03-03-2005 01:29									#31
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

From the definitions offered here. Im not sure how inheritence tax can be considered a wealth tax - its so different, both practically and morally different

	03-03-2005 01:32									#32
	Increase Your PM Length

Inheritance tax should be treated in the same manner as gift taxes, the fact that you are dead when you give the gift shouldn't enter into it.

	03-03-2005 01:33									#33
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Dauphin Council tax is an interesting one. With council tax the concept of the wealth tax for its own sake is often lost. Its often not based on the ability to pay, which is an ideological basis for wealth taxes.

Outside municipal taxes, one difficult case for wealth taxes has always been farms. They often are "worth" millions but the farmer has no ability to pay a large tax bill. This often remains true when an offspring inherits the farm.

	03-03-2005 01:35									#34
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Dauphin Inheritance tax should be treated in the same manner as gift taxes, the fact that you are dead when you give the gift shouldn't enter into it.

Canada does not tax gifts IIRC. No deduction for the donor and no income inclusion for the donee.

Thats part of the reason I don't see the logic of an inheritence tax-- If I can give something to my son tax free now, why should my death triggering that gift change the situation?

	03-03-2005 01:38									#35
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Zulu Elephant From the definitions offered here. Im not sure how inheritence tax can be considered a wealth tax - its so different, both practically and morally different

I always thought of an inheritence tax as a form of or a subset of the possible range of wealth taxes. In eitehr case the practical calculation is a % of "wealth"

As for morality . . . If you accept that I own something, part of the parcel of rights of ownership is the ability to give that something to someone else. I don't see what is so moral about stripping a person of that ownership right since they happen to be dead

	03-03-2005 01:39									#36
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Zulu Elephant From the definitions offered here. Im not sure how inheritence tax can be considered a wealth tax - its so different, both practically and morally different

I always thought of an inheritence tax as a form of or a subset of the possible range of wealth taxes. In eitehr case the practical calculation is a % of "wealth"

As for morality . . . If you accept that I own something, part of the parcel of rights of ownership is the ability to give that something to someone else. I don't see what is so moral about stripping a person of that ownership right since they happen to be dead

	03-03-2005 01:40									#37
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Flubber Canada does not tax gifts IIRC. No deduction for the donor and no income inclusion for the donee. Thats part of the reason I don't see the logic of an inheritence tax-- If I can give something to my son tax free now, why should my death triggering that gift change the situation?

Same here, and that's my thought aswell. Well, that is to say there is no tax on gifts as long as you don't peg it for seven years. Which seems silly really.

	03-03-2005 01:46									#38
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Silly in that it would make inheritance tax even more pointless if that stipulation wasn't there?

	03-03-2005 01:49									#39
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

To play devil's advocate...In a meritocracy, why shouldn't we have a 100% inheritance tax (without getting into the whole thing about passing on small family owned businesses)

	03-03-2005 01:52									#40
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Inheritance tax is an income tax, plain and simple.

	03-03-2005 01:55									#41
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Zulu Elephant To play devil's advocate...In a meritocracy, why shouldn't we have a 100% inheritance tax (without getting into the whole thing about passing on small family owned businesses)

For starters, you'd have to tax all gifts at 100% as well (including paying for kids education, grandparents healthcare, family holidays, birthday and Christmas presents etc) Just not gonna work.

	03-03-2005 02:08									#42
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

But why, in a meritocracy - where the amount of money you have is meant to be determined by the set of skills you have, should people recieve large sums of money thanks to the wealth of their family

	03-03-2005 02:16									#43
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

There's actually a practical reporting problem as well. If I have a million dollars worth of cut gems in a safe deposit box that I pass on to my son, how exactly are you going to enforce things?

Plus put on your 100% wealth tax and then watch as capital flees your country or alternately, ownership of most things becomes corporate with a sheaf of thick agreements that would make your head spin. I'm not even in this area of law and I could create a series of corporations and trusts with interrelated leasing and usage agreements that it would take teams of government regulators to unravel while the GRANDCHILDREN continued to enjoy the benefits of the wealth.

Heck a simple solution is debt. Own a 10 million house . . . mortgage it to the hilt and invest the rest outside the country with the big wealth tax-- or even fritter it away

	03-03-2005 02:25									#44
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Zulu Elephant But why, in a meritocracy - where the amount of money you have is meant to be determined by the set of skills you have, should people recieve large sums of money thanks to the wealth of their family

In a pure meritocracy, they wouldn't. But then again perhaps the drug addled criminal would be denied basic health care in such a system



But how many parents do you know that care about "merit" when they care for their children? I want my son to go to a good university and will pay for him to do so if thats his wish. Do I care that another better student may not get to that school?? In the abstract yes but in reality hell no!! I want what's best for my son and most of the work I do is mainly so I can provide for him. I WANT my son to benefit from my labours and thats why I work. If I provide well, my son will probably have advantages compared to some ( and disadvanatges compared to some others) but thats not what concerns me . . . making the best life I can for my son is.


I don't want to live in a pure meritocracy if it means my son's well being is totally divorced from my efforts

	05-03-2005 05:03									#45
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Dauphin 41%. But then the average sod is paying 33%. Its just gloss the fact that income tax' is stated as only 22%

Don't forget that most of the wealth of the upper class comes from inheritance, corporate dividends, and capital gains...so with the Republicans' successful attacks on the "death tax," on "double taxation" and on capital gains, the Americans with the highest incomes pay less tax on their income than middle-class wage earners.

	05-03-2005 06:22									#46
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Zkribbler Don't forget that most of the wealth of the upper class comes from inheritance, corporate dividends, and capital gains...so with the Republicans' successful attacks on the "death tax," on "double taxation" and on capital gains, the Americans with the highest incomes pay less tax on their income than middle-class wage earners.

I don't live in America, so Republicans don't directly bother me.