Create a Family Trust NOW!
That's The Plan....................
Plank #3 of the Communist Manifesto: Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
http://www.laissez-fairerepublic.com/TenPlanks.html
Wealth distribution by any other name is still theft
In what country on earth, could a net estate after taxes be reduced from $4.2 million to zero over night by passing a new law?
—
China
They are pretty confident they can do this without any consequences to themselves.
> would subject individuals with net assets not in the same zip code... <
Unbelievable. Now the government is trying to tell you where you should live, and where you shouldn’t.
I’m wondering if they’ll ever go after Roth accounts (Roth IRA, Roth 401k, Roth 403b, and Roth 457). If my wife and I earn 10% annually (we actually earn more than that), live off of 4% withdrawals annually for a net gain of 6% annually, and live until we’re in our 80’s, then our estate is liable to be above $10 million. And all of it in Roth IRA’s. (Not all of our wealth is in those now, but I’m converting tax deferred accounts in chunks to Roth IRA’s to migrate to Roth IRA’s eventually without putting us into an ultra-high bracket on a one-year conversion event.) Of course, that’s with the assumption that they’ll grow tax free forever (or at least until the 10th anniversary of mine and my wife’s deaths, when my kids will have to have moved their inherited Roth IRA money out of the accounts).
At some point, things get kinetic.
The Government needs more of your assets to fund socialism.
As I have said, if the American taxpayer gave every damn red cent to the dems, it would not be enough.
What ever happened to the ‘US Taxpayers’ party?
I don’t see a problem with this personally;
You buy a house for $50K like 50 years ago, now it is worth $1,050,000 (million dollar appreciation).
If you sell it now, before you die, you owe taxes on it (minus the onetime lifetime exclusion if you haven’t already used it).
So pay the tax man on your appreciated assets, just like if you sold a long-term held stock.
What difference does it make if you still have debt on it?
Say you bought it for $50K, now is worth $1050,000, and at one point it was worth $1.5M instead, so you borrowed a million dollars against it and spent the money on crack. Should you be able to sell it and not owe any taxes? The fact that you (or the person you inherited from) chose to get a tax-free loan against the equity - and spent it - really should affect your tax bill.
I am all for reducing taxes in a fair way - but keeping loopholes in so that those fortunate enough to inherit wealth can get everything tax-free on things that were never taxed in the first place (i.e. the stepped up basis rule), only help a few rich/lucky people.
Cut taxes on income, cut property taxes, cut sales taxes before you start giving windfalls to heirs that never earned it in the first place.
Don’t be fooled by the ‘oh the family farmers...’, this is a loophole that allows the uber-wealthy to build dynastic wealth for generations at the expense of income earners who need to make up the difference.
401k on the chopping block next. Too much money in the hands of the peasants.
The Obama/Biden regime (for this is the 3rd term!) are determined to give new, and chilling meaning, to that old meme; “I’m from the government and I am here to help”! At this moment, the Administration is desperate to avoid the reprise of the 2008-10 Obama term where their control of Congress only got the Healthcare bill passed before the RINOs got back power in Congress. Right now, barring a more successful “bait & switch” 2022 campaign season, a more conservative legislature will make these proposals very unlikely to pass!
As much as I hate to say it, we conservatives must USE Biden’s epic idiocy with Afghanistan and, per Obama’s Chicagoan Chief of Staff, Rahm Emmanuel, “Not waste this crisis”!
I can’t believe this will be passed, especially retroactively. It is immoral to change rules at the end of the game. Just like SS, no one seriously suggests cutting current benefits, only future ones, so that people can plan accordingly.
Forget the details. The intention is to take it all (except for the clintons, obamas, bezos, gates, soros).
This is another reason why they’ve deliberately ramped up inflation. (assets “appreciate” in inflated dollars, and are taxed on the “appreciation” even though it has little value.)
When I worked in Brazil back in the 90s I believe Lula was the new president and he established some terms for taxes and monetary policy. People down there said it was the first time in their lives they could plan.
Without stable tax policy, and we have none, you can’t plan.
Taxes to politicians are like reserve pits, the higher you raise them or the bigger you build them the more is spent or put in them. Or my wife and closets and drawers, the more you make she WILL fill them no matter.
Can you explain this from the post:
“Currently, an individual must have net assets in excess of $11.7 million to be subject to zero estate taxes. The proposed Biden capital gains tax at death proposal would subject individuals with net assets not in the same zip code as $11.7 million of net worth to very significant new death taxes.”
Does this mean that everyone with net assets less than $11.7 million ARE subject to estate taxes? It does not make sense to me.
bkmk