Kansas Crimson

TDub wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 4:05 pm

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 3:57 pm That was a number I pulled out of the air.

Maybe you start taxing at 1.5 million and progressively increase from there.

But to the point MJL made. I just don't see why the Accountant making $90K has to pay a higher tax rate and the top level inheritance tax rate has dropped 20% over the past couple decades.

The argument against it is that it's already been taxed, but that was when it was someone else's money. If you got a windfall of money for sharing half your genetic information rather than working for it, tax the shit out of it, and be happy you got any money given to you. Let people who do something productive to earn their money keep more of it.

Well. Technically the wealth in thw inheritance money has already had tax paid on it when it was made. Its just a gift to the benefactor.


But. You can only receive i believe 13k per year in gift money tax free. So im not sure why inheritance would be different than that

NiceDC wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 4:40 pm

TDub wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 4:05 pm

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 3:57 pm That was a number I pulled out of the air.

Maybe you start taxing at 1.5 million and progressively increase from there.

But to the point MJL made. I just don't see why the Accountant making $90K has to pay a higher tax rate and the top level inheritance tax rate has dropped 20% over the past couple decades.

The argument against it is that it's already been taxed, but that was when it was someone else's money. If you got a windfall of money for sharing half your genetic information rather than working for it, tax the shit out of it, and be happy you got any money given to you. Let people who do something productive to earn their money keep more of it.

Well. Technically the wealth in thw inheritance money has already had tax paid on it when it was made. Its just a gift to the benefactor.


But. You can only receive i believe 13k per year in gift money tax free. So im not sure why inheritance would be different than that

I agree with TDub in part. Estate taxes are not the issue. An estate, theoretically, has already been taxed. It's loopholes in the tax code that leads to a lack of tax revenue. I don't agree with taxing income twice only because they died. That's pretty communistic (assuming that the state has more rights to the money than the heirs). If you want to put a nominal tax, 1-3%, I think that might fine. I don't know how you justify it other than "you did well in life, and we want a cut."

Also, tax-free giftable income is now $15k per person.

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 4:04 pm We differentiate more between $60,000 and $80,000 than we do between $2.5 million and $2.5 billion. So that means a 1.3 fold increase in money matters more than a 1,000 fold increase.

TDub wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 6:02 pm Smaller government. More power at state level, more power/ responsibility in individuals.


Now wheres someone to come call me racist for that, that would complete my day.

NiceDC wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 6:05 pm

TDub wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 6:02 pm Smaller government. More power at state level, more power/ responsibility in individuals.


Now wheres someone to come call me racist for that, that would complete my day.

How is small government racist? Unless you mean Pygmies government.

zsn wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 6:03 pm “The Government” doesn’t use the money one way or another. It’s the reprobates we elect who don’t use the money wisely.

NiceDC wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 6:05 pm

TDub wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 6:02 pm Smaller government. More power at state level, more power/ responsibility in individuals.


Now wheres someone to come call me racist for that, that would complete my day.

How is small government racist? Unless you mean Pygmies government.

TDub wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 6:37 pm

NiceDC wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 6:05 pm

TDub wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 6:02 pm Smaller government. More power at state level, more power/ responsibility in individuals.


Now wheres someone to come call me racist for that, that would complete my day.

How is small government racist? Unless you mean Pygmies government.

Thats a good question. Ive been called racist on here for preferring smaller government and saying that we should lessen the federal power and increase state level power.

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 4:59 pm

NiceDC wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 4:40 pm

TDub wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 4:05 pm

Well. Technically the wealth in thw inheritance money has already had tax paid on it when it was made. Its just a gift to the benefactor.


But. You can only receive i believe 13k per year in gift money tax free. So im not sure why inheritance would be different than that

I agree with TDub in part. Estate taxes are not the issue. An estate, theoretically, has already been taxed. It's loopholes in the tax code that leads to a lack of tax revenue. I don't agree with taxing income twice only because they died. That's pretty communistic (assuming that the state has more rights to the money than the heirs). If you want to put a nominal tax, 1-3%, I think that might fine. I don't know how you justify it other than "you did well in life, and we want a cut."

Also, tax-free giftable income is now $15k per person.

But we HAVE an estate tax NOW. That goes from 18% (on anything up to $10,000) up to 40% (that caps out inheritance above $1 million). I'm not proposing something that doesn't already exist, so it's already been justified.

My point, is if you increase the tax rate on truly large sums of money, it should encourage people to use their money in their lifetimes rather than accruing familial wealth. And I'd get rid of it for smaller sums of money, I think it's silly to tax inheritances of say under $1 million (But that's currently happening - although there are large exemptions in most cases.)

Yes tax loopholes are a bigger problem. But you're sounding like a republican if you want to simplify the tax code and get rid of deductions.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 7:27 pm I...don’t think it’s from dollar one right now?

jfish26 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 7:27 pm

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 4:59 pm

NiceDC wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 4:40 pm
I agree with TDub in part. Estate taxes are not the issue. An estate, theoretically, has already been taxed. It's loopholes in the tax code that leads to a lack of tax revenue. I don't agree with taxing income twice only because they died. That's pretty communistic (assuming that the state has more rights to the money than the heirs). If you want to put a nominal tax, 1-3%, I think that might fine. I don't know how you justify it other than "you did well in life, and we want a cut."

Also, tax-free giftable income is now $15k per person.

But we HAVE an estate tax NOW. That goes from 18% (on anything up to $10,000) up to 40% (that caps out inheritance above $1 million). I'm not proposing something that doesn't already exist, so it's already been justified.

My point, is if you increase the tax rate on truly large sums of money, it should encourage people to use their money in their lifetimes rather than accruing familial wealth. And I'd get rid of it for smaller sums of money, I think it's silly to tax inheritances of say under $1 million (But that's currently happening - although there are large exemptions in most cases.)

Yes tax loopholes are a bigger problem. But you're sounding like a republican if you want to simplify the tax code and get rid of deductions.

I...don’t think it’s from dollar one right now?

NiceDC wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 8:37 pm

jfish26 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 7:27 pm I...don’t think it’s from dollar one right now?

I remember talking to a lawyer that said if any client had to pay an estate tax, that client's lawyer should be disbarred.

But to answer your question, it's like 12 millions dollars that the federal estate tax comes into play. Then dollar one does comes into play, but it's so toothless that less than 2k estates a year actually have to pay estate tax.

NiceDC wrote: ↑Thu Aug 06, 2020 8:45 am Per Worldinfo, US will hit 5 million confirmed cases today.

NiceDC wrote: ↑Thu Aug 06, 2020 8:58 am As, I hate to put on the tinfoil hat, but Florida's numbers have been suspiciously low the last week, when it appeared they were cooking the numbers earlier own (pneumonia deaths, not allowing some number to report). Newsweek reported this week that there are 10s of thousands of cases in Texas that aren't being reported.

I love how Republican led states are hiding numbers as they think it will make them/the party look poorly. I hope the Biden administration looks into this, and gives up better estimates on how many folks actually are thought to have had this.