
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
57223 posts
Posted on 9/29/14 at 12:32 pm to
quote:

And, the money YOU actually EARN isn't?
At what income level does one stop "earning" their own money? Give us the dollar amount, please.

quote:

If I could unilaterally make just ONE change to the tax code it would be to suspend withholding for just one year. I would love for people to actually see what they actually pay in income taxes. Let them cut a check to the federal government every year (like many of us "nonemployees" have to do), and you would see a tax revolt.
Completely agree. But the reality is, "the rich" still pay thhe majority of the taxes. If anything... I'd like to see the federal spending split evenly amongst the citizenry. Take the budget / population there is your tax bill. Everyone pays the same. Our government treats us as equals, and we all share in the government's funding equal. What's more "fair" and equitable than that?
Posted by MMauler
Member since Jun 2013
19216 posts
Posted on 9/29/14 at 12:33 pm to
quote:

Except that they have, in almost all cases, paid a transaction tax, and, potentially ad valorem taxes thoughout their ownership of the asset - there are some deductions they can take off their income taxes, but don't pretend that captial isn't taxed - it absolutely is.


You're right. We pay double, triple, quadruple taxes on the same money all the time. Why do people only get upset when we do the same thing with the estate tax -- a tax that less than 1% of the population pays?

And, most people can get rid of much of their estate tax burden. The problem is that most are unwilling to give up control of those assets. THAT is where they run into estate tax problems.
Posted by SpidermanTUba
my house
Member since May 2004
36128 posts
Posted on 9/29/14 at 12:34 pm to
quote:


Except that they have, in almost all cases, paid a transaction tax, and, potentially ad valorem taxes thoughout their ownership of the asset


...to the federal government?

The taxation on stock ownership is virtually zero until the realization of profit. If it passes on to the heir's tax free then that's straight up tax free profit - which ultimately comes at the expense of taxing actual work.
Posted by MMauler
Member since Jun 2013
19216 posts
Posted on 9/29/14 at 12:35 pm to
quote:

But the reality is, "the rich" still pay thhe majority of the taxes.


But, vis-a-vis the middle class, they do get the most benefit out of our system.

Does the middle class really need a multibillion dollar SEC protecting their millions in investments?

Who would lose the most if our system collapsed?
Posted by Korkstand
Member since Nov 2003
28707 posts
Posted on 9/29/14 at 12:36 pm to
quote:

Fairest? Everyone should pay the same share.

Same dollar amount, same percentage, or same burden on individual survival?
first pageprev pagePage 4 of 9Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram