Why one should not be subject to monetary inheritance

Agreed. I think you could make an argument for bumping up the exemption to be a multiple of a tax deductible to equate to an equivalent tax on a stream of payments over a lump sum.

 

You didn't write post #47?

 

Well, while I do have a gripe with what sort of things can be owned privately, I generally disagree with what you said.

Essentially, it's something like this: Since the generation before had to invent the lightbulb, the next generation should not be entitled to it unless they invent one themselves. There's little communal benefit in this and actually defeats the purpose of the father-son relationship. It sucks for those who were not able to do as much (by hook or by crook), but that's just life...

 

Apples and oranges. One is business (hiring a painter), one isn't.

 

So what should an Estate do.Just willy-nilly hand it over to the Government.
I mean,how Unamerican and near retarded.Monies earned within a Family have
every right to stay within that family.Yes,it is a good possibility that a Family Fortune
may reap a generation or two of slackers or idle rich.What is known as ne'er-do-well.
That is why we have Wills.Or the ability of being written out or disowned.That decision belongs to
the Matriarch or Patriarch who controls the Fortune.

 

In both case they are using money that taxes have already been paid (supposedly), which was the argument for not paying taxes again.

Sounds like apples to apples to me.

 

I think people should be able to transfer assets to family members or anyone else. The person getting the money should have to pay taxes on it.

 

No. Hiring the painter is business. You're providing him with work and an income, for which he should pay income taxes.

Your children are your personal life, and you should be able to give to them if you wish. We can already give to charities, and the government actually rewards us for doing so. We should be able to freely give our money to anyone we choose, including our children .... especially our children. And when I say "give", I mean freely give ... not in exchange for some service like painting or whatever.

 

wanting parents not to be able to pass on their wealth to their children is as crazy as the people that do not want to tax such wealth

the current system where the first 5 million is tax free works, lets not change it

- - - Updated - - -

you can give your children up to 5 million tax free, if you do it while your alive, they subtract it from the amount you can give tax free while your dead

 

No problem. We'll just say he's doing it as a favor. But you've already paid taxes on the money. So why should the painter have to pay taxes again?

Why can't I choose to give the money to the painter instead of a child? Why should the child get the money tax free and not that painter? After all, the painter is doing something useful and is earning the money. The child didn't do anything except be born to a particular womb. Why should he get the same money tax free?

Kind of smacks a little of feudalism, doesn't it? Aren't we supposed to be a meritocracy where we reward industry and work?

 

Well fine .. But I'm going to go all libertarian on ya and say that once I pay the taxes on my income and assets, whatever I do with that money with regards to my children, whether I am dead or alive, is not the government's business.

My opinion ...

My two cents ...

 

Because it's my money, once I've paid my taxes. It's my money!

If my final wishes are that it go to my children, or a charity, or my friggin cat, that is my business. I earned it! I paid taxes on it. It's mine! I want my money to go where I want it to go, not where the government wants it to go.

 

We discussed this with our lawyer after my father in law died. We thought my mother in law would eventually have to be put in a nursing home. The lawyer said they look at the past 5 or 6 years ( can't remember which). So we couldn't do that.
We ended up keeping her at home, which is what we preferred to do anyway, and paying people to take care of her. Thankfully my father in law left her well taken care so we had money to pay for her care. And a family member was able to move in and care for her at night and on weekends. We helped on weekends. We did this for 4 years. She died a year ago.

 

It is 5 years in my state and there is a not as well known exception: if their child lives in the residence with the person for two years prior to nursing home admission assisting in keeping them out of the nursing home for those two years, then they do not have to sell the house. Not sure how it is in every state on that. Basically they just have to prove they lived there and get a couple of letters from people verifying that the child was taking care of the parents.

 

Not sure what you mean. We currently have an estate exemption on the first 5 million left behind - do you mean adding a recipient side exemption?

 

It's not the government's business to interfere and try to obstruct a father's intent for his estate. However, if an heir receives a couple billion, isn't that income?

That is the extent of the government's interest.

 

I did not know that. I'll look in to this because my mom currently lives alone but I don't know how much longer she will be able to. She has a house and about 10-15 acres of land. She does have insurance that would cover home assistance.
However, she lives 5 hours away. My two brothers live near her but they work and can't stay with her. I'm trying to talk her in to selling and moving here where my sister and I would be able to care for her if needed.
Thanks for the info!!

 

I think the inheritance should be untouchable. If a person works all their life to be successful, pays their taxes on their earnings, then they should have the freedom to give it away as they please without the government taking a chunk.

The heir will make money off the inheritance (like interest or creating a business), and that can be taxed.

When the heir spends the money, someone else will make money off the inheritance, and they will pay taxes on that income.

And that person will spend that money, creating income for someone else, and that will be taxed.

And so on and so on.

The government will get theirs that way, inevitably.

But the idea that your estate owes the government money because you died is just .... hell, it's kinda creepy come to think of it.

 

It's a wealth transfer. Whether I give you a bag of gold coins for a job or as a gift, it's income. We make some special leeway, bit it is and should be limited. You can gift someone up to 10k/yr. The first five mil of your estate is untaxed. It you donate a dollar to charity, well tax a dollar less of your income. But it's still income.

 

My estate will be nothing near 5 mil unless I strike gold in my back yard. So it's just a matter of principle to me. My views on things are a mixture of libertarian, conservative, moderate, independent, and even liberal. This is my libertarian side talking.

 

The problem, I think, is obvious. Leaving your wealth behind to your kid is essentially a gift, right? It's a gift you give to your kid. Well, what if we treated gifts as not taxable? Why would you, then, pay your buddy contractor top dollar to fix something at your house? Pay him min possible, and then gift him the rest. See the issue?

The simple answer most would go for is that ok, just make an exception for gifts to your kids - but why? Isn't that giving an undue preference to taxpayers who choose to have kids? Wouldn't it then be unfair to allow you to gift as much as you want to your kids, but I don't have kids and so when I want to dote on people then get taxed?

Ultimately you have to treat gifts as taxable income.

 

Well the example of the guy who fixes your house is just fraud in my book. It's "under the table", and it goes on all the time.

Nah, leave gifts alone. It all gets taxed sooner or later as it makes its rounds through the economy. Most people let their kids inherit, but I could see letting you will it all to anyone. Like a best friend, for example.

Can't you give what you have as you see fit as your dying wish? Your dying wish! Is it really the role of government to hover over your deathbed like some sort of ghoulish vulture waiting for you to die so it can feed off you?

I find it revolting.

My two cents ...

 

Well if you give a gift it's taxed. Like when you win a new car, it's taxed, because it's "income". So I see the point of taxing inheritances as income, but we already have an exemption on the first five million.