View Poll Results: which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

Voters
153. You may not vote on this poll
  • There should be no inheritance tax of any amount of money or assets.

    84 54.90%
  • The first 5 million dollars should be exempt. After that the tax rate should be 35%.

    21 13.73%
  • The first 5 million dollars should be exempt. After that the tax rate should be 50%.

    12 7.84%
  • The first 1 million should be exempt. After that the rate should be 50%.

    19 12.42%
  • No exempt amount. Tax at 35% from the get-go.

    9 5.88%
  • No exempt amount. Tax at 50% from the get-go.

    1 0.65%
  • Abolish all inheritance. In other words, tax 100%.

    7 4.58%
Page 71 of 195 FirstFirst ... 2161697071727381121171 ... LastLast
Results 701 to 710 of 1947

Thread: which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

  1. #701
    Professor
    Sig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    11-29-13 @ 11:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    2,179

    Re: which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

    Quote Originally Posted by Luna Tick View Post
    [/LIST]So vote your opinion.
    I say do away with all inheritance tax but ditch the idea that money, particularly in the form of campaign contributions, represents constitutionally protected free speech.
    It's like you're dreaming of Gorgonzola when it's clearly Brie time, baby. Step into my office.

  2. #702
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:27 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,831

    Re: which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

    Quote Originally Posted by Centinel View Post
    Wages are payments to factors of production, and are counted as income in national accounting. Inheritance is simply a transfer of wealth from parent to child, and is not income. So despite the fact that they both result in the recipient having wealth they did not previously own, we can make a logical distinction between the two things.
    that is currently the distinction the state makes because of certain political considerations. We can just as easily change the definition of INCOME - ie: money which comes in to a persons pocket or account to include capital gains as it most certainly is money which comes in.

    You seem to be making the defender of the state or status quo argument that
    a) this is how the government currently defines something, and
    b) that is how it always has to be defined, so
    c) the change you want to make by redefining the subject under discussion cannot be considered because
    d) back to a) in a never ending loop.
    Last edited by haymarket; 02-04-12 at 04:34 PM.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  3. #703
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    that is currently the distinction the state makes because of certain political considerations. We can just as easily change the definition of INCOME - ie: money which comes in to a persons pocket or account to include capital gains as it most certainly is money which comes in.

    You seem to be making the defender of the state or status quo argument that
    a) this is how the government currently defines something, and
    b) that is how it always has to be defined, so
    c) the change you want to make by redefining the subject under discussion cannot be considered because
    d) back to a) in a never ending loop.
    So the definition of income doesn't fit your premise and you want to change it? Could that be because there exists no logical premise to unfairly treat differing levels of accumulation with punitive taxes? Methinks so. In other words you are fine with preferential treatment as long as it is punitive towards people who you think "have too much".
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  4. #704
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:27 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,831

    Re: which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    So the definition of income doesn't fit your premise and you want to change it? Could that be because there exists no logical premise to unfairly treat differing levels of accumulation with punitive taxes? Methinks so. In other words you are fine with preferential treatment as long as it is punitive towards people who you think "have too much".
    The definition of income for tax purposes is ANYTHING THE TAXING ENTITY WANTS IT TO BE. You should learn how legislation is written. Its what I do for a living
    .
    I have no idea what you mean by your last statement.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  5. #705
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,640

    Re: which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    First, you are wrong. Here are the current tax brackets according to the IRS

    Tax Bracket Married Filing Jointly Single
    10% Bracket $0 $17,400 $0 $8,700
    15% Bracket $17,400 $70,700 $8,700 $35,350
    25% Bracket $70,700 $142,700 $35,350 $85,650
    28% Bracket $142,700 $217,450 $85,650 $178,650
    33% Bracket $217,450 $388,350 $178,650 $388,350
    35% Bracket Over $388,350 Over $388,350

    My example of the person earning one million would indeed find himself in the 35% bracket.

    2012 Federal Income Tax Brackets Released By IRS - Novel Investor

    Second - your statement about anyone making that amount would be investing is reflective of your own tax strategies and does not apply to all. It is your own opinion based on your own values.

    Third - your statement about his estate at death is again you projecting your own tax strategies and values onto others, You have no idea at all what this person may or may not have at the time of death and may in fact end up with nothing in the way of an estate.

    My example holds.
    JEEZ IS THAT A STUPID POST. I have no dispute that he is in the 35% bracket but he doesn't pay 35% on his entire million. he only pays 35% on income over 388,350 THUS ALL THE INCOME BELOW THAT AMOUNT IS TAXED LESS THAN 35%

    THUS YOUR CLAIM HE PAYS 350k IS COMPLETELY WRONG

  6. #706
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:27 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,831

    Re: which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    JEEZ IS THAT A STUPID POST. I have no dispute that he is in the 35% bracket but he doesn't pay 35% on his entire million. he only pays 35% on income over 388,350 THUS ALL THE INCOME BELOW THAT AMOUNT IS TAXED LESS THAN 35%

    THUS YOUR CLAIM HE PAYS 350k IS COMPLETELY WRONG
    I gave you the federal income tax official IRS site. You gave me your opinion and provided no support for it.

    Yet again.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  7. #707
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    The definition of income for tax purposes is ANYTHING THE TAXING ENTITY WANTS IT TO BE.
    No it isn't. Words mean things, that's why people take the time to compile dictionaries. You have been given the economist definition of income by other posters and myself. The taxing body doesn't even bother calling the inheritance tax an income tax because of the risk of it not standing up to the definition. Words mean things, and that meaning isn't up to selective interpretation.
    You should learn how legislation is written. Its what I do for a living
    Do you now? Well, I have learned how it's written considering I had to take civics in grade school and poli sci in college. Glad you think people giving you the proper definitions are stupid, but we aren't.
    I have no idea what you mean by your last statement.
    Oh I think you do.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  8. #708
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:27 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,831

    Re: which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

    Turtle

    I just called my CPA and he said that I do have to figure the tax rate according to how you said to figure it applying the various bracket levels as you go up to $388K. So I will do that and be back with the appropriate figure.

    So you were correct about that formula and I was wrong.

    And the new total is...... $326,760.00. That is rounded off dropping a few odd dollars here and there. So the actual rate for that millionaire would be 32.6%.

    So I do stand corrected.

    So we have case #1 - the same earner who ends up paying 32.6% or a tax bill of $326,700 on putting one million dollars in his pocket assuming no other deductions.
    Case #2 - the investor who puts a million dollars in their pocket from long term capital gains pays 15% or a tax bill of $150,000.00 assuming no other deductions.
    Case #3 - the one who inherits the million dollars that he puts in his pocket pays a tax bill of 0% as his inheritance is excluded with the generous exemption.

    So now that the numbers are corrected, can you please explain to Mr Wage Earner why he should be happy to support a system that taxes him at over TWICE the rate it does the investor in capital gains while letting the inheritor off completely free even though all three put the same one million in their pockets and it spends exactly the same?
    Last edited by haymarket; 02-04-12 at 07:51 PM.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  9. #709
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:27 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,831

    Re: which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    No it isn't. Words mean things, that's why people take the time to compile dictionaries. You have been given the economist definition of income by other posters and myself. The taxing body doesn't even bother calling the inheritance tax an income tax because of the risk of it not standing up to the definition. Words mean things, and that meaning isn't up to selective interpretation. Do you now? Well, I have learned how it's written considering I had to take civics in grade school and poli sci in college. Glad you think people giving you the proper definitions are stupid, but we aren't.
    Oh I think you do.
    You really have no idea how laws are written. You really have no idea beyond your college or grad school course how legislation is put together.

    Capital gains are treated as they are because the law was written to exclude them that way and the legal definition was crafted for that purpose. Are you that uninformed that you do not know that?

    One can easilly write legislation which treats
    1- wages and salary
    2- capital gains
    3- money from an inheritance

    as all the same and classify it as income because it is MONEY COMING IN TO PERSONS ACCOUNT OR POCKET. It makes sense and has a basis in the real world.

    As such, there would be no problem at all writing the tax law defining income as such.

    This is what I do for a living La Mid.... its a bit beyond your grade school civics course or even your polisci 101 in college.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  10. #710
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    You really have no idea how laws are written. You really have no idea beyond your college or grad school course how legislation is put together.

    Capital gains are treated as they are because the law was written to exclude them that way and the legal definition was crafted for that purpose. Are you that uninformed that you do not know that?

    One can easilly write legislation which treats
    1- wages and salary
    2- capital gains
    3- money from an inheritance

    as all the same and classify it as income because it is MONEY COMING IN TO PERSONS ACCOUNT OR POCKET. It makes sense and has a basis in the real world.

    As such, there would be no problem at all writing the tax law defining income as such.

    This is what I do for a living La Mid.... its a bit beyond your grade school civics course or even your polisci 101 in college.
    You can stop the elitism at any time. I worked in radio and got to know many lawmakers both state and national. I do know what I am talking about.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •