4 ms·

Would that not sap people's motivation to work hard and innovate, if they were unable to pass on the benefits to their children? What if they provided a comfor

by alehul 9y ago

Would that not sap people's motivation to work hard and innovate, if they were unable to pass on the benefits to their children? What if they provided a comfortable lifestyle for their children? Would that just be taken away by the government upon the parent's death?

KentGeek 9y ago
Remember that there's a HUGE exemption (the recently passed Donor Relief Act increases it to >$20M) and then it's only a percentage of the amount above that exemption. Your tears are wasted.
- alehul 9y ago
  I was responding to what I believed was a 100% tax being suggested. Not 'only a percentage'.
plandis 9y ago
This is a tax (in the US at least) of assets over $10MM. Where in the US can that much untaxed money not provide a comfortable living?
- alehul 9y ago
  I was responding to someone who was suggesting to set the tax at 100%, and I believe they meant all assets. My mistake if they meant otherwise. Nonetheless, with enough kids, that money doesn't go terribly far in the Bay Area.
sandworm101 9y ago
100% on income, not wealth transfer. I want to tax supernatural/dead people still earning income for years who havent passed on their assets. The lawyers keep the estate spinning for as long as possible. Dead people still sue living people and charge them rents years later.
- alehul 9y ago
  Ah, I misunderstood then. I agree that it should be paid as an income tax, at the appropriate tax bracket of the inheritor. If it stays within the estate, then at the relevant income tax bracket for the estate. If there isn't any income tax on estates, then I see your point and that should definitely be changed.
wott 9y ago
"Children" are nowadays more than 50 years old when they inherit... Their life and situation are already made and set, and their active life mostly behind them.
- alehul 9y ago
  Grandchildren, then? As we live longer, we're also able to have children later, and I know many people in their twenties who have had parents pass away or expect it to happen soon.
- sandworm101 9y ago
  The real danger in this pattern is that people do not inherit until they are themselves retired or soon to be. My grandparents didn't die until my parents were both in their 60s. Not getting an inheritance is pain for a young person but they can live on. For someone planning on that money to fund a retirement, someone who is about to stop working due to age anyway, not getting it is life-altering.

by alehul 9y ago

KentGeek 9y ago

Remember that there's a HUGE exemption (the recently passed Donor Relief Act increases it to >$20M) and then it's only a percentage of the amount above that exemption. Your tears are wasted.

alehul 9y ago
I was responding to what I believed was a 100% tax being suggested. Not 'only a percentage'.

plandis 9y ago

This is a tax (in the US at least) of assets over $10MM. Where in the US can that much untaxed money not provide a comfortable living?

alehul 9y ago
I was responding to someone who was suggesting to set the tax at 100%, and I believe they meant all assets. My mistake if they meant otherwise. Nonetheless, with enough kids, that money doesn't go terribly far in the Bay Area.

sandworm101 9y ago

100% on income, not wealth transfer. I want to tax supernatural/dead people still earning income for years who havent passed on their assets. The lawyers keep the estate spinning for as long as possible. Dead people still sue living people and charge them rents years later.

alehul 9y ago
Ah, I misunderstood then. I agree that it should be paid as an income tax, at the appropriate tax bracket of the inheritor. If it stays within the estate, then at the relevant income tax bracket for the estate. If there isn't any income tax on estates, then I see your point and that should definitely be changed.

wott 9y ago

"Children" are nowadays more than 50 years old when they inherit... Their life and situation are already made and set, and their active life mostly behind them.

alehul 9y ago
Grandchildren, then? As we live longer, we're also able to have children later, and I know many people in their twenties who have had parents pass away or expect it to happen soon.
sandworm101 9y ago
The real danger in this pattern is that people do not inherit until they are themselves retired or soon to be. My grandparents didn't die until my parents were both in their 60s. Not getting an inheritance is pain for a young person but they can live on. For someone planning on that money to fund a retirement, someone who is about to stop working due to age anyway, not getting it is life-altering.