Death Tax

[raceright]

Ad hom argument based on inaccurate presumption does not rebut anything.

But for the record, I am jealous that a special class should get a tax free status on money they get when I'm paying almost 40% marginal on mine. How do merit that special tax free status?

First of all Jealousy is an evil emotion and only leads to disaster,
envy on the other hand means you are happy someone has something and wish you had it also..I can only guess that you are a employee somewhere as these are the most jealous class of people we have. If you went to college you are suppose to be smart and not just capable of earning a living but guess what it ain't so.

Fine crank up the inheretence tax to 90% and eliminate SS taxes and I won't be jealous.

Gotcha,just like most who think death tax is some how to be shared
your looking for something for nothing, like someone else to pay for your SS..Incidently all the death taxes in the USA would not cover
SS costs..(maybe if it went just to retires it might)

 

[raceright]

Oh and when I die my estate will have long been past to my children
it can be done legally . Do you really think the Donald will let his hard work not go to his Children,why you think they are working with (notice I didn't say for) him. What you all don't know is that the most valuable part of any business is not the balance sheet or valuable assets which is all that CAN BE TAXED...figure out what I mean on your own.

 

[Iriemon]

Oh and when I die my estate will have long been past to my children
it can be done legally . Do you really think the Donald will let his hard work not go to his Children,why you think they are working with (notice I didn't say for) him. What you all don't know is that the most valuable part of any business is not the balance sheet or valuable assets which is all that CAN BE TAXED...figure out what I mean on your own.

The Donald?

 

[Iriemon]

First of all Jealousy is an evil emotion and only leads to disaster,
envy on the other hand means you are happy someone has something and wish you had it also..I can only guess that you are a employee somewhere as these are the most jealous class of people we have. If you went to college you are suppose to be smart and not just capable of earning a living but guess what it ain't so.

Fine crank up the inheretence tax to 90% and eliminate SS taxes and I won't be jealous.

Gotcha,just like most who think death tax is some how to be shared
your looking for something for nothing, like someone else to pay for your SS..Incidently all the death taxes in the USA would not cover
SS costs..(maybe if it went just to retires it might)

Yep, I think someone inhereting millions should share in the tax burden just like folks who get their money working.

I don't believe the estate tax should be 90%, for the record, my response was tounge in cheek. IMO it should be the same rate folk who earn income should pay, as stated above.

 

[Burp]

It is my choice to leave it to them. My parents wanted me to be better off than they were - and I want the same for mine.

Your children are being left millionaires. They aren't better off?

My complaint is that I don't want the government to tax it twice.

So when you give your child 20 bucks to go the the movie you are unhappy because they paid sales tax...

And we aren't talking about $100.00. We are talking about everything over 3.5...and next year possibly everything over 1 million.

When did 55% become everything? Your math skills are a bit lacking here.

I will try again:

Forget the dollar amount. Answer this question:

Your grandparents give your parents $20,000.00. Your parents pay taxes on the amount over 13K - 7K.

That money sits in a box in their closet. Then your parents die. They leave that 7K to you.

For a moment, imagine that EVERYTHING passed to an heir is taxed. Would it be fair for the government to tax you on the 7K?

Taxes have already been paid on it - why would it be fair for you to pay taxes on it (the same 7k has now been taxed twice).

That concept is actually acceptable to you?

Why wouldn't it be? I never paid taxes on the money did I. You contention is that I should have no tax obligation because someone else had a tax obligation. This is nonsense.

When did 55% become everything? Your math skills are a bit lacking here.

And your comprehension skills are lacking every worse. Everything above 3.5 million is taxed. NO where did I say that everything over 3.5 would be taken. I said everything over 3.5 would be taxed.

I am amazed that so many people feel that government's tax policies are just and fair. All this talk about Paris Hilton and Trust Fund babies have nothing to do with my situation and what I am talking about.

This is about small businesses. I have several friends who own small businesses and will probably be in the same position as I will be in a few years. We believe in taxes - hell, we pay them every year. We pay all kinds of taxes. I have no problem paying taxes.

I also have no problem with paying taxes on capital gain. That money hasn't been taxed in the first place.

My problem, and I will say it again, is the government insisting that taxes be paid on monies that had already paid taxes.

I assume that everyone here who finds this acceptable also has no problem with their property taxes going up. Sales taxes being increased. They will be jumping for joy when BO raises all kinds of taxes to pay for his pipe dreams.

Remember, he wants YOU to pay taxes on the portion of your health insurance that your company provides. That is more money out of your pocket.

The only way to pay off his "bail outs" is to increase taxes on everyone. When this happens, I trust everyone will be ok with it.

Then again, maybe I missed the point. Could some of you believe that it's ok for someone else to have to pay taxes .... as long as it isn't you?

And to say that the heirs should be happy with 45% of everything over 3.5 million isn't the point either.

The idea is to leave them 100%. All 100% has already been taxed. It isn't selfish of me to want them to receive all 100%.

We can agree to disagree. Just like everything else on a message board of this type - everyone has opinions - they are like assholes. Everyone has one.

But to say that I have "death issues" or "family guilt issues" because I want them to have 100% is ludicrous.

Try owning a small business. Working 20 hours a day. Going in debt seven figures. Having the pressure every day that you could go under if just one invoice isn't paid.

Why do it? Because one day, it will pay off. You will be able to live a little more comfortably.

You raise your kids by your example: hard work, dedication, morals, ethics, honestly.

Some parents raise their children in hopes that they will have a better life than they had. I was raised that way. The kids were raised that way. Will they have a better life with 45% of everything over 3.5 million (plus the original 3.5 million)? Of course they will.

Remember, they aren't complaining. I am..

I will never be convinced that the government has any right to "re-tax" monies that I have already paid taxes on.

 

[Ravi]

I work hard. I take care of my finances. I plan ahead. I invest wisely.

I do all this to leave a legacy to my family when I pass.

However, when I die, the government will take 45 percent of my estate.

Can anybody defend this?

Maybe you need to explain what you mean. The government won't take 45% of your estate, and nothing you've subsequently posted really makes any sense given this fact.

 

[Burp]

Oh and when I die my estate will have long been past to my children
it can be done legally . Do you really think the Donald will let his hard work not go to his Children,why you think they are working with (notice I didn't say for) him. What you all don't know is that the most valuable part of any business is not the balance sheet or valuable assets which is all that CAN BE TAXED...figure out what I mean on your own.

I stated several times that my plan is exactly that.

There won't be a thing solely in my name when that time comes.

 

[Burp]

I work hard. I take care of my finances. I plan ahead. I invest wisely.

I do all this to leave a legacy to my family when I pass.

However, when I die, the government will take 45 percent of my estate.

Can anybody defend this?

Maybe you need to explain what you mean. The government won't take 45% of your estate, and nothing you've subsequently posted really makes any sense given this fact.

President Obama's budget keeps the estate tax at its 2009 level, which means the government gets 45 percent of a dead person's estate valued over $3.5 million dollars or $7 million for a couple.

Obama's Budget Resurrects 'Death Tax' - First 100 Days of Presidency - Politics FOXNews.com

Perhaps I should have said, "45 percent of my estate over 3.5 million dollars."

However, I think through the subsequent pages of this thread that was made quite clear.

 

[Iriemon]

And your comprehension skills are lacking every worse. Everything above 3.5 million is taxed. NO where did I say that everything over 3.5 would be taken. I said everything over 3.5 would be taxed.

I am amazed that so many people feel that government's tax policies are just and fair. All this talk about Paris Hilton and Trust Fund babies have nothing to do with my situation and what I am talking about.

To the contrary, it has every thing to do with the inheritance tax, which was the subject of your OP.

...

My problem, and I will say it again, is the government insisting that taxes be paid on monies that had already paid taxes.

Repetitive. It's been pointed out repeatedly that much of the value of estates being inherited have not been taxed, and everyone who gets money and is taxed is getting taxed on monies that had already paid taxes.

The issue is, which you have not addressed, is why the Paris Hiltons should be treated differently.

I assume that everyone here who finds this acceptable also has no problem with their property taxes going up. Sales taxes being increased. They will be jumping for joy when BO raises all kinds of taxes to pay for his pipe dreams.

Personally, I'd feel a little better about taxes going to to provide an energy policy to get us off the oil dependency and national health care, than paying higher taxes so the trust fund babies can inherit billions tax free.

Remember, he wants YOU to pay taxes on the portion of your health insurance that your company provides. That is more money out of your pocket.

The only way to pay off his "bail outs" is to increase taxes on everyone. When this happens, I trust everyone will be ok with it.

How is this relevant to whether Paris should inheret a few hundred million tax free?

Then again, maybe I missed the point. Could some of you believe that it's ok for someone else to have to pay taxes .... as long as it isn't you?

Who has said that?

I will never be convinced that the government has any right to "re-tax" monies that I have already paid taxes on.

Same reason the Govt has a right to "re-tax" monies that Ms. Jones pays me to paint her house that she has already paid taxes on.

 

[Ravi]

I work hard. I take care of my finances. I plan ahead. I invest wisely.

I do all this to leave a legacy to my family when I pass.

However, when I die, the government will take 45 percent of my estate.

Can anybody defend this?

Maybe you need to explain what you mean. The government won't take 45% of your estate, and nothing you've subsequently posted really makes any sense given this fact.

President Obama's budget keeps the estate tax at its 2009 level, which means the government gets 45 percent of a dead person's estate valued over $3.5 million dollars or $7 million for a couple.

Obama's Budget Resurrects 'Death Tax' - First 100 Days of Presidency - Politics FOXNews.com

Perhaps I should have said, "45 percent of my estate over 3.5 million dollars."

However, I think through the subsequent pages of this thread that was made quite clear.

Well, here you go, a little list of estate tax myths, including this one:

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Myth: The Estate Tax must be repealed because it is forcing family farms to sell out.
Fact: As with family businesses, this issue has been distorted. Only 3 of every 10,000 people who die leave a taxable estate in which a farm forms the majority of the estate. On April 8, 2001, the New York Times reported that the pro-repeal American Farm Bureau Foundation could not cite a single case of a family farm lost due to the estate tax. In any case, family farms can be protected by gradually raising exemption levels. Repealing the Estate Tax will likely encourage the growth of mega-farms, thereby hurting smaller operations.[/FONT]

RW - Tax Fairness: Estate Tax Myths and Facts

Why don't you go talk to your accountant instead of letting Republican douche bags jerk you around in a frenzy because they want to protect people that make massive contributions to their campaigns?a

I'm going to write to my representatives and ask them to support legislation to have income taxed the same no matter what source it comes from.

 

[Burp]

And your comprehension skills are lacking every worse. Everything above 3.5 million is taxed. NO where did I say that everything over 3.5 would be taken. I said everything over 3.5 would be taxed.

I am amazed that so many people feel that government's tax policies are just and fair. All this talk about Paris Hilton and Trust Fund babies have nothing to do with my situation and what I am talking about.

To the contrary, it has every thing to do with the inheritance tax, which was the subject of your OP.

...

My problem, and I will say it again, is the government insisting that taxes be paid on monies that had already paid taxes.

Repetitive. It's been pointed out repeatedly that much of the value of estates being inherited have not been taxed, and everyone who gets money and is taxed is getting taxed on monies that had already paid taxes.

The issue is, which you have not addressed, is why the Paris Hiltons should be treated differently.



Personally, I'd feel a little better about taxes going to to provide an energy policy to get us off the oil dependency and national health care, than paying higher taxes so the trust fund babies can inherit billions tax free.



How is this relevant to whether Paris should inheret a few hundred million tax free?

Then again, maybe I missed the point. Could some of you believe that it's ok for someone else to have to pay taxes .... as long as it isn't you?

Who has said that?

I will never be convinced that the government has any right to "re-tax" monies that I have already paid taxes on.

Same reason the Govt has a right to "re-tax" monies that Ms. Jones pays me to paint her house that she has already paid taxes on.

No, he said 55% of everything. I didn't say everything. I said, over the 3.5 million.

I'm not talking about Paris Hilton. If Paris is left money that has NEVER been taxed, then yes, there needs to be a tax. That isn't what I'm talking about.

You won't mind paying higher taxes to fund national health care? Good. Because you will.

Be careful what you ask for.

 

[Burp]

Maybe you need to explain what you mean. The government won't take 45% of your estate, and nothing you've subsequently posted really makes any sense given this fact.

President Obama's budget keeps the estate tax at its 2009 level, which means the government gets 45 percent of a dead person's estate valued over $3.5 million dollars or $7 million for a couple.

Obama's Budget Resurrects 'Death Tax' - First 100 Days of Presidency - Politics FOXNews.com

Perhaps I should have said, "45 percent of my estate over 3.5 million dollars."

However, I think through the subsequent pages of this thread that was made quite clear.

Well, here you go, a little list of estate tax myths, including this one:

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Myth: The Estate Tax must be repealed because it is forcing family farms to sell out.
Fact: As with family businesses, this issue has been distorted. Only 3 of every 10,000 people who die leave a taxable estate in which a farm forms the majority of the estate. On April 8, 2001, the New York Times reported that the pro-repeal American Farm Bureau Foundation could not cite a single case of a family farm lost due to the estate tax. In any case, family farms can be protected by gradually raising exemption levels. Repealing the Estate Tax will likely encourage the growth of mega-farms, thereby hurting smaller operations.[/FONT]

RW - Tax Fairness: Estate Tax Myths and Facts

Why don't you go talk to your accountant instead of letting Republican douche bags jerk you around in a frenzy because they want to protect people that make massive contributions to their campaigns?a

I'm going to write to my representatives and ask them to support legislation to have income taxed the same no matter what source it comes from.

I never said anything about people "losing" a farm. If we were talking about farms, I guess this would be valid.

I don't own a farm. Never have. Never will.

You probably want to start a thread about the death tax and farming.

That isn't what we're talking about here.

 

[raceright]

Fine crank up the inheretence tax to 90% and eliminate SS taxes and I won't be jealous.

Gotcha,just like most who think death tax is some how to be shared
your looking for something for nothing, like someone else to pay for your SS..Incidently all the death taxes in the USA would not cover
SS costs..(maybe if it went just to retires it might)

Yep, I think someone inhereting millions should share in the tax burden just like folks who get their money working.

I don't believe the estate tax should be 90%, for the record, my response was tounge in cheek. IMO it should be the same rate folk who earn income should pay, as stated above.

They already did

 

[Iriemon]

Gotcha,just like most who think death tax is some how to be shared
your looking for something for nothing, like someone else to pay for your SS..Incidently all the death taxes in the USA would not cover
SS costs..(maybe if it went just to retires it might)

Yep, I think someone inhereting millions should share in the tax burden just like folks who get their money working.

I don't believe the estate tax should be 90%, for the record, my response was tounge in cheek. IMO it should be the same rate folk who earn income should pay, as stated above.

They already did

No they already didn't. Paris didn't pay a dime.

 

[ItsFairmont]

I work hard. I take care of my finances. I plan ahead. I invest wisely.

I do all this to leave a legacy to my family when I pass.

However, when I die, the government will take 45 percent of my estate.

Can anybody defend this?

What if you screw up, building massive debts? Should your family inherit that?

That's the way it used to be.

What if the business you own stock in goes bankrupt, and has a ton of unpaid debt, like GM or Enron? Shouldn't you, the business owner, be responsible for that debt?

That's the way it used to be.


I think what you're really saying is that you want inheritance to be a one-way street. You get to inherit all the money, but don't have to inherit debt if things don't work out so well.


Did I get that right?

 

[Yurt]

I work hard. I take care of my finances. I plan ahead. I invest wisely.

I do all this to leave a legacy to my family when I pass.

However, when I die, the government will take 45 percent of my estate.

Can anybody defend this?

What if you screw up, building massive debts? Should your family inherit that?

That's the way it used to be.

What if the business you own stock in goes bankrupt, and has a ton of unpaid debt, like GM or Enron? Shouldn't you, the business owner, be responsible for that debt?

That's the way it used to be.


I think what you're really saying is that you want inheritance to be a one-way street. You get to inherit all the money, but don't have to inherit debt if things don't work out so well.


Did I get that right?

nonsensical and irrelevent to the discussion at hand...unless you are going to take your logic all the way to its logical conclusion....do you then believe that if a father gets convicted and his time 150 years or 2 life sentences, should the child serve the remainder time....

one is a punishment directly attributed to one person...the other is the government punishing you for doing nothing wrong and illegal...if the people who loaned you money want to have your kids be cosigners, they are free to do so...but if you contract with only one person you have absolutely no right to go after someone you did not contract with.

 

[Burp]

I work hard. I take care of my finances. I plan ahead. I invest wisely.

I do all this to leave a legacy to my family when I pass.

However, when I die, the government will take 45 percent of my estate.

Can anybody defend this?

What if you screw up, building massive debts? Should your family inherit that?

That's the way it used to be.

What if the business you own stock in goes bankrupt, and has a ton of unpaid debt, like GM or Enron? Shouldn't you, the business owner, be responsible for that debt?

That's the way it used to be.


I think what you're really saying is that you want inheritance to be a one-way street. You get to inherit all the money, but don't have to inherit debt if things don't work out so well.


Did I get that right?

Where did that come from? Show me a single post where I said that.

The businesses aren't in debt. Loans have been repaid.

If you just want to throw out things that have nothing to do with what I am talking about, feel free.

 

[Yurt]

instead of taxing one rich person for 1 million dollars, why not tax 1 million people 1 dollar....

 

[Iriemon]

instead of taxing one rich person for 1 million dollars, why not tax 1 million people 1 dollar....

Because a million dollars won't pay for spit.

 

[Yurt]

instead of taxing one rich person for 1 million dollars, why not tax 1 million people 1 dollar....

Because a million dollars won't pay for spit.