Quote:
Originally Posted by jammies
I'm not really sure one way or the other on whether estate taxes are a good idea, but this argument is specious. You're dead, you're not getting double-taxed, your heirs are affected by the tax, not "you". Your estate is also not "you", forestalling that argument as well. "You" have ceased to exist.
Of course, it sounds better if you can yelp about getting double-taxed, but what's really happening is a financial transaction moving wealth from one entity to one or more others. Like selling goods, or paying employees, or getting paid, or the numerous other financial transactions the gov't takes a cut on. Arguments on the basis of whether it's economically advantageous or not are valid, arguments based on a false appeal to emotion are worthless.
|
The trasference from one entity to another is already being taxed (excluding the spousal rollover, which only delays the process).
That is why it is called double taxation. The deceased's estate is taxed on a deemed disposition. Taxing the estate again, because 'taxes' is no different than taxing savings at any other time. It is a random tax grab.
Your complaint of my post is mere semantics - I could have taken the time to write 'estate' instead of 'you' on several occasions, but it changes nothing.