Skip to main content

The house of representatives passed a bill eliminating the inheritance tax. This is a $269 billion tax cut for the wealthiest 0.2%. That's two tenths of one percent. The shortfall will be added to the deficit.

How many of you know someone who has lost a farm or business because of the inheritance tax? I know of some multimillion dollar estates that passed on without a hitch or paying tax.

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

"Ohio is losing over 700 family farms a year, some of them just to pay the inheritance tax."

Jim Zehringer on Tuesday, November 16th, 2010 in a news conference

http://www.politifact.com/ohio...-loss-family-farms-/

 

Rated as true by the left leaning Politifact fact checker. Since this is done on already taxed earnings, this is nothing more than theft from grieving people who had a productive family member.

Last edited by Stanky

Agreed, plus government over values cost of the land and assets, frequently. But, must settle for the actual amount if the farm is sold. 

 

Best compromise would be a true inheritance tax -- only paid when the assets are sold by heirs., at least for farms, ranches and wholly owned businesses. For stock portfolios, I'm neutral.

Originally Posted by mad American:

Why tax already taxed property?

Because someone is getting it for nothing!  Can you not see that?  Oh wait you probably are not wearing the rose colored Liberalist Emperials required for one to see that despite the fact that these properties have already adequately taxed, they need to be taxed again just to claim a little more money for the crown.  Remember, this is where the word "coroner" originated.  he was the ultimate collector for the crowner, or the crowner, which was later shortened to "coroner".

Originally Posted by direstraits:

Agreed, plus government over values cost of the land and assets, frequently. But, must settle for the actual amount if the farm is sold. 

 

Best compromise would be a true inheritance tax -- only paid when the assets are sold by heirs., at least for farms, ranches and wholly owned businesses. For stock portfolios, I'm neutral.

 

+++

 

I'm asking because I think you'll know.  Correct any of my misstatements.  I'm just thinking out loud.

 

The value of the inheritance needs to be above a certain amount to be taxed.

 

Those who inherit above or below that amount and sell it may be subject to capital gains.

 

Am I close?  Or did I oversimplify.

 

Thanks.

 

Originally Posted by teyates:
Originally Posted by mad American:

Why tax already taxed property?

Because someone is getting it for nothing!  Can you not see that?  Oh wait you probably are not wearing the rose colored Liberalist Emperials required for one to see that despite the fact that these properties have already adequately taxed, they need to be taxed again just to claim a little more money for the crown.  Remember, this is where the word "coroner" originated.  he was the ultimate collector for the crowner, or the crowner, which was later shortened to "coroner".

 

+++

 

Sure explains the "death tax."

Two cases:

#1 Person works a skilled trade in the NE or NW for his 45 year career. He lives like a miser, stuffs all his money into a mattress. All this money has been taxed. Should the amount over the thresh hold be subject to inheritance tax?

#2  Man buys a 20 acre plot of swamp ground.  Ten years later, Disney builds an amusement park next to it. The value jumps to fifteen million. This gain was through no effort of him. Should he have to pay the inheritance tax?

Originally Posted by jtdavis:

Only some of the 700 are due to inheritance tax. 

Of the ones lost due to the inheritance tax, how many is because of the state tax ($333,000 exemption) and how many are due to the federal tax($10,000,000 exemption)?

_________________________________________________________

Politifact didn't look for absolute numbers and Zehringer used a rough conservative average number of farms lost over 15 years time. That era includes Clinton era Estate tax rules with a far lower exclusion amount of  $675,000 at the start of Bush2's era.

 

Originally Posted by mad American:
Well, since in my opinion there should be no inheritance tax, the answer to number one is no.
If someone inherits land next to Disneyland, they will be paying taxes on the assessed value in property taxes. So, no.

Bingo right answer.  Funny how someone makes light of someone else taking a chance on a property and making money on thier investment.  

Originally Posted by budsfarm:
Originally Posted by direstraits:

Agreed, plus government over values cost of the land and assets, frequently. But, must settle for the actual amount if the farm is sold. 

 

Best compromise would be a true inheritance tax -- only paid when the assets are sold by heirs., at least for farms, ranches and wholly owned businesses. For stock portfolios, I'm neutral.

 

+++

 

I'm asking because I think you'll know.  Correct any of my misstatements.  I'm just thinking out loud.

 

The value of the inheritance needs to be above a certain amount to be taxed.

 

Those who inherit above or below that amount and sell it may be subject to capital gains.

 

Am I close?  Or did I oversimplify.

 

Thanks.

 ____________________________________________________________

Really not a tax specialist anymore, but can answer this question -- its a two parter.

 

If the total property value is over $5.43 million (amount goes up annually per an inflation factor)  as of 2014, its taxed under the inheritance tax.  If, one inherits a house originally purchased for $150,000 and sells it immediately for $200,000 there is no tax.  If, one holds onto the home for years, then sells it for $300,000; then there is a capital gains tax on the additional $100,000.

 

Last edited by direstraits
Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by budsfarm:
Originally Posted by direstraits:

Agreed, plus government over values cost of the land and assets, frequently. But, must settle for the actual amount if the farm is sold. 

 

Best compromise would be a true inheritance tax -- only paid when the assets are sold by heirs., at least for farms, ranches and wholly owned businesses. For stock portfolios, I'm neutral.

 

+++

 

I'm asking because I think you'll know.  Correct any of my misstatements.  I'm just thinking out loud.

 

The value of the inheritance needs to be above a certain amount to be taxed.

 

Those who inherit above or below that amount and sell it may be subject to capital gains.

 

Am I close?  Or did I oversimplify.

 

Thanks.

 ____________________________________________________________

Really not a tax specialist anymore, but can answer this question -- its a two parter.

 

If the total property value is over $5.43 million (amount goes up annually per an inflation factor)  as of 2014, its taxed under the inheritance tax.  If, one inherits a house originally purchased for $150,000 and sells it immediately for $200,000 there is no tax.  If, one holds onto the home for years, then sells it for $300,000; then there is a capital gains tax on the additional $100,000.

 

+++

 

Thanks.  I was thinking along the lines of your example of a home.  Such as if a person inherits a $100k home and hangs on it thinking it might be an investment, the longer one does, the greater the capital gains and that plus the property taxes paid in the meantime might negate whatever increase in value it might have.

 

A tax on tax?

Originally Posted by budsfarm:
Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by budsfarm:
Originally Posted by direstraits:

Agreed, plus government over values cost of the land and assets, frequently. But, must settle for the actual amount if the farm is sold. 

 

Best compromise would be a true inheritance tax -- only paid when the assets are sold by heirs., at least for farms, ranches and wholly owned businesses. For stock portfolios, I'm neutral.

 

+++

 

I'm asking because I think you'll know.  Correct any of my misstatements.  I'm just thinking out loud.

 

The value of the inheritance needs to be above a certain amount to be taxed.

 

Those who inherit above or below that amount and sell it may be subject to capital gains.

 

Am I close?  Or did I oversimplify.

 

Thanks.

 ____________________________________________________________

Really not a tax specialist anymore, but can answer this question -- its a two parter.

 

If the total property value is over $5.43 million (amount goes up annually per an inflation factor)  as of 2014, its taxed under the inheritance tax.  If, one inherits a house originally purchased for $150,000 and sells it immediately for $200,000 there is no tax.  If, one holds onto the home for years, then sells it for $300,000; then there is a capital gains tax on the additional $100,000.

 

+++

 

Thanks.  I was thinking along the lines of your example of a home.  Such as if a person inherits a $100k home and hangs on it thinking it might be an investment, the longer one does, the greater the capital gains and that plus the property taxes paid in the meantime might negate whatever increase in value it might have.

 

A tax on tax?

 

_____________________________

Even the rather liberal Beatles had no love for the taxman once they made enough to be taxed at a higher level by the US and UK, hence their Taxman (I'll tax the pennies on your eyes).

 

Jt

if I choose to save my money instead of buying 22" spinners for my car, a new gold grill for my teeth, a new off road utv that cost more than a car that is real popular around here or any other toys.  i continure to do this while I live why should I now be able to give the money I have saved to my children instead of the Government?  The whole while any money making a profit and not in a defferred saving plan was taxed every year.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×