Some form of a federal "death tax" has been in existence since 1916. In 2001 the Bush administration enacted the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act, or EGTRRA, which led to a gradual increase in the federal estate tax exemption, a gradual decrease in the estate tax rate, and complete repeal of the federal estate tax effective January 1, 2010. Since EGTRRA there has been much debate over the pros and cons of the estate tax, and Congress intervened at the end of 2010 and reinstated the tax for 2010, 2011 and 2012, and again in 2013, when the estate laws were made permanent. Regardless, everything in Washington is permanent, until it is changed. So what do you think about the federal estate tax - should it be permanently repealed?
Share Your Opinion
- Families have worked all there lives to create some form of wealth and support for their growing families and have paid taxes on most of this growth. This success should be allowed to pass to the remaining family with out taxing by a government who is totally out of control in most area's. The Buffett, Gates, Ellison, and similar extraordinarily wealthy people will pay no estate taxes as they set up their foundations on a tax free basis to distribute their wealth and they have so much wealth they can gift millions to each family member paying the necessary gift taxes. This would not change if the estate tax was repealed but would give the moderately wealthy families the ability to retain what they earned in there lifetime. It would allow small business, small farms and other small successful enterprises the ability to continue ownership without having to sell to meet estate taxation expense .
- —Guest Bill.
- There is nothing new. You work your butt off. Save some money. Build a business. Own a home. Pay everything off. Then instead of your loved ones benefiting when you die, the government takes more than half. Crooked politicians have taken care of themselves and their families. Inept politicians play politics. The very wealthy have all the liquid money off shore. That is legal passed by crooked politicians who get paid off, and so called honest politicians who get paid off by lobbyists. Farmers can just jump off a bridge. The rest of our survivors, well too damn bad, your daddy and mommy worked for us because we said so. Tax, tax and more tax, even on money that was already taxed. Repeal the "death" tax. We pay enough when we're alive and our estates should go to our loved ones, period.
- —Guest otsy
- After faithfully paying taxes on earnings throughout a lifetime, how can we justify Taking 55% more of those hard earned dollars Upon death? At a 55% estate tax rate, This would mean that of a dollar earned, $.65 after-tax net income would become $.29!!! That dollar earned would end up being 29cents (or even less for people in higher tax brackets) after income and estate tax! For a lifetime of hard work, 71%+ goes to the us government??? To be mismanaged, wasted, and redistributed?
- —Guest Meredith
- We all work our entire lives to be able to retire and leave something for our kids when we are gone and then have the goverment take half of what we already paid taxes on is absolutely stealing from us. What's the since in trying to build your net worth when the crooks will take it from you!
- —Guest John Kearney
What is fair?
- Large estates result from successful businesses, investments or farming operations and all require capital to continue. So how big should the tax levee on capital be when an owner dies? Any levy large enough to force sale of the asset is too large a levee. Perhaps the way to fix this is to make governments accept a debt or equity interest in the asset that can only be liquidated on cash sale of the asset, and an interest that is discharged in bankruptcy if that occurs.
- —Guest JT Vermont
Keep the 2012 plan
- How is it fair that my father's farmland will be taxed at a 55% rate in 2013? Is the government ignorant of the price of land in today's market? Our farm family will be unable to save even half of our land. We need this land to continue farming. Why work 7 day weeks all your life, so you can give over half your land to the government?!!!
- —Guest nurse boynton
- The sad part of this story is that we won't know what the rules are until it's too late. For everyone trying to manage their estate in 2012, it's been a frustrating waiting game. The difference in tax for a person with a $5 million estate in a state that kicks in additional estate taxes is over half of everything you own....or maybe nothing. Now everyone in Congress is off for the holidays with nothing accomplished.
- —Guest Jay
- I take a step back and try to look at the total picture and envision what this means to our country. I keep coming up with the same answers. There may be individuals in the Republican party who can stand up to their peer group. However, as a majority they care about only one thing, their pocketbooks. Without a middle class our democracy turns to a socialistic form of government. At the the very least, they should have spared the middle class from the fiscal cliff as Obama requested. They used the middle class as a focal point in their campaign in order to win. Now they could care less. Estates are often composed of income property where an enormous amount of money is given to state and federal income taxes yearly. Estate present limits should stay the same and have the tax rate reduced. Let the owners of the estate leave some money to their heirs not just to state and local governments. Raise the tax rate on incomes over $284,000. Then, maybe our democracy can survive.
- —Guest Gail Lawler
- Yes, it's December 20 and the information is correct!
- —Guest Julie Ann Garber, Esq.
- You need to update this information. It is now dec 20th,2012 and is what i just read absolutely still the same?
- —Guest cara
US Citizen - California
- I think this is too important of issue to hurry along. I believe it should stay the same until Congress is able to really do it's homework. $ 1 million in some states is one home.....the only inheritance a person may have is their parent's home. Why should that person be taxed so heavily on his only inheritance (fyi California homes) while a person in North Dakota can inherit two homes and not be taxed at all.
- —Guest Diane Gagliani
- It is really sad that our elected officials have done nothing about the future about the estate tax. As of now, in 2013 the amount that can be passed tax free is only $1 million. If you live in California, then that does not cover too much property. One home or a small business will eat up that entire amount. What incentives do families have to work hard and save for their children? We seriously need an answer that is fair to all Americans. In my opinion the 2012 level should be carried over in 2013.
- I can't believe this is happening in the USA. I am ashamed of my government. They are stealing my money.
- —Guest Jay
- A current exemption of $5 million for individuals, and indexed for future inflation, seems reasonable. It shouldn't matter whether the individual is a land- rich farmer or just someone who has busted his butt all his life, lived frugally and took some business and investment risks and paid federal and state income taxes all along the way. The individual ought to be free to distribute a good part of his wealth as he sees fit and not have it confiscated by the government. Such confiscation is nothing less than tyranny. As to the tax rate beyond the exemption, perhaps 33% would be reasonable. If one knew early in life that the government would eventually confiscate his rewards after a lifetime of work he might have limited his goals, industry and accomplishments. Do we want our America to be a nation where ambition and hard work is discouraged?
- —Guest StanA
repeal the estate tax
- just to hear the words death tax is enough to make you sick whoever thought this tax up shoud go to hell
- —Guest john martino