Estate Tax Dormant, Billionaire’s Bequest Is Tax-Free - NYTimes.com y DAVID KOCIENIEWSKI
Published: June 8, 2010
A Texas pipeline tycoon who died two months ago may become the first American billionaire allowed to pass his fortune to his children and grandchildren tax-free.
Dan L. Duncan, a soft-spoken farm boy who started with $10,000 and two propane trucks, and built a network of natural gas processing plants and pipelines that made him the richest person in Houston, died in late March of a brain hemorrhage at 77.
Had his life ended three months earlier, Mr. Duncan?s riches ? Forbes magazine estimated his worth at $9 billion, ranking him as the 74th wealthiest in the world ? would have been subject to a federal tax of at least 45 percent. If he had lived past Jan. 1, 2011, the rate would be even higher ? 55 percent.
Instead, because Congress allowed the tax to lapse for one year and gave all estates a free pass in 2010, Mr. Duncan?s four children and four grandchildren stand to collect billions that in any other year would have gone to the Treasury.
Replies
78
SoWal Insider
You are going to have to explain that one.
A central pillar of progressive politics. Fair trade vs. free trade, fair taxation vs. equal taxation, fair representation vs. equal representation, etc.. Progressives disagree with the basic idea that government should treat people equally. Instead, government can and should "tip the scales" in favor of certain groups.
Wikipedia has a lot of info, see "marxism", "socialism", and "social democracy" for reference.
Beach Fanatic
A central pillar of progressive politics. Fair trade vs. free trade, fair taxation vs. equal taxation, fair representation vs. equal representation, etc.. Progressives disagree with the basic idea that government should treat people equally. Instead, government can and should "tip the scales" in favor of certain groups.
Wikipedia has a lot of info, see "marxism", "socialism", and "social democracy" for reference.
:floor::floor::floor::rofl::rofl::rofl::funn::funn::funn:
Great explanation 30a! It's a great idea if you are in a favored group. Otherwise it sucks.
Banned
A central pillar of progressive politics. Fair trade vs. free trade, fair taxation vs. equal taxation, fair representation vs. equal representation, etc.. Progressives disagree with the basic idea that government should treat people equally. Instead, government can and should "tip the scales" in favor of certain groups.
Wikipedia has a lot of info, see "marxism", "socialism", and "social democracy" for reference.
Or speak to any conservative or watch Fox news and you will see fair does not always equal balanced.
Let's look at something that could touch close to home and be relative to many families. Two children in the same class room, one excells while the other lags a bit behind. The teacher spends a little extra time with the one lagging behind to help him/her catch up and better understand the lessons. Are they being treated equal? No. Fair? yes.
Now a conservative might say "no fair", since the student not needing help did not cause the school board any extra time or money he/she should be given a special tax break because equal and fair have to always balance.
Beach Fanatic
Or speak to any conservative or watch Fox news and you will see fair does not always equal balanced.
Let's look at something that could touch close to home and be relative to many families. Two children in the same class room, one excells while the other lags a bit behind. The teacher spends a little extra time with the one lagging behind to help him/her catch up and better understand the lessons. Are they being treated equal? No. Fair? yes.
Now a conservative might say "no fair", since the student not needing help did not cause the school board any extra time or money he/she should be given a special tax break because equal and fair have to always balance.
That is really off point, sort of like saying if your house is ablaze the FD has to spray my house too. We are talking about each citizen who benefits from government services paying their fair share for those services. If the person making 50,000 pays 15% then everyone else should pay the same 15%. The fair tax exempts income earned up to the poverty level and then requires every citizen to pay the same percentage of the remaining income. So if the poverty rate is 30,000 and you make 50,000 you would owe 15% or some detirmined percentage of the remaining 20,000, or 3,000. Another idea with merit is to exempt the poverty level wages from FICA and medicare taxes and raise the upper limit.
Banned
That is really off point, sort of like saying if your house is ablaze the FD has to spray my house too. We are talking about each citizen who benefits from government services paying their fair share for those services. If the person making 50,000 pays 15% then everyone else should pay the same 15%. The fair tax exempts income earned up to the poverty level and then requires every citizen to pay the same percentage of the remaining income. So if the poverty rate is 30,000 and you make 50,000 you would owe 15% or some detirmined percentage of the remaining 20,000, or 3,000. Another idea with merit is to exempt the poverty level wages from FICA and medicare taxes and raise the upper limit.
A fair tax is usually defined as a tax someone else pays.
It all sounds so simple until you get down to the definition of fair, what's fair to one person can seem unfair to another.
Beach Fanatic
Look, I'll be the first to admit I don't know what comprises a fair tax system. I only think that everyone in the U.S. should have to pay a determined portion of their income as a tax if others have to do so. It is the only way to really appreciate what you receive from your government. In paying your taxes you become a contributor, not a panhandler.
Beach Fanatic
Sorry. Somewhere I lost the trend of the thread. So what else is new? How did we go from estate tax to income tax? To clarify my position, I think estate or "death taxes" are unfair, immoral and reprehensible. Is that clear enough a position?
Beach Fanatic
Look, I'll be the first to admit I don't know what comprises a fair tax system. I only think that everyone in the U.S. should have to pay a determined portion of their income as a tax if others have to do so. It is the only way to really appreciate what you receive from your government. In paying your taxes you become a contributor, not a panhandler.
The simplest system frequently is the most fair. When you begin to go down the road of exemptions you lose the underlying fairness. If I pay 20% then Bill Gates should pay 20%. I will conceed to the progressives that income below the poverty line should be exempt but everything else should be fair game. ( play on words intentional)
Beach Fanatic
Sorry. Somewhere I lost the trend of the thread. So what else is new? How did we go from estate tax to income tax? To clarify my position, I think estate or "death taxes" are unfair, immoral and reprehensible. Is that clear enough a position?
Crystal clear and on point.:clap:I happen to agree 100% too.😀
SoWal Insider
I keep picturing this western, I think it was with Gene Hackman and Sharon Stone, where every time somebody got shot in a duel, the dregs of the town ran out and stripped the guy down to his undewear.
"He's dead."
"I get his shoes!"
"I got his watch!"
"He's dead."
"I get his shoes!"
"I got his watch!"
Edited
SoWal Insider
Banned
I keep picturing this western, I think it was with Gene Hackman and Sharon Stone, where every time somebody got shot in a dual, the dregs of the town ran out and stripped the guy down to his undewear.
"He's dead."
"I get his shoes!"
"I got his watch!"
Interesting concept. :scratch:
Strother Martin and Warren Oates did much the same thing in The wild Bunch
Edited
SoWal Insider
Is it dual or duel?
- ah duel.
- ah duel.
Edited
SoWal InsiderAuthor
You are going to have to explain that one.massive disparities in income asked to pay the same rate is grossly unjust. it perpetuates a caste system.
SoWal InsiderAuthor
You are going to have to explain that one.the working poor pay enough taxes without the need for income tax. the obscenely rich can shoulder a greater burden easily.
Beach Fanatic
Sorry. Somewhere I lost the trend of the thread. So what else is new? How did we go from estate tax to income tax? To clarify my position, I think estate or "death taxes" are unfair, immoral and reprehensible. Is that clear enough a position?
Which is why the estate tax liability affects a minuscule portion of the population.
For 2009 only a few thousand estates had any estate tax liability.
If you don't support cutting Medicare, Social Security, Federal pensions (civilian & military) and military spending then taxes on someone are going to have to go up.
Here's a free pdf that includes folks across the political spectrum.
National Academies Press PDF Download Info 😀
SoWal Insider
Which is why the estate tax liability affects a minuscule portion of the population.
For 2009 only a few thousand estates had any estate tax liability.
If you don't support cutting Medicare, Social Security, Federal pensions (civilian & military) and military spending then taxes on someone are going to have to go up.
Here's a free pdf that includes folks across the political spectrum.
National Academies Press PDF Download Info 😀
So because they are small in number, it's ok to exploit them? Nobody will notice?
SoWal Insider
It's time for austerity measures.
Beach Fanatic
So because they are small in number, it's ok to exploit them? Nobody will notice?
That's silly.
This is the inconvienient truth :rolling:
Prior to this year all estates got a step-up in basis. Which meant no captial gains tax on ALL inherited assets
But that goes away, while there is a very confusing mechanism to allowing some step up in basis, at best expect a higher bill from your CPA and at worst a capital gains tax liability.
Last year a husband and wife could shelter 7M easily, this year their heirs could face a captial gains tax liability.
Under your scenario shopper, billionaires make out like bandits while mass affluent taxpayers are the ones exploited. :idontno:
Estate Tax: What You Need to Know for 2010 - CBS MoneyWatch.com
SoWal Insider
That's silly.
This is the inconvienient truth :rolling:
Prior to this year all estates got a step-up in basis. Which meant no captial gains tax on ALL inherited assets
But that goes away, while there is a very confusing mechanism to allowing some step up in basis, at best expect a higher bill from your CPA and at worst a capital gains tax liability.
Last year a husband and wife could shelter 7M easily, this year their heirs could face a captial gains tax liability.
Under your scenario shopper, billionaires make out like bandits while mass affluent taxpayers are the ones exploited. :idontno:
Estate Tax: What You Need to Know for 2010 - CBS MoneyWatch.com
All the money these people save, has already been taxed at normal rates through standard means before the estate tax kicks in, correct?
SoWal Insider
Two Words: Irrevocable Trust.
A Few More Words: Everyone needs a good Estate Planner.
The cost basis thing in this article is frightful.
A Few More Words: Everyone needs a good Estate Planner.
The cost basis thing in this article is frightful.
Beach Fanatic
All the money these people save, has already been taxed at normal rates through standard means before the estate tax kicks in, correct?
Nope, wrong again.
Many types of assets have no taxes paid at all:
- Qualified retirement plans-exclusive of SS tax
- Annuities
- Cash value life insurance
- Unrealized capital gains
And again, under your scenario many heirs of mass affluent taxpayers who had no estate tax liabilty will face a capital gains liability.
This is keeping me from work. C-ya later
Beach Fanatic
massive disparities in income asked to pay the same rate is grossly unjust. it perpetuates a caste system.
Pure socialist BS
Beach Fanatic
the working poor pay enough taxes without the need for income tax. the obscenely rich can shoulder a greater burden easily.
If you can take off your socialist colored glasses you will see what is proposed is to exempt all income below the poverty level. This establishes a baseline for everyone. All income above this level is taxed equally. So if the poverty line is 30,000 and the tax rate is 10% (examples) then someone making 35,000 would pay 500 in taxes, 50,000 would pay 2,000, 100,000 would pay 7,000 and 1,000,000 would pay 97,000. I would say the rich guy is shouldering a greater burden, wouldn't you. The only people hurt is HR Block and tax accountants.
SoWal Insider
Nope, wrong again.
Many types of assets have no taxes paid at all:
Again- last year a married couple could totally exclude up to 7M USD.
- Qualified retirement plans-exclusive of SS tax
- Annuities
- Cash value life insurance
- Unrealized capital gains
And again, under your scenario many heirs of mass affluent taxpayers who had no estate tax liabilty will face a capital gains liability.
This is keeping me from work. C-ya later
I wasn't making a statement, but that's ok. I have no problem with normal tax rates being applied to assets handed down. Capital gains should be paid on investement gains, tax deferred income should be taxed when drawn out, or closed out, etc.. I don't think real property should be taxed, because descendends may not have the money to pay the tax, forcing them into hardship or the selling of "the home they grew up in", things like that. But overall applying normal tax rates on assets makes sense. But the estate tax at it's core is a tax on assets beyond these standard taxes. I don't understand why people feel, after base taxes are paid, they are entitled to a slice of the pie of a dieing woman or man. That's just not right.
Edited
Checking your forum account
Please wait while we verify your forum account.