• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should Jim DeMints proposed amendment, removing the estate tax have failed?

Should Jim DeMints proposed amendment removing the estate tax have failed?

  • Yes

    Votes: 10 41.7%

  • No

    Votes: 14 58.3%
  • Total voters
    24
obvious Child said:
Come again?

So if Harry buys a stock at $5 with after tax dollars and dies when it's at $15, that gain of $10 has already been taxed?

If so, when was that gain ever taxed?
Click to expand...

when his son sells it at 15 bucks then they can tax it with a basis of 5

If my father buys a painting for 20K and leaves it to me, and at the time of his death its worth 50K I shouldn't have to sell it to pay taxes on it. HOwever if I do sell it, the capital gain should be taxed and that is 30K
 
Well, I voted "No".

I don't think there should be any estate taxes.

Now, I know this means those few extremely rich persons can pass massive fortunes on to their decedents, without a cent being taxed…

But why is that a bad thing?

As I view it, one of the key reasons for working to obtain wealth is to prevent your decedents from having too, or having to do as much.

Having said that, however, I personally do not approve of the uses some (the ones who show up in the news) heirs put their inheritance to.

I would almost say there should be a “luxury tax”, but I tend to be opposed to taxation in general terms, so…

I dunno.

/shrug
 
Chappy said:
I think inheritance taxes are a good thing for society: let's not have wealth become too entrenched.
Click to expand...

so lets apply the death tax to everyone then and entrench the wealth into the hands of the government since the government obviously has a better claim to it.

Inheritance taxes are only good for the pimps in the government who pander to people who are envious of the rich
 
TurtleDude said:
when his son sells it at 15 bucks then they can tax it with a basis of 5
Click to expand...

So the answer is no, it hasn't been taxed. RTFQ.

Furthermore, when the son sells the stock, he will sell it at the stepped up basis of $15, not the carry over basis from his deceased father. Therefore, the gain would never have been taxed. Welcome to basic estate taxes 101. It appear the class knows virtually nothing.

If my father buys a painting for 20K and leaves it to me, and at the time of his death its worth 50K I shouldn't have to sell it to pay taxes on it. HOwever if I do sell it, the capital gain should be taxed and that is 30K
Click to expand...

But that's not how it works. Assets get a stepped up basis upon transfer from the estate. Therefore, if you sold the painting with an original basis of $20k which was then stepped up to $50k, there would be no taxable income from that transaction. Thus, we have an estate tax to compensate for that.

If we wanted to do it your way, we'd have to spend huge amounts of time and money to police tax exempted organizations as people with low basis but high FMV items would simply donate them to charities they controlled, have the charity sell it and then pay themselves a salary from that transaction.
 
Last edited:
Hell yes, it was correct to vote the Bill down.

  • Dynastic wealth is not good for the country.
  • The very wealthy already have ways to shelter their wealth through various foundations.
  • If there is no estate tax, then the heirs get the money tax free. To claim this is double taxation is ludicrous. (If you earn money, you are taxed for it. If you use that profit to pay an employee, they will have to pay taxes on those earnings)
  • The heirs need to use their ingenuity to earn their own wealth.
  • Make the limit high enough that people don't lose their business.
 
jamesrage said:
I do not think its right to tax something that someone has already paid taxes on. Its just like these vehicle registrations and property taxes, there should one be a one time tax at the time of the purchase and thats it.
Click to expand...

Its not double taxation. The tax is assessed on the receiver (its new wealth to them) not the giver.
 
megaprogman said:
Its not double taxation. The tax is assessed on the receiver (its new wealth to them) not the giver.
Click to expand...

You are incorrect because the estate is taxed on its worth not the income of the recipient. The entire purpose of that abomination was created when there was no income tax. With steep-almost confiscatory income taxes-the estate tax needs to be eliminated. If your argument is it is income then tax it as income for everyone. If your argument is that the heirs didn't "earn it" (setting aside the right of the donor to do what he wants) then that argument is even more valid when applied to greedy politicians who use this tool of class warfare to appeal to the envious
 
obvious Child said:
So the answer is no, it hasn't been taxed. RTFQ.

Furthermore, when the son sells the stock, he will sell it at the stepped up basis of $15, not the carry over basis from his deceased father. Therefore, the gain would never have been taxed. Welcome to basic estate taxes 101. It appear the class knows virtually nothing.



But that's not how it works. Assets get a stepped up basis upon transfer from the estate. Therefore, if you sold the painting with an original basis of $20k which was then stepped up to $50k, there would be no taxable income from that transaction. Thus, we have an estate tax to compensate for that.

If we wanted to do it your way, we'd have to spend huge amounts of time and money to police tax exempted organizations as people with low basis but high FMV items would simply donate them to charities they controlled, have the charity sell it and then pay themselves a salary from that transaction.
Click to expand...


better yet lets get rid of this abomination--if its so great why apply it only to a small voting block? Because it is designed to further the power of those who pander to people who think like you. It is not designed as an efficient an fair revenue producer but a tool that political pimps use to get power
 
TurtleDude said:
You are incorrect because the estate is taxed on its worth not the income of the recipient. The entire purpose of that abomination was created when there was no income tax. With steep-almost confiscatory income taxes-the estate tax needs to be eliminated. If your argument is it is income then tax it as income for everyone. If your argument is that the heirs didn't "earn it" (setting aside the right of the donor to do what he wants) then that argument is even more valid when applied to greedy politicians who use this tool of class warfare to appeal to the envious
Click to expand...

Estate tax in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The estate tax in the United States is a tax imposed on the transfer of the "taxable estate" of a deceased person, whether such property is transferred via a will, according to the state laws of intestacy or otherwise made as an incident of the death of the owner, such as a transfer of property from an intestate estate or trust, or the payment of certain life insurance benefits or financial account sums to beneficiaries. The estate tax is one part of the Unified Gift and Estate Tax system in the United States. The other part of the system, the gift tax, imposes a tax on transfers of property during a person's life; the gift tax prevents avoidance of the estate tax should a person want to give away his/her estate.
Click to expand...

As far as I can tell, transfer = income. However, I would not be opposed to taxing it as income since that is what it is. At least the money portions of it. I think stuff or land should be taxed at the market rate from a base of $0 at the time of sale.
 
Last edited:
TurtleDude said:
typical class warfare
which has been brewing since the dawn of time, and will continue.
do you think an estate of a couple million is "ultra wealthy"Of course, compared to me, most here seem to be "ultra wealthy"..
Click to expand...
And the wealthy conservatives will not give up until there is a 10% tax on all people, without any regard as to how a government can function....
I think they just want to regress to an earlier time of lords , serfs, and slaves. And continual warfare between the haves and the have-nots.
 
earthworm said:
And the wealthy conservatives will not give up until there is a 10% tax on all people, without any regard as to how a government can function....
I think they just want to regress to an earlier time of lords , serfs, and slaves. And continual warfare between the haves and the have-nots.
Click to expand...

thanks-your responses to my comments is the mindset that the dem lords pander to.

Its dems who really want a system of lords and serfs.. we have problems when too many people don't have to pay any taxes and yet feel a need to constantly raise them on others because they have the same mindset as you do--ultra wealthy is anyone making more than you
 
megaprogman said:
Estate tax in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



As far as I can tell, transfer = income. However, I would not be opposed to taxing it as income since that is what it is. At least the money portions of it. I think stuff or land should be taxed at the market rate from a base of $0 at the time of sale.
Click to expand...

1977, a girl I grew up with had this happen. Her grandfather died of a sudden heartattack-he was a widower and in great health with 20 more years of predicted life. His ten millon dollar estate goes to her father and mother-sans seveal millons. Two months after his funeral a suicidal nutcase drives his pickupt 120 miles an hour the wrong way on Interstate 71 and slams into this girl's parents Porsche. She and her sister are orphaned. That remaining estate again gets hit with the death confiscation tax, In 2 months 10 Million is twice hit with confiscatory taxes.

the death tax is an abomination-look at the arguments for it-its all based on envy and greed of those who are upset they didn't have wealthy parents.
 
TurtleDude said:
better yet lets get rid of this abomination--if its so great why apply it only to a small voting block? Because it is designed to further the power of those who pander to people who think like you. It is not designed as an efficient an fair revenue producer but a tool that political pimps use to get power
Click to expand...

So you not only are incapable of admitting you are wrong, but you are also incapable of admitting you know nothing about the topic.

What makes you think anyone should take what you say at any value when you don't even understand what the estate tax is and how it functions?

Tell me why the untaxed gains on inheritance shouldn't be taxed like all other gains.

Or just ramble on about meaningless partisan vomit that is in no way relevant to anything I said.
 
obvious Child said:
So you not only are incapable of admitting you are wrong, but you are also incapable of admitting you know nothing about the topic.

What makes you think anyone should take what you say at any value when you don't even understand what the estate tax is and how it functions?

Tell me why the untaxed gains on inheritance shouldn't be taxed like all other gains.

Or just ramble on about meaningless partisan vomit that is in no way relevant to anything I said.
Click to expand...

you are being clueless

I am not wrong-just because you don't like my opinion on what ought to be is not being wrong.

There should be no tax on capital gains
there should be no tax on income
there should be no tax on estates

the taxes should be on sales or use taxes

when you figure out the difference between speaking of what is and what should be get back to me
 
TurtleDude said:
you are being clueless
Click to expand...

Says the guy who demonstrated he does not understand the basis of how estate items are taxed. I'm clueless...but you don't understand how the estate tax operates. Really.

I am not wrong-just because you don't like my opinion on what ought to be is not being wrong.
Click to expand...

No, you are wrong on how the system operates.

Post #32
http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls...-estate-tax-have-failed-4.html#post1058884727

Shows you don't understand how the basis of items are valued which is absolutely vital to determining taxes on estates.

I'm not talking about how it outta be. I'm talking about your demonstration of ignorance on the topic as to how it actually works. Or are you again lacking reading comprehension to understand the subject as usual?

when you figure out the difference between speaking of what is and what should be get back to me
Click to expand...

Wow. Total Epic Fail there.

I pointed out you are 100% wrong on how the estate tax actually works and you come back saying my statement is wrong because of something different.

Furthermore, your little example there about the double taxation of estate is false. Current code does not tax the inherited estate twice if the beneficiary dies within a certain period of time, I believe currently ten years.

I see you utterly failed to show why untaxed gains on estates should escape taxation.
 
obvious Child said:
Says the guy who demonstrated he does not understand the basis of how estate items are taxed. I'm clueless...but you don't understand how the estate tax operates. Really.



No, you are wrong on how the system operates.

Post #32
http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls...-estate-tax-have-failed-4.html#post1058884727

Shows you don't understand how the basis of items are valued which is absolutely vital to determining taxes on estates.

I'm not talking about how it outta be. I'm talking about your demonstration of ignorance on the topic as to how it actually works. Or are you again lacking reading comprehension to understand the subject as usual?



Wow. Total Epic Fail there.

I pointed out you are 100% wrong on how the estate tax actually works and you come back saying my statement is wrong because of something different.

Furthermore, your little example there about the double taxation of estate is false. Current code does not tax the inherited estate twice if the beneficiary dies within a certain period of time, I believe currently ten years.

I see you utterly failed to show why untaxed gains on estates should escape taxation.
Click to expand...

LOL your opinions again

I oppose all taxes on income, wealth etc

so how do I fail-because you disagree with me or you are mad you are not as industrious and prosperous as others?

seems to me that where the FAIL is is not with me but with you

I am not the one envious and screaming that others need to be taxed more
 
TurtleDude said:
LOL your opinions again
Click to expand...

How is my statement that estate items receive a stepped up basis to FMV an "opinion?"

Oh it's not. And you're wrong. As usual.

I oppose all taxes on income, wealth etc
Click to expand...

Well, we know why.

so how do I fail-because you disagree with me or you are mad you are not as industrious and prosperous as others?
Click to expand...

Still can't read eh. You fail because you totally screwed up how the estate tax values items. Seriously, did you even read my post?

seems to me that where the FAIL is is not with me but with you
Click to expand...

See post #32 for your failure.

I am not the one envious and screaming that others need to be taxed more
Click to expand...

Again see post #32 for your failure.
 
obvious Child said:
How is my statement that estate items receive a stepped up basis to FMV an "opinion?"

Oh it's not. And you're wrong. As usual.



Well, we know why.



Still can't read eh. You fail because you totally screwed up how the estate tax values items. Seriously, did you even read my post?



See post #32 for your failure.



Again see post #32 for your failure.
Click to expand...

again you confuse opinion with what you think is fact

and again if you weren't a failure you'd not be whining about wanting others to pay more taxes
 
TurtleDude said:
again you confuse opinion with what you think is fact
Click to expand...

O'rly?

So you are saying that assets in an estate do not receive a stepped up basis to FMV?

OR IGNORE THIS AND RUN AWAY FROM IT LIKE IT'S THE PLAGUE

Let's play a game: How wrong is TurtleDude in understanding the estate tax?

and again if you weren't a failure you'd not be whining about wanting others to pay more taxes
Click to expand...

And again, if you weren't such a failure at reading, you'd actually respond to what people said.

Post #32 shows you are, as usual wrong.
 
obvious Child said:
O'rly?

So you are saying that assets in an estate do not receive a stepped up basis to FMV?

OR IGNORE THIS AND RUN AWAY FROM IT LIKE IT'S THE PLAGUE

Let's play a game: How wrong is TurtleDude in understanding the estate tax?



And again, if you weren't such a failure at reading, you'd actually respond to what people said.

Post #32 shows you are, as usual wrong.
Click to expand...

damn I need some more boots.


You sure are angry
 
TurtleDude said:
damn I need some more boots.


You sure are angry
Click to expand...

Well, thanks for proving my various points.

You don't understand the estate tax.
You don't understand the basis of assets in the estate tax.
You can't read properly.

And yes, assets in an estate receive a stepped up basis to FMV. You are wrong on this. 100%.
 
obvious Child said:
Well, thanks for proving my various points.

You don't understand the estate tax.
You don't understand the basis of assets in the estate tax.
You can't read properly.

And yes, assets in an estate receive a stepped up basis to FMV. You are wrong on this. 100%.
Click to expand...

more ASSumptions on your part

stop lying
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom