you from 532
..and if the inheritance goes to the wife?... you want that taxed again too?.. even though it's basically hers through common law?
I clearly stated that this was false and presented verifiable information that such a belief was false. A wife is already co-owner so she does not 'inherit' in the legal sense that we were discussing. She cannot be given what she already has.
A wife or husband is a co-owner while a child is not. That simple distinction is everything in determining who is taxed and who is not. Your distinction about "immediate family" may be yours - but it is NOT the traditional one used in the law on such matters.
So the real question then becomes this: if you are going to pretend that you also knew the wife was not taxed and I presented the law that the wife was not taxed soon after you floated your post, why oh why would you go on for page after page after page about it if you seemingly knew that my position was the proper one?
Can you answer that?