3 ms·

Warren Buffett also advocates higher taxes for the rich: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html http://www.nytimes.com/201

by lutusp 13y ago

Warren Buffett also advocates higher taxes for the rich: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-... Quote: "My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice." Buffett, Gates and many other super-rich people have decided to give most of their fortunes to charity, not to their children.

kevingadd 13y ago
Wouldn't putting your fortune into a charitable trust (like the Gates foundation - iirc a 501(c)3 tax exempt organization) basically count as a way to evade paying full tax on it (estate taxes, etc)? Not that I'm saying giving your money to charity is bad, but it seems like a way to reduce your tax burden while still being able to direct the money towards things you were interested in doing anyway.
- dublinben 13y ago
  Only if you're using that foundation as a way to funnel the money to your heirs. The Gates Foundation is spending a lot of that money right now, while Bill is still alive.
  - kevingadd 13y ago
    Yeah, sorry - I wasn't implying anything bad about Gates, I think he's doing great stuff - it's just unclear to me whether it's possible for someone to use a foundation like that as a tax dodge. I don't know if he represents the average or if he's actually a positive outlier.
    - lutusp 13y ago
      > it's just unclear to me whether it's possible for someone to use a foundation like that as a tax dodge. Only if burning money in your yard counts as a tax dodge. Setting up a foundation doesn't allow the money to be redirected to the donor in any way, and the donor doesn't even get to specify how the money is spent, except in a broad philosophical sense (i.e. "The goal of my foundation is to help education", things like that). > I don't know if he represents the average or if he's actually a positive outlier. Even among well-known philanthropists, Gates is an outlier. His willingness to tackle polio, and his project to redesign condoms to make them more effective, are both wise and daring projects. Unlike smallpox, polio only exhibits symptoms in a small minority of those infected, so it is very difficult to identify, control and eradicate. It's going to be much harder to eradicate polio than it was to eliminate smallpox, the first dramatic pathogen extinction that was based on simple human effort.
- lutusp 13y ago
  > Wouldn't putting your fortune into a charitable trust (like the Gates foundation - iirc a 501(c)3 tax exempt organization) basically count as a way to evade paying full tax on it (estate taxes, etc)? This may appear to be true at first glance, but compare using capital to set up a foundation versus using the same capital to grow one's fortune in equities and other investments. The latter choice is better overall when a combination of growth and tax issues are taken into account. This means that people who set up foundations do it because they want to change the world, not because they want to avoid taxes.
  - kevingadd 13y ago
    Thanks! Informative.

by lutusp 13y ago

kevingadd 13y ago

Wouldn't putting your fortune into a charitable trust (like the Gates foundation - iirc a 501(c)3 tax exempt organization) basically count as a way to evade paying full tax on it (estate taxes, etc)? Not that I'm saying giving your money to charity is bad, but it seems like a way to reduce your tax burden while still being able to direct the money towards things you were interested in doing anyway.

dublinben 13y ago
Only if you're using that foundation as a way to funnel the money to your heirs. The Gates Foundation is spending a lot of that money right now, while Bill is still alive.
- kevingadd 13y ago
  Yeah, sorry - I wasn't implying anything bad about Gates, I think he's doing great stuff - it's just unclear to me whether it's possible for someone to use a foundation like that as a tax dodge. I don't know if he represents the average or if he's actually a positive outlier.
  - lutusp 13y ago
    > it's just unclear to me whether it's possible for someone to use a foundation like that as a tax dodge. Only if burning money in your yard counts as a tax dodge. Setting up a foundation doesn't allow the money to be redirected to the donor in any way, and the donor doesn't even get to specify how the money is spent, except in a broad philosophical sense (i.e. "The goal of my foundation is to help education", things like that). > I don't know if he represents the average or if he's actually a positive outlier. Even among well-known philanthropists, Gates is an outlier. His willingness to tackle polio, and his project to redesign condoms to make them more effective, are both wise and daring projects. Unlike smallpox, polio only exhibits symptoms in a small minority of those infected, so it is very difficult to identify, control and eradicate. It's going to be much harder to eradicate polio than it was to eliminate smallpox, the first dramatic pathogen extinction that was based on simple human effort.
lutusp 13y ago
> Wouldn't putting your fortune into a charitable trust (like the Gates foundation - iirc a 501(c)3 tax exempt organization) basically count as a way to evade paying full tax on it (estate taxes, etc)? This may appear to be true at first glance, but compare using capital to set up a foundation versus using the same capital to grow one's fortune in equities and other investments. The latter choice is better overall when a combination of growth and tax issues are taken into account. This means that people who set up foundations do it because they want to change the world, not because they want to avoid taxes.
- kevingadd 13y ago
  Thanks! Informative.