"ATP" on Fri, 30 Jul 2010 22:03:30
-0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

"Ignoramus18915" wrote in message
m...
On 2010-07-31, ATP wrote:

"Ignoramus18915" wrote in message
...
On 2010-07-30, pyotr filipivich wrote:
Nope. An Estate Tax (or to call it more properly a Death Tax) is
why we get Paris Hilton. She knows she's not going to inherit it, her
Daddy knows she's not going to inherit, so why not spend it as much as
possible now, before it goes tot he tax man.

Excuse me?

Do you have a clue as to what you are talking about?

Transferring money to anyone (such as heir) as a gift, while alive,
subjects them to gift tax, which is very similar (and is designed to
supplant) estate tax.

Getting money from daddy when daddy is alive, is generally taxed the
same way as when daddy is dead.

I'd be surprised if the full value of the services, transportation,
clothing
etcetera consumed by Paris Hilton is accounted for and taxed.

Do you mean that what her dad pays for her clothing, is not taxed with
gift tax?

Good question.

i

Staying at family compounds, buying on family charge accounts, payments for
bogus services, staff on family payroll, there are probably a lot of ways to
prop up her lifestyle without gift taxes.

The details of how MS Hilton spends the money is beside the point.
What incentive does Paris Hilton have to add to the family nest egg?
Or not to reduce the family nest egg?

What incentive does anyone have, to save and invest in order to
give half of it to the government when they die?

tschus
pyotr

--
pyotr filipivich
We will drink no whiskey before its nine.
It's eight fifty eight. Close enough!