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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (575580)	7/8/2010 10:26:43 AM
From: Brumar89	Respond to of 1570184

JULY 4, 2010 Reviving the Federal Estate Tax ....... Here is the current bizarre state of affairs: The federal estate tax disappeared at the end of 2009. But the tax is scheduled by law to return in 2011 with a basic exemption of $1 million and a top tax rate of 55%. If Congress does nothing, heirs of wealthy people who die this year would enjoy an exceptional windfall. However, under the law as it now stands for 2010, many people who inherit assets that have gone up in value and who later sell those assets could face capital-gains taxes that wouldn't have been imposed under last year's law. One possibility is to revive the basic structure of the estate tax as it was in 2009. That would mean a basic exemption of $3.5 million and a top tax rate of 45%. (Transfers from one spouse to the other typically were tax-free.) ....... online.wsj.com CJ is behind the times.

To: combjelly who wrote (575580)	7/8/2010 11:13:03 AM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1570184

Bull shit. There is no effective tax until the value of the estate gets over about $3.5 million. And only the amount over $3.5 million is subject to tax. Before it cuts into the value of the estate, it is well over what a rational person would call "middle class". $3.5 Million for a lifetime accumulation of assets isn't much. By the time one considers a home, a 401k, other savings, everything else, it just doesn't go very far. For sure, we're talking about "upper middle" class, but an estate larger than this is very typical for small business owners, professionals, persons who have inherited property (timberland, royalty interests, commercial property) with the death of their parents, etc. It is hard to have a small business that one built over a lifetime to come in under this. And the continued existence of the business is often threatened if there isn't some serious liquidity with which to pay the tab. This valuation is based on the gross estate, and it isn't much money anymore. Furthermore, the gross estate limitation is reduced by any lifetime gifts that were made. And the states often pile on with estate taxes of their own. It is a horrible tax in every respect.

To: combjelly who wrote (575580)	7/27/2010 2:29:08 PM
From: TimF	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1570184

There is no effective tax until the value of the estate gets over about $3.5 million. For 2011 the exemption is only $1mil, and the rate is 55 percent. "The wealthy have their assets in trusts and other instruments that shield them from taxation." Yeah, right. Which is why the Walton heirs have been bankrolling the opposition to estate taxes for decades.... Assuming you're correctly describing them, Walton's actions provide essentially no support for arguing Bill's claim is incorrect. Having to structure your estate to avoid heavy taxation, itself costs money and reduces flexibility. Assuming the heirs care nothing except their inheritance and perhaps that of their later heirs, opposing the estate tax or trying to get it reduced, still makes sense. And its also possible that they might have other reasons to be against it. I'm not likely to be subject to it, but I oppose it, and if I had billions (but still would somehow not be subject to it), I likely would contribute to the effort against it.