Death Tax

[John Dibble]

Simple question - do you support taxes on inherited money and property?

[Moooooo]

Only on rich people. 

[A18]

Yes. However, I do not support the death tax.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

yes. Basically keep as much away from Paris Hilton as possible.

[David S]

No.

[A18]

Inheritance should not be exempt from taxes (that is, you shouldn't be able to exempt income from the income tax just because you're going to pass it on), but it shouldn't be taxed again later on.

[The Duke]

It should not be taxed.  Of course liberals think if you only tax the rich its okay since they don't need it, but in truth I don't think need is an issue here.  Its someone's property, they should be able to bequeth it to whomever they want.

[opebo]

I must say that Bush's abolition of the inheritance tax is good news for me.  But I would've been just as happy with, and my interests served just as well by, the Democrats proposal to exempt the first ten million of the estate.

Overall that seems like the best compromise - $10,000,000 exemption indexed to CPI, and no more than 50% of any amount above that.

[David S]

I must say that Bush's abolition of the inheritance tax is good news for me.  But I would've been just as happy with, and my interests served just as well by, the Democrats proposal to exempt the first ten million of the estate.

Overall that seems like the best compromise - $10,000,000 exemption indexed to CPI, and no more than 50% of any amount above that.

How would you feel about the marxist concept of eliminating all inheritances?

[Redefeatbush04]

I believe in equality of opportunity (also why I oppose affirmative action) though not necessarily equality of results (why I favor a slightly flatter tax than what we have today). I say tax inheritence after first  five million. Why would someone who has never worked a day in their lives end up with millions and someone who works their ass off get hardly anything after taxes, rent, and food. That money can be put into the effort to fix social security. Right now we are also paying a g ton of money on interest due to our national debt.  Meanwhile some kid just received 30 million dollars because someone died.

[John Dibble]

Why would someone who has never worked a day in their lives end up with millions and someone who works their ass off get hardly anything after taxes, rent, and food.

Why should anyone receive ANY gift of any sort that they haven't earned?

Obviously, if the parents did not disown the person, they felt their kid was deserving of it - they earned the money from those who thought they earned it, and now they are just giving the money to those they feel have earned it through inheritance. Just because you don't feel the inheritor may have earned it, how do you have the right to determine how the money is transferred over the person who owned it(and therefore earned it) previously?

[opebo]

I must say that Bush's abolition of the inheritance tax is good news for me.  But I would've been just as happy with, and my interests served just as well by, the Democrats proposal to exempt the first ten million of the estate.

Overall that seems like the best compromise - $10,000,000 exemption indexed to CPI, and no more than 50% of any amount above that.

How would you feel about the marxist concept of eliminating all inheritances?

I would bitterly oppose this, because I have great plans for mine!  I suppose if my parents had no money I wouldn't care much.

[Erc]

The inheritance tax is always something that I've dithered back and forth on. 

On the one hand, it does help to establish equality of economic opportunity (NOT economic equality), so that kids of rich folks aren't unfairly advantaged because they're kids of rich folks [of course, you can't actually get true equality here without the state taking full responsibility for childrearing, which is stupid].

On the other hand, it does seem a bit unfair...and it could discourage productivity (if it's higher than the going tax rate) as people wouldn't be able to pass down a lot to their kids.  Although, of course, it could encourage consumption as well...

I don't know.  As much as it stinks of progressivity, I'm inclined to agree with the Democrats on this one.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The Democratic plan was to make the first $1 million be completely tax free.

[A18]

The Democratic plan was to make the first $1 million be completely tax free.

That's almost nothing.

[Leif Ericson]

The inheritance tax is always something that I've dithered back and forth on. 

On the one hand, it does help to establish equality of economic opportunity (NOT economic equality), so that kids of rich folks aren't unfairly advantaged because they're kids of rich folks [of course, you can't actually get true equality here without the state taking full responsibility for childrearing, which is stupid].

On the other hand, it does seem a bit unfair...and it could discourage productivity (if it's higher than the going tax rate) as people wouldn't be able to pass down a lot to their kids.  Although, of course, it could encourage consumption as well...

I don't know.  As much as it stinks of progressivity, I'm inclined to agree with the Democrats on this one.

I agree

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The Democratic plan was to make the first $1 million be completely tax free.

That's almost nothing.

I'm glad you feel that way. I'll be expecting a $1 million check in the mail.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The major problem with the inheriance tax is that the marginal rate is too high.  I don’t favor seeing any sort of tax having a marginal rate of greater than 10% unless you are actively trying to prevent some activity.  A 10% inheritance tax is about the right level.  Inheritance taxes are easy to implement and have low compliance costs unless you include personal property such as art, furniture, etc. as being subject to inheritance taxes.  Rather than complicate the tax collection and thus raise the costs to both payer and payee, I would exempt most personal property from inhertance taxes.  Real property and negotiable property would be subject to them with no exceptions.

[MaC]

Karl Marx's top 10 list for Making a country communist

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.

6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.

10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc.

so of course I am against the death tax in that it correlates with number 3; Abolition of rights to inheritance.  I mean, in some way or form we have all 10 implemented in the US already.  We've fought so hard during the cold war to keep the Commies out, but Communism has slipped through our fingers as the politicians have been promoting it.  I suggest further reading Micheal Badnarik's "Good to be King", Chapter 6

[opebo]

The Democratic plan was to make the first $1 million be completely tax free.

That's almost nothing.

I would have to agree that one million is an inadequate exemption.  I'm sure the Democrat proposal was ten million, because one million per parent was already exempt (presuming you arrange the wills that way).  I think the Democrats suggested raising the exemption to ten million to counter the Republican proposal to abolish the interitance tax.

[A18]

Ten million is still problematic. If it was just money, that'd be one thing, but what if you want to pass on huge estates?

[Erc]

Ten million is still problematic. If it was just money, that'd be one thing, but what if you want to pass on huge estates?

But its impossible to tell the difference between estates that have been quickly deliquidated for tax purposes and ye olde family heirlooms and such...which makes this even more problematic...

[David S]

Philosophical question; Is the fact that someone has money an adequate reason for the government to take it?

[dazzleman]

I really don't believe in inheritance taxes.  The money has already been taxed once, and I don't think it's the government's job to decide who should be rich and who shouldn't be.

I fully agree that excessive inheritances are bad for people for personal reasons.  Many people who receive huge inheritances turn out not to be very good people.  Paris Hilton is an example of that, and we have another prominent example in this forum.

But it's not the government's job to rectify that.

We should also recognize that the old limit of $600,000 simply isn't a lot of money these days.  That may sound crazy to some of the younger people here, but there are many, many people who are not particularly well off, but by virtue of owning a paid-off house and having a savings plan from when they work leave behind an estate well in excess of $600,000, without ever having really been wealthy in life.

If there is going to be an inheritance tax, the limit on the amount of the estate should be higher, and probably indexed to inflation.

[nclib]

I would support an inheritance tax after a certain amount, say $200,000.