What's wrong with near 100% death tax?

[Martin]

Apart from some minor exceptions (for example, leaving a dwelling and some money to your spouse), why shouldn't you be taxed when you die? You certainly don't need the money, your children will succeed or fail based on their own merits, and you'd be able to enjoy much lower tax rates while you're still alive.

The only losers would be the rich who can't make it on their own but rely on their family's wealth. And I can't see that as a bad thing really...

 

[HombrePequeno]

Obviously some exceptions need to be made but I pretty much agree with that. I see it as a tax on unearned wealth more than anything.

 

[Balt]

The money was already taxed when it was earned the first time.

Taxing it again just because someone died and wanted to pass it on to their family is lame.

 

[Zorba]

There shouldn't be any death tax if you have a living spouse, IMHO.

Otherwise, I don't mind a high death tax. But having a really high death tax would not really lower other tax rates, because most people would donate all their money to charity instead.

 

[Aisengard]

So basically the will would be to the government. Sounds great (meaning terrible).

 

[Ronstang]

Spoken by those who will never amount to anything. Work harder and you will feel differently when you have a family. I don't care what the tards on the hill do now because my family is all protected.....family trust FTW.

 

[her209]

The only potential problem I see with "the plan" is that people will start offing the rich people, which may or may not be a good thing. :laugh:

 

[BarneyFife]

What a horrible idea.

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: Ronstang
Spoken by those who will never amount to anything. Work harder and you will feel differently when you have a family. I don't care what the tards on the hill do now because my family is all protected.....family trust FTW.

Let me guess, your kids are smart, beautiful and oh-so-very special... just like everyone else's. :roll:

 

[dahunan]

If I EARNED the money and we ARE NOT A SOCIALIST COUNTRY then why does the govt deserve any of it

Tell us why.. really WHY they "DESERVE" any of it?

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

100% death tax.

So a guy starts a business... makes some money... grows the business... employs lots of people... makes more money, paying taxes all the way... then when he dies, his family gets nothing, his business is liquidated, his employees lose their jobs... How is this good?

 

[bamacre]

It seems rather ignorant for our government to benefit, even more, when it's citizens die.

 

[BarneyFife]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
100% death tax.

So a guy starts a business... makes some money... grows the business... employs lots of people... makes more money, paying taxes all the way... then when he dies, his family gets nothing, his business is liquidated, his employees lose their jobs... How is this good?

It doesn't even have to be a business. A person can work hard and save up $1 mil and then when he dies, his kids won't see the fruit of his labor. It will go to the government so they can donate it to Israel and Iraq.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: dahunan
If I EARNED the money and we ARE NOT A SOCIALIST COUNTRY then why does the govt deserve any of it

Tell us why.. really WHY they "DESERVE" any of it?

Socialism has nothing to do with it.

In a civilized society taxes are necessary to provide for basic services. Police protection, fire protection, infrastructure maintenance, roads, schools, etc...

The degree to which these services are necessary and the amount it takes to provide them is what makes us fiscal libs/cons. But in the end, there is no denial that they are necessary and they need to be paid for. That is what taxes are for. But you know this already.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
100% death tax.

So a guy starts a business... makes some money... grows the business... employs lots of people... makes more money, paying taxes all the way... then when he dies, his family gets nothing, his business is liquidated, his employees lose their jobs... How is this good?

It doesn't even have to be a business. A person can work hard and save up $1 mil and then when he dies, his kids won't see the fruit of his labor. It will go to the government so they can donate it to Israel and Iraq.

That and the basic demogogery (sp) that comes from those who are jealous of people who made some money in their time on earth. God forbid their kids should have any kind of a head start in life.

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: dahunan
If I EARNED the money and we ARE NOT A SOCIALIST COUNTRY then why does the govt deserve any of it

Tell us why.. really WHY they "DESERVE" any of it?

Socialism has nothing to do with it.

In a civilized society taxes are necessary to provide for basic services. Police protection, fire protection, infrastructure maintenance, roads, schools, etc...

The degree to which these services are necessary and the amount it takes to provide them is what makes us fiscal libs/cons. But in the end, there is no denial that they are necessary and they need to be paid for. That is what taxes are for. But you know this already.

I know that.. but you already said it.. this is money that taxes have already been paid for.. so anymore taxation is double taxation

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
100% death tax.

So a guy starts a business... makes some money... grows the business... employs lots of people... makes more money, paying taxes all the way... then when he dies, his family gets nothing, his business is liquidated, his employees lose their jobs... How is this good?

It doesn't even have to be a business. A person can work hard and save up $1 mil and then when he dies, his kids won't see the fruit of his labor. It will go to the government so they can donate it to Israel and Iraq.

That and the basic demogogery (sp) that comes from those who are jealous of people who made some money in their time on earth. God forbid their kids should have any kind of a head start in life.

Pension funds manage enormous amounts of wealth, so obviously there's no need for liquidation and things like that.

But I'm afraid the only demagoguery comes from the "oh, what will my special little precious children do without inheritance" crowd. It's not jealousy - some people just like the idea of a meritocracy.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: dahunan
If I EARNED the money and we ARE NOT A SOCIALIST COUNTRY then why does the govt deserve any of it

Tell us why.. really WHY they "DESERVE" any of it?

Socialism has nothing to do with it.

In a civilized society taxes are necessary to provide for basic services. Police protection, fire protection, infrastructure maintenance, roads, schools, etc...

The degree to which these services are necessary and the amount it takes to provide them is what makes us fiscal libs/cons. But in the end, there is no denial that they are necessary and they need to be paid for. That is what taxes are for. But you know this already.

I know that.. but you already said it.. this is money that taxes have already been paid for.. so anymore taxation is double taxation

Heh... apparently the beer has impared my sarcasm meter. For some reason it went off the scale when I read your post.

I agree. You pay taxes on what you earn... then, when you spend your already taxed money you pay sales tax on things you buy... and sometimes you pay taxes for simply owning the things you already paid taxes on when you bought them with the money that was taxed when you earned it.

And then when you die, every thing you owned (and your ownership was taxed) that was taxed when it was paid for with money that was taxed when it was earned... is taxed again when it is handed to your descendants... Yikes. Makes my head spin.

It's psychotic when you think about it.

 

[daniel49]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
100% death tax.

So a guy starts a business... makes some money... grows the business... employs lots of people... makes more money, paying taxes all the way... then when he dies, his family gets nothing, his business is liquidated, his employees lose their jobs... How is this good?

qft

redistribution of wealth...blah... I make money the old fashioned way. I earn it.

 

[Balt]

Originally posted by: Martin

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
100% death tax.

So a guy starts a business... makes some money... grows the business... employs lots of people... makes more money, paying taxes all the way... then when he dies, his family gets nothing, his business is liquidated, his employees lose their jobs... How is this good?

It doesn't even have to be a business. A person can work hard and save up $1 mil and then when he dies, his kids won't see the fruit of his labor. It will go to the government so they can donate it to Israel and Iraq.

That and the basic demogogery (sp) that comes from those who are jealous of people who made some money in their time on earth. God forbid their kids should have any kind of a head start in life.

Pension funds manage enormous amounts of wealth, so obviously there's no need for liquidation and things like that.

But I'm afraid the only demagoguery comes from the "oh, what will my special little precious children do without inheritance" crowd. It's not jealousy - some people just like the idea of a meritocracy.

Someone worked and spent their life earning that money. It is THEIR money and it has already been taxed. No one should tell them how they can and can't pass it on, and it certainly shouldn't be confiscated by the government like it was something 'evil' or illegal that they didn't deserve.

If parents decide they want their children to go it alone, they can decide to leave it to charity. If they decide they want to leave it to their kids and family, then they should be able to and everyone else should mind their own f'ing business.

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: Balt
Someone worked and spent their life earning that money. It is THEIR money and it has already been taxed. No one should tell them how they can and can't pass it on, and it certainly shouldn't be confiscated by the government like it was something 'evil' or illegal that they didn't deserve.

It already gets taxed, there's nothing illegal or unprecedented about that. As someone else mentioned, if people don't want the government getting it, they can always donate it, which is even better.

So, no one yet said much except "please think of the children", nor have they explained why promoting a meritocratic society is such a horrible thing.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: Martin

Originally posted by: Balt
Someone worked and spent their life earning that money. It is THEIR money and it has already been taxed. No one should tell them how they can and can't pass it on, and it certainly shouldn't be confiscated by the government like it was something 'evil' or illegal that they didn't deserve.

It already gets taxed, there's nothing illegal or unprecedented about that. As someone else mentioned, if people don't want the government getting it, they can always donate it, which is even better.

So, no one yet said much except "please think of the children", nor have they explained why promoting a meritocratic society is such a horrible thing.

I pointed out the insanity of it all...

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

You pay taxes on what you earn... then, when you spend your already taxed money you pay sales tax on things you buy... and sometimes you pay taxes for simply owning the things you already paid taxes on when you bought them with the money that was taxed when you earned it.

It's psychotic when you think about it.

Income is taxed multiple times. And in many instances, if you imposed a 100% death tax the government would lose out on a perpetual tax stream because the business owned by the dead guy would be liquidated to pay the death tax. Does the government really want a one time pay out over continuous, potentially unlimited stream of revenue?

The whole idea is stupid and self defeating.

Even if the wealth is not a business, the interest will still be taxed in perpetuity and the govenment makes more in the long haul by not taking all the principal of the dead guy. Wealth creates more wealth if managed properly. And the rich pay the most in taxes. A total death tax = killing the goose that laid the golden egg for government revenue.

 

[Balt]

Originally posted by: Martin

Originally posted by: Balt
Someone worked and spent their life earning that money. It is THEIR money and it has already been taxed. No one should tell them how they can and can't pass it on, and it certainly shouldn't be confiscated by the government like it was something 'evil' or illegal that they didn't deserve.

It already gets taxed, there's nothing illegal or unprecedented about that. As someone else mentioned, if people don't want the government getting it, they can always donate it, which is even better.

So, no one yet said much except "please think of the children", nor have they explained why promoting a meritocratic society is such a horrible thing.

There is absolutely no reason to believe that hijacking people's earned money upon their death will produce a meritocracy. Parents with better financial means will still usually send their children to better schools and possibly help them pay for college.

If you want to take away a parent's right to do such things, then perhaps you'd just be happier living under someone like Stalin. Or perhaps you'd just like to see every motivation that a person has for accumulating money disappear. Damn those evil people for earning money and feeling like they should see some benefit from it. Selfish bastards trying to help their kids. :roll:

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: Martin

Originally posted by: Balt
Someone worked and spent their life earning that money. It is THEIR money and it has already been taxed. No one should tell them how they can and can't pass it on, and it certainly shouldn't be confiscated by the government like it was something 'evil' or illegal that they didn't deserve.

It already gets taxed, there's nothing illegal or unprecedented about that. As someone else mentioned, if people don't want the government getting it, they can always donate it, which is even better.

So, no one yet said much except "please think of the children", nor have they explained why promoting a meritocratic society is such a horrible thing.

I pointed out the insanity of it all...

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

You pay taxes on what you earn... then, when you spend your already taxed money you pay sales tax on things you buy... and sometimes you pay taxes for simply owning the things you already paid taxes on when you bought them with the money that was taxed when you earned it.

It's psychotic when you think about it.

Income is taxed multiple times. And in many instances, if you imposed a 100% death tax the government would lose out on a perpetual tax stream because the business owned by the dead guy would be liquidated to pay the death tax. Does the government really want a one time pay out over continuous, potentially unlimited stream of revenue?

The whole idea is stupid and self defeating.

Even if the wealth is not a business, the interest will still be taxed in perpetuity and the govenment makes more in the long haul by not taking all the principal of the dead guy. Wealth creates more wealth if managed properly. And the rich pay the most in taxes. A total death tax = killing the goose that laid the golden egg for government revenue.

You didn't point out the insanity, because you read neither the OP nor my reply.

- you can afford to tax the living less
- no one is talking about liquidating businesses. If Paul Allen dies and his shares go to a fund, MS won't cease to exist or produce software.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: Martin

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: Martin

Originally posted by: Balt
Someone worked and spent their life earning that money. It is THEIR money and it has already been taxed. No one should tell them how they can and can't pass it on, and it certainly shouldn't be confiscated by the government like it was something 'evil' or illegal that they didn't deserve.

It already gets taxed, there's nothing illegal or unprecedented about that. As someone else mentioned, if people don't want the government getting it, they can always donate it, which is even better.

So, no one yet said much except "please think of the children", nor have they explained why promoting a meritocratic society is such a horrible thing.

I pointed out the insanity of it all...

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

You pay taxes on what you earn... then, when you spend your already taxed money you pay sales tax on things you buy... and sometimes you pay taxes for simply owning the things you already paid taxes on when you bought them with the money that was taxed when you earned it.

It's psychotic when you think about it.

Income is taxed multiple times. And in many instances, if you imposed a 100% death tax the government would lose out on a perpetual tax stream because the business owned by the dead guy would be liquidated to pay the death tax. Does the government really want a one time pay out over continuous, potentially unlimited stream of revenue?

The whole idea is stupid and self defeating.

Even if the wealth is not a business, the interest will still be taxed in perpetuity and the govenment makes more in the long haul by not taking all the principal of the dead guy. Wealth creates more wealth if managed properly. And the rich pay the most in taxes. A total death tax = killing the goose that laid the golden egg for government revenue.

You didn't point out the insanity, because you read neither the OP nor my reply.

- you can afford to tax the living less
- no one is talking about liquidating businesses. If Paul Allen dies and his shares go to a fund, MS won't cease to exist or produce software.

Yes I did and your response further proves my point...

By your logic the controlling interest in microsoft goes to the government. Think about it for a minute. And what if the business in question is a sole propriatorship? Is the government supposed to run a mom & pop corner liquor store?