Re: So, why would I vote Republican?

On Sat, 08 Sep 2007 15:19:06 -0400, JB <JayBeeee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Brad Greer wrote:
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 14:21:26 -0700, Carlisle
<carrie-cox@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sep 7, 1:41 pm, Brad Greer <jjh110...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 06:17:54 -0700, Carlisle





<carrie-...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sep 7, 3:26 am, Pepe Papon <a...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 15:13:09 -0700, Lfh <onetaste2...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
You want the rich to get richer?
Uh sure yeah..What do you think the top tax rate should be, Seth? 70%
80%? When my mom passes away we have to pay the government half of my
parents' savings unless she pays a kings ransome in life insurance. I
just think it's funny that only so called republicans supposedly want
to get richer. Wonder what stocks Joko the mad clown's trust fund is
invested in that allows him to fly (imagine the carbon footprint!) to
Hawaii to see a mediocre band and smoke more dope. Ain't capitalism
great when you don't have to work for it!
Really? Your mom's estate will owe 50% to the government in estate
taxes? Hard to imagine when the current top rate is 45% and the first
two million of the estate is exempt. Perhaps your mom needs to
consult a tax attorney or better yet, stop swallowing the bull***
lies regarding the so-called death tax.

My parents are in a position where the estate tax could definitely cut
into their estate. However, they have taken numerous steps to limit
their exposure (setting up trusts, gifting money, charitable
contributions, etc.) so they will have a minimum impact from the
estate tax. The belief that "they take half your money when you die"
is pure bull***.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
45% as opposed to 50? 2 million is exempt from estate taxes if you
have the liquidity to set up trusts then that's it. Anything you gift

No - the first 2 million dollars of your estate is exempt. has
nothing to do wih liquidity, etc. - if your estate (home, stocks,
cash, material goods) are worth less than 2 million your estate
doesn't owe a dime. The vast majority of Americans pass away with an
estate under the tax limits.

Keep in mind, too, that you pay 45% of the amount *above* 2 million
dollars. So, let's take a hypothetical example. Say your estate is
worth 3 million dollars. The first 2 are exempt, you pay no taxes on
that. The next million (the rest of your estate) is taxed at 45%,
that's $450,000 that your estate will owe in taxes. Now, I haven't
taken a course in mathematics in a long time but I'm reasonably
certain that $450,000 is no where near 50% of $3,000,000 (it's
actually 15%). So, to make it clear, if your estate owes anything
approaching 50% to taxes you have a very large estate and are guilty
of abysmal planning.

HTH.

The only problem I see with your analysis is that you used too small of
an estate value. Take your example to the next level: If someone has
an estate worth $12M. Certainly, the first $2M is exempt, but the next
$10M is taxed at the same 45%, for a whopping $4.5M tax bill (assuming
no trusts have been arranged). Then, you've reached an effective tax
rate of nearly 40%. And, obviously, the larger the estate, the higher
the effective tax rate (i.e. an estate worth $122M would be taxed at
just over 44%).

Right, I understand that. However, how many estates are worth $122M?
Not too many, but yet Carrie (and others) insist that the government
"takes half your money" when you die. It's just not true, and given
that somewhere around 1% of all estates pay a federal estate tax
scaring people to believe they won't be able to leave any money to
their heirs is misleading. Agree or disagree?

Remember, of course, that this tax is imposed on moneys that have been
saved after income taxes had already been paid and on assets that have
been purchased using post-tax dollars and, in many cases, taxed in other
ways (such as local property and sales taxes).

Yeah, that happens. But the alternative is to raise *everybody's* tax
rate to make up for the loss of estate tax income (which affects only
a very people and which includes my parent's estate so again, I'm not
giving away other people's money). Besides which, if you have an
estate that is likely to be subject to estate taxes there are plenty
of steps you can take to minimize your exposure (legally), I encourage
people to do so. Taxes are required for the government to function,
we have a large national debt that must be paid off. Do you have some
alternative suggestions that will not impact the majority of the
population?

And, fwiw, I find Neil's position on this matter very telling. 70 - 80%
of an estate should be taxed, simply because he despises many of rich
people he's encountered??

Disgusted.

Well, I don't agree with Neil, and I find his threshold for exemption
($500k) to be far too low in today's economic environment. Many, many
houses are worth more than that, assuming one dies after owning the
same house for long enough to pay off the mortgage that means a lot of
families will have to sell the family house to pay estate taxes
(neither my sisters nor I have any desire to live in our parents house
so we'll sell it anyway, but emotionally that's a heavy thing to have
to pay for a lot of people). I tend to agree more with Toad - keep
the exemption somewhere between $2M and $3.5M, keep the tax rate on
all assets above that at the current rate (45%) and most people will
be able to leave something for their families. Those who have larger
estates can afford the lawyers/accountants to shield their assets if
they want.
.

Loading