2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWhich 7 Democrats just voted to repeal the Estate Tax?
Daily Kos
April 16, 2015
Continuing the string of tax-related votes from yesterday, House Republicans brought up their bill to repeal the Estate tax entirely.
Barely anyone in the U.S. has to pay the estate tax.
In 2016, only 5400 estates in the whole country--the wealthiest 0.2 percent --would owe any estate tax.
The so-called "Death Tax Repeal Act" passed 240-179.
Only 3 Republicans voted against it:
David Jolly (R-FLA)
Walter Jones (R-NC)
Scott Rigell (R-VA)
Seven Democrats voted for this giveaway to the super-rich:
Brad Ashford (D-NE)
Sanford Bishop (D-GA)
Jim Costa (D-CA)
Henry Cuellar (D-TX)
Collin Peterson (D-MN)
Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD)
Krysten Sinema (D-AZ)
More;
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/04/16/1378170/-Which-7-Democrats-Just-Voted-to-Repeal-the-Estate-Tax#
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)Vote for crap like this there should be a guaranteed primary response!
And we need to make sure that there are no more people like Rahm Emanuel in charge of the DCCC to try and keep this from happening in subsequent elections.
Cal33
(7,018 posts)Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)and most of them wouldn't know what you were talking about.
BobSmith4152
(75 posts)Hey http://fresnocountydemocrats.org/ think there's a REAL Democrat in your district?
C'mon we need primary candidates NOW!
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)He must be slipping.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)AuntPatsy
(9,904 posts)CrispyQ
(36,546 posts)~kick
EL34x4
(2,003 posts)Why should it be taxed again?
Just asking.
KansDem
(28,498 posts)Then I have to pay taxes on April 15th. Why?
Why should Richie Rich pay less taxes?
EL34x4
(2,003 posts)My dad paid taxes on all the money he earned.
DURHAM D
(32,617 posts)Earned income is taxed. Investments are not.
1939
(1,683 posts)Stock dividends, bond interest
former9thward
(32,110 posts)You are not being taxed twice. If you pay taxes at the end of the year you did not have enough withheld from your paycheck.
n2doc
(47,953 posts)If all we are going to do is tax money "once", why do only the ultra rich get to benefit when money changes hands?
Just Asking. Also asking- are you ready to have your Social Security and medicare cut (when the time comes, of course) to cover the loss of income from this perk? Just asking.
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)... which is why the wealthy structure their assets so that they put their assets with the biggest potential gains and taxation to themselves in to their retirement accounts dedicated to going towards their kids that they never intend to sell that would have them pay this large tax, because in most estate law provisions at the state levels, etc. even if the property is sold, the amount of value from the time it was initially acquired and what it has gained until the day it is inherited is IGNORED and that tax revenue is LOST to government entities, since the capital gains is only assessed based upon the value at the time it was inherited and subsequently sold, not when it was initially acquired.
The wealthy are able to control these investments being in trust funds whereas the non-wealthy can't afford to put aside those assets and not cash in on them at times when they need money, and THEY wind up paying capital gains that the wealthy don't.
I was feeling similar pain this week, when I had to pay the 10% penalty of IRAs I cashed in last year, because I wasn't over 59 1/2 and didn't have 3 CONSECUTIVE months of paying health insurance while being unemployed, even though I paid for health insurance for over 4 months of unemployment that weren't consecutive. Another example of how the less wealthy are forced to paying added taxes that the wealthy are able to avoid. There are so many taxes structured like this today by design that has contributed to our economic collapse and bigger wealth divide. a fancy way of redistribution to the top.
eggplant
(3,915 posts)airplaneman
(1,240 posts)cascadiance
(19,537 posts)... that the wealthy can find ways around, but often the rest of us get screwed by it.
Back in the days of the dotcom boom/bust, many employees that worked for startups who exercised stock options when the public stock value was high after initial public offering, but their options price was low, were liable for huge amounts of AMT then, because of that difference in "value" of the stock. But of course due to the laddering schemes that were going on at the time, when only the insiders knew when to sell stock to maximize that initial value of the stock, and only many of them were able to sell stock in many instances that the employees were kept from selling stock because of "quiet periods", etc. When taxes came due, and the stock was in the toilet, many were forced to sell their stock because they couldn't wait for it to rebound (which in many cases it didn't), or they'd be liable for a huge amount of AMT tax to be paid on the presumed value of the stock that they would never see.
The wealthy could afford with their other assets to pay that high AMT tax, and could wait to see if the stock value would rebound later instead of being forced to sell it at a very low price to pay taxes. They could also be more careful when they exercised options to ensure that they did it when the public value of the stock was low to minimize that tax liability to.
I was liable for AMT and paying unemployment income tax the same year. How's that for a coincidence in those days.
lakercub
(659 posts)The rich person has indeed already been taxed, but the heir hasn't. To use the typical example, Paris Hilton's father has already paid his taxes on the money (although I actually doubt that given how well the rich dodge taxes ). However when he dies Paris will get the money and she will never have paid a cent of it in taxes. Therefore, in my mind, this a new source of one time income for her and should be taxed as such.
Nay
(12,051 posts)When the 'someone else' is an employee, we tax it as wages. Think of it as wages. That will make it easier on you.
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)me and don't have to turn them over to the state and locality? Hmmm?
former9thward
(32,110 posts)Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)former9thward
(32,110 posts)Probably an incentive to build there from the state and local authorities.
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)that incentive, they are at a huge disadvantage. We, the citizens are at a disadvantage because masses of dollars are going to the big box stores instead of the fire, police, public works, roads etc.
quakerboy
(13,923 posts)has been taxed. Why should any of it ever be taxed again, after the first taxing when it leaves the mint?
Maybe because its income. And our nation, in theory, taxes income to individuals.
Mister Ed
(5,945 posts)By golly, next time I go to the hardware store, I'm going to tell the cashier, "Uh, no sales tax, please. This money was already taxed when I earned it."
But wait! Better yet, next April 15th, I'll just send the IRS a note explaining that my income shouldn't be taxed, because my employers already paid taxes on that money when they earned it.
No,wait. My employers shouldn't have to pay taxes either. After all,their customers have already paid taxes on the money they used to buy our product.
Of course, I reckon the customers shouldn't have to pay taxes either, because...
Do you get it yet? Just asking.
airplaneman
(1,240 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)I could explain it but you wouldn't listen.
Now take your teabagger meme and go back from where you came.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)n2doc
(47,953 posts)Bastard will probably die in office since the people of his district vote name recognition only.
Wilms
(26,795 posts)So why do we have to hire DINOs?
MisterP
(23,730 posts)if they're from purple districts, we can't afford to dump them for someone popular and we have to move right
it's almost like they suggest "primary" them, and then torpedo any primaries repeatedly, as a distraction to keep us anesthetized! it's almost like they consider us cattle, using terms like "veal pen," and expect us to put in votes and money and be grateful that we're getting our livelihoods taken from us, like it's a party modeled on a sweatshop!
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Darb
(2,807 posts)Time well spent.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)back-stabbing weasels who pretend to be Democrats so they can undermine the party principles is more important.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)IF they had needed 8 or 10 votes to pass, they would have gotten 8 to 10 (or 12 or 15) votes to pass the 1% agenda. It ALWAYS works out that way.
Rotating Villain
http://www.salon.com/2010/02/23/democrats_34/
TheFarseer
(9,327 posts)But Christ man, this would be an easy vote to defend. Unless people are worried that Berkshire Hathaway would shut down to pay the taxes if Warren Buffet dies.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)He is our DINO in Oregon.