Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, September 22, 2016

Tax plan changed to increase top rate for wealthiest households

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton would levy a 65% tax on the largest estates and make it harder for wealthy people to pass appreciated assets to their heirs without paying taxes, expanding the list of tax increases she would impose on the top sliver of America's affluent.

The estate-tax increase and other new proposals that Mrs. Clinton detailed on Thursday would generate $260 billion over the next decade, enough to pay for her plans to simplify small business taxes and expand the child tax credit, according to the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, which advocates fiscal restraint.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

The Clinton campaign changed its previous plan -- which called for a 45% top rate -- by adding three new tax brackets and adopting the structure proposed by Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont during the Democratic primaries.

She would impose a 50% rate that would apply to estates over $10 million a person, a 55% rate that starts at $50 million a person, and the top rate of 65%, which would affect only those with assets exceeding $500 million for a single person and $1 billion for married couples.

In 2014, just 223 estates with a gross value exceeding $50 million filed taxable estate-tax returns, according to the Internal Revenue Service.

In a statement, Mr. Sanders said the proposal would respond to the "grotesque level of wealth" concentrated among the top few households.

"Secretary Clinton understands that it is appropriate to ask the top three-tenths of 1%, the very wealthiest people in this country, to pay their fair share of taxes so that we can provide a child tax credit for millions of working families and lower taxes for small businesses," Mr. Sanders said.

The 65% estate-tax rate would be the highest since 1981 and marks one of the most enormous tax-policy gulfs between Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Trump, who would repeal the tax.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

"..Hillary Clinton would levy....proposals would generate..."

By what power? certainly not in a gridlocked GOP congress even with 6 lefty economists that tanked on Bernie.

#1 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2016-09-22 08:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Gee, and it was SO different and better when Bernie proposed it...

#2 | Posted by Corky at 2016-09-22 11:23 PM | Reply

#2 - Nah, back then it would have been unrealistic, "magic thinking," something that would never pass a GOP lead gridlocked congress.

#3 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2016-09-23 12:22 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#2 - Nah, back then it would have been unrealistic, "magic thinking," something that would never pass a GOP lead gridlocked congress.

#3 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2

You got it.

#4 | Posted by PunchyPossum at 2016-09-23 12:28 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The very wealthy use trusts and foundations to pass wealth to their heirs.

#5 | Posted by visitor_ at 2016-09-23 12:53 AM | Reply

"magic thinking,"

That would be any "thinking" you did. It is also what Libs have always pointed out about rosy estimates of future growth which Republican budgets are famous for, as did Bernie.

#6 | Posted by Corky at 2016-09-23 01:16 AM | Reply

Clinton's going to hop on her broom and fly over that GOP wall of gridlock to pass Bernie's tax proposal. Magical.

#7 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2016-09-23 01:31 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

The very wealthy use trusts and foundations to pass wealth to their heirs.

#5 | POSTED BY VISITOR_ AT 2016-09-23 12:53 AM | REPLY

Gifts to trusts are subject to gift taxes which mirror estate taxes.

65% on estates OVER $1,000,000,000? THE HORRORS! How will they survive?

#8 | Posted by 726 at 2016-09-23 07:19 AM | Reply

She might as well have said 110% because so long as there are 41 GOP senators it will not see the light of day.

#9 | Posted by 726 at 2016-09-23 07:20 AM | Reply

"... it will not see the light of day."

Not only will it never see the light of day, it'll never even be mentioned again after the election.

#10 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2016-09-23 10:29 AM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

Oh Gee, If I had that kind of cash, what would I do to keep the government from getting their grubby paws on it. Start a foundation, transfer my assets overseas, open legacy accounts for my heirs, buy real estate, the problem is that even with such a law, it would not accomplish a thing. Rich people are not stupid. Even if they are, they can hire people who aren't. Dodging taxes is an art form to some, just ask the Clintons.

#11 | Posted by docnjo at 2016-09-23 02:25 PM | Reply

it'll never even be mentioned again after the election.

#10 | POSTED BY SHEEPLESCHISM AT 2016-09-23 10:29 AM | FLAG:

She'll mention it in her first State of the Union address.

#12 | Posted by 726 at 2016-09-23 02:55 PM | Reply

You made the money and paid tax on it, you bought the property and have paid tax on it every year but when you die they want more than half again?
Estate taxes would prove that individual ownership does not exist, we are all just renting from the government.

#13 | Posted by salamandagator at 2016-09-23 03:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

65% on estates OVER $1,000,000,000? THE HORRORS! How will they survive?

#8 | POSTED BY 726 AT 2016-09-23 07:19 AM | FLAG: First, you not survive [why some call it a Death Tax]. Secondly, you've paid taxes on your earnings, dividends [double taxation]/interest, property, etc., so why should the country's greediest entity [the government] be entitled to any you've accumulated and want to pass onto your children?

#14 | Posted by MSgt at 2016-09-23 07:55 PM | Reply

To prevent the rise of an aristocracy, is the reason the Founders gave.
Is that answer not satisfactory, MSgt?

#15 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-23 07:58 PM | Reply

First, you not survive [why some call it a Death Tax]. Secondly, you've paid taxes on your earnings, dividends [double taxation]/interest, property, etc., so why should the country's greediest entity [the government] be entitled to any you've accumulated and want to pass onto your children?

Because your children didn't earn it or pay taxes on it?

I don't see why this shouldn't simply be taxed as income.

You made the money and paid tax on it, you bought the property and have paid tax on it every year but when you die they want more than half again?
Estate taxes would prove that individual ownership does not exist, we are all just renting from the government.

No, it just proves that we pay taxes on transactions of money.

#16 | Posted by jpw at 2016-09-23 11:10 PM | Reply

I don't see why this shouldn't simply be taxed as income.

Same here.

#17 | Posted by JeffJ at 2016-09-23 11:52 PM | Reply

To prevent the rise of an aristocracy, is the reason the Founders gave.
Is that answer not satisfactory, MSgt?

#15 | POSTED BY SNOOFY AT 2016-09-23 07:58 PM | FLAG: I do believe that the majority for such taxes are those who know that they will have little or nothing to pass on so naturally they [the wealth envy crowd] love the idea of hampering those who have been fiscally successful in life. There are ways to circumvent and it is doubtful that the govt will see much of an increase in revenues from such.

#18 | Posted by MSgt at 2016-09-24 12:21 PM | Reply

Hillary Clinton's plan is to apparently Make Private Wealth Management & Estate Planning, Great Again.

Her Finance-industry stakeholders must be very pleased with their political puppet in Hillary Clinton. It is highly amusing that her voters (low-IQ?) are willing to believe that centa-millionaires and beyond will not read these new tax laws, and plan ahead on wealth succession to their heirs.

#19 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2016-09-24 12:26 PM | Reply

and fail to plan ahead on wealth succession to their heirs.

#20 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2016-09-24 12:31 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2016 World Readable

Drudge Retort