If we passed an estate tax rate of 90% on all estate proceeds over $1 million

[CTLawGuy]

could we eliminate all other federal taxes and still have sufficient revenue?

Even if we believed that people should enjoy the money they've earned without taxation, what right does anyone have to tax free windfall income from people just because they are related to them? What justification is there for allowing people to create generations of idle children living off the hard work of their ancestors? Why shouldn't everyone have to contribute to society to make a living, including wealthy spoiled children?

Not that this is going to happen, but a thought provoking idea.

[Cleita]

1. Yep, but it's never going to happen unless we

storm the Bastille and take over.

[aquart]

2. I'm gonna be nice and make it 80% over ten million.

A million doesn't go as far as it used to and I LIKE movie stars to live large.

[SoCalNative]

3. $1 million

doesn't buy what it used to. It would barely be enough for me not to have to worry about paying the bills after I retire.

[ChrisMCV]

5. Does that include farms?

A family farm could easily be worth that and be a small family operation. You would just make the big factory farms the only farms left?

A million is a lot less then you think when your combine replacement cost is in the 6 digit range.

[SoCalNative]

10. Um..where did I ever say that?

In fact where do you get that I'm for taxing $1 mil+? I stand to inherit an estate that, depending on the real estate market, will be at a mil or a little more, and I sure don't want to pay taxes on it.

[TexasObserver]

4. No, such a tax wouldn't produce sufficient revenues.

[napi21]

6. Even I don't believe in an estate tax being set at $1 million+

It's not a very big business that is worth more than $1 million! I once worked for a business when the husband died. Almost all his case was tied up in the business, and his wife had to sell a large part of the business just to pay the taxes. That same thing happens when a large parcel of land is owned by a family for many years. There's really no cash, just the value of the land. People are taxed on the VALUE OF THE ESTATE. In many cases, that old homestead has to be broken up and sold just to pay the taxes.

I'd much prefer to see an estate tax on those in excess of $10 million or more. Then maybe at a rate of 50% or 60%.

Very wealthy people always find a way around paying hugh estate taxes anyway. They set up trusts and other financial vehicles that exempt the money.

[KittyWampus]

8. thank you for understanding. My family business is 3rd generation. The land under our feet

is worth money on paper. On paper. But we don't have it to spend. Heck, we just found out a roof need replacing and no money is coming in right now.

[Abq_Sarah]

7. I do not know how popular that would be

With most of the voters.

Most people don't work hard to build a company to hand it over to the government on their deathbed. Most people understand they will never see $1 million in assets but they don't want anyone crapping on that dream, either.

In some areas of my state, families may be cash poor but they've handed down land to their children for generations. Due to the scarcity of private land, prices have been driven up over the years. Should it be handed over to the government to be auctioned off because someone doesn't think their kids deserve it?

[ManiacJoe]

9. You are wrongly assuming that only cash is taxed.

Currently, the vast majority of what is taxed is the business assets. Your idea only stands a chance of working if you tax the cash only. Else, every small business would be put out of business when inherited by the children.

[Alias Dictus Tyrant]

11. Nope, a 100% tax on ALL estates would not cover it

Some buddies and I had this discussion a while back, and looked up the figures. Even if the government took 100% of the assets of every single person that died, the average estate value would have to be ~$250k just to cover personal income tax revenue alone. Since the average estate at death is nowhere near $250k on average, it would amount to a drop in the bucket. And that ignores all the other taxes that would not cover or leaving joint assets alone. In short, you have to tax the living for the level of spending the government does.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

12. Let's just tax lawyers at 90%. That would be far more popular.

[CTLawGuy]

13. I have no doubt

NT