Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well, I have to disagree with most of the posters... technically it isn't anything new, estate taxes have for a long time been that high... Obama is merely continuing it and not abating it per Bush's plans... Besides that, estates less than 3.5M are EXEMPT (7M per couple), thus if your estate is less than 3.5M to 7M, you aren't affected at all... seems fair to me, the parents are obviously enjoying their lives, the children should be building their own fortunes... to each their responsibility...
So you work hard to save and die and it's okay with you that the government gets 45% of it and not your children??? Now I know where you are coming from...
Life's not fair. Not going to get blood from a turnip either from the poorer classes. US declares bankruptcy? United States of China!
Awful easy to be in favor of taking away someone else's money, isn't it? Try that shoe on when it's your money that's being taken away and see if it fits the same way.
Do you know what happens when you penalize the most productive people in a group? They leave! Then what happens? You're left with the same mess and a lot less talent to fix it. Doesn't seem very smart to me.
why would anybody think that the government could handle money better than they could? it seems that the government track record for managing money has been pretty lame considering that our country is BANKRUPT.
Can somebody clarify this point - for a single person, the $3.5 million exemption means that if a single guy dies with $5 million, the taxes equal 45% on the dollars from $3.5 to $5 only, correct? In this case, a total of $675,000 payment, not the $2.25 million it would be if the whole five mill were taxed. In effect, that is a tax rate of 13.5% on the whole estate.
The hypocricy involved in this issue is sort of interesting to watch too.
President Obama's Chief economic advisor is Lawrence Summers. Summers was one of two co-authors of the 1980 study that determined that, "intergenerational transfers account for the vast majority of aggregate U.S. capital formation." They concluded that one of the biggest motivators for people to reinvest in their businesses and to create strong, growing, and sustainable businesses was the desire to leave it to their progeny so they might enjoy a better life. Expanding on that research, a guy by the name of Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who was once the director of the Congressional Budget Office, concluded that, "the long-term impact of eliminating the death tax would be to increase small business capital investment by $1.6 trillion. This additional investment would create 1.5 million new jobs."
So let's review. President Obama's cheif economic advisor has shown that the ability to pass wealth to the next generation is one of the most significant motivators for successful people to create & invset in businesses that benefit the nation. A former director of the CBO has shown that taxing that passed down wealth to such a degree will cost trillions of dollars and over a million jobs. Yet, President Obama STILL insists on taking this money from "the Rich." What's the reason for that? Can anyone show us how it's beneficial to the nation? How it does anything other than punish the families of those that have been successful? Well, that and buy the votes of those who believe that they are being cared for by poppa government.
Last edited by Bill Keegan; 04-04-2009 at 09:14 AM..
Reason: Typos
Can somebody clarify this point - for a single person, the $3.5 million exemption means that if a single guy dies with $5 million, the taxes equal 45% on the dollars from $3.5 to $5 only, correct? In this case, a total of $675,000 payment, not the $2.25 million it would be if the whole five mill were taxed. In effect, that is a tax rate of 13.5% on the whole estate.
Do I have that right?
Technically, there are taxes due on the entire estate, with the % increasing as the value of the estate increases, at various stepping points along the way. (Here's a link to Wikipedia's entry on the tax, where you can find the entire progressive table. Note that I didn't validate the numbers, but they appear accurate.) Credits are issued on any amount due for the estate value below $3.5mil., effectively eliminating taxes for that level.
The hypocricy involved in this issue is sort of interesting to watch too.
President Obama's Chief economic advisor is Lawrence Summers. Summers was one of two co-authors of the 1980 study that determined that, "intergenerational transfers account for the vast majority of aggregate U.S. capital formation." They concluded that one of the biggest motivators for people to reinvest in their businesses and to create strong, growing, and sustainable businesses was the desire to leave it to their progeny so they might enjoy a better life. Expanding on that research, a guy by the name of Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who was once the director of the Congressional Budget Office, concluded that, "the long-term impact of eliminating the death tax would be to increase small business capital investment by $1.6 trillion. This additional investment would create 1.5 million new jobs."
So let's review. President Obama's cheif economic advisor has shown that the ability to pass wealth to the next generation is one of the most significant motivators for successful people to create & invset in businesses that benefit the nation. A former director of the CBO has shown that taxing that passed down wealth to such a degree will cost trillions of dollars and over a million jobs. Yet, President Obama STILL insists on taking this money from "the Rich." What's the reason for that? Can anyone show us how it's beneficial to the nation? How it does anything other than punish the families of those that have been successful? Well, that and buy the votes of those who believe that they are being cared for by poppa government.
Great Post!
I wish people would put the effort into really thinking about an issue prior to forming their opinion. The Death Tax is counterproductive in so many aspects that it needs to be abolished.
Fact 1. It does not affect the dynasties that control big business; if anything it helps them by hindering the up and coming productive family businesses. Why do you think the same dynasties are in charge now that were in charge in the last depression?
Fact 2. It encourages people with large assets to invest those assets offshore to avoid the tax.
Fact 3. It discourages productivity by placing a ceiling on earnings beyond which there is little reward for the risks and effort of expansion.
Fact 4. It takes capitol out of a system where it would be adding to GDP and creating jobs, putting it in the hands of government, where it is immediately spent, almost always in a manor that is wasteful and non productive.
Is that 3.5 mil figure correct..? It's been four years since handed an estate, but at that time it was anything over 1 million. I can't believe it's gone up that much. Anyone have an accuratre figure on the taxable amount..??
I would argue that the actions and leadership of that CEO led to their company earning hundreds of millions of dollars.
Otherwise, I don't begrudge anyone getting money that is legally and ethically earned.
Didn't some guy walk around the desert for 40 years in search of an honest CEO?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
