Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elroy Jetson who wrote (26304)	12/29/2004 8:54:03 AM
From: rrufff	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

Have to disagree with you with respect to the estate tax. The current exemption is $1.5 million. Although that sounds like a lot of money, in reality, it's a home in much of the US and maybe a relatively small stock or savings account. I have been involved with the industry that makes a fortune devising plans for the rich to avoid these taxes. Thus, I can say that even though this would hurt my own business and others, it is a waste of resources to come up with layers of trusts, charitable foundations, convoluted minority interests, etc., because of this tax. I would make the exemption $10 million and eliminate all the loopholes, except possibly straight outright gifts to charities that have no strings attached. Charitable foundations are incredible. Almost nobody monitors them and IRS agents have no idea even what to look for. The abuse is rampant. The Boston Globe and others have done exposes on this, but it continues. They are ways for billionaire families to keep control of assets for generations all under the guise of running a foundation. So - my solution - $10 million exemption. Eliminate charitable foundations and other methods that avoid the tax, such as convoluted trusts. Make the estate tax very simple. $10 million is enough for most families. Above $10 million is a tiny number, but significant, number of families in terms of dollars the tax would raise. This would be at worst revenue neutral. In fact, I believe the money obtained from the billionaire families would way more than offset the loss on the upper middle class by going from $1.5 to $10 million. You would also eliminate an industry that wastes resources planning around this esoteric tax. This was proposed by a few congressmen but Republicans, who want it totally eliminated and Democrats, who will fight anything that looks remotely like something for the rich (are those who make 100,000 or have a million bucks really rich?) have prevented progress on a reasonable compromise that makes sense.