He is not even in yet and has never worked so hard but he can not give 95% tax reduction, He can not get the troops out maybe the whole first term. blah blah blah.

Wont be closing Gitmo, now I just heard him say they are dangerous.

Instead of taxing the estate before distribution, the money should be taxable income of the heirs.

I'm sure this will be happy news to the 2% of Americans to which it applies

See, now whatsleft is on to something.

Great news. What better time to pay tax than after you're dead and can't spend what's left anyway.

Without this, that "popping" sound you would have heard in the 4th quarter of 2010 would be all those plugs being pulled on the life support systems of everyone with money.

Obama can call it "The Rich Geezer's Survival Act".

"The value of estates above that would be taxed at 45%"

Look, I don't want to come off as saying the rich shouldn't be taxed because they've gotten it pretty easy the past 8 years, but that number seems really high on something that the previous owner had to pay taxes on already.

The cure to this is don't die of course.

And they who have this kind of wealth do not have it laying around.

They keep all of it by putting it in a foundation or some such.

Never to be taxed.

"The cure to this is don't die of course.

"And they who have this kind of wealth do not have it laying around.

"They keep all of it by putting it in a foundation or some such.

"Never to be taxed."

So much for the urgency for repealing the so-called "death tax."

So, what's the problem?

Hans

It's the principle Hans--they are taxing something that was already taxed.

You mean like they tax the savings that I put in the bank that's already been taxed by the income tax? Like that?

They tax the interest--yes that is crazy too.

And they tax --or soon will tax-- capital gains and dividends.

Anything the bastards, can they will tax.

Including farmers' cow farts.

The gov't punishes saving, investing and wealth in general or wealth on a lower level.

"It's the principle Hans--they are taxing something that was already taxed."

So, once I've paid income tax on my, well, income, I should be exempt from paying gasoline taxes, property taxes, sales taxes, etc. from my income?

Is that what you're saying?

Hans

"It's the principle Hans--they are taxing something that was already taxed."

So, under this "principle," I shouldn't have to pay the mark-up from manufacturer to distributor to retailer.

So much for the distributor's and retailer's American dream.

Hans

Hans--I am talking about your money that once earned--if saved or invested or accumulated should not have to taxed as in death tax, estate tax, etc.

We can't get away from consumption taxes--sales, gas, property.

Even property taxes here is CA are held to 1% thru Prop 13.

But we are taxed from the moment we are born to the moment we die.

We have a nation of spenders and not savers because saving is considered taxable by the gov't.

Prop 13 is the reason California schools are so horrible. If you're smart, you can avoid taxes on savings (tax-free municipal bonds) or delay until you are in a lower tax bracket (401k, etc).
The whole joke about the estate tax is it applies to almost no one.

"Hans--I am talking about your money that once earned"

I've earned it. Why should I pay property taxes, sales taxes, gasoline taxes, etc.

"But we are taxed from the moment we are born to the moment we die."

Death and taxes? And you're only now figuring that out?

"We have a nation of spenders and not savers because saving is considered taxable by the gov't."

Actually, the people demand police protection, fire protection, 911 services, clean water, safe food in restaurants, safe elevators, protection from failed banks, a military to protect us, a space program, Social Security, Medicare, farm subsidies, a War on Drugs, a War on "Terrorism," etc. etc. etc.

And some people have the idea (!) that those things (among many, many others) don't come free.

Imagine that!

Hans

I've earned it. Why should I pay property taxes, sales taxes, gasoline taxes, etc.

----

Because you bought something. You bought property, goods, and gas.

"Because you bought something. You bought property, goods, and gas."

We have a nation of spenders and not savers because saving is considered taxable by the gov't.

#16 | Posted by MURPHY

Fine, let's not tax savings. Let's consider inheritance as taxable income.

Should heirlooms be taxed?

"Should heirlooms be taxed?"

If the demos were real liberals they would respond the the marketing "death tax" bullshit by calling it the "anti-emperor tax".

Then we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't think heirlooms (which includes cash) should be taxed regardless of the value.

"Then we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't think heirlooms (which includes cash) should be taxed regardless of the value."

Ah, yes, the Paris Hilton wealth preservation act.

Have to make sure she keeps every single (unearned) dime.

Hans

Then we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't think heirlooms (which includes cash) should be taxed regardless of the value.

#25 | Posted by Pirate at 2009-01-12 11:04 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

I AGREE

Ah, yes, the Paris Hilton wealth preservation act.

Have to make sure she keeps every single (unearned) dime.

----

I could care less about Paris Hilton. If she only got $1 from inheritance, she didn't earn that either. She making millions on name recognition alone so I guess we need to tax her for her name as well. Better tax Eli as well.

Either tax all inheritances or don't.

"Either tax all inheritances or don't."

Nope. We as an organized society make certain choices. Married people are subjected to a different tax structure than individuals. People over a certain age are entitled to Social Security. People under a certain age can't legally drive a car or purchase liquor.

As a civilized society we have needs which require sacrifice from all. And this includes progressive taxes, such as inheritance and income taxes, just like it includes regressive taxes, like sales taxes and gasoline taxes. It includes taxes on those who own property, while exempting those who don't.

And even with inheritance taxes, we choose to exempt some (below a certain level), while taxing others.

Hans

Exactly, we choose. My choice would be to not tax any inheritances.

Wealth is relative.

People get around it now, and they will get around it if Democrats block the repeal. Someday Democrats will learn that despite it being their "patriotic duty," Americans simply don't want to pay taxes. Especially on money they've already earned, and paid taxes on before.

Rich get richer, poor get poorer?

Quelle fucking surprise.

So Obama will take the troops outta Iraq but no timeline guarantee.

Obama will close Gitmo but it'll take longer than he figured.

Obama will try for progressive taxation but not just yet?

Is that pretty much how it's going?

Meh, the corporate duopoly rolls on.

And on and on ...and over the vast majority all the while pretending there's a hair's worth of difference between the two parties.

While Obama/Biden are still better than McCain/Palin it's getting harder and harder to make the case why.

And he's not even in office yet.

* deep sigh *

Well, the change thing always was a long shot.

Here's the funny thing fer Spud.

If you win the lotto as a poor person or win a prize on some game show they tax the shit out of you.

But rich folks who already have half a gazillion ways to beat the tax man don't even have to try anymore in terms of inheritance.

Neo-fuedalism here we come!

This will not end well.

Be Well.

/Still, having a POTUS who can speak in whole sentences at least will make a nice change.

"And they tax --or soon will tax-- capital gains and dividends.
Anything the bastards, can they will tax." MURPHY

And why shouldn't capital gains be taxed as normal income or loss? Gambling is. It's new income. Am I missing something?

what's mine is mine.
what's yours is mine.
what's yours when your dead is mine too.

love,

the IRS

er, "you're"

/Still, having a POTUS who can speak in whole sentences at least will make a nice change.
#33 | Posted by dethspud

um, well, uhhh...when he, ummm, uhhh at least has uhhh teleprompter & uhhh a speech prepared. you know? ;)

.......somebody has to pay for Bush's war........

Gee hans glad you think you have everything figured out so well. Tell us dude, why do you think only 2% of the public pays federal estate tax? (Many more Do pay state estate tax)

Now tell us what amount of assets is OK before they should be taxed!???

It's at 3.5 million....because good old Ronnie Raygun PUSHED to have it moved upward. We use to tax at $55,000, and when that was changed in 1982 it moved to a 600,000 exemption, PER ESTATE. Sooo a husband and wife can EACH shelter 600,000 if a bypass trust was properly created. (1.2 mill). Now 3.5 million per estate...all because of ray gun's push

Now that has moved up significantly. I want to hear YOU tell us where the line should be drawn for estates.

BTW Obama was so tongue tied he started out declaring 1 million should be the marital exemption, and moved it all the way up to 10 million (on his web site during campaign)...WITHOUT ANT EXPLANATION. So which should it be dude. Keep in mind it was 55,000.......

Danforth said "Without this, that "popping" sound you would have heard in the 4th quarter of 2010 would be all those plugs being pulled on the life support systems of everyone with money.
Kind of like "Throw Momma from the Train"??

You can make jokes about other people taking their lives, I DO NOT THINK THAT IS FUNNY

.....they better get this figured out and declared ASAP, or I will bet you that we have a lot of cases of suicide.

Old age and unclear thinking go hand in hand. If this is not cleared up, then there will be worry. And let me assure you people will take their own lives worrying about a tax.....that probably end up not making a difference to their estate at all.

Meh, the corporate duopoly rolls on.

You are either a fairweather fan or you finally get it.

I say this in response you your flagrant Obama cheerleading previous to the election. Not that I was a fan of either.

"We have a nation of spenders and not savers because saving is considered taxable by the gov't."

Except that in most states there is a sales tax which, by your logic, would cause saving. We are not a nation of savers but it has nothing to do with tax laws...has much more to do with the 24 hour per day of commercial television and radio we are bombarded with.

If we have a nation of spenders we wouldn't be in this problem.

Saving is not considered taxable, spending is considered taxable as well as using savings for profit that doesn't propagate the investing economy.

The problem with the investing economy, the investing is not here in this nation.

Except that in most states there is a sales tax which, by your logic, would cause saving. We are not a nation of savers but it has nothing to do with tax laws...has much more to do with the 24 hour per day of commercial television and radio we are bombarded with.

I don't agree with Danni much, but when I do it is usually wholeheartedly. What she said here is very true. I would add to her last sentence that material greed and self image (keeping up with the Jones') is also a factor to Americans not saving.

but that number seems really high on something that the previous owner had to pay taxes on already.

#8 | Posted by GreenDad a

Stop listening to right wing talking points.

"The problem with the investing economy, the investing is not here in this nation."

True, but with changes to our tax laws and some protectionism that could be remedied.

A certain family business appraised at 2 million dollars provides many jobs and goods for the community. It is a family owned business.

The father dies, leaving his business to his two sons. The death/estate tax is levied and the sons have to take out a loan to pay the tax and keep the business. Alas, the financial hit is too much. The sons jigsaw the business, selling the remaining inventory, the various parts and building...everything that made up the business. The employees lose their jobs, and the production of goods ceases.

Hey, but at least the rich won't get richer and the poor won't get poorer!

The father dies, leaving his business to his two sons. The death/estate tax is levied and the sons have to take out a loan to pay the tax and keep the business. Alas, the financial hit is too much. The sons jigsaw the business, selling the remaining inventory, the various parts and building...everything that made up the business. The employees lose their jobs, and the production of goods ceases.

LOL!

Tell us again how it happens!

Never seen so many make up so much shit.

It's the principle Hans--they are taxing something that was already taxed.

Once again, the U.S. income tax system taxes transfers of wealth - i.e., when you are paid there is a transfer of money, this is generally a taxable event. In the case of the estate tax there is a transfer of wealth from the decedent to the decedents heirs and beneficiaries. Rather than taxing the decedent's heirs and beneficiaries individually (which would be quite costly), we tax the estate before distribution to the heirs and beneficiaries.

Well Money, most businesses today are not like evil oil corporations who make huge profits. The overhead costs from payroll, health care and SS costs, to leases for space, taxation, regulations...etal, leave most business owners earning a living off of their profits that is nothing "rich." Any additions to their overhead can be a real pinch. They are "making it" but it's nothing exorbitant. But because their entire business is appraised at, let's say 2 million dollars, stupid fucks like yourself would call them millionaires.

Then, when dad dies and his $2 million business, plus any other property or assets are taxed, the boys have to pay the bill somehow. It's not like they have to pay tax on a $2 million lottery winning where they give the govt. its take and keep the rest, cuz the $2 million is "IN" the business. To keep the business going, and pay the estate tax on it, something has to give. You could fire an employee or two maybe, but the business suffers then. Maybe you could downsize until the tax burden is paid? Ahhh, but that hurts the business too, and maybe beyond the point of profitability.

It's easier to sell and get out...sell off the whole thing or parcel off the parts.

If you don't think it's happening then you're one stupid fuck who sees the world through his libtard idealism, imagining it to be reality. Perhaps if you got a job you would understand these things?

Again theonebs makes a post of bull shit.

When will the bull shit rhetoric stop? Living in a world of make believe is so right.

Instead of taxing the estate before distribution, the money should be taxable income of the heirs.

#3 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2009-01-12 09:26 PM | Reply | Flag

Its both.

Estate tax hits first.
Then income tax.
uncle sam thanks you!

as far as onebs's scenario goes
this is only a situation that affects people who have made ABSOLUTELY no plans for the future.

One simple way around this is to have a life insurance plan on the key employee (in this case dad) that covers any and all costs associated with moving the business from sole proprietor to a partnership (the two sons). The business pays for the insurance, and recieves a tax write off as a cost of doing business.

ANY financial planner will be happy to walk any small business through these steps and much more.

Ironic! I need an insurance policy to protect me from my government!

What a wonderful government ours is!

The father dies, leaving his business to his two sons. The death/estate tax is levied and the sons have to take out a loan to pay the tax and keep the business. Alas, the financial hit is too much. The sons jigsaw the business, selling the remaining inventory, the various parts and building...everything that made up the business. The employees lose their jobs, and the production of goods ceases.

You do realize under your scenario that in 2009 NO estate tax would be owed. Don't you?

Besides that there are plenty of ways to plan for the estate tax that would remedy the situation.

No one plans to fail, they just fail to plan.

Estate tax hits first.
Then income tax.
uncle sam thanks you!

Wrong.

Anyone with a two million dollar business also has an accountant who can advise the owners how to structure things to avoid taxes in the event of the death of the father. If they don't then they will be stuck with taxes they don't want to pay. If they are that dumb then they deserve to pay that tax.

The business pays for the insurance, and recieves a tax write off as a cost of doing business.

Wrong again.

as far as onebs's scenario goes
this is only a situation that affects people who have made ABSOLUTELY no plans for the future.

I agree. That scenario can happen if no planning takes place. Most of those problems are avoidable with proper estate planning which takes advantage of things such as using the unified tax credit twice rather than once (thus doubling the exemption amount) and, as Valisk mentions, life insurance can be purchased to offset tax liabilities (and other debt issues) that can affect the transfer of an estate from one generation to another.

Never seen so many make up so much shit.

Look at some of your crap from the other day like your claim that people will buy more of a product that costs more. LOL

You do realize under your scenario that in 2009 NO estate tax would be owed. Don't you?

#53 | Posted by 726

Well I guess the title and subject of this thread was made up then?

The $1MM exemption is bullshit.
The 55% tax in the Clinton years was way too high and another example of the gov't stealing from its citizens

We keep hearing stories about businesses and farms being sold because of the estate tax, but the reason this happens is that the kids don't want to work the farm or manage the business.

Taxes have always been a sore point for Americans, and tax fraud has been ingrained in our culture since the Whiskey Rebellion.

If you really want to lower or eliminate taxes then impose a transaction tax. Start with a low rate, like 1/10th of one percent to make sure the system works, and then gradually raise it as other taxes drop off.

Our monetary problems stem from the Federal Reserve, the imposition of the Income Tax which opened the door to fiscal hell, and the embrace of the American Empire.

What about going back to being a Republic?

'We need to raise the standard of living of our poor, unemployed and minorities. For example, we have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in our country who need our help along with millions of unemployed minorities. Stock market windfall profits taxes could go a long way to guarantee these people the standard of living they would like to have as 'Americans'.'
-Nancy Pelosi

You do realize under your scenario that in 2009 NO estate tax would be owed. Don't you?

I thought it was death in 2010, not 2009

Anyone with a two million dollar business also has an accountant who can advise the owners how to structure things to avoid taxes in the event of the death of the father. If they don't then they will be stuck with taxes they don't want to pay. If they are that dumb then they deserve to pay that tax.

But if you're dumb and making $25,000 a year or less, then others deserve to pay for you!

I'm always amazed at how many people oppose the estate tax but there's never any mention of the gift tax. For the vast majority of us, we'll never have an estate worth in excess of $3.5 million but there's a good chance we all will be hit with the gift tax at some point.

It seems like all of the arguments against the estate tax can be applied to the gift tax. I guess I just don't see why the tax rate should be drastically different if a parent wants to give a house/car/business to a child while alive vs. as part of an estate.

You do realize under your scenario that in 2009 NO estate tax would be owed. Don't you?

I thought it was death in 2010, not 2009

#63 | Posted by eberly

Good point. Families should be sure and tell dad to die before 2010.

I'm always amazed at how many people oppose the estate tax but there's never any mention of the gift tax. For the vast majority of us, we'll never have an estate worth in excess of $3.5 million but there's a good chance we all will be hit with the gift tax at some point.

Good point. I've seen plenty of people who's estates aren't even close to a taxable estate (federal tax at least) but get affected by gift tax restrictions all the time.

I thought it was death in 2010, not 2009

#63 | Posted by eberly

Business was valued at $2 million.

Estate tax exemption for 2009 - $3.5 million.

million but there's a good chance we all will be hit with the gift tax at some point.

Really?

$13,000 annual exemption per gift giver per gift recipient.

Therefore a mom and dad can give $26,000 annually to junior tax free. $52,000 if junior is married.

After the $13,000 the gift begins to eat into the $1,000,000 gift tax exemption.

'We need to raise the standard of living of our poor, unemployed and minorities. For example, we have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in our country who need our help along with millions of unemployed minorities. Stock market windfall profits taxes could go a long way to guarantee these people the standard of living they would like to have as 'Americans'.'
-Nancy Pelosi

#62 | Posted by 101Chairborne

Ron Paul's favorite politician!:>)

After the $13,000 the gift begins to eat into the $1,000,000 gift tax exemption.

Posted by 726

I forgot about that. Good post.

Business was valued at $2 million.

Estate tax exemption for 2009 - $3.5 million.

I thought the unlimited exemption was being referenced.

Except that in most states there is a sales tax which, by your logic, would cause saving. We are not a nation of savers but it has nothing to do with tax laws...has much more to do with the 24 hour per day of commercial television and radio we are bombarded with.

#41 | POSTED BY DANNI
---------

I can tell you right now that if I was able to keep that 40%-50% of my income that goes out in income taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, medicare, social security, ect. I would be completely debt free and would have a real nice savings built up. And I'm already funding my own retirement and health insurance so I wouldn't need stupid SS and Medicare.

I don't think people realize just how much they pay in taxes, and how little they get in return.

More taxes, go figure.......... Here it comes folks..

Put them back at Clinton-era rates, and make it illegal to form a tax-exempt foundation. Pisses me off that limo libs like Warren Buffett and Bill Gates can parade around and say they don't pay enough taxes, then build a non-profit group to shelter tens of billion of dollars from inheritance taxes. Let's call their bluff, and balance the budget.

Take it all. Doesn't matter if you're rich or poor, there's nothing like unearned money to make you a lazy liberal over time. Who needs more generations of Rockefeller's and Kennedy's?

100% over $1 million. Works for me.

#74 | Posted by rightisright at 2009-01-13 10:52 AM

Agreed. Eliminate Section 501 of the internal revenue code entirely. The limitation of "reasonable compensation" for executives of those tax-exempt organizations is laughable considering they all sit on the boards of 3 or 4 of them, and live like kings off the US government.

The funny thing is that if anyone of you here were offered a seat on a board with all it's perks, you would jump on it.

You're right. But since that isn't going to happen, it's more intelligent to understand that our country has severe budget problems and is about to attempt to spend its way out of them - and that we need all the extra revenue we can get.

million but there's a good chance we all will be hit with the gift tax at some point.

Really?

$13,000 annual exemption per gift giver per gift recipient.

Therefore a mom and dad can give $26,000 annually to junior tax free. $52,000 if junior is married.

After the $13,000 the gift begins to eat into the $1,000,000 gift tax exemption.

#69 | Posted by 726

I've known several people (including my father in-law who is currently dying of cancer) who wanted to essentially spread their assets before death, just so they can have the peace of mind and so they can watch children & grandchildren "enjoy" themselves.

Yes, the limit is very high when it's a married couple gifting to another married couple but $13,000 doesn't go very far when it's a widowed grandmother giving to a single grandchild. In addition to cash, coin collections, old cars, antiques, and gun collections can add up in value very quickly; though, I suspect many don't report this to the IRS. To me, it just seems weird that there are tax incentives for people to give gifts posthumously vs. while they're still alive.

I don't know the details but I've also had gay friends indicate that the gift tax makes finances and estate planning very difficult for them.

I'm not arguing that there shouldn't be a gift tax, I just think it's odd that the subject is never broached.

After the $13,000 the gift begins to eat into the $1,000,000 gift tax exemption.

What is the $1 mil gift tax exemption?

SInce we are all in this together the gov should raise taxes at the same rate across the board..

You are allowed $1,000,000 in tax-free gifts above and beyond thet $13,000 per donor per year. Your gifts that exceed the annual exempt amount are added up when you die and if they go over $1,000,000 you owe the IRS some money. The calculations are not as simple as I described but that is basically how it goes.

Deth spud you ever see Obama without a transponder?

who wanted to essentially spread their assets before death, just so they can have the peace of mind and so they can watch children & grandchildren "enjoy" themselves.

King Lear Syndrome. Hope it works out better for your father in law.

#3 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2009-01-12 09:26 PM | Reply | Flag

Its both.

Estate tax hits first.
Then income tax.

#51 | Posted by Valisk

You are incorrect.

Contributors to the thread, such as Valisk and TheOneBS should develop an understanding of what is being discussed by studying a reliable source, rather than listening to Hannity or Boortz, before commenting.

The estate tax only applies if your total estate is worth more than $3.5 million as of 2009. That will disappear in 2010 and re-appear in 2011 at a lower rate without legislation.

This is a non-issue. Any time money is changes hands without a specific exception for a step-up in basis we tax it. It is also a good thing to give those without millions in wealth an incentive to build that small fortune and pass it on tax free until it becomes significant.

The whole "death tax" backlash was manufactured by the elite and carried out without question or thought by the straight-ticket voting republican minions to whom the tax didn't even apply. Thanks Murphy. Nice work.

The whole "death tax" backlash was manufactured by the elite and carried out without question or thought by the straight-ticket voting republican minions to whom the tax didn't even apply. Thanks Murphy. Nice work.

#84 | Posted by kevin23

You hit the nail on the head.

Nice work.

Oh, I don't know. It's sort of touching to see so many selfless people care so deeply about America's very last minority-it's-OK-to-hate, the SuperRich.

Someone fetch me a tissue...

45% tax rate is crazy. These Dems lives to tax so they can give it all to welfare moms, illegal immigrants and subsidies to unions who grease they grubby paws. If a man or women earns the money they were already taxed on it and that money should not be taxed again when it flows to the children. It's just immoral what these thieving Democrats want to do.

that money should not be taxed again when it flows to the children.

#87 | Posted by utastaff

Under the #'s Obama is proposing the VAST majority of estates and/or heirs will never pay any "death tax". If those whom are taxed miss the money, I guess it's time for them to go to work.

We need the Estate Tax, just to make up for all the rich Democrats who don't pay their taxes. Charles Rangel, Tim Geithner . . . I wonder how many of Obama's other close personal friends we should be auditing?

So Hans how much should the marital exemption be?

So Hans how much should the marital exemption be?

#90 | Posted by DavetheWave

For you, nothing. You should pay a penalty.

I figured the dr left would find it hard to quantify. Leave it up to you pathetic excuses for human beings and it'd still be 55,000 dollars

Come on dudes, at what level would you start federally taxing estates?

I would think it's an easy question to answer.

Then, of course I then want you to justify your answer.

BE CAREFUL!!!!!1

"If a man or women earns the money they were already taxed on it and that money should not be taxed again when it flows to the children. "

What about when it flows to a business in exchange for goods or services (sales tax)? What about when it flows to a non-relative as a gift (gift tax)? What about when it flows from a business to a person (corperate tax + income tax)? What about when it flows to shareholders in a corporation who has already been taxed (capital gains tax)?

Anytime money is transferred around it is taxed. Exceptions are in place to give people an incentive to be more productive (estate tax), and to protect certain heirlooms (step up in cost basis for antiques for example) from being sold to pay the taxes on them.

Want an exception? Make a good case that it benefits our society as a whole. Otherwise, shut up and pay your taxes.

AT WHAT LEVEL KEVIN? Why is it so hard for the dr left to quantify a number (Hatred perhaps, jealousy???)

Way to turn an honest question into ignorant douchebaggery, Dave. I'm not a democrat, nor do I feel it necessary to pull a number out of my ass. The idea of shielding any estate from tax is to provide an incentive to work hard for your heirs. At a certain point (crunch the numbers if you're so eager) an estate is so large that estate taxes are no longer the same sort of threat they once were (ie. the difference between heirs driving a new Bentley every month v. every other month). If you want to make an argument on behalf of trust fund babies that they should be 45% richer and that this benefits society more than building roads and schools, then go for it. But enough of the BS.

Hey douche bag, I am NOT calling for repeal of the tax. I am showing how hypocritical MANY here ARE, and that's A FACT...... With blind hatred/envy, the attitude displayed here ie FUCK THEM!!!! before you shot your mouth off, maybe you should get a basic idea of what/why your questioner is asking!

Obama hisself is calling for a SEVEN MILLION dollar exemption. Combine that with a simple A/B trust, and the any couple with 14 million can pass it all fed estate tax.

"Estate Tax: The estate tax would be effectively repealed for 99.7 percent of estates. For the
remaining 0.3% of estates over $7 million per couple, Obama will retain a rate of 45%. This policy
would cut the number of estates covered by the tax by 84 percent relative to 2000.

DR LEFT= HYPOCRITES!!!!

Dr Left Who is that??

It is my understanding that the estate tax affects a tiny number of small or family-owned businesses. A 2005 report by the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center found that in 2004, when the exemption was at $1.5 million, just 440 small businesses and farms were hit with the tax. That same year, a Congressional Budget Office study determined that in 2000, 485 estates that included a family-owned business were hit with the tax. (Another 1,659 estates of farmers incurred estate taxes.)

I find it hard to fathom that so many tears can be spent on something which affects so few. Especially when there are issues which affect millions of taxpayers.

"Come on dudes, at what level would you start federally taxing estates?"

Well, though I'm not one of the "DR Left" but an independent, I did want to state that I see no problem with the current estate tax. I see no reason for its repeal.

The reason it's being repealed is because in 2010 there is NO fed estate tax. Die in 2010 and it all passes fed estate tax free,

It started at a million and moved up every few years and culminated with it being unlimited. Barack the messiah has suggested setting it at 7 million...

which to me is WAY TO HIGH!!!

As a dummy on taxes, I have to ask; who benefits from all of this ?

Dave needs to calm down before he shits himself. Too late perhaps?

Take me seriously YOU GODDAMN LEFTY COMMIES!

-Davethewave

Tax internet use.
Tax on every email sent.
Tax on each post made.

The Estate Tax, or Death Tax, is the most unfair and unreasonable tax on the books.

You work hard all of your life, build a business (or a farm or whatever) and when you and your spouse die, instead of it going to your kids, somehow, Uncle Sam wants a big piece of it, in cash.

The fact that not everyone is successful enough to pay the death tax is immaterial.. The wonderful thing about America, is that you get the chance to be succesful, and its completely unreasonable for the government to take it. (Keep in mind, that you've already paid taxes on the income and profits that went into your estate.)

No American, of either party should be in favor of the death tax. It's big stupid and arrogant government at its very worst.

NMG NO-
I think you're right. They worked hard for it; they should be allowed to take it with them.

"There is no moral justification for cutting estate taxes. Much of the wealth taxed after death has never been taxed because profits on stocks, bonds, real estate, artwork you name it are not taxed until an asset is sold. Obviously, people with big estates never got around to selling their assets.

And yet, some multimillionaires, and their Congressional supporters, have the gall to say that the wealthy should not be "penalized." Estate taxes imposed after one's death are no more of a penalty than income taxes withheld from paychecks."

I make $1M from hard work and the government taxes it at about 40%.

Some rich twat makes $1B from a relative's death and they pay no tax?

Any time money changes hands it is taxed barring a special exception. For the majority of people, the incentive of tax-free inheritance is needed for productivity and fiscal responsibility. I've yet to hear a good reason for an exception for the richest of the rich. They transfer it, it gets taxed. Period. There's plenty leftover for trust funds.

Obama started out his campaign saying he would have a million dollar exemption. He didn't explain why.

Then he changed it, and increased it to 7 million, which effectively allows 14 million to pass fed tax free, again no explanation.

I would think everyone here justifying the estate tax, would howl at that number.

Just another case of the left saying one thing, while they do another.

Want another good example? How about Obama saying they want oversight on the 350 BILLION dollar tarp dollar spending. Debt got us into this problem, how the hell can MORE debt get us out?

"I would think everyone here justifying the estate tax, would howl at that number."

Why are you so anal about that number? Just for example, if a business-owning couple have a few employees, a large house and more than a few kids, you can reach the $10M mark pretty quickly in today's (or tomorrow's) diluted dollars. I can understand why it might be counter-productive to force the sale of the house and business so the heirs can afford the taxes. Then they are left with maybe a million per kid, no business, and no family home. On the other hand, avoiding the tax lets them keep those things most important to them, keep employing people, and keep striving for the kind of wealth that can be taxed without tanking a life's work. Does that strike you as consistent with the goal of the exception?

From the article: That would exempt estates of $3.5 million -- $7 million for couples --

From DavetheWave: Then he changed it, and increased it to 7 million, which effectively allows 14 million to pass fed tax free, again no explanation.

Can you clear that up for me, Dave?

"How about Obama saying they want oversight on the 350 BILLION dollar tarp dollar spending. Debt got us into this problem, how the hell can MORE debt get us out?"

Theoretically, the same way borrowing money from mom and dad to make the rent during college helped you get on your feet after graduation (assuming you went). Will it work? It depends on the future, now doesn't it?

Not sure why you take issues with the theory, rather than the details...that's where the devil lies.

"That would exempt estates of $3.5 million -- $7 million for couples"

Thanks BetelG, I meant to mention that, too.

"they better get this figured out and declared ASAP, or I will bet you that we have a lot of cases of suicide. "

You missed the point. The plug-pullers will be the heirs.

You pull your own plug, Danforth.

"You pull your own plug, Danforth."

Doesn't anyone have basic reading and comprehension skills?

If this isn't passed, there will be a lot of incentive to pull the plug on a wealthy, ill ancestor. What don't you understand?