In article , dpb wrote:

On 05/14/2015 3:37 PM, dpb wrote:
On Thu, 14 May 2015 15:08:31 -0500, dpb wrote:

If there's something left, good; if not, well, "too bad, sorry!"

Uncle Sam wants his share before the children get some. Tax a dead
man. The selfish *******. Spit!
...

Only if estate approx. $5.4M (or twice that for joint ...

That said, I'm all in favor of the attempt by Farm Bureau and small
business org's to repeal the estate tax entirely (or move the exemption
level up to something _really_ sizable) but realistically it just "ain't
agonna' happen".

--

My problem with the Estate Tax is that it is not a revenue raising tax,
never really has been. Even the supporters note that the main reason for
it is that people shouldn't be able to keep family money above a certain
level that offends the writers of the tax. To keep dynasties from
forming. Yeah, like the Rockefellers, Kennedys, etc. are all destitute.
It is an artificial event from a tax standpoint.
Personally I would do away with the estate tax, but also do away
simultaneously with cap gains ramp up at death. So any capital gains
taxes (really the only tax that makes sense in this context) would only
be collected when somebody sold the item (be it stock, family farm, etc)
and it wouldn't matter if the seller was first generation or 12th.
--
³Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital.²
‹ Aaron Levenstein