Highlights of the Tax Package Before the Senate

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
I don't care if you have a trillion dollars. If you already paid taxes on it when you were living the government doesn't have the right to tax it again because you died. I guess the idea of owning anything is just an illusion anymore.
 

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
12,750
2,525
126
i care because i want to make sure that my wife kids family are taken care of with the money I MADE. THINK!

A $2,000,000 exemption before ANY taxes at all (present law with a simple AB trust)will not be sufficient to take care of your "wife kids family?" (Remember this $2,000,000 does not include life insurance unless you were stupid enough to have the life insurance payable to your estate). If so, perhaps spending a few dollars with a decent estate attorney will solve whatever anxiety you still have.

Frankly you have been sold an enormous pile of BS c/o Fox News continued moaning about "death taxes."
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
I don't care if you have a trillion dollars. If you already paid taxes on it when you were living the government doesn't have the right to tax it again because you died. I guess the idea of owning anything is just an illusion anymore.

That's not very progressive of you. You owe that money and property to the society that allowed you to live and prosper after you die.

Seriously, that is what liberals/progressives believe. You can see it in this thread. They don't even hide it, it's a core belief.
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Let's say that I sell an asset that I've held for many years and give the money to my son. I'd pay capital gains taxes and he'd pay income taxes on it. Under your no estate tax scenario, no taxes of any kind would be paid if the asset were transferred to my son after my death. He'd pay no taxes on the sale. It'd be free money for him, either way, just more if he collects it as an inheritance.


The difference is how the taxes are applied. If you did that while living you both would have the opportunity to decide how to handle it. Your son could decide to not go through with the transfer, you could make other arrangements, etc. If dad dies your son does not get that benefit. It is like when you die the government is saying "Your dad is dead and now the estate belongs to us, if you want it, pay this fee or lose it" . They are acting on behalf of the deceased as if they were named in the will, choosing what happens to that persons possessions. I can't see any way that can be right.
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
A $2,000,000 exemption before ANY taxes at all (present law with a simple AB trust)will not be sufficient to take care of your "wife kids family?" (Remember this $2,000,000 does not include life insurance unless you were stupid enough to have the life insurance payable to your estate). If so, perhaps spending a few dollars with a decent estate attorney will solve whatever anxiety you still have.

Frankly you have been sold an enormous pile of BS c/o Fox News continued moaning about "death taxes."

2 mill or 5 mill is not enough to take care of my family for the rest of their lives in the lifestyle they are accustomed to or that I worked so hard to provide for them.

Jealousy, you're showing it.
 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,051
6
81
i care because i want to make sure that my wife kids family are taken care of with the money I MADE. THINK!

Once again, as has been pointed out a number of times for the dense, the issue is about inheritance tax, not the right to have a will.
 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,051
6
81
That's not very progressive of you. You owe that money and property to the society that allowed you to live and prosper after you die.

Seriously, that is what liberals/progressives believe. You can see it in this thread. They don't even hide it, it's a core belief.

So Spidey, you owe society nothing? You are an island unto yourself?

Bullshit.

Reality is we live within a social contract, one part of which includes taxes to pay for this country and your privilege as a first world citizen.

Creating a system of rich owning all through inheritance is as undemocratic and anti-free market as you can get.

Once again Spidey, you have shown yourself to be nothing less then a dim bulb tool of the elites more easily manipulated then clay with a few catch phrases.
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
So Spidey, you owe society nothing? You are an island unto yourself?

Bullshit.

Reality is we live within a social contract, one part of which includes taxes to pay for this country and your privilege as a first world citizen.

Creating a system of rich owning all through inheritance is as undemocratic and anti-free market as you can get.

Once again Spidey, you have shown yourself to be nothing less then a dim bulb tool of the elites more easily manipulated then clay with a few catch phrases.

This is what I'm talking about. Progressive/liberal mentality. See it for what it is. Fight it. It is the enemy of our freedom and the enemy of our nation. So I have to PAY for my PRIVILEGE to LIVE? Go read the declaration of Independence, and then read it again until it sinks in.

All the good things in this bill to "allow" people to keep more of THEIR MONEY and they focus on the death tax. Know thy enemy.
 
Last edited:

thegimp03

Diamond Member
Jul 5, 2004
7,420
2
81
So Spidey, you owe society nothing? You are an island unto yourself?

Bullshit.

Reality is we live within a social contract, one part of which includes taxes to pay for this country and your privilege as a first world citizen.

Creating a system of rich owning all through inheritance is as undemocratic and anti-free market as you can get.

Once again Spidey, you have shown yourself to be nothing less then a dim bulb tool of the elites more easily manipulated then clay with a few catch phrases.

And creating a system where if grandpa or grandma dies their heirs owe a huge chunk of change in death taxes is about as nightmarish as it can get for family owned businesses. It's blatantly unfair to farmers and ranchers who have to sell off land and livestock - assets that have already been taxed - to fork over money to the fed gov't which will just turn around and waste it.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,586
50,771
136
And creating a system where if grandpa or grandma dies their heirs owe a huge chunk of change in death taxes is about as nightmarish as it can get for family owned businesses. It's blatantly unfair to farmers and ranchers who have to sell off land and livestock - assets that have already been taxed - to fork over money to the fed gov't which will just turn around and waste it.

As has been shown before, the scenario you are describing basically never happens.
 

thegimp03

Diamond Member
Jul 5, 2004
7,420
2
81
As has been shown before, the scenario you are describing basically never happens.

It doesn't? Ask my mom's relatives who live up in Oregon. Had to sell a ranch built up over 3-4 generations to pay death taxes. Pretty sad situation.
 

jhbball

Platinum Member
Mar 20, 2002
2,917
23
81
This is what I'm talking about. Progressive/liberal mentality. See it for what it is. Fight it. It is the enemy of our freedom and the enemy of our nation. So I have to PAY for my PRIVILEGE to LIVE? Go read the declaration of Independence, and then read it again until it sinks in.

All the good things in this bill to "allow" people to keep more of THEIR MONEY and they focus on the death tax. Know thy enemy.

Nice deflection.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,586
50,771
136
It doesn't? Ask my mom's relatives who live up in Oregon. Had to sell a ranch built up over 3-4 generations to pay death taxes. Pretty sad situation.

Yeap, it almost never happens. Regardless of what your mom's relatives endured, as the statistics have already shown it is a situation that is so unlikely as to be foolish to legislate around.

If your relatives owned a ranch worth millions that couldn't generate enough revenue to pay estate taxes on, it was a terrible business anyway. You can pay them over time, you know.
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
Yeap, it almost never happens. Regardless of what your mom's relatives endured, as the statistics have already shown it is a situation that is so unlikely as to be foolish to legislate around.

If your relatives owned a ranch worth millions that couldn't generate enough revenue to pay estate taxes on, it was a terrible business anyway. You can pay them over time, you know.

None of that matters. It's wrong to have to pay anything. It's wrong.

Unless you believe it's the government's money and property and the government is doing you a favor by letting you live and own something - you know, progressive liberal thinking.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,586
50,771
136
None of that matters. It's wrong to have to pay anything. It's wrong.

Unless you believe it's the government's money and property and the government is doing you a favor by letting you live and own something - you know, progressive liberal thinking.

Wrong. Taxation is both a legitimate and necessary function of government.

That, and you are mentally ill. Why would anyone take your insane rambling seriously?
 

thegimp03

Diamond Member
Jul 5, 2004
7,420
2
81
Yeap, it almost never happens. Regardless of what your mom's relatives endured, as the statistics have already shown it is a situation that is so unlikely as to be foolish to legislate around.

If your relatives owned a ranch worth millions that couldn't generate enough revenue to pay estate taxes on, it was a terrible business anyway. You can pay them over time, you know.

The cash they have on hand is tiny in proportion to the land, buildings, machinery, livestock, etc. assets they have. And most cash they do generate is spent running the business. Stating that it's a terrible business anyway is a blatant lie and cop out.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,586
50,771
136
The cash they have on hand is tiny in proportion to the land, buildings, machinery, livestock, etc. assets they have. And most cash they do generate is spent running the business. Stating that it's a terrible business anyway is a blatant lie and cop out.

So their business is not very profitable is what you're saying.

Debating anecdotes is silly because they are both unfalsifiable and non-representative. The statistics show that the amount of businesses affected in the way you describe is vanishingly small.
 

OutHouse

Lifer
Jun 5, 2000
36,410
616
126
Yeap, it almost never happens. Regardless of what your mom's relatives endured, as the statistics have already shown it is a situation that is so unlikely as to be foolish to legislate around.

If your relatives owned a ranch worth millions that couldn't generate enough revenue to pay estate taxes on, it was a terrible business anyway. You can pay them over time, you know.

this just shows you dont know what the fuck you are talking about. you have no first hand experience in this so you just post links that support your argument. if this crap happen you, there is no doubt i my mind you would be singing a different toon.
 

OutHouse

Lifer
Jun 5, 2000
36,410
616
126
So what? Why on earth would we make tax policy based around what happens to .001% of households? Does that sound like a smart idea to you?

as long as its not you, who cares right? tax them to hell and back, its not my familys money so just take it all!...
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,586
50,771
136
this just shows you dont know what the fuck you are talking about. you have no first hand experience in this so you just post links that support your argument. if this crap happen you, there is no doubt i my mind you would be singing a different toon.

Right, I post links that support my argument. That's how adult discourse works.

More importantly, my links are about nationwide statistics as opposed to a single person's experience. I will leave it to you to figure out why that might be more useful when determining nationwide tax policy.