Bye, Bye Estate Tax!

[Sikander]

I see that no one has yet addressed the reason why so much of this argument is moot (besides the fact that the senate has yet to get its hands on this legislation). Namely, anyone with a big fat estate (ie those affected by this legislation) is going to simply avoid the inheritance tax by using trusts, gifts before they pass on, and offshore financial instruments to avoid this tax, just as they do now. As this tax already generates very little money, it makes sense to get rid of it, and perhaps make more money by keeping these assets in the U.S. and in more intelligent instruments, where they will profit both the government and the individuals more.

[Wernazuma III]

Originally posted by Berzerker
Wernazuma -
Why does it become legitimate based on age? Does it stop belonging to Ming and his family?

Luckily, kinships ties have lost their position as space with proper rules and being structures that dominate society into legislation too much. However emotionally we might feel belonging together or wanting to care for each other, family is no juridical entity anymore, with some exceptions, like statutory shares, and most importantly shared wealth between partners.
"Ming's family" is no persona iuridica.
It does never stop to belong to Ming, what stops is the obligation of Ming to care for his children. Thus the transaction is between independent individuals. Ming is not required to make his children his heirs, he is obligued though to care for the lunch of his children.
One can give away one's estate to anyone, though there's some statutory share. I would rather abandon that.

Trust me, most of us "blind" people want tax cuts for everyone, but we also know a tax cut for someone is a good thing even if we aren't the ones getting it.

I was thinking of exluding extremist liberals like you from the argument because in your view, the state should do completely without any money obviously. The state needs funds, otherwise he can't control nor guide or make any politics.
Higher or lower taxes can be argued about, but saying that a tax cut has always to be good is also blind, but it's a different blindness.

I think you're confusing the sales tax with giving money to a family member. But since money is exchanged when we pay taxes, maybe the IRS can stick us with another "legitimate" tax on the act of paying taxes...

Sure, the state should tax tax the money it actually gets from taxes with 100% That would leave the state with 100% of the money.


Generally, inheritance means getting capital/resources not based on personal merit. It allows some people an advantage over others without having done anything for it. I wouldn't want to have estates all sacked by the state as of course it should be the right of people to do what they want with their wealth, but it should not be a privileged space bare of taxes.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Sikander
I see that no one has yet addressed the reason why so much of this argument is moot (besides the fact that the senate has yet to get its hands on this legislation). Namely, anyone with a big fat estate (ie those affected by this legislation) is going to simply avoid the inheritance tax by using trusts, gifts before they pass on, and offshore financial instruments to avoid this tax, just as they do now. As this tax already generates very little money, it makes sense to get rid of it, and perhaps make more money by keeping these assets in the U.S. and in more intelligent instruments, where they will profit both the government and the individuals more.

Don't we collect $60 billion on it?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Oerdin


Double check that. You should get all of your federal income tax back especially if you have any deductions like head of house hold, married, kids, or own your own home.

I suspect you're thinking of FICA or state income taxes.

The tax table says that everyone owes federal income tax, but I can see that if you have exemptions that you might not have to. Still I think if you make 20k a year you will have to pay something unless you get child credit which shouldn't count because its a credit.

[Japher]

What if you inherit a peice of Real Estate woth 6 Million. Yet, it was bought for 3 Million, 10 years ago. Does the governemt take their estate tax from the 6 or from the 3 million.

What if you can't afford the property tax on it, or to pay the government when they come asking for their 50% of that estate? What are you going to do? Sell the estate.

So if they tx the 6 Million, they want 3 million. You sell it for 6 million, pay the government the 3 million, so your left with 3 million. Yet, is that 3 million now income, since you sold the inheritence?

If it is at the 3 Million, it is in't as bad, since the government only wants 1.5 Million. You sell it for 6 Million leaving you with 4.5 Million. Yet, once a gain do they see that 4.5 Million as income since you sold the property?

I guess what I am asking is if you inherit something, then sell it to pay the taxes, wouldn't you also be taxed again for the sell?