Inheritance Taxes plus No Stock reset...

[QP!]

You only pay taxes on realized capital gains, so most of the wealth did not have taxes paid on it.

Terry's view is that is irrelevant.

When Bezos, Musk, Zuckerberg, etc created their companies they got their initial stock at a value of $0. If they pass that stock on to their kids, having never sold any of it, the kids, thanks to gov't lobbying, get that stock with a Capital Gains reset. Meaning if the kids inherit it and it is worth $1T the kids do not pay a penny of tax on that growth from $0 to $1T and would only pay tax on Capital gains above that level.

So the kids could actually do something the Founders of those companies could not and that is liquidate all $1T in stock and pay zero tax.

Terry says that is fair and the only way to do it. The kids and generations that follow should not pay a penny of tax on that income to them.

 

[Walt]

Terry's view is that is irrelevant.

When Bezos, Musk, Zuckerberg, etc created their companies they got their initial stock at a value of $0. If they pass that stock on to their kids, having never sold any of it, the kids, thanks to gov't lobbying, get that stock with a Capital Gains reset. Meaning if the kids inherit it and it is worth $1T the kids do not pay a penny of tax on that growth from $0 to $1T and would only pay tax on Capital gains above that level.

So the kids could actually do something the Founders of those companies could not and that is liquidate all $1T in stock and pay zero tax.

Terry says that is fair and the only way to do it. The kids and generations that follow should not pay a penny of tax on that income to them.

The whole concept of Buy, Hold, Die is never paying taxes. That is not paying taxes initially, and not paying taxes later. It gets pathological after a while. Do you really think the tiny bit of taxes that Musk would have had to pay would have mattered that much?

With AI, more of the economy will become capital, rather than wages. Right now over 75% of the federal taxes are on wages. As that declines, we will have to decide whether we can really afford these giant subsidies for the very rich.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Trusts only exist because governments allow them to. It is a form of corporate personhood. If governments want to, they can simply tax trusts, or even just make them illegal.

When the US wanted to make bearer bonds illegal, they just placed a tax on them. Now there are no bearer bonds issued in the USA.

Then, people will simply move on to what works to avoid taxes.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Terry's view is that is irrelevant.

When Bezos, Musk, Zuckerberg, etc created their companies they got their initial stock at a value of $0. If they pass that stock on to their kids, having never sold any of it, the kids, thanks to gov't lobbying, get that stock with a Capital Gains reset. Meaning if the kids inherit it and it is worth $1T the kids do not pay a penny of tax on that growth from $0 to $1T and would only pay tax on Capital gains above that level.

So the kids could actually do something the Founders of those companies could not and that is liquidate all $1T in stock and pay zero tax.

Terry says that is fair and the only way to do it. The kids and generations that follow should not pay a penny of tax on that income to them.

Sounds like a great thing to me! Government did NOTHING to deserve a penny of that wealth. NOTHING! It is far more fair that the person(s) that made that money can decide what to do with it than government steal it upon their death and keep it while doing nothing to have earned a penny of it.

 

[Walt]

Then, people will simply move on to what works to avoid taxes.

The lax tax laws have taught some people that avoiding taxes is more important than making money. This is a terrible lesson to learn. I would rather pay $25 million on a $100 million increase of my net worth than pay $0 on $0 net worth.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

I am curious what everyone, left or right view on this.

Using Jeff Bezos as the example, when he dies he will likely leave substantially all of his Stock to his kids. Stock he received at a zero cost base when Amazon was created that is worth Hundreds of billions today.

Due to lobbied for tax policy Bezos has been able to just borrow money against his stock to live and never sell any stock and thus avoid the significant Capital Gains tax he would otherwise pay.

When his kids get the stock, after his death Congress due to Lobbying passed a law that the stock gets a Capital gains reset, meaning whatever the stock price is, it is trading at, now becomes the price they would set for them to pay Capital gains but all the prior gains they get free. SOmething Jeff Bezos would not have got while alive.

So not only do the kids hundreds of billions but they get it tax free on a stock gain that NEVER EVER gets taxed in the way normal citizens with stock get taxed.

Making the heirs pay the Capital Gains at inheritance still leaves them filthy rich but just allows the tax everyone else pays on stock gains to be received by government.

Would you support this transfer being taxed or do you believe the heirs should get it tax free?

Where There Is Heir, There Is Suffocation

Well, it's a start. But hereditary power is the well-hidden cancer that has destroyed all civilizations. The spoiled brats should get no stocks at all. Furthermore, large inheritances and trust funds should be abolished. With 140 trillion dollars of inheritance due to the younger generations, closing off all opportunities to Commoners, this will become a major issue soon.

 

[QP!]

Sounds like a great thing to me! Government did NOTHING to deserve a penny of that wealth. NOTHING! It is far more fair that the person(s) that made that money can decide what to do with it than government steal it upon their death and keep it while doing nothing to have earned a penny of it.

Which is just something a stupid person thinks and says.

It is because of American security and infrastructure and political system that most of the worlds top entrepreneurs want to build their company there as opposed to in Somalia or Turkistan.

You are stupid so you have no clue about any of that and just think they could build their corporations in any undeveloped, undefended country and have the same success.

You are wrong on that. And what you want is just simply massive ENTITLEMENTS but only for the uber rich and particularly for their heirs.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Which is just something a stupid person thinks and says.

It is because of American security and infrastructure and political system that most of the worlds top entrepreneurs want to build their company there as opposed to in Somalia or Turkistan.

You are stupid so you have no clue about any of that and just think they could build their corporations in any undeveloped, undefended country and have the same success.

You are wrong on that. And what you want is just simply massive ENTITLEMENTS but only for the uber rich and particularly for their heirs.

What is stupid, beyond stupid, is that government deserves anyone's money simply for existing. THAT is your position here: Government deserves the money someone has on dying more than their heirs, or anyone else does. Government does not have to confiscate wealth on death to do what they have to do.

It is YOU that wants "entitlements" in the form of government largesse. You are practicing the politics of envy. Generational wealth accumulation is one of the best ways a nation grows whereas governments confiscating wealth and spending it like a drunken sailor on social welfare nonsense and whatnot is how nations go broke.

 

[QP!]

What is stupid, beyond stupid, is that government deserves anyone's money simply for existing. THAT is your position here:

No you simpleton.

Stop talking about things you do not understand.

My position is that the things that corporations NEED, like security, infrastructure, etc HAVE A COST TO THEM and tax payers pay that cost by giving tax money to the government to provide it.

Your entire position is the uber rich and their heirs and their corporations should get all those benefits that ALLOWS them to set up and succeed but they should pay NONE of the cost.

Thus ENTITLEMENTS or FREE RIDERS.

 

[Jerry Mathers]

Income is income when it is gained by any person the first time.

Terry has created this fake criteria that income gained via inheritance is magic and thus should get a pass and only working slobs should pay.

The reason for a tax on any income is so each person contributes to the services they get from government. There is no reason Larry Elisons son should get billions in income and be able to contribute nothing for the services he uses while the working slobs with the 9-5 job pays for the services for him.

They should BOTH pay on their income with no type considered magic and exempt.

No entitlements.

yeah. that shit is bullshit.

capital income from investments should be taxed high and working should be taxed ZERO.

fuck the libertariain shit-minded corporate cocksucking idiot worldview.

 

[Jerry Mathers]

What is stupid, beyond stupid, is that government deserves anyone's money simply for existing. THAT is your position here: Government deserves the money someone has on dying more than their heirs, or anyone else does. Government does not have to confiscate wealth on death to do what they have to do.

It is YOU that wants "entitlements" in the form of government largesse. You are practicing the politics of envy. Generational wealth accumulation is one of the best ways a nation grows whereas governments confiscating wealth and spending it like a drunken sailor on social welfare nonsense and whatnot is how nations go broke.

and you want banker bailouts, and corporations perverting all policies for their profit.

that's worse.

you're a shit human being, fuck you fascist.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

No you simpleton.

Stop talking about things you do not understand.

My position is that the things that corporations NEED, like security, infrastructure, etc HAVE A COST TO THEM and tax payers pay that cost by giving tax money to the government to provide it.

So, your argument is that government cannot do these things without rapacious confiscation of accumulated wealth upon the death of someone.

Your entire position is the uber rich and their heirs and their corporations should get all those benefits that ALLOWS them to set up and succeed but they should pay NONE of the cost.

My position is, that someone's lifetime accumulation of wealth should not be taxed simply because they died and left it to heirs. This isn't about corporations. Corporations rarely inherit wealth from someone.

Thus ENTITLEMENTS or FREE RIDERS.

And now you circle back to the politics of envy.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

and you want banker bailouts, and corporations perverting all policies for their profit.

Argument using a fallacy fallacy. I never stated any of that.

 

[QP!]

yeah. that shit is bullshit.

capital income from investments should be taxed high and working should be taxed ZERO.

fuck the libertariain shit-minded corporate cocksucking idiot worldview.

Yup.

There is no logic to say some next generation kid inheriting his income should pay less tax than a working man earning his income.

That is an entirely arbitrary choice that gov't officials made as they got bribes from the uber rich called lobbying.

But guys like Terry, who, if he did not inherit all his money is the worst kind of simp and puppet for the uber rich argue that the rich who inherit their income should be able to take advantage of everything they get securely in America and not pay a cent for it.

That 10 generations later, Jeff Bezos or Zuckerberg wealth via stock that was never sold and did not pay a cent of tax on, should NEVER have to pay a penny. They get all the US has to offer and OTHER WORKING SLOBS have to pay the tax that provide it.

 

[QP!]

So, your argument is that government cannot do these things without rapacious confiscation of accumulated wealth upon the death of someone.

Stop trying to state my argument as you are wrong 100% of the time.

My argument is that NO PERSON, ESPECIALLY THE SECOND, THIRD AND FORTH generations of Zuckerberg types should not have to pay a cent of tax on the billions of stock they inherit EVEN IF THEY SELL IT, as it got a Capital Gains Reset, and thus they can enjoy everything America gives them but NEVER HAVE TO PAY A CENT of tax on their income towards it creation and maintenance.

That the guy making $50k should not be forced to pay tax on his income for it but the 3rd generation heir getting his $1B in income via inheritance does not have to pay one cent. He gets to utilize everything but pay for nothing.

 

[QP!]

...
My position is, that someone's lifetime accumulation of wealth should not be taxed simply because they died and left it to heirs. This isn't about corporations. Corporations rarely inherit wealth from someone.

And now you circle back to the politics of envy.

Your position is clear and that is that these uber rich 2nd and 3rd generation heirs to trillion dollar fortunes should never in their life need to pay a cent of tax on their income if they just sell the stock they inherit based on its Capitals Gains Reset or they just borrow against it.

That they get to live in America and take advantage of all America provides but not be one of the suckers who has to pay anything for that.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Stop trying to state my argument as you are wrong 100% of the time.

My argument is that NO PERSON, ESPECIALLY THE SECOND, THIRD AND FORTH generations of Zuckerberg types should not have to pay a cent of tax on the billions of stock they inherit EVEN IF THEY SELL IT, as it got a Capital Gains Reset, and thus they can enjoy everything America gives them but NEVER HAVE TO PAY A CENT of tax on their income towards it creation and maintenance.

That the guy making $50k should not be forced to pay tax on his income for it but the 3rd generation heir getting his $1B in income via inheritance does not have to pay one cent. He gets to utilize everything but pay for nothing.

Okay, I can agree to no capital gains reset.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Your position is clear and that is that these uber rich 2nd and 3rd generation heirs to trillion dollar fortunes should never in their life need to pay a cent of tax on their income if they just sell the stock they inherit based on its Capitals Gains Reset or they just borrow against it.

That they get to live in America and take advantage of all America provides but not be one of the suckers who has to pay anything for that.

No, I'm saying that if they inherit it and do nothing more with it, they shouldn't have to pay taxes on it.

 

[QP!]

No, I'm saying that if they inherit it and do nothing more with it, they shouldn't have to pay taxes on it.

No.

You are now trying to duck and change your position as we highlight how stupid it is and you realize you can not hide from it.

Here is exactly what your position was...

Terry's view is that is irrelevant.

When Bezos, Musk, Zuckerberg, etc created their companies they got their initial stock at a value of $0. If they pass that stock on to their kids, having never sold any of it, the kids, thanks to gov't lobbying, get that stock with a Capital Gains reset. Meaning if the kids inherit it and it is worth $1T the kids do not pay a penny of tax on that growth from $0 to $1T and would only pay tax on Capital gains above that level.

So the kids could actually do something the Founders of those companies could not and that is liquidate all $1T in stock and pay zero tax.
...

Sounds like a great thing to me! Government did NOTHING to deserve a penny of that wealth. NOTHING! It is far more fair that the person(s) that made that money can decide what to do with it than government steal it upon their death and keep it while doing nothing to have earned a penny of it.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

No.

You are now trying to duck and change your position as we highlight how stupid it is and you realize you can not hide from it.

Here is exactly what your position was...

That is paper wealth. Until the stock is sold, it has no actual value, only an intrinsic one. I agree on the point that if the inheritors get it and they sell, they should pay on the full value of the stock at the price it was sold. That means if they sell for $1 billion, they pay taxes on $1 billion.

Where we disagree is that the stock should be taxed at it estimated value when it transfers owners due to inheritance. I see that as having no tax applied whereas you want to tax that transaction.