Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Trump family gets 1 billion from tax proposal [DJRed] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
DJRed wrote:
efernand wrote:
How is he going to save $1B? Weren't his naysayers saying that he wasn't even worth $1B when he was running?

Over what time frame are they talking about? I can't imagine he would even owe $1B in taxes. $200mm a year for 5 years?

I could see the elimination of the Death Tax protecting $1B from taxes, but not actually saving $1B.[/quote]

^^This.

The Trump family wouldn't be "getting" anything. They would be "keeping" what is theirs.

I understand that's a hard concept for some to grasp since you think what's mine is yours. Guess what? It's not.

Anyone have the figures on what this "gives" to Gates? Zuckerberg? Buffet? Bezos?

Gates and Buffett are giving their fortunes to charities and foundations, so this won't "give" them anything. Trump, of course, used his own foundation (into which he gave essentially nothing) as his personal slush fund, for which he was fined multiple times.

Don't even think about Trump and the likes of Gates, Buffett, and Bloomberg in terms of estates at the same time.

The point of the estate tax is not to "get" anything that might not be "mine." Perhaps you can think for a second or two and understand what the point is (as has been explicit in this thread). But, perhaps not.

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"
Last edited by: klehner: Nov 28, 17 5:33
Quote Reply
Re: Trump family gets 1 billion from tax proposal [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
klehner wrote:
DJRed wrote:
efernand wrote:
How is he going to save $1B? Weren't his naysayers saying that he wasn't even worth $1B when he was running?

Over what time frame are they talking about? I can't imagine he would even owe $1B in taxes. $200mm a year for 5 years?

I could see the elimination of the Death Tax protecting $1B from taxes, but not actually saving $1B.[/quote]

^^This.

The Trump family wouldn't be "getting" anything. They would be "keeping" what is theirs.

I understand that's a hard concept for some to grasp since you think what's mine is yours. Guess what? It's not.

Anyone have the figures on what this "gives" to Gates? Zuckerberg? Buffet? Bezos?


Gates and Buffett are giving their fortunes to charities and foundations, so this won't "give" them anything. Trump, of course, used his own foundation (into which he gave essentially nothing) as his personal slush fund, for which he was fined multiple times.

Don't even think about Trump and the likes of Gates, Buffett, and Bloomberg in terms of estates at the same time.

The point of the estate tax is not to "get" anything that might not be "mine." Perhaps you can think for a second or two and understand what the point is (as has been explicit in this thread). But, perhaps not.

I know what the point is. I disagree with it.

Good point on Gates and Buffet. What we should add in the new tax bill is some kind of incentive for charitable donations. A deduction maybe?
Quote Reply
Re: Trump family gets 1 billion from tax proposal [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
klehner wrote:
windywave wrote:
klehner wrote:
Duffy wrote:
The estate tax should be repealed.


Pray tell, why? The Founding Fathers thought that wealth shouldn't be passed down across generations, to avoid building a landed aristocracy that would accumulate more and more wealth and power.


Citation? That seems at odds with their demographic makeup

It is quite consistent with their view of the European aristocracy (built through inherited wealth). Having vast personal wealth doesn't mean you think it should be passed down so easily (see Buffett, Warren).

Ben Franklin: "Hence the Public has the Right of Regulating Descents, and all other Conveyances of Property, and even of limiting the Quantity and the Uses of it."

Jefferson: “A power to dispose of estates for ever is manifestly absurd. The earth and the fulness of it belongs to every generation, and the preceding one can have no right to bind it up from posterity. Such extension of property is quite unnatural.”

More Jefferson: "Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise. Whenever there is in any country, uncultivated lands and unemployed poor, it is clear that the laws of property have been so far extended as to violate natural right. The earth is given as a common stock for man to labour and live on."

Madison: “The great object [of political parties] should be to combat [this] evil: . . . by withholding unnecessary opportunities from a few, to increase the inequality of property, by an immoderate, and especially an unmerited, accumulation of riches . . .”

Interesting. Do you have the context of the quotes or the original?
Quote Reply
Re: Trump family gets 1 billion from tax proposal [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
klehner wrote:
Lagerhead wrote:
Yes, perhaps my point is too obvious -- while an estate tax might have some superficial appeal where there is no income tax --- that attraction should end when you include an income tax paid over a lifetime of productive earning. In other words, you are taxed in the normal course when you earn or realize income. Death itself should be free of charge.

The founding fathers were no fans of taxes in general. We are a nation founded on freedom and limited government. Let us not quote the founders to represent them as if they were some socialist utopians.

Wealthy people don't get most of their earnings from wages, either. Trump will have used the tax system to avoid paying taxes on huge gains in real estate values. These gains have never been taxed. Should he be able to just hand it over to his heirs without ever paying taxes on it?

Death is free of charge. Inheriting ("realizing") wealth should not be free of charge.

What's your cut off point before punitive taxes start? I'm intellectually opposed to having to sell a company or farm land or partition a "going concern" in order to satisfy such taxes. As to your example taxes will be paid on the disposal of the property
Quote Reply
Re: Trump family gets 1 billion from tax proposal [Sanuk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sanuk wrote:
Why is this populist guy so hell bent on helping me?


That's what populist Presidents like Trump do and why his followers love him. He promises them riches and they think that he is doing it for them and that he will make them rich too. The Trump lovers actually believe Trump is going to help them get their coal jobs back, reduce their taxes, make healthcare cheaper and MAGA.


No, seriously.




Some discusssion of the CBO report out over the weekend here.

-------------

"But what the CBO did is different. It didnÂ’t just look at the tax cuts. It looked at the net effect, because, William, this bill is so large that it would likely trigger automatic spending cuts in various programs.

So, the CBO said, OK, letÂ’s look at the combined effect of those two things, how your taxes would change under this bill, plus any benefits you get, any government programs that you get, any loss you would see from spending cuts.

And they found that those two things combined would have a dramatically larger effect on lower classes, people earning under $40,000, many times the effects we have seen in other analyses so far. They would be paying a little bit more in taxes, but they would lose a lot more in benefits, as programs like Medicaid, maybe Medicare would be hit by cuts."

-----------

"...the average really doesnÂ’t apply here. You canÂ’t look at the tax cuts that way, because many millions of Americans fall into very broad groups whose deductions would be taken away.

LetÂ’s start with one big one, the medical expenses deduction. If you have a very large amount of medical expenses, anything more than 10 percent of your income, you can deduct that on your taxes. So, say someone is facing a cancer diagnosis, and they donÂ’t have strong insurance. TheyÂ’re paying $100,000 out of pocket. They can deduct that from their taxes now.

The Senate and House bills would wipe that away."

------------

"Then another group — we talked about before state and local taxes. Now, this is also a very huge group. Almost a quarter or maybe more than a quarter of Americans take state and local taxes off of their federal taxes. Of course, this affects mostly high-tax states. New Jersey gets brought up a lot, New York, but it’s also states like Maryland, California, Virginia.

A quarter of million American taxpayers would lose that deduction, most or all of it. And so, when you say, on average, the middle class would see a tax cut, well, really, everyone is unique, and you see a lot of unique situations where the taxes might go up."

------------

"...those at the highest income level, say, $500,000 and above, would see not only the biggest benefit in dollar terms, William, but also in terms of percentage of their own income.

And thatÂ’s per person. So, itÂ’s not a broad category. I really dove in on that analysis."
Quote Reply
Re: Trump family gets 1 billion from tax proposal [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
windywave wrote:
klehner wrote:
windywave wrote:
klehner wrote:
Duffy wrote:
The estate tax should be repealed.


Pray tell, why? The Founding Fathers thought that wealth shouldn't be passed down across generations, to avoid building a landed aristocracy that would accumulate more and more wealth and power.


Citation? That seems at odds with their demographic makeup


It is quite consistent with their view of the European aristocracy (built through inherited wealth). Having vast personal wealth doesn't mean you think it should be passed down so easily (see Buffett, Warren).

Ben Franklin: "Hence the Public has the Right of Regulating Descents, and all other Conveyances of Property, and even of limiting the Quantity and the Uses of it."

Jefferson: “A power to dispose of estates for ever is manifestly absurd. The earth and the fulness of it belongs to every generation, and the preceding one can have no right to bind it up from posterity. Such extension of property is quite unnatural.”

More Jefferson: "Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise. Whenever there is in any country, uncultivated lands and unemployed poor, it is clear that the laws of property have been so far extended as to violate natural right. The earth is given as a common stock for man to labour and live on."

Madison: “The great object [of political parties] should be to combat [this] evil: . . . by withholding unnecessary opportunities from a few, to increase the inequality of property, by an immoderate, and especially an unmerited, accumulation of riches . . .”


Interesting. Do you have the context of the quotes or the original?

Do your own research.

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"
Quote Reply
Re: Trump family gets 1 billion from tax proposal [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
klehner wrote:
windywave wrote:
klehner wrote:
Duffy wrote:
The estate tax should be repealed.


Pray tell, why? The Founding Fathers thought that wealth shouldn't be passed down across generations, to avoid building a landed aristocracy that would accumulate more and more wealth and power.


Citation? That seems at odds with their demographic makeup


It is quite consistent with their view of the European aristocracy (built through inherited wealth). Having vast personal wealth doesn't mean you think it should be passed down so easily (see Buffett, Warren).

Ben Franklin: "Hence the Public has the Right of Regulating Descents, and all other Conveyances of Property, and even of limiting the Quantity and the Uses of it."

Jefferson: “A power to dispose of estates for ever is manifestly absurd. The earth and the fulness of it belongs to every generation, and the preceding one can have no right to bind it up from posterity. Such extension of property is quite unnatural.”

More Jefferson: "Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise. Whenever there is in any country, uncultivated lands and unemployed poor, it is clear that the laws of property have been so far extended as to violate natural right. The earth is given as a common stock for man to labour and live on."

Madison: “The great object [of political parties] should be to combat [this] evil: . . . by withholding unnecessary opportunities from a few, to increase the inequality of property, by an immoderate, and especially an unmerited, accumulation of riches . . .”

Here is a research paper on the topic that appears even-handed and well researched: http://scholars.law.unlv.edu/...1371&context=nlj

It suggests the estate tax was opposed by some, but not by the majority of the founders. The majority seemed to view estate taxes as a means to finance war, not to level the playing field for citizens. The article points out that Jefferson actually repealed a death tax soon after taking office, despite his earlier rhetoric. The concept of death taxation as a means to level the playing field was discussed by the founding fathers, but they still proposed them in 1794 and 1796, enacted them in 1797, repealed in 1802 and didn't reenact until 1862. This suggests the majority of the founding fathers may not have agreed with Thomas Paine or Thomas Jefferson on their view of estate taxes as a means to redistribute wealth. It wasn't until death taxes being enacted to finance WWI that they became more or less a permanent revenue source for the federal government.

I don't doubt the strong views and writings of many respected founding fathers, but when trying to determine intent going back over 200 years, I prefer to look at actions over words. Actions more likely reflect the predominant view at that point in time.
Quote Reply
Re: Trump family gets 1 billion from tax proposal [DJRed] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
DJRed wrote:
klehner wrote:
DJRed wrote:
efernand wrote:
How is he going to save $1B? Weren't his naysayers saying that he wasn't even worth $1B when he was running?

Over what time frame are they talking about? I can't imagine he would even owe $1B in taxes. $200mm a year for 5 years?

I could see the elimination of the Death Tax protecting $1B from taxes, but not actually saving $1B.[/quote]

^^This.

The Trump family wouldn't be "getting" anything. They would be "keeping" what is theirs.

I understand that's a hard concept for some to grasp since you think what's mine is yours. Guess what? It's not.

Anyone have the figures on what this "gives" to Gates? Zuckerberg? Buffet? Bezos?


Gates and Buffett are giving their fortunes to charities and foundations, so this won't "give" them anything. Trump, of course, used his own foundation (into which he gave essentially nothing) as his personal slush fund, for which he was fined multiple times.

Don't even think about Trump and the likes of Gates, Buffett, and Bloomberg in terms of estates at the same time.

The point of the estate tax is not to "get" anything that might not be "mine." Perhaps you can think for a second or two and understand what the point is (as has been explicit in this thread). But, perhaps not.

I know what the point is. I disagree with it.

Good point on Gates and Buffet. What we should add in the new tax bill is some kind of incentive for charitable donations. A deduction maybe?

You should read the weaponized charity story i posted
Quote Reply
Re: Trump family gets 1 billion from tax proposal [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
klehner wrote:
windywave wrote:
klehner wrote:
windywave wrote:
klehner wrote:
Duffy wrote:
The estate tax should be repealed.


Pray tell, why? The Founding Fathers thought that wealth shouldn't be passed down across generations, to avoid building a landed aristocracy that would accumulate more and more wealth and power.


Citation? That seems at odds with their demographic makeup


It is quite consistent with their view of the European aristocracy (built through inherited wealth). Having vast personal wealth doesn't mean you think it should be passed down so easily (see Buffett, Warren).

Ben Franklin: "Hence the Public has the Right of Regulating Descents, and all other Conveyances of Property, and even of limiting the Quantity and the Uses of it."

Jefferson: “A power to dispose of estates for ever is manifestly absurd. The earth and the fulness of it belongs to every generation, and the preceding one can have no right to bind it up from posterity. Such extension of property is quite unnatural.”

More Jefferson: "Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise. Whenever there is in any country, uncultivated lands and unemployed poor, it is clear that the laws of property have been so far extended as to violate natural right. The earth is given as a common stock for man to labour and live on."

Madison: “The great object [of political parties] should be to combat [this] evil: . . . by withholding unnecessary opportunities from a few, to increase the inequality of property, by an immoderate, and especially an unmerited, accumulation of riches . . .”


Interesting. Do you have the context of the quotes or the original?

Do your own research.

If I was Duffy I'd post a don't have time for that meme
Quote Reply
Re: Trump family gets 1 billion from tax proposal [tyrod1] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The republicans have wanted the estate tax gone for years. I’m not sure how this is related to Trump besides the fact that he has enough money for it to effect him.

I think the estate tax should be gone also, but this plan definitely wasn’t started or thought up because of Trump.
Quote Reply
Re: Trump family gets 1 billion from tax proposal [Grant.Reuter] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
think it was a main motivator for him to enter race as repub......yes they wanted to get rid of it for a while. top 1% controlling 50% wealth roughly is not good. repubs game plan to cater to rich, they have citizens united, get corporate judges, protect gerrymandering and hold off demographic changes as long as they can. build up military for foreign and domestic purposes. trump could care less about main street. he wants trump name to last. all these cats have egos but trump is on steroids and his listening to bannon and wanting to be king like putin is disturbing. all likely because he got ignored in ny.. how's that for armchair qbing.
Quote Reply
Re: Trump family gets 1 billion from tax proposal [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
windywave wrote:
You act as if folks can't avoid the estate tax with some planning

Windy,

No one believe that you know anything about money because you try too hard to show everyone you do.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.
Quote Reply
Re: Trump family gets 1 billion from tax proposal [ajthomas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ajthomas wrote:
windywave wrote:
You act as if folks can't avoid the estate tax with some planning

Windy,

No one believe that you know anything about money because you try too hard to show everyone you do.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.

Uh okay. Please point out where my statement is incorrect.
Quote Reply
Re: Trump family gets 1 billion from tax proposal [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I’d rather not because it is irrelevant to my point.
Quote Reply
Re: Trump family gets 1 billion from tax proposal [ajthomas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ajthomas wrote:
I’d rather not because it is irrelevant to my point.

Because you're wrong? Got it.
Quote Reply
Re: Trump family gets 1 billion from tax proposal [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Wrong about what, exactly? Estate tax avoidance? I am quite sure I haven’t stated an opinion.
Quote Reply
Re: Trump family gets 1 billion from tax proposal [ajthomas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ajthomas wrote:
Wrong about what, exactly? Estate tax avoidance? I am quite sure I haven’t stated an opinion.

So my statement about avoiding inheritance tax is correct?
Quote Reply

Prev Next