[jeffkrol]

Most estates have always been exempted from the estate tax, which only applies to the very richest Americans. At its peak, in 1976, only 7.65 percent of all estates were taxed at all. Under the 2001 tax code, 2 percent of estates would be taxed. Under the Obama-GOP tax cut plan, 0.2 percent of estates would be subject to the tax.

Resurrect the estate tax or lose $250 billion - CSMonitor.com

Those relatively few estates—just 3,600 by TPC estimate—would pay much less tax: an average of just over 14 percent of the estate’s value compared with about 19 percent if the law isn’t changed. According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, that will cost the federal government $68 billion in forgone revenue over the coming decade.

House Democrats have called for returning the estate tax to its 2009 level: a $3.5 million exemption and a 45 percent tax rate. That move would impose tax on a few more estates—an estimated 6,500 in 2011—and would raise the effective tax rate to roughly the same 19 percent that current law would claim. Making that level of tax permanent would save more than $35 billion over the next three years compared to the compromise proposal but would still lose more than $250 billion between now and 2020 compared to what would happen if Congress made no changes in the law.

Given the nation’s dire fiscal straits, with huge deficits predicted to swell rapidly, it’s hard to justify giving up nearly $70 billion in revenue that only the wealthiest two-tenths of one percent of people would pay. Congress and the president can justify many of the tax cuts in the compromise bill as stimulus badly needed while our economy is still weak and unemployment remains sky-high. But cutting the estate taxes for the wealthy will do little or nothing to boost the economy and only represents further fiscal irresponsibility.

[Nesster]

Not to worry, McCain has a solution (he trots this out every year): end silly earmarks:
McCain Denounces Senate Spending Bill

Seriously, the items classed as 'earmarks' do add up, but the list is always a funny side show and entirely misses the bigger problem(s)...

“While we continue to uncover which earmarks the appropriators decided to fund – thanks to a new online database – we at least know what earmarks were requested by Members and how much those projects would cost the American people if they were all funded. Taxpayers against Earmarks, WashingtonWatch.com - Welcome to WashingtonWatch.com and Taxpayers for Common Sense joined forces to create this database. According to the data they compiled – for fiscal year 2011 Members requested over 39,000 earmarks totaling over $130 billion. Absolutely disgraceful. I encourage every American to go to the website Taxpayers Against Earmarks | EndingSpending.com study it, and make yourselves aware of how your elected officials seek to spend your money.

“In the short time I’ve had to review this massive piece of legislation – I’ve identified approximately 6,488 earmarks totaling nearly $8.3 billion. Here is a small sample:

$277,000 for potato pest management in Wisconsin

$246,000 for bovine tuberculosis in Michigan and Minnesota

$522,000 for cranberry and blueberry disease and breeding in New Jersey

$500,000 for oyster safety in Florida

$349,000 for swine waste management in North Carolina

$413,000 for peanut research in Alabama

$247,000 for virus free wine grapes in Washington

$208,000 beaver management in North Carolina

$94,000 for blackbird management in Louisiana

$165,000 for maple syrup research in Vermont

$235,000 for noxious weed management in Nevada

$100,000 for the Edgar Allen Poe Cottage Visitor’s Center in New York

$300,000 for the Polynesian Voyaging Society in Hawaii

$400,000 for solar parking canopies and plug-in electric stations in Kansas

“Additionally, the bill earmarks $727,000 to compensate ranchers in Wisconsin, Minnesota and Michigan whenever endangered wolves eat their cattle. As my colleagues know, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Gray Wolf program is under intense scrutiny for wasting millions of taxpayer dollars every year to ‘recover’ endangered wolves that are now overpopulating the West and Midwest. My State of Arizona has a similar wolf program but ranchers in my state aren’t getting $727,000 in this bill.

I note that the Death Tax should qualify as a Republican earmark; they seem to believe significant votes come their way from dead -or soon to be dead- people...

[grhazelton]

Back in the day, Senator William Proxmire trumpeted the "Golden Fleece Award." This was his vehicle for lambasting what he considered silly or worthless government funded projects. One of these was research into the mating habits of moths. Just imagine that!

Well, it turned out that the pheromones or sex scents secreted by moths furnish us a powerful biological means of control. I can put a sticky strip up in my pantry and catch the male pantry moths before they can fertilize the females, all with NO hazard to food or pets - unless your pet is a pantry moth! I suspect that we don't need to worry about the moths developing resistance to the sex lure, as they certainly could do insecticides. What an elegant solution!

But this kind of research takes money, and a longer view than most politicians are willing or able to take.

My point is that what seems ridiculous - swine waste management in N. C. - may turn out to be of real and lasting value. Anyone whose ever driven past a pig farm would agree that SOMETHING needs to be done, both to abate the stench and to keep the waste matter from polluting the environment. Unless we as a county devote significant funds for basic research we will fall yet farther behind the rest of the world. How'd you like to find the USA a third world country?

And with that cheery thought, Merry Christmas, Happy Hanakkah, and a Happy New Year to all!

[mikemike]

Just when we thought Washington couldn't get any stupider the lame duck session came along and we have this stupid tax cut deal.

Just let the current law prevail as the neocons designed it in their infinite wisdom.

[GeneV]

Back in the day, Senator William Proxmire trumpeted the "Golden Fleece Award." This was his vehicle for lambasting what he considered silly or worthless government funded projects. One of these was research into the mating habits of moths. Just imagine that!

Well, it turned out that the pheromones or sex scents secreted by moths furnish us a powerful biological means of control. I can put a sticky strip up in my pantry and catch the male pantry moths before they can fertilize the females, all with NO hazard to food or pets - unless your pet is a pantry moth! I suspect that we don't need to worry about the moths developing resistance to the sex lure, as they certainly could do insecticides. What an elegant solution!

But this kind of research takes money, and a longer view than most politicians are willing or able to take.

My point is that what seems ridiculous - swine waste management in N. C. - may turn out to be of real and lasting value. Anyone whose ever driven past a pig farm would agree that SOMETHING needs to be done, both to abate the stench and to keep the waste matter from polluting the environment. Unless we as a county devote significant funds for basic research we will fall yet farther behind the rest of the world. How'd you like to find the USA a third world country?

And with that cheery thought, Merry Christmas, Happy Hanakkah, and a Happy New Year to all!

True. There was a thread here started as a result of an overblown article decrying a project to see if Africans can be taught to practice a kind of washing after sex. Everyone snickered about it, but it is a step in a larger study to determine whether hygiene may have role in stopping the spread of HIV.

[jeffkrol]

Just when we thought Washington couldn't get any stupider the lame duck session came along and we have this stupid tax cut deal.

Just let the current law prevail as the neocons designed it in their infinite wisdom.

to some of us it was pretty obvious it can get a LOT stupider after the mid term carnival vote.......

“We should accomplish the most basic function of government — we can at least vote to keep the lights on around here,” he said. “Pass the tax legislation and keep the lights on,” Mr. McConnell said. ““Everything else can wait.”

Democrats, however, are refusing to back down on any of their priorities, which include the omnibus spending bill, the New Start arms control treaty with Russia, a bill to repeal the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy barring open service by gay soldiers, and an immigration measure that would create a path to citizenship for certain illegal immigrants brought to the United States as young children.

Mr. Reid said that the Senate would be in session on Sunday in a push to finish work on all of these legislative items, but Republicans were maneuvering aggressively to thwart him. Senator Jim DeMint, Republican of South Carolina, said he would force a complete public reading of both the Start treaty and the more than 1,900-page spending bill, potentially locking up the Senate floor for more than 24 hours.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/16/us/politics/16cong.html

[mikemike]

Senator Jim DeMint, Republican of South Carolina, said he would force a complete public reading of both the Start treaty and the more than 1,900-page spending bill, potentially locking up the Senate floor for more than 24 hours.

I hope Bernie Sanders will spend the next two years making good on these empty threats of legislative tactics.

But it looks like the democrats might be spending their last few days trying to make it easier for the incoming republicans to push through their agenda. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/15/tom-harkin-filibuster-reform-fireworks_n_797019.html

[GeneV]

Back to the original topic, though. I've always been at a loss to understand why many feel it is better to tax live, working people than dead people and their heirs. I'd rather see all my taxes paid after I'm gone.

Could it be that large estates support one of the political parties?

[Ratmagiclady]

I hope Bernie Sanders will spend the next two years making good on these empty threats of legislative tactics.

But it looks like the democrats might be spending their last few days trying to make it easier for the incoming republicans to push through their agenda. Tom Harkin: 'Fireworks' And Shot At Filibuster Reform Coming Jan. 5

Yeah, that's how it always is, Dems end up the first ones having to take the hits from fixing abused rules, as well as other kinds of messes.

[Nesster]

Back to the original topic, though. I've always been at a loss to understand why many feel it is better to tax live, working people than dead people and their heirs. I'd rather see all my taxes paid after I'm gone.

Could it be that large estates support one of the political parties?

Perhaps the wee sliver of idea here is that private businesses where the owner is remiss in taking care of estate planning and transition to heirs may suffer a debilitating blow from estate taxes and have to close. This particular solution to this 'problem' of course therefore is welfare nanny-statism for the wealthy, and serves to encourage poor behavior by the owning class.

However, the larger picture seems to be a part of the idea that we must enable the creation of large pools of wealth (as opposed to the wealth being split across several) as this provides a source of capital for business growth. You know, supply side.

[Ratmagiclady]

You know, supply side.

Yeah, and we know how *brilliantly* *that* has been working out for we, the people, already.

[JavaJoe]

Back to the original topic, though. I've always been at a loss to understand why many feel it is better to tax live, working people than dead people and their heirs. I'd rather see all my taxes paid after I'm gone.

Could it be that large estates support one of the political parties?

When the rate is over 50% for amounts over 10 million? Why should the government get to collect on that money twice? It's forced many heirs to have to sell off the estate to pay for the taxes. Their should be NO estate tax. Uncle Obama already got his share when it was earned.

[JavaJoe]

Yeah, that's how it always is, Dems end up the first ones having to take the hits from fixing abused rules, as well as other kinds of messes.

Yeah the libs aren't really showing their true colors right now in the lame duck session. As they stick it to us again.

[Ratmagiclady]

Yeah the libs aren't really showing their true colors right now in the lame duck session. As they stick it to us again.

I'm not even going to ask how that's supposed to follow from what's been going on.

As for estate taxes, when you inherit from the gains of an aristocratic family, it's still *income,* and another way to concentrate wealth at the top. It has nothing to do with real people's homes, (I'm pretty sure primary residences are exempt, anyway, even if they're a mansion in Newport or something) Considering with people who actually have that much money rarely seem to end up paying *any* tax either on inheritance or other kinds of wealth as it is, there's really nothing for the rich bankrollers of the GOP to whine about anyway.

I sure ain't crying for any tycoons who find the tax shelters inconvenient, lest their kids only inherit two billion rather than four, whereas when it comes to cutting social security death benefits to the poor, they just say, "Well, it's your fault for dying without billions of dollars."

[jeffkrol]

When the rate is over 50% for amounts over 10 million? Why should the government get to collect on that money twice? It's forced many heirs to have to sell off the estate to pay for the taxes. Their should be NO estate tax. Uncle Obama already got his share when it was earned.

WHEN was there NO estate tax????
1 year?????
AND who was aking for 50+ percent..
AND

Proponents also note that the arguments of estate tax opponents are occasionally disingenuous. For example, while opponents point to family farmers and small business owners in an effort to demonstrate the unfairness or overreach of the tax, proponents note that nearly all family farmers and small business owners are exempt from or are not subject to the estate tax.[23]


One of the world's wealthiest men, Warren Buffett, CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, and the father of another of the world's wealthiest men (Microsoft founder Bill Gates), William H. Gates, Sr., favor the estate tax

SO give me proof that this

It's forced many heirs to have to sell off the estate to pay for the taxes.

is true.......... more FUD and actually even if it were remotely true it would only mean the "estate" was "stupid"...........

Proponents argue that the estate tax is a better source of revenue than the income tax, which is said to directly disincentivize work. While all taxes have this effect to a degree, some argue that the estate tax is less of a disincentive since it does not tax money that the earner spends, but merely that which he or she wishes to give away for non-charitable purposes. Moreover, some argue that allowing the rich to bequeath unlimited wealth on future generations will disincentivize hard work in those future generations.[24] Winston Churchill argued that estate taxes are “a certain corrective against the development of a race of idle rich”. Research suggests that the more wealth that older people inherit, the more likely they are to leave the labor market[26].

Proponents of the estate tax tend to object to characterizations that it operates as a double or triple taxation. Proponents point out that many of the earnings that are subject to the estate tax were never taxed because they were "unrealized" gains.[23] Others note that double and triple taxation is common (through income, property, and sales taxes, for instance) or argue that the estate tax should be seen as a single tax on the inheritors of large estates.

http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/June09/Features/FederalEstateTax.htm
PLEASE don't try to pull the widows and orphans logic.. these are large corporate farms NOT MA and PA..... BS

Concerns that estate taxes might cause the breakup of some family-owned farms and small businesses led Congress to include two special provisions in the Tax Reform Act of 1976. These targeted provisions—the special-use valuation and the installment payment of estate taxes—have reduced the impact of Federal estate taxes on farms with estates valued above the basic exemption.

With repeal and resurrection of the estate tax approaching, there is increasing interest in a substantial permanent increase in the exempt amount combined with the retention of the “stepped-up basis at death” treatment for inherited assets. The President’s 2010 Budget would make the current $3.5 million exemption amount and maximum 45-percent tax rate permanent and retain the stepped-up basis treatment for inherited assets. This would limit the share of estates subject to tax to less than one-half of 1 percent of all estates and between 1 and 2 percent for farm estates. It would also reduce some of the uncertainty and inequity created by the temporary repeal and sunset provisions applicable under current law.

Same w/ the "small business" BS........ many are HUGE BUSINESSES.