Vox article on inheritance

[Anonymous]

In any case, the democrats are 6-10 Senators away from having the votes to do anything with the estate tax, and that.assumes no filibuster. Estate tax reform is not likely anytime soon, probably ever. The estate tax is unpopular with Americans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the article:

"But Wolff also says, surprisingly, that inherited wealth isn’t a huge driver of inequality in America — it actually has had an equalizing effect. And there’s no indication that the next decades will be any different.

The reason is deceptively simple: While much (much!) more money flows among the rich, for middle- and low-income people who receive gifts or inheritance, they represent a larger percentage of wealth. So large, in fact, that for some people, a gift from mom or dad is the thing that will keep them middle class."

I'd like to see the data to back this up. Otherwise, I'm calling BS.

But ultimately, I don't care. The current estate taxes (lack thereof) is crazy. We are incentivizing bad things.

Working hard, saving, and investing money are not “bad things.” They are actually good things that society should encourage. Which is why the tax code does so.

I also work hard, save and invest. But I have to pay taxes. I would love a step up in basis for my capital gains. Why do heirs and heiresses get one and not me?

Every tax you pay was also paid by the decadent. And your children are able to inherit on the same tax basis as everyone else.

That still doesn't explain why society should give up a step up in basis to heiresses. Why not me, right now, a living person who works for my money? What is the benefit of that? What are estates taxed differently that ordinary income?

The same rationale underlies the capital gains tax being lower than income tax. And gains on sale of a primary residence being mostly exempt from capital gains tax Both of which you do benefit from. So, you want to keep the policies you personally benefit from only, which is not how the tax code works.

Quite the contrary. I want taxes to be uniform for everyone. No exceptions. I'm in favor of a flat tax. That is why our current estate tax laws are so abhorrent to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In any case, the democrats are 6-10 Senators away from having the votes to do anything with the estate tax, and that.assumes no filibuster. Estate tax reform is not likely anytime soon, probably ever. The estate tax is unpopular with Americans.

Because most don't know how the estate tax works. They would crap their pants if they understood how much the rich are getting away with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the article:

"But Wolff also says, surprisingly, that inherited wealth isn’t a huge driver of inequality in America — it actually has had an equalizing effect. And there’s no indication that the next decades will be any different.

The reason is deceptively simple: While much (much!) more money flows among the rich, for middle- and low-income people who receive gifts or inheritance, they represent a larger percentage of wealth. So large, in fact, that for some people, a gift from mom or dad is the thing that will keep them middle class."

I'd like to see the data to back this up. Otherwise, I'm calling BS.

But ultimately, I don't care. The current estate taxes (lack thereof) is crazy. We are incentivizing bad things.

Working hard, saving, and investing money are not “bad things.” They are actually good things that society should encourage. Which is why the tax code does so.

I also work hard, save and invest. But I have to pay taxes. I would love a step up in basis for my capital gains. Why do heirs and heiresses get one and not me?

Every tax you pay was also paid by the decadent. And your children are able to inherit on the same tax basis as everyone else.

That still doesn't explain why society should give up a step up in basis to heiresses. Why not me, right now, a living person who works for my money? What is the benefit of that? What are estates taxed differently that ordinary income?

The same rationale underlies the capital gains tax being lower than income tax. And gains on sale of a primary residence being mostly exempt from capital gains tax Both of which you do benefit from. So, you want to keep the policies you personally benefit from only, which is not how the tax code works.

This is false. If we wanted to incentivize "investing" everyone would pay the same capital gains rate. The step up in basis on death is not an incentive for anything. It is a giveaway to the wealthy.

What exactly is false? Are you denying that capital gains are taxed at a lower rate than income? Or that Sales of primary residences are largely exempt from tax?

By your reasoning, we should get rid of all business related deductions because only people in certain occupations can use them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the article:

"But Wolff also says, surprisingly, that inherited wealth isn’t a huge driver of inequality in America — it actually has had an equalizing effect. And there’s no indication that the next decades will be any different.

The reason is deceptively simple: While much (much!) more money flows among the rich, for middle- and low-income people who receive gifts or inheritance, they represent a larger percentage of wealth. So large, in fact, that for some people, a gift from mom or dad is the thing that will keep them middle class."

I'd like to see the data to back this up. Otherwise, I'm calling BS.

But ultimately, I don't care. The current estate taxes (lack thereof) is crazy. We are incentivizing bad things.

Working hard, saving, and investing money are not “bad things.” They are actually good things that society should encourage. Which is why the tax code does so.

I also work hard, save and invest. But I have to pay taxes. I would love a step up in basis for my capital gains. Why do heirs and heiresses get one and not me?

Every tax you pay was also paid by the decadent. And your children are able to inherit on the same tax basis as everyone else.

That still doesn't explain why society should give up a step up in basis to heiresses. Why not me, right now, a living person who works for my money? What is the benefit of that? What are estates taxed differently that ordinary income?

The same rationale underlies the capital gains tax being lower than income tax. And gains on sale of a primary residence being mostly exempt from capital gains tax Both of which you do benefit from. So, you want to keep the policies you personally benefit from only, which is not how the tax code works.

Quite the contrary. I want taxes to be uniform for everyone. No exceptions. I'm in favor of a flat tax. That is why our current estate tax laws are so abhorrent to me.

Never going to happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the article:

"But Wolff also says, surprisingly, that inherited wealth isn’t a huge driver of inequality in America — it actually has had an equalizing effect. And there’s no indication that the next decades will be any different.

The reason is deceptively simple: While much (much!) more money flows among the rich, for middle- and low-income people who receive gifts or inheritance, they represent a larger percentage of wealth. So large, in fact, that for some people, a gift from mom or dad is the thing that will keep them middle class."

I'd like to see the data to back this up. Otherwise, I'm calling BS.

But ultimately, I don't care. The current estate taxes (lack thereof) is crazy. We are incentivizing bad things.

Working hard, saving, and investing money are not “bad things.” They are actually good things that society should encourage. Which is why the tax code does so.

I also work hard, save and invest. But I have to pay taxes. I would love a step up in basis for my capital gains. Why do heirs and heiresses get one and not me?

Every tax you pay was also paid by the decadent. And your children are able to inherit on the same tax basis as everyone else.

That still doesn't explain why society should give up a step up in basis to heiresses. Why not me, right now, a living person who works for my money? What is the benefit of that? What are estates taxed differently that ordinary income?

The same rationale underlies the capital gains tax being lower than income tax. And gains on sale of a primary residence being mostly exempt from capital gains tax Both of which you do benefit from. So, you want to keep the policies you personally benefit from only, which is not how the tax code works.

This is false. If we wanted to incentivize "investing" everyone would pay the same capital gains rate. The step up in basis on death is not an incentive for anything. It is a giveaway to the wealthy.

What exactly is false? Are you denying that capital gains are taxed at a lower rate than income? Or that Sales of primary residences are largely exempt from tax?

By your reasoning, we should get rid of all business related deductions because only people in certain occupations can use them.

It is false that I only want to keep the policies I personally benefit from.

It is false that the step up in basis on death incentives investing. And even if it did incentivize investing, there are much better ways to incentivize investing with our tax laws. Surely you would agree that a 0% capital gains tax rate for all would incentivize investing more than the current tax law?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the article:

"But Wolff also says, surprisingly, that inherited wealth isn’t a huge driver of inequality in America — it actually has had an equalizing effect. And there’s no indication that the next decades will be any different.

The reason is deceptively simple: While much (much!) more money flows among the rich, for middle- and low-income people who receive gifts or inheritance, they represent a larger percentage of wealth. So large, in fact, that for some people, a gift from mom or dad is the thing that will keep them middle class."

I'd like to see the data to back this up. Otherwise, I'm calling BS.

But ultimately, I don't care. The current estate taxes (lack thereof) is crazy. We are incentivizing bad things.

Working hard, saving, and investing money are not “bad things.” They are actually good things that society should encourage. Which is why the tax code does so.

I also work hard, save and invest. But I have to pay taxes. I would love a step up in basis for my capital gains. Why do heirs and heiresses get one and not me?

Every tax you pay was also paid by the decadent. And your children are able to inherit on the same tax basis as everyone else.

That still doesn't explain why society should give up a step up in basis to heiresses. Why not me, right now, a living person who works for my money? What is the benefit of that? What are estates taxed differently that ordinary income?

The same rationale underlies the capital gains tax being lower than income tax. And gains on sale of a primary residence being mostly exempt from capital gains tax Both of which you do benefit from. So, you want to keep the policies you personally benefit from only, which is not how the tax code works.

This is false. If we wanted to incentivize "investing" everyone would pay the same capital gains rate. The step up in basis on death is not an incentive for anything. It is a giveaway to the wealthy.

What exactly is false? Are you denying that capital gains are taxed at a lower rate than income? Or that Sales of primary residences are largely exempt from tax?

By your reasoning, we should get rid of all business related deductions because only people in certain occupations can use them.

Doesn't this DISINCENTIVIZE work? Seems pretty messed up to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In any case, the democrats are 6-10 Senators away from having the votes to do anything with the estate tax, and that.assumes no filibuster. Estate tax reform is not likely anytime soon, probably ever. The estate tax is unpopular with Americans.

Because most don't know how the estate tax works. They would crap their pants if they understood how much the rich are getting away with.

The rich are getting away with? Indeed. We need to take all the profits from good decision making and redirect them to government bureaucrats, BECAUSE! The great decisions we will get once all wealth is reallocated will be delightful!

[Anonymous]

Tax all consumption now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In any case, the democrats are 6-10 Senators away from having the votes to do anything with the estate tax, and that.assumes no filibuster. Estate tax reform is not likely anytime soon, probably ever. The estate tax is unpopular with Americans.

Because most don't know how the estate tax works. They would crap their pants if they understood how much the rich are getting away with.

The rich are getting away with? Indeed. We need to take all the profits from good decision making and redirect them to government bureaucrats, BECAUSE! The great decisions we will get once all wealth is reallocated will be delightful!

Please stop pretending this is "wealth reallocation." I just want rich people to pay the same taxes as me.

No step up basis for living people -> No step up in basis for estates.
No $11 million dollar tax exemption for living people -> No $11 million dollar estate tax exemption. You can have $12,000, like the rest of us.
No 90% marginal tax rate for living people -> No 90% estate tax rate.

It's pretty simple. The fact that you can't talk about it without resorting to hyperbole and exaggeration is telling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In any case, the democrats are 6-10 Senators away from having the votes to do anything with the estate tax, and that.assumes no filibuster. Estate tax reform is not likely anytime soon, probably ever. The estate tax is unpopular with Americans.

Uh, no. They can do it through reconciliation via an omnibus revenue and spending bill. The GOP increased the Estate Tax threshold to $11m in 2017 with no Democrat votes in the Senate through reconciliation.

Dems will need to lower the threshold in order to meet the budget scoring requirements for their next bill. So yeah, you only need 51 votes in the Senate and can go around the filibuster.

[Anonymous]

My parents were career feds. Never bought a multimillion home in close in Arlington. Always drove older domestic sedans. Saved up so they could send their kids to good colleges, spent prudently.

So yes now they have built a $2.5-ish million portfolio and invested in their kids, all of whom have solid jobs because we went to great colleges. And for this they should have to pay a huge tax because???? Sure, figure out a way to have some equity in a $1 billion+ estate for sure. But for a typical upper middle class estate, no one in either party is going to touch that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My parents were career feds. Never bought a multimillion home in close in Arlington. Always drove older domestic sedans. Saved up so they could send their kids to good colleges, spent prudently.

So yes now they have built a $2.5-ish million portfolio and invested in their kids, all of whom have solid jobs because we went to great colleges. And for this they should have to pay a huge tax because???? Sure, figure out a way to have some equity in a $1 billion+ estate for sure. But for a typical upper middle class estate, no one in either party is going to touch that.

How about just normal taxes? How about you don't get a step up in basis on capital gains? That's reasonable, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My parents were career feds. Never bought a multimillion home in close in Arlington. Always drove older domestic sedans. Saved up so they could send their kids to good colleges, spent prudently.

So yes now they have built a $2.5-ish million portfolio and invested in their kids, all of whom have solid jobs because we went to great colleges. And for this they should have to pay a huge tax because???? Sure, figure out a way to have some equity in a $1 billion+ estate for sure. But for a typical upper middle class estate, no one in either party is going to touch that.

How about just normal taxes? How about you don't get a step up in basis on capital gains? That's reasonable, right?

Lol , they aren't getting a huge tax. Quit the fear-mongering. 2.5 M between two people isn't going to be touched.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My parents were career feds. Never bought a multimillion home in close in Arlington. Always drove older domestic sedans. Saved up so they could send their kids to good colleges, spent prudently.

So yes now they have built a $2.5-ish million portfolio and invested in their kids, all of whom have solid jobs because we went to great colleges. And for this they should have to pay a huge tax because???? Sure, figure out a way to have some equity in a $1 billion+ estate for sure. But for a typical upper middle class estate, no one in either party is going to touch that.

How about just normal taxes? How about you don't get a step up in basis on capital gains? That's reasonable, right?

THEY won’t be paying a huge tax 🙄. YOU will (read: should) have to pay tax. And why shouldn’t YOU have to pay taxes on YOUR windfall?