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 96 of 195 FirstFirst ... 46869495969798106146 ... LastLast
Results 951 to 960 of 1947

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

  1. #951
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    02-15-14 @ 04:49 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,939

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

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    I'm actually okay with a slightly higher luxury goods rate than necessary ones. I'm fine with the full rate taxed on electronics, cars, etc. and a basic rate on food, utilities, basic housing, and other needs. To me the rate discussed in the "fair tax" book seems a little high but it was around 22%, the thing is they proved that we're already paying that along the chain in hidden taxes. So if it's 22% on luxury goods I'd say maybe around 5-10% on necessities depending on the current earnings climate.
    This is quite unrealistic. The Fair Tax quoted rate is 23%, but that means that the final cost of an item with a pre-tax price of $100 would be $130, not $123. This is because $30 is 23.08% of $130 and the sponsors of the Fair Tax wanted the rate to sound as low as possible (especially after focus groups showed that public support for such flat-taxes dropped precipitously once the rate went beyond 25%), so they stated the rate in a way that is entirely counter-intuitive with respect to sales taxes.

    We meanwhile do not pay in hidden taxes anything like the amounts that the Fair Tax people claim to be able to recover. The bureaucratic costs of the IRS would supposedly vanish, but the costs of the new and even more invasive bureaucracy that would have to track people in every step of their personal lives in order to assure that they were still eligible to receive a monthly "prebate" check are ignored and thus grossly underestimated. Also not well considered is the factor by which state and local governments will have to come up with new revenues to cover new taxes that they will owe on their existing purchases of new goods and services. These entities do not currently pay income taxes, hence these Fair Tax outlays would be new gross costs to them. This is hardly the end of the issues with the proposal. Consider for instance that if you are a homeowner, you would not only lose the mortgage interest deduction that you currently enjoy, but you would have to pay that 30% sales tax on the interest portion of your monthly mortgage installment as a purchase of new financial services. That will typically run several hundred dollars per month. Are people really aware of and ready for that?

    And speaking of housing, the cost of a new home would have to include a 30% sales tax, while the cost of an existing home would have to include a 0% sales tax. What might happen in real estate markets as the result of that, I wonder. Any implications for new versus used cars?
    Last edited by Cardinal Fang; 02-12-12 at 04:37 PM.

  2. #952
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

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

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    what makes sense is a tax system that prevents the masses' votes being bought by a system that allows politicians to promise them more government paid for by tax hikes on others
    You're kidding, right? I've never seen anything closer to actually buying votes than contributing $$$ billions to political campaigns. It isn't "the masses" making those huge contributions, it's the rich and their corporate minions. The masses don't write the tax laws or vote on them. Face it, the rich buy the only votes that really matter in America - the votes of the lawmakers.

  3. #953
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    02-15-14 @ 04:49 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,939

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

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    Okay. 1) People drive income, there is no income to tax without people so you are wrong. 2) Inheritance is not income. It goes Income, Dividends, Capital Gains, Inheritance and they are all different types of monetary transactions with very specific definitions. Under any honest definition income has already been taxed. For the purposes of today's tax code dividends come from investment and capital gains are a secondary tax, which is fine because there has been a value transaction. The Inheritance is off of the estate which is all monies and items pertaining to the deceased including properties, items of value, investments, and money all of which has been taxed already and is not a value transaction but merely a transferrence. So if you are equating it to income you are wrong.
    With all due respect, this is full of mistakes. Review the legislation and law -- it is very clear that it is INCOME that is being taxed, from whatever source derived. No people. It is no different from property taxes on that score. It is very clear that it is the property that is being taxed and the person who owns the property is merely the one who pays.

    An inheritance is money or other goods that you did not previously own that you now do. Inheritances are taxed under the same regime as gifts. Creating an argument that these are not taxable flows will be a very difficult task. If it were feasible, it would have been accomplished already.

    It doesn't matter if something has been taxed already. Everything has in fact been taxed already, so complaining of it is rather pointless. There is no rule or promise anywhere that says anything will be taxed only once and then that's the end of it. People try to enforce some principle that fails in actuality to exist.

    Particularly with respect to large estates (the only kind which actually pays any federal estate tax anymore), substantial and even majority portions of them are derived from unrealized capital gains that have never been taxed before, and since these assets will move to an heir at their stepped-up basis, these gains never will be taxed unless that is done at the time of inheritance.
    Last edited by Cardinal Fang; 02-12-12 at 05:24 PM.

  4. #954
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    02-15-14 @ 04:49 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,939

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

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    You want to back that? You cannot be in a higher earning bracket without a higher income. So that was in fact a stupid assertion, do you actually want to deny that people with more money are being hijacked by the tax code because they earn more?
    Your personal opinion on the matter is of course entirely irrelevant. Unless you can make a valid claim that your million-dollar income is being treated differently from the million-dollar income of someone similalry situated, you have no case. None. Congress has a clear power to create as many tax brackets as it wants at whatever rates that it wants.

  5. #955
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    02-15-14 @ 04:49 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,939

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

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    what makes sense is a tax system that prevents the masses' votes being bought by a system that allows politicians to promise them more government paid for by tax hikes on others
    You mean tax hikes on income that others have, I suppose. Maybe I should remind you while I'm at it though that the first rule of tax policy is that you can only tax the money. Whoever has all the money will pay all the taxes. If you want the middle class to pay more in taxes and the wealthy to pay less, simply move some money from the wealthy to the middle class, and your job will be done.

  6. #956
    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 Cardinal Fang View Post
    This is quite unrealistic. The Fair Tax quoted rate is 23%, but that means that the final cost of an item with a pre-tax price of $100 would be $130, not $123. This is because $30 is 23.08% of $130 and the sponsors of the Fair Tax wanted the rate to sound as low as possible (especially after focus groups showed that public support for such flat-taxes dropped precipitously once the rate went beyond 25%), so they stated the rate in a way that is entirely counter-intuitive with respect to sales taxes.
    In pure numbers you are correct. I flinched at first when the rate was introduced in the book dealing with the subject but the competition argument presented therein is compelling. Basically it states that all previous taxes are to be counted for the year prior, then the consumption tax(only) would indeed add to the purchase price, consider though that other taxes are stricken from the record so this becomes "at point of transaction" taxation rather than a constant tax on earnings. Therefore taxes paid at transaction would essentially be relatively close to what is already paid in actual dollars plus or minus consumption habits. The idea is that once the "hidden taxation" along the chain dissappears profits are better realized and can be passed along to the consumer as price reductions, the counter argument being that businesses will retain the larger margins. However the nature of competition will state that businesses will realize that the larger margins are less than a quantitative margin with more sales so they will reduce prices, the pressure of competitive price drops will force other businesses to likewise lower their own prices until the sustainable rate is hit, this gives the consumer a better price even with the high tax rate. I don't summarize the book as well as I would like to but I do suggest it as a read, a lot of it makes sense.
    We meanwhile do not pay in hidden taxes anything like the amounts that the Fair Tax people claim to be able to recover.
    This is simply not true. Even at a minimum wage there are still taxes on labor that must be paid such as FICA, Medicare/Medicaid, etc. Then there are compliance costs etc. A simplified tax code would eliminate much of that.
    The bureaucratic costs of the IRS would supposedly vanish, but the costs of the new and even more invasive bureaucracy that would have to track people in every step of their personal lives in order to assure that they were still eligible to receive a monthly "prebate" check are ignored and thus grossly underestimated.
    First, I am not a fan of the prebate, actually neither are the authors of the bill, this is a concession to the side that is worried about the poor being hurt by this tax. I actually favor a lower rate on necessities and a "luxury Tax Rate" on consumer goods with a margin gap complimentary to both. The idea of eliminating the IRS is a good one, first off they have less accountability to due process than any other agency which is concerning, secondly if the IRS were to be dissolved it would not be that difficult to incorporate into the FBI former agents of the IRS to enforce collection and investigate failures to pay on collections. I think that is an economically viable alternative.
    Also not well considered is the factor by which state and local governments will have to come up with new revenues to cover new taxes that they will owe on their existing purchases of new goods and services. These entities do not currently pay income taxes, hence these Fair Tax outlays would be new gross costs to them. This is hardly the end of the issues with the proposal.
    States already lay and collect taxes in some form or another, and they do still pay a "hidden tax" on all purchases, I would argue that once consumer goods needed to run state operations became less expensive buying in bulk or in fleet would actually save states a considerable amount of money.
    Consider for instance that if you are a homeowner, you would not only lose the mortgage interest deduction that you currently enjoy, but you would have to pay that 30% sales tax on the interest portion of your monthly mortgage installment as a purchase of new financial services.That will typically run several hundred dollars per month. Are people really aware of and ready for that?
    Actually, the taxes would be paid on purchase. Consider this, if the mortgage deduction is lost it is a percentage of what the mortgage represents, under any tax system you still have a mortgage but if you are making 60k a year and taxed 10k with a mortgage deduction of say 1k you save at that point 1k but still pay 9k, with the fair tax you retain the 10k but pay at purchase. The mortgage is a standing financial service so you would pay at signing not on a continual basis so through the life of the mortgage you actually have free money as disposable income which leads to either consumption or investment/savings at which you pay the taxes. I argue that the consumer is still ahead.

    And speaking of housing, the cost of a new home would have to include a 30% sales tax, while the cost of an existing home would have to include a 0% sales tax. What might happen in real estate markets as the result of that, I wonder. Any implications for new versus used cars?
    I don't think behavior will change all that much. Many people already don't buy new cars due to the automatic depreciation upon leaving the lot, used cars have a lower rate, I believe that a new car/new home buyer is already of the mindset that they will pay for new. Most people who buy new homes buy because it has what they want, many buyers of existing homes do so as a trade off on cost. I see no reason this would change.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  7. #957
    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 Cardinal Fang View Post
    Your personal opinion on the matter is of course entirely irrelevant. Unless you can make a valid claim that your million-dollar income is being treated differently from the million-dollar income of someone similalry situated, you have no case. None. Congress has a clear power to create as many tax brackets as it wants at whatever rates that it wants.
    According to the sixteenth it does. As I said earlier economic discrimination is still discrimination and if someone wanted to press the issue using the equal protections clause they would have a decent case.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  8. #958
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

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

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    a temporary tax to pay for a war-not a permanent malignancy to support dems winning elections
    Are you under the impression we have no wars or debts to pay for today?

    The “War On Terror” Is A $6 Trillion Racket, With $1 Trillion In Interest Alone, Exceeding The Total Cost Of World War II
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  9. #959
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,606

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal Fang View Post
    The rich seem to be paying about 20% LESS per dollar than they were just a decade or so ago. These last years have been like a tax holiday for the wealthy. More and more low-income workers meanwhile fall off the rolls because their incomes are stagnant enough to render them unqualified to pay taxes anymore.

    same with everyone else-especially the 50% or so who pay NO INCOME TAX. Guess what, the rich pay a higher percentage of the income tax now than at any time in the last 60 years.

  10. #960
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,606

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

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    You're kidding, right? I've never seen anything closer to actually buying votes than contributing $$$ billions to political campaigns. It isn't "the masses" making those huge contributions, it's the rich and their corporate minions. The masses don't write the tax laws or vote on them. Face it, the rich buy the only votes that really matter in America - the votes of the lawmakers.
    why does the class warrior in chief constantly spew stuff out his ass claiming the "rich don't pay their fair share"

    and you seem to think all the rich and all the corporations are GOP leaning. complete crap

Posting Permissions

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