Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: zipper

Sounds like this Irons guy is throwing a lot of chaff into the air. If a man wants his estate to go to his son he needs to write it into his will and the courts need to stop playing games and recognize a will as written.

The simple fact is that the state had little to do with marriage until the 1850s


50 posted on 04/07/2013 2:41:28 PM PDT by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]


To: cripplecreek

But he’s right. The inheritance tax would take his inheritance, and as a son you can only get SS benefits until a certain age (21?). But if you’re the spouse you get more benefits, and there is no “inheritance” since you’re the spouse.

You missed the point. By corrupting the definition of marriage they have opened Pandora’s Box to endless litigation. The “playing games” part started when the rules of the game were changed to include gay “marriage”.


83 posted on 04/07/2013 7:12:22 PM PDT by zipper ("The Second Amendment IS my carry permit!" -- Ted Nugent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]

To: cripplecreek

RE: Sounds like this Irons guy is throwing a lot of chaff into the air. If a man wants his estate to go to his son he needs to write it into his will and the courts need to stop playing games and recognize a will as written.

Our tax laws DO NOT TAX a spouse’s inheriting a deceased husband’s estate. However our tax laws DO tax children inheriting their deceased parent’s estate.

The solution is to ABOLISH all inheritance taxes ( AKA DEATH or ESTATE taxes ).


88 posted on 04/07/2013 8:02:40 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson