Anonymous
Post 03/25/2021 10:21     Subject: Re:Vox article on inheritance
Anonymous wrote:
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.


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.


Nope, there aren’t close to 50 dems who will vote for this. My point was there may be 40 to 44 or so who would vote for changes to estate tax. Maybe you should read the whole post and nit just the first sentence.


I’m curious where you are getting the info that only 40-44 Ds would vote for an estate tax increase. Manchin, Sinema and Tester have all said in recent months that they are open to increased taxes on the wealthy to pay for infrastructure. I have not heard any D take the estate tax off the table.


I don’t doubt that Biden will be able to undo Trump’s tax cuts and maybe finally get rid of the carried interest exception. But the estate tax is unpopular because many people view it as double taxation. Democrats were 8 votes short on $15 minimum wage. Those are all moderate senators who are unlikely to vote for the more controversial parts of Biden’s agenda. Those from wealthier states and agricultural states will also be pressured not to support it.

Tax rates have changed several times in my lifetime, but more substantive tax reform has proved much more difficult to pass. I don’t expect that to change.
Anonymous
Post 03/25/2021 06:57     Subject: Re:Vox article on inheritance
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.


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.


Nope, there aren’t close to 50 dems who will vote for this. My point was there may be 40 to 44 or so who would vote for changes to estate tax. Maybe you should read the whole post and nit just the first sentence.


I’m curious where you are getting the info that only 40-44 Ds would vote for an estate tax increase. Manchin, Sinema and Tester have all said in recent months that they are open to increased taxes on the wealthy to pay for infrastructure. I have not heard any D take the estate tax off the table.
Anonymous
Post 03/25/2021 04:52     Subject: Vox article on inheritance
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Not really surprised by this, the net worth of the top 10% is >1M so why not a 500k+ inheritance?


This. My parents were very middle class, and my sister I should inherit about $1m each.




Listen, folks. Just because YOUR middle class parents are/were terrible with their money (thus leaving you little to nothing) doesn’t mean that other older people who were responsible and saved/invested their money throughout their lives (thus leaving an inheritance for their children - even *gasp* one million dollars!!!) were “rich” - they saved their money, now they have money! Some of you should try it.

That being said, I am struggling to even get through that article. It is structured in such a bizarre, haphazard way that it reads almost like a stream of consciousness. I really miss editors.


Listen to yourself. What a nasty thing to say. Your parents might have saved a lot of money but that clearly doesn't say anything about their parenting skills.

My (lower) middle class parents had a large number of children, a couple of whom had severe medical issues. They weren't "terrible with their money" - they had a lot more bills than your "superior" parents did. They didn't save much at all compared to the folks of DCUM, but my dad got himself a job with an excellent pension so they live just fine in retirement. 50 years ago they bought a nice house in a good neighborhood but it is in the middle of the country so it hasn't appreciated as much as it would have in some parts of the country- if it were a property in the DC area it would be worth well over a million. But it's not. So they'll leave a modest amount that will be divided up by my kids and maybe we'll get 25-30k each. Except some of us with means will give our share to our siblings who need it more.

Not nearly as much as your million dollars, but we received something more important from our parents, which was to know how to grow up to be good people who don't think money is a moral value.


I never said MY parents saved any money. They were solidly middle class and I won’t inherit a dime (thank God we don’t inherit debt!). But I am not blind or stupid - they don’t have anything because they spent it all throughout their lives, and never made saving a priority. That’s fine, totally their choice how they live their lives, but they (and I would imagine most middle class boomers who don’t have much in retirement) are simply living the consequences of their own choices.

It sounds like your parents will leave you a hell of a lot more than my parents will leave to me. By the logic of MANY posters on this thread (and the logic I was trying to push back against with my post) that means your parents weren’t lower middle class! They were clearly rich or at least upper middle class if they can leave you an inheritance!!!

(As an aside, maybe stop accusing people of being nasty if you either don’t understand what they’re saying or simply disagree with them. Not every comment is a personal attack on you. Although you turned your failure to comprehend my point into a personal attack on me, as well as my parents...)
Anonymous
Post 03/25/2021 04:40     Subject: Vox article on inheritance
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
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?


Why don't you work hard and save like PP's parents? Come back and tell us how it feels when they take away 40% of their estate and forcing your kids to sell the family home and collectibles to pay taxes. But you don't want to do that, do you? Just mooch off others..


Well I’ll be dead, so...

(Why doesn’t PP work hard and save like her parents, though? That’s the real question.)
Anonymous
Post 03/25/2021 00:11     Subject: Vox article on inheritance
I hate voting for Republicans. But.. In about a year and 8 months..
Anonymous
Post 03/24/2021 21:50     Subject: Vox article on inheritance
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Not really surprised by this, the net worth of the top 10% is >1M so why not a 500k+ inheritance?


This. My parents were very middle class, and my sister I should inherit about $1m each.




Listen, folks. Just because YOUR middle class parents are/were terrible with their money (thus leaving you little to nothing) doesn’t mean that other older people who were responsible and saved/invested their money throughout their lives (thus leaving an inheritance for their children - even *gasp* one million dollars!!!) were “rich” - they saved their money, now they have money! Some of you should try it.

That being said, I am struggling to even get through that article. It is structured in such a bizarre, haphazard way that it reads almost like a stream of consciousness. I really miss editors.


Listen to yourself. What a nasty thing to say. Your parents might have saved a lot of money but that clearly doesn't say anything about their parenting skills.

My (lower) middle class parents had a large number of children, a couple of whom had severe medical issues. They weren't "terrible with their money" - they had a lot more bills than your "superior" parents did. They didn't save much at all compared to the folks of DCUM, but my dad got himself a job with an excellent pension so they live just fine in retirement. 50 years ago they bought a nice house in a good neighborhood but it is in the middle of the country so it hasn't appreciated as much as it would have in some parts of the country- if it were a property in the DC area it would be worth well over a million. But it's not. So they'll leave a modest amount that will be divided up by my kids and maybe we'll get 25-30k each. Except some of us with means will give our share to our siblings who need it more.

Not nearly as much as your million dollars, but we received something more important from our parents, which was to know how to grow up to be good people who don't think money is a moral value.
Anonymous
Post 03/24/2021 21:36     Subject: Re:Vox article on inheritance
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.


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.


Nope, there aren’t close to 50 dems who will vote for this. My point was there may be 40 to 44 or so who would vote for changes to estate tax. Maybe you should read the whole post and nit just the first sentence.


I do not thing that a chamber of multi-millionaires is going to take up the estate tax issue.

https://www.rollcall.com/wealth-of-congress/
Anonymous
Post 03/24/2021 21:14     Subject: Re:Vox article on inheritance
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
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!


Frankly I don't see how being educated about ones own money and working within the provisions of the law to stringently protect it is "getting away with" something. When wealthy people squander money they are ridiculed, and when they legally estate plan and fund endowments to charity along with their children they are "getting away with something".



Well, sure, but the real problem is that those laws that are of so much benefit are written by lobbyists bankrolled by the wealthy. It's getting away with something if you get to pay to write your own rules and then use them as cover.


The wealthy may benefit but most aren’t those lobbyists or congressmen/women. Most are ordinary folk who can benefit from those laws. I definitely did when I received a large inheritance. Whew.
Anonymous
Post 03/24/2021 21:10     Subject: Re:Vox article on inheritance
Anonymous wrote:
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!


Frankly I don't see how being educated about ones own money and working within the provisions of the law to stringently protect it is "getting away with" something. When wealthy people squander money they are ridiculed, and when they legally estate plan and fund endowments to charity along with their children they are "getting away with something".



Well, sure, but the real problem is that those laws that are of so much benefit are written by lobbyists bankrolled by the wealthy. It's getting away with something if you get to pay to write your own rules and then use them as cover.
Anonymous
Post 03/24/2021 21:08     Subject: Vox article on inheritance
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
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?


Why don't you work hard and save like PP's parents? Come back and tell us how it feels when they take away 40% of their estate and forcing your kids to sell the family home and collectibles to pay taxes. But you don't want to do that, do you? Just mooch off others..


Please. Estate taxes currently only affect the very wealthy, and no one inheriting over $11M is selling off homes and collectibles (though, really? collectibles are more likely to end up in an estate sale or Goodwill - old people not culling their houses before dumping it all on the kids to clean up is a real problem). Let's say that floor is drastically lowered and, in this fantasy land, we're talking about the hard-working fed's $2.5M estate -- kids get $1.5M that they didn't earn, maybe a house with the 30-year paid off that they didn't buy, and that's assuming that the the parents weren't smart enough to estate plan to bring the number down. I mean, how awful. I can see the humanitarian crisis here.

And I love the moocher accusations... I don't think DCUM is the bastion of safety net benefit cheats... more likely corporate welfare recipients and their enablers. Biggest benefit people here get are mortgage interest deductions and all those pretty tax loopholes for the HHI/look-at-my-net-worth crowd. It might be nice not to be in hock to China and pay down the debt; they don' t send checks to poor Americans when an estate gets taxed.
Anonymous
Post 03/24/2021 20:45     Subject: Vox article on inheritance
Anonymous wrote:
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?


Why don't you work hard and save like PP's parents? Come back and tell us how it feels when they take away 40% of their estate and forcing your kids to sell the family home and collectibles to pay taxes. But you don't want to do that, do you? Just mooch off others..
Anonymous
Post 03/24/2021 19:23     Subject: Re:Vox article on inheritance
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.


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.


Nope, there aren’t close to 50 dems who will vote for this. My point was there may be 40 to 44 or so who would vote for changes to estate tax. Maybe you should read the whole post and nit just the first sentence.
Anonymous
Post 03/24/2021 16:52     Subject: Re:Vox article on inheritance
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:If you guys are mad about regular estate taxes you will be really upset when you learn about dynasty trusts.


Trusts are taxed at a higher rate than ordinary income. And, yes, these trusts exist to avoid estate taxes. But they aren't a free lunch.


The growth...
Anonymous
Post 03/24/2021 16:40     Subject: Vox article on inheritance
Tax the shit out of all of it.

Step up tax deductions absolutely need to disappear. What a ridiculous loophole. Fed and State should also immediately ask for taxes due on inherited properties. If you have to pay income tax on unemployment relief, it's utterly absurd we do not taxes a massive windfall when people acquire property through inheritance.
Anonymous
Post 03/24/2021 15:34     Subject: Re:Vox article on inheritance
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!


Frankly I don't see how being educated about ones own money and working within the provisions of the law to stringently protect it is "getting away with" something. When wealthy people squander money they are ridiculed, and when they legally estate plan and fund endowments to charity along with their children they are "getting away with something".