Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 12-17-2007, 11:09 AM   #81
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freein05 View Post
As far as those with estates over 17 million I really don't care.
And why doesn't he care?

I didn't check freein05's other posts - maybe freein05 is one of those lawyers or planners that makes money helping the >$17M estates avoid paying this tax?

I just don't get how the 'wealth redistribution' crowd can support the estate tax, when they know that the really rich don't pay it? No matter which side of the fence you come down on regarding wealth redistribution, this just does not make sense to me.

:confused:

-ERD50
__________________

__________________
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 12-17-2007, 11:18 AM   #82
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
And why doesn't he care?

I didn't check freein05's other posts - maybe freein05 is one of those lawyers or planners that makes money helping the >$17M estates avoid paying this tax?

I just don't get how the 'wealth redistribution' crowd can support the estate tax, when they know that the really rich don't pay it? No matter which side of the fence you come down on regarding wealth redistribution, this just does not make sense to me.

:confused:

-ERD50
Why do people call it Redistribution of Wealth? It is a tax just like any other tax. It is used to fund bad things like war and other things like to build the roads you drive on. Those who use the term are basically calling for class warfare. I do not believe in war especially the current one so why should my taxes be Redistributed to finance a war that many wealthy companies are making a killing on.
__________________

__________________
Freein05 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2007, 11:31 AM   #83
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freein05 View Post
Why do people call it Redistribution of Wealth? It is a tax just like any other tax. It is used to fund bad things like war and other things like to build the roads you drive on. Those who use the term are basically calling for class warfare. I do not believe in war especially the current one so why should my taxes be Redistributed to finance a war that many wealthy companies are making a killing on.
Well, it seems to me that the people who are in favor of estate taxes make that exact claim - they want to redistribute the wealth from the 'rich' to the 'rest of us'.

How many times have we heard Ms Paris's name associated with this tax? I don't hear that about my federal telecommunications tax.

It's not like any other tax - it is a 55% rate on your life savings (minus the exclusion). Some of this may or may not have been taxed i several ways previously - no distinction made.

Yes, taxes all go into one big pool, and this is no different. But the sources are the 'rich' that did not pay people to avoid the tax. So from that standpoint, it is some convoluted form of wealth redistribution.

FYI - I'm not against (moderate and 'fair') forms of wealth redistribution. When I made little money, I paid lower tax rates. When I made more, I paid higher rates - and I could afford to do so - it wasn't 'painful' (I had more discretionary income) and I don't think it was 'unfair'. But I think the estate tax and loopholes is just plain crazy.

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2007, 11:51 AM   #84
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
bright eyed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,891
just curious, does anyone know the actual percentage of those who qualify to pay the tax that avoid it? seems like the general assumption is that most don't - just wanted to know if there was any data to support this? why would so many push so hard to discard it if they weren't paying it? perhaps just to avoid the PIA to avoid it...
__________________
If i think of something clever to say, i'll put it here...
bright eyed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2007, 11:59 AM   #85
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon
Posts: 831
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
But I think the estate tax and loopholes is just plain crazy.

-ERD50
I think it is just a legallized, socially sanitized form of corpse robbing. They used to severly ostracize and punish the low-life who robbed jewelry or belongings from corpses. Now they call this dispicable practice "an estate tax".
__________________
Dreams Worth Dreaming are Dreams Worth Planning For. I Spent a Career Planning for Early Retirement.
RetireeRobert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2007, 12:01 PM   #86
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by bright eyed View Post
just curious, does anyone know the actual percentage of those who qualify to pay the tax that avoid it? seems like the general assumption is that most don't - just wanted to know if there was any data to support this? why would so many push so hard to discard it if they weren't paying it? perhaps just to avoid the PIA to avoid it...
I'd love to hear the numbers, but it is always tough to measure 'avoidance'.

One basic reason to be against it is the unfairness of the loopholes, and inconsistency of taxing at the same rate regardless of how much the estate was previously taxed (realized vs unrealized gains).

Honest people hate 'unfairness' even if it does not affect them directly.

I don't have to be a member of a minority to recognize how unfair discrimination can be, and take a stand against discrimination.

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2007, 01:13 PM   #87
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Rustic23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Lake Livingston, Tx
Posts: 3,624
When we were in Napa Ca. we went to the Beringer Winery. They told us about the two brothers that founded it and how it was not owned by a big corporation. Seems like the winery was left to the widows. One died and huge estate taxes were owed and payed, then in the same year the other one died. The estate could not pay the tax without selling the winery. So now Beringers is not family owned. I don't really see how this is a good thing.
__________________
Rustic23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2007, 01:23 PM   #88
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon
Posts: 831
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rustic23 View Post
When we were in Napa Ca. we went to the Beringer Winery. They told us about the two brothers that founded it and how it was not owned by a big corporation. Seems like the winery was left to the widows. One died and huge estate taxes were owed and payed, then in the same year the other one died. The estate could not pay the tax without selling the winery. So now Beringers is not family owned. I don't really see how this is a good thing.

It's not. It's a bad thing. I rmember decades ago, early 70's, going to the Beringer Winery. Sampled a special limited edition called "Traubengold". I loved it. Only a family winery would make something like that in the limited volumes they did. It would never even occur to a corporation.
__________________
Dreams Worth Dreaming are Dreams Worth Planning For. I Spent a Career Planning for Early Retirement.
RetireeRobert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2007, 02:24 PM   #89
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
bright eyed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,891
Well, here is some interesting counter-point...

http://www.citizen.org/documents/EstateTaxFinal.pdf


According to this report, 18 families have poured over $55 mill into the anti estate tax campaign...
I think this is an interesting point:

In 2004, for instance, the Club for Growth, one of the many “issue-advocacy groups” bankrolled by the wealthy families who appear in Spending Millions to Save Billions, ran ads throughout the South Dakota re-election campaign of Senate minority leader Tom Daschle, an estate tax supporter.
“When you die, the IRS can tax you again, taking as much as 55 percent of everything you’ve saved for your children,” intoned one of the Club for Growth spots. “Sen. Tom Daschle wants to keep the death tax.”
In fact, in the year before that ad aired, only 50 of the 7,026 South Dakotans who passed away left an estate large enough to face even a penny of federal estate tax.
And the current estate tax impacts even fewer families.


In 2006,individuals receive a $2 million exemption from the estate tax and couples receive a $4 million exemption. As a result, it is estimated that less than one-third of one percent (0.27 percent) of all estates will pay the federal estate tax in 2006, about one out of every 370 estates
. Based on census projections for 2006, 2.3 million people will die in 2006 and only about 6,300 will have
taxable estates.1

And that's not counting the people who pay it, just eligible to pay it...
__________________
If i think of something clever to say, i'll put it here...
bright eyed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2007, 02:33 PM   #90
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freein05 View Post
Why do people call it Redistribution of Wealth? It is a tax just like any other tax. It is used to fund bad things like war and other things like to build the roads you drive on. Those who use the term are basically calling for class warfare. I do not believe in war especially the current one so why should my taxes be Redistributed to finance a war that many wealthy companies are making a killing on.
It is called re-distribution of wealth when a special tax or fee is targeted specifically at a group of people that make more than the average. If a tax is applied to everyone reguardless of wealth status, then I might not like the tax, but at least it is fair accross the board.
When a tax is imposed on only the top 10% (or whatever percentage you might include), then it has the net effect of making that percentage "poorer" and usually that money gets redirected to lower income folks in the form of government programs, making those people "richer". If this sounds like a robin hood type scenario... that is because it is...
__________________
armor99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2007, 03:52 PM   #91
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rustic23 View Post
... The estate could not pay the tax without selling the winery. So now Beringers is not family owned. I don't really see how this is a good thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bright eyed View Post
Well, here is some interesting counter-point...
... only 50 of the 7,026 South Dakotans who passed away left an estate large enough to face even a penny of federal estate tax.
And the current estate tax impacts even fewer families.
Interesting - I keep picking up very mixed messages from the liberal crowd. Maybe someone can explain.

1) I thought liberals hated big corporations and idolized the small family owned mom-pop operations. Yet, this tax can destroy family owned businesses (though I imagine some expensive planners and lawyers could have 'saved them').

2) Since when do we justify being unfair to a group of people, by pointing out that it is a small group? That's a pretty slippery slope. << I decided to delete a colorful analogy here - but not the reference to it >>

I think the moral compass must be getting bumped around a bit too much to give a true North reading?

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2007, 04:14 PM   #92
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
bright eyed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,891
Why paint with such broad stroaks? None of us fall so neatly into such boxes do we?

I just wanted to provide some numeros to contribute to the discussion

<<Since when do we justify being unfair to a group of people, by pointing out that it is a small group? That's a pretty slippery slope>>

I'm not convinced it's unfair...The $2 mill is going up in 2009...to $3.5 million - which means $7 mill for a couple!

If you allow this massive accumulation of wealth forever, i don't quite see how that is "fair" since very quickly none of the recipients earned anything but by being born into the right family and then the vast majority of us are born into the wrong ones!
__________________
If i think of something clever to say, i'll put it here...
bright eyed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2007, 04:14 PM   #93
Moderator Emeritus
Martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: minnesota
Posts: 13,212
__________________
.


No more lawyer stuff, no more political stuff, so no more CYA

Martha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2007, 04:22 PM   #94
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
Interesting - I keep picking up very mixed messages from the liberal crowd. Maybe someone can explain.

1) I thought liberals hated big corporations and idolized the small family owned mom-pop operations. Yet, this tax can destroy family owned businesses (though I imagine some expensive planners and lawyers could have 'saved them').

2) Since when do we justify being unfair to a group of people, by pointing out that it is a small group? That's a pretty slippery slope. << I decided to delete a colorful analogy here - but not the reference to it >>

I think the moral compass must be getting bumped around a bit too much to give a true North reading?

-ERD50
What good does using labels like liberals add to this discussion.
__________________
Freein05 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2007, 04:26 PM   #95
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Tadpole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,170
bright eyed
You are right. Also, I won't support any new tax cuts for the golden asses until the AMT is fixed and the government bills are paid. You get the money from those who have the money. I can't stand all the whining about the rights of people who did not earn their money while people who do earn their money are having their SS borrowed and are told "we stole it; it's gone" by the very people that keep spending it as fast as it comes in.

If you want to be the biggest war machine in the world - fine, pay for it. If you want to subsidize rich companies - fine, pay for it. If you want to outsource the government to private contractors - fine, pay for it. Etc. At some point these arguments are beyond ridiculous considering the spending side.
__________________
Tadpole is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2007, 05:32 PM   #96
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by armor99 View Post
And this is where all wealth re-distribution type thinking falls apart. Do you really think that most people who you consider weathy, consider "themselves" to be wealthy? Most likely not. There is always more money to be had, bigger homes to buy etc. Even owners of that 110' yaht, look with envy on occasion at the 200' yaht. Very few people that I know are 100% content with what they have, and never strive for more. I think this is a constant no matter how much wealth you have.
So my question is this. What if someone who makes considerably less money than you suddenly said.... "Well I do not really care about people with estates over <fill in your own value here> they are weathy anyway!" What is considered "rich" is a completely relative term. If such taxes affected someone with a $ 2mill estate, those people would yell , "Wait... do not tax me I am not rich!!! (looking at those who have a $ 5 mill estate)" And exactly the same thing would happen to those with a $20 mill estate looking at those who make even more. I guess I just find it hypocritical for folks to advocate an esate tax for the rich (whoever those folks might actually be), but not for themselves as well. Just another example of "wanting your cake, and eating it too", you just cannot have it both ways.
Bingo!

Make the exemption $0 and keep the tax rate at 55%, and see how many folks support it.
__________________
TickTock Rule Of Finance - heavily discount any promises of money/benefits to be paid to you in the future

"I've traded love for pennies, sold my soul for less" -Jim Croce, Age
TickTock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2007, 05:34 PM   #97
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tadpole View Post
I can't stand all the whining about the rights of people who did not earn their money while people who do earn their money are having their SS borrowed and are told "we stole it; it's gone" by the very people that keep spending it as fast as it comes in.
Tadpole,

I'm assuming here that by 'not earn their money' you mean inheritances. No, that person did not earn it - but someone else did work for it, save, and invest. Why shouldn't they decide who gets the fruits of their labors instead of the government?
__________________
TickTock Rule Of Finance - heavily discount any promises of money/benefits to be paid to you in the future

"I've traded love for pennies, sold my soul for less" -Jim Croce, Age
TickTock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2007, 05:48 PM   #98
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by bright eyed View Post
I'm not convinced it's unfair...The $2 mill is going up in 2009...to $3.5 million - which means $7 mill for a couple!
That is not the real 'unfairness' I speak of. The major 'unfairness' that I speak of is how the very rich evade the estate tax altogether. I said I'm OK with the idea of some wealth redistribution. I happen to think the idea of an estate tax is not a good way to do it, and I think the current system of loopholes make it an abominable way to do it.

This is one of the inconsistencies I just don't get. Why support a 'tax on the rich', that is evaded by 'the rich enough to hire people to help them evade it'?

Quote:
If you allow this massive accumulation of wealth forever, i don't quite see how that is "fair" since very quickly none of the recipients earned anything but by being born into the right family and then the vast majority of us are born into the wrong ones!
Well, I addressed this before, but once again - the estate tax does a really, really poor job of attacking this issue. If that is what you think we need, you should support an $X limit per person, right? (and then figure out how to do this w/o creating loopholes to help a truly needy child). The Estate tax could be 99%, and I imagine there would still be plenty of money for a Ms Hilton to live an 'unfair' lifestyle.

And I said this somewhat tongue-in-cheek (on the Danny thread I think), but the advantages of being born into the 'right' family are not just a matter of inheritance, but upbringing. It is a fact that the children of higher income people do better in school - this is before they inherited a penny! So let's switch babies at birth - give 'em a fair chance. My kids had the 'unfair' advantage of being born into a family of educated, hard-working, stable parents - no fair! We should have the govt steal them from us, put them in the homes of drug addicts and give us a couple of crack babies. Fair enough?

( sorry if Martha just imploded - I didn't want to do it, I swear )

The first step to solving a problem is - defining the problem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freein05 View Post
What good does using labels like liberals add to this discussion.
Sorry - it was just a convenience. I should have said 'some supporters of the Estate Tax'. But I'm not aware of any non-liberals that are really in favor of the Estate Tax - and I don't count the ones who say they are, but make sure they aren't paying it.

-ERD50

Here Martha, maybe this will help

__________________
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2007, 06:02 PM   #99
Recycles dryer sheets
gandalf42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Fort Collins, CO
Posts: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
That is not the real 'unfairness' I speak of. The major 'unfairness' that I speak of is how the very rich evade the estate tax altogether.
This keeps coming up, but is this a truth or an urban myth? The article quoted earlier had wealthy families donating millions towards eliminating the estate tax. Gates and Buffet are giving their $ away.

Sure, I can avoid taxes by giving away everything, there's just not much future in it.

:confused:
__________________
"Being rich is having money; being wealthy is having time."

"It is only possible to live happily ever after on a day-to-day basis” Margaret Bonnano
gandalf42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2007, 06:07 PM   #100
Moderator Emeritus
Martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: minnesota
Posts: 13,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by gandalf42 View Post
This keeps coming up, but is this a truth or an urban myth? The article quoted earlier had wealthy families donating millions towards eliminating the estate tax. Gates and Buffet are giving their $ away.

Sure, I can avoid taxes by giving away everything, there's just not much future in it.

:confused:
Yes, the very wealthy avoid estate taxes by setting up foundations. So charities benefit as a result. Now sometimes those foundations employ the grantor's relatives for a hefty salary, so wealth to some extent is perpetuated that way.

Now back to bowing out of this discussion. Bad Martha! Bad!
__________________

__________________
.


No more lawyer stuff, no more political stuff, so no more CYA

Martha is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Those Who Tithe, What About Inheritance? retiringby50 FIRE and Money 22 12-08-2007 11:23 PM
inheritance Moemg FIRE and Money 36 11-05-2007 02:36 PM
Impending Inheritance - What to do! Jon Snow Hi, I am... 4 03-11-2007 12:31 AM
Anyone expecting an inheritance? laurence Young Dreamers 77 03-03-2007 03:42 PM
not only no inheritance... Khan FIRE and Money 10 12-31-2006 06:47 AM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:34 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.