Why do people vote for Hilary and Obama?

[Final-Fan]

Sqrl said:

Final-Fan said:

Sqrl said:

Final-Fan said:

I would treat someone inheriting $10,000 differently than someone inheriting $10,000,000 because -- guess what -- it's a different situation. If I had a rich uncle I expected to inherit millions from -- and in fact I DO have a wealthy uncle, but I don't know his net worth and haven't seen his will -- I would be making the same exact arguments. I'm not saying I would fork over the $2 million tax bill with a smile on my face, but I would still vote to keep the law even knowing that would happen to me.

"Treating each person the same" -- Do you tell someone in a wheelchair to suck it up or do you build him a ramp next to the staircase? Rich people are more able to pay a high tax rate without hardship, so we do, to benefit society.

Its not a different situation. It is someone dying and leaving their estate to their friends and family. Why does it make a difference if I leave $10,000 worth of posessions or $10,000,000 worth of posessions. It is still the final request of a person who has just died and it is being ignored because the government wants to cram its hand down their pocket one last time. I'm sorry but you just cannot convince me that this is "ok".

Aside from that there are so many problems with the tax, for example: Would you think it is ok if your uncle leaves you an authenticated baseball bat signed by Babe Ruth and certified as the last bat he used to hit a home run with. Oh...but wait, you can't keep it because it is valued at $20m and in order to pay the estate tax it has to be sold. Sorry better luck next time, maybe next time your relative dies and specifically gives you a priceless treasure the government will decide that it is ok to follow their wishes....but only if you can fork over the cash!

The difference is exactly the same as the difference between a guy who makes $10,000 a year and a guy who makes $10,000,000 a year, only we don't start taxing inheritance until it hits $2 million.

Your example is such an extreme unlikelihood that I find it hard to believe that such a thing has ever happened. Has it? Did the IRS heartlessly force him to sell it off to pay the bill or did they cut the guy some slack? The IRS guys are human too.

This past year the guy who cought the big Bonds homerun had to sell the ball because the IRS knocked on his door the next morning saying they wanted their share.

The fact is that there are folks who have estates worth a few million and the money is all tied up in assets that they own. It is not an uncommon occurence for people to sell portions of an estate to pay the taxes on the estate. The fact that anyone would be forced to sell things given to them by their recently deceased relative is quite frankly mortifying.

OK, so the "insanely valuable collectible" example is valid.  [edit:  No it's not -- that's the gift tax; thanks fkusumot!  My moment of stupidity...]  But as for the "no liquid assets" example, here's factcheck.org to the rescue:

"Worth noting is that family-owned farms and closely held businesses already receive special treatment under current law. Heirs who agree to keep the farm or business assets within the family for 10 years after death can reduce the taxable amount of the estate by 40 percent to 70 percent. And if the farm or business is at least 35 percent of the gross value of the estate, payments can be spread out over 14 years." http://www.factcheck.org/article328.html

In fact, there is not a single known incident of heirs being forced to sell the family farm to pay off the estate tax.