Estate Tax by the numbers
This is one of my pet subjects, the Estate Tax, or as spun by the Republics and their "base", the "Death Tax."
I read a couple of items lately. One from a column in the San Francisco Chronicle cited a Brookings Institute study which said that the Estate Tax as currently written would affect only a bit over 12,000 families and already-scheduled increases in the exemption would affect only a bit over 7,000 families.
And the cost of reducing or eliminating the Estate Tax will cost 1 trillion dollars over 10 years.
12,000 families vs 1 trillion dollars. Hmmm.
Under a more modest reform proposed by the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, 99.7% of all estates would pay no estate tax at all. And only 50 small businesses and farms would owe any estate tax.
I read a couple of items lately. One from a column in the San Francisco Chronicle cited a Brookings Institute study which said that the Estate Tax as currently written would affect only a bit over 12,000 families and already-scheduled increases in the exemption would affect only a bit over 7,000 families.
And the cost of reducing or eliminating the Estate Tax will cost 1 trillion dollars over 10 years.
12,000 families vs 1 trillion dollars. Hmmm.
Under a more modest reform proposed by the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, 99.7% of all estates would pay no estate tax at all. And only 50 small businesses and farms would owe any estate tax.
posted by Jim at 8:45 PM
7 Comments:
I completely agree and am working with the Coalition for America's Priorities to raise awareness about Senator Frist's plan to vote on a repeal next week. I would urge everyone to contact your Senators as soon as possible and tell them to oppose a repeal of the estate tax.
Repealing the estate tax would cost $75 billion a year in federal revenue and over a trillion dollars overall. In addition, fewer than 2% of Americans have to pay the estate tax.
You can contact your Senators and learn more abut the effects of a repeal at the Coalition's website,
http://www.coalition4americaspriorities.com/
Also, Harold Meyerson had a great op-ed in the Washington Post this week on the current status of the repeal movement in the Senate,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/30/AR2006053001182.html
Everyone say the estate tax would cost someone. Who? Who is going to pay the price for the estate tax going away. The govenment? Since when do they own our money before we give it to them. Let the people have the money, let them die for free.
Rusty, if a tax is repealed, then there is less revenue coming into the US Treasury. That means that it has to borrow more of your children's and grandchildren's money.
Does your family have an estate in excess of $10 Million dollars? If not, you don't have anything to worry about.
Only the likes of Paris Hilton have to worry about losing a few million of their inheritance.
Take Bill Gates and Warren Buffet as an example of what to do with accumulated wealth.
Uhm, They didn't pay it away in Taxes...
Jim, have you ever considered the fact that Paris Hilton has at least been worth her bank account to the Left as a whipping boy (so to speak)on just this issue?
If you eliminate people like her, then who will you hold up as an example of why the State should steal money from it's citizens if those citizens accumulate any wealth?
This is a great position that you have taken, by the way.
Paraphrased: "There aren't many of them, and there are a LOT of us, so let's take away just THEIR Personal Property Rights.
Look at all we would gain, and we would only oppress 2% of Americans!"
Is there such a thing as the greater good?
Is there such a thing as enough money?
Good point jim. As was the Buffett Gates example of what to do with wealth. The people supporting our 3oo(so far) billion dollar "war on terra" want to borrow the money from China and give them interest on the money?
To whom much is given, much is expected.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Post a Comment
<< Home