16 ms·

The article is pretty clear. They allow "families to pass wealth from generation to generation, indefinitely, without estate taxes at each death". Significant e

The article is pretty clear. They allow "families to pass wealth from generation to generation, indefinitely, without estate taxes at each death". Significant estate taxes are important to a democracy to prevent the rise of a noble class. Even Britain, whose system of inherited wealth and power America's founders were desperate to avoid emulating, now has a significant estate tax: https://taxfoundation.org/downton-abbey-and-death-taxes/ https://taxfoundation.org/downton-abbey-and-death-taxes/

dantheman 5y ago
Estate taxes are immoral, that money has already been taxed.
- onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago
  You're taxed on income. You save buy a house, and you're taxed on the property you bought. You're also taxed on dividends from any remaining savings. You're also taxed on any spending you do (in most states).
- tzs 5y ago
  Almost every dollar that comes into almost anyone's possession has already been taxed, so you could make the same argument about income taxes and sales taxes. I doubt that I have ever owned a dollar that had not been taxed before I got it. Same also goes for taxes on real property. My land had already been taxed long before I bought it. Do you think that all of those taxes are also immoral?
- andrewljohnson 5y ago
  Why is double taxation a moral issue?
- foo_barrio 5y ago
  What about sales tax? My income has already been taxed.
  - refurb 5y ago
    That’s a separate transaction. When I die and give my home to my kid that’s not a transaction that a family home going to family. Or are you arguing that when a husband dies the wealth should be taxed before going to the surviving spouse? Or if you pay for your kids education (say college - they’re an adult) should that money be taxed?
    - foo_barrio 5y ago
      My mom already "owns" whatever money my dad makes and vice versa. They file jointly and have partnership+joint accounts. This has been the case for 40+ years. The money won't go to her when he dies. It's already hers. I see what you're getting at but that's a bad example.
- mrRandomGuy 5y ago
  That's great and all, but I prefer not having an entrenched aristocracy.
- newacct583 5y ago
  Alternatively: estate taxes are a huge boon to the accumulators of wealth because they allow people to shift much of their tax burden until after they're dead and don't need it anymore. Cut the estate tax and you'll need to increase the taxes people pay while they're alive. That's a ridiculous point, by the way. All money is taxed repeatedly. Hand it to a store. Sales tax. Report it as profit. Corporate tax. Pay it to employees. Income tax. Hand it to a different store... There's no "moral" calculus here. We tax economic activity. If you give money to someone else, be it for a candy bar or in an inheritance, that's economics and the apropriate place for government to take a cut is on something that sales linearly with the economy.
- hellisothers 5y ago
  Why is being taxed multiple times immoral? My income is taxed and when I spend it the receiver is taxed again. Also, “immoral”, is that the word angle you want to take? Seems hyperbolic
- ubercow13 5y ago
  Money is taxed continuously as it moves around the economy, it is certainly not taxed only once.
- coyotespike 5y ago
  "Money should only be taxed at one specific point as it passes through the economy, and anything more is immoral" is actually a large claim to make. It's not self-evident, and requires at least some justification. "Hey, that's already been taxed!" does have some intuitive appeal, but honestly I think that intuition comes from the game of Tag or something. But money, being fungible, in constant circulation, and yielding assets and profits from re-investment, has many points at which it might feel fair to tax it. It might not feel fair, but at least there's more there to discuss.
jikbd 5y ago
I don’t like that the state can take part of the wealth you’ve worked for after you die. But obviously laws to steal money from everybody else are popular.
- pjc50 5y ago
  What are you proposing to do with it when you're dead?
  - jikbd 5y ago
    Pass it on to whomever I choose. Since it is, you know, my money.
    - pavlov 5y ago
      So why shouldn't the person receiving the money pay tax on it? After all it's new income for them.
      - jikbd 5y ago
        Because that money has already paid tax before.
        wpietri 5y ago
        Money doesn't pay tax. People do. And if it did, then taxes would have been done a long time ago, because money in its endless circulation pays taxes all the time.
        JumpCrisscross 5y ago
        > Money doesn't pay tax. People do. To emphasise this point, when an employer pays an employee wages, they pay it with a dollar that someone else earned (and paid tax on) and paid to them (and likely paid sales tax on). Money isn’t taxed, and neither are people; transactions are. An estate transfer is a transaction.
drstewart 5y ago
Is there an estimate of how much the Crown Estate will pay in estate taxes when the Queen passes?
- refenestrator 5y ago
  I think it's all technically government property already?
- pjc50 5y ago
  The UK has inheritance tax for literally everyone except one person passing that estate to her direct inheritors. This is why bringing it up is derailing. (and yes obviously the hereditary monarchy and peerages do not belong in the modern era let alone the 21st century, but changing that in a not especially democratic country is hard)
- hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
  This question is not made in good faith and I think you know it. The Crown Estate is not the personal property of the monarch, it's essentially just government assets. Who is the Crown Estate going to pay taxes to, itself? Here is a better discussion of the details around the queen's estate tax exemption: https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/money-and-power/a34242784/queen-elizabeth-royal-family-tax-breaks/ https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/money-and-power/a3...
  - drstewart 5y ago
    >The Crown Estate is not the personal property of the monarch, it's essentially just government assets. Who is the Crown Estate going to pay taxes to, itself? Pretty ingenious way to allow "families to pass wealth from generation to generation, indefinitely, without estate taxes at each death". The UK should do something about that. I hear significant estate taxes are important to a democracy to prevent the rise of a noble class.
    - wongarsu 5y ago
      Good thing then that the UK is a parliamentary monarchy. Having a noble class is kind of built into that system.
mostertoaster 5y ago
Serious question, what is wrong with a noble class? If the family line squanders that wealth, then they weren’t noble. If they are wise with it and good stewards, then it seems like it makes sense that they would become part of the nobility. It isn’t some zero sum game, where there is some limited amount of wealth, and by them having it others must be destitute. I’d be curious if those with several children feel differently than those with none. I love the idea of my sacrifices today one day benefitting my grandchildren’s’ grandchildren in a material way. I feel like if more people lived with the thoughts of how they can improve their own descendants lives over improving their own the world would be a better place.
- mostertoaster 5y ago
  Like I’d hope that my daughters have enough that they don’t have to feel like they have to get married, or if they do that they could feel they have the option to stay home and take care of their children without having to work to make ends meet. I’d hope my grandchildren are so well off that they can go get a higher education and get a liberal arts degree for the love of learning. Study history, philosophy, sociology, these are all great fields of study, they just don’t pay well. That they could just be intellectuals and not laborers would be great. After a few generations of just being intellectuals or less if they live lavishly, they will have to return to labor, and that ok. There is nothing wrong with folks like me getting an engineering degree because they want to work and make money, but it doesn’t seem like a bad desire to hope that your children will not have to labor because you did.
  - fredophile 5y ago
    I really like this quote from Warren Buffet “Leave your children enough money so they can do anything, but not enough that they don’t have to do anything.” I want my children to be able to do what they want. However, I want to raise productive, functioning adults.
    - mostertoaster 5y ago
      I don’t think raising productive functioning adults is mutually exclusive from leaving them an inheritance enabling them not to work to live. There is too much ideas that unless you get paid to do something it isn’t worthwhile. I wish people could study the liberal arts or sciences freely to expand knowledge, not for the sake of money. This is a privilege only provided to those whose parents leave them a large inheritance.

dantheman 5y ago

Estate taxes are immoral, that money has already been taxed.

onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago
You're taxed on income. You save buy a house, and you're taxed on the property you bought. You're also taxed on dividends from any remaining savings. You're also taxed on any spending you do (in most states).
tzs 5y ago
Almost every dollar that comes into almost anyone's possession has already been taxed, so you could make the same argument about income taxes and sales taxes. I doubt that I have ever owned a dollar that had not been taxed before I got it. Same also goes for taxes on real property. My land had already been taxed long before I bought it. Do you think that all of those taxes are also immoral?
andrewljohnson 5y ago
Why is double taxation a moral issue?
foo_barrio 5y ago
What about sales tax? My income has already been taxed.
- refurb 5y ago
  That’s a separate transaction. When I die and give my home to my kid that’s not a transaction that a family home going to family. Or are you arguing that when a husband dies the wealth should be taxed before going to the surviving spouse? Or if you pay for your kids education (say college - they’re an adult) should that money be taxed?
  - foo_barrio 5y ago
    My mom already "owns" whatever money my dad makes and vice versa. They file jointly and have partnership+joint accounts. This has been the case for 40+ years. The money won't go to her when he dies. It's already hers. I see what you're getting at but that's a bad example.
mrRandomGuy 5y ago
That's great and all, but I prefer not having an entrenched aristocracy.
newacct583 5y ago
Alternatively: estate taxes are a huge boon to the accumulators of wealth because they allow people to shift much of their tax burden until after they're dead and don't need it anymore. Cut the estate tax and you'll need to increase the taxes people pay while they're alive. That's a ridiculous point, by the way. All money is taxed repeatedly. Hand it to a store. Sales tax. Report it as profit. Corporate tax. Pay it to employees. Income tax. Hand it to a different store... There's no "moral" calculus here. We tax economic activity. If you give money to someone else, be it for a candy bar or in an inheritance, that's economics and the apropriate place for government to take a cut is on something that sales linearly with the economy.
hellisothers 5y ago
Why is being taxed multiple times immoral? My income is taxed and when I spend it the receiver is taxed again. Also, “immoral”, is that the word angle you want to take? Seems hyperbolic
ubercow13 5y ago
Money is taxed continuously as it moves around the economy, it is certainly not taxed only once.
coyotespike 5y ago
"Money should only be taxed at one specific point as it passes through the economy, and anything more is immoral" is actually a large claim to make. It's not self-evident, and requires at least some justification. "Hey, that's already been taxed!" does have some intuitive appeal, but honestly I think that intuition comes from the game of Tag or something. But money, being fungible, in constant circulation, and yielding assets and profits from re-investment, has many points at which it might feel fair to tax it. It might not feel fair, but at least there's more there to discuss.

jikbd 5y ago

I don’t like that the state can take part of the wealth you’ve worked for after you die. But obviously laws to steal money from everybody else are popular.

pjc50 5y ago
What are you proposing to do with it when you're dead?
- jikbd 5y ago
  Pass it on to whomever I choose. Since it is, you know, my money.
  - pavlov 5y ago
    So why shouldn't the person receiving the money pay tax on it? After all it's new income for them.
    - jikbd 5y ago
      Because that money has already paid tax before.
      - wpietri 5y ago
        Money doesn't pay tax. People do. And if it did, then taxes would have been done a long time ago, because money in its endless circulation pays taxes all the time.
        JumpCrisscross 5y ago
        > Money doesn't pay tax. People do. To emphasise this point, when an employer pays an employee wages, they pay it with a dollar that someone else earned (and paid tax on) and paid to them (and likely paid sales tax on). Money isn’t taxed, and neither are people; transactions are. An estate transfer is a transaction.

drstewart 5y ago

Is there an estimate of how much the Crown Estate will pay in estate taxes when the Queen passes?

refenestrator 5y ago
I think it's all technically government property already?
pjc50 5y ago
The UK has inheritance tax for literally everyone except one person passing that estate to her direct inheritors. This is why bringing it up is derailing. (and yes obviously the hereditary monarchy and peerages do not belong in the modern era let alone the 21st century, but changing that in a not especially democratic country is hard)
hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
This question is not made in good faith and I think you know it. The Crown Estate is not the personal property of the monarch, it's essentially just government assets. Who is the Crown Estate going to pay taxes to, itself? Here is a better discussion of the details around the queen's estate tax exemption: https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/money-and-power/a34242784/queen-elizabeth-royal-family-tax-breaks/ https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/money-and-power/a3...
- drstewart 5y ago
  >The Crown Estate is not the personal property of the monarch, it's essentially just government assets. Who is the Crown Estate going to pay taxes to, itself? Pretty ingenious way to allow "families to pass wealth from generation to generation, indefinitely, without estate taxes at each death". The UK should do something about that. I hear significant estate taxes are important to a democracy to prevent the rise of a noble class.
  - wongarsu 5y ago
    Good thing then that the UK is a parliamentary monarchy. Having a noble class is kind of built into that system.

mostertoaster 5y ago

Serious question, what is wrong with a noble class? If the family line squanders that wealth, then they weren’t noble. If they are wise with it and good stewards, then it seems like it makes sense that they would become part of the nobility. It isn’t some zero sum game, where there is some limited amount of wealth, and by them having it others must be destitute. I’d be curious if those with several children feel differently than those with none. I love the idea of my sacrifices today one day benefitting my grandchildren’s’ grandchildren in a material way. I feel like if more people lived with the thoughts of how they can improve their own descendants lives over improving their own the world would be a better place.

mostertoaster 5y ago
Like I’d hope that my daughters have enough that they don’t have to feel like they have to get married, or if they do that they could feel they have the option to stay home and take care of their children without having to work to make ends meet. I’d hope my grandchildren are so well off that they can go get a higher education and get a liberal arts degree for the love of learning. Study history, philosophy, sociology, these are all great fields of study, they just don’t pay well. That they could just be intellectuals and not laborers would be great. After a few generations of just being intellectuals or less if they live lavishly, they will have to return to labor, and that ok. There is nothing wrong with folks like me getting an engineering degree because they want to work and make money, but it doesn’t seem like a bad desire to hope that your children will not have to labor because you did.
- fredophile 5y ago
  I really like this quote from Warren Buffet “Leave your children enough money so they can do anything, but not enough that they don’t have to do anything.” I want my children to be able to do what they want. However, I want to raise productive, functioning adults.
  - mostertoaster 5y ago
    I don’t think raising productive functioning adults is mutually exclusive from leaving them an inheritance enabling them not to work to live. There is too much ideas that unless you get paid to do something it isn’t worthwhile. I wish people could study the liberal arts or sciences freely to expand knowledge, not for the sake of money. This is a privilege only provided to those whose parents leave them a large inheritance.