It's called being "land rich and cash poor", and this happens all the time up here in the Hill Country to people who have had this land in their families for generations and don't have the money to plan properly. It either gets sold to very wealthy auslanders from Dallas/Austin/Houston who have minimal knowledge of conservation and what's best for the land, or to developers, because god knows we need more subdivisions up here. We've spent countless hours and many tens of thousands of monies on estate planning so my folks and then my brother and I don't have to worry about it. That's the only advice I can give, lawyer up.
Of course that is one good argument, but the other side is what if it is a billion dollar business unit? Should it be passed on without any tax as well? Unless you abolish the tax, you have to draw the line at some point, be it million or five million.
So if I'm born as the heir to dynastic fortune, and you're born to a Calcutta slum dweller, it's a "fair" and just initial distribution of resources in between the two of us? I don't anybody would argue that your parents resources at birth is at all just or based on merit or anything, they're completely based on random chance. I'm not sure if there's a better illustration of the cliche "life isn't fair" than your financial circumstances at birth.
That's just a transaction though, why should this transaction be tax exempt unlike any other transaction? Or anyway why is it "unfair" to not have this transaction tax exempt?
Why? Explain it - you were a superior person so god chose you to be born unto privilege, and the rest of the world to suffer in misery because of their inferiority? Some sort of Panglossian "best of all possible worlds" ratonale? Or perhaps you are a believer in reincarnation and merit in this life is a manifestation of past life deeds? The thread title implies a condition that a world without an estate tax and thus birth-level inheritance is fair (because an estate tax is not...) Is it really to much to ask why this is believed to be true?
Don't presume to decide who is deserving of my wealth. Perhaps my child took care of me in my latter years. Or perhaps I consider it a moral obligation to provide as much as possible to those I brought into this world. I don't have to justify the dispensation of my property to you or anyone else. Your selfish presumption of entitlement to take by force wealth you did not earn is not my idea of fairness. Wealth taxes discourage the accumulation of wealth. In other words, savings, something we desperately need more of.
exactly...why should the government get any of this? people should be able to leave their estate with anyone they wish to without the government interfering.
No, we don't need more rich people saving more money. We need more poor and middle class people to be in the position to save money. We need to discourage the concentration of wealth in a tiny fraction of the population.
Yeah! We need to appropriate all the earnings of more than $250,000 per year. Then there is enough incentive to get to the $250k plateau and the federal government can wisely spend the rest on projects for the people!
