Countries Are Wanting Their Cut of Cryptocurrency Profits

[BSmith]

This isn't a productive conversation.
1. I don't give a shit if the deeds to the guys 4 mansion are held by an LLC formed in Belize. We're taking them.
2. We'll see what the guy thinks is and isn't held by offshore banks once we get the guy locked in the guillotine.

If only the world was that simple.

 

[noko]

In reports today, India and South Korea are announcing they want their cut from cryptocurrency investors. BlockTribune and others are reporting that India has sent tax notices to cryptocurrency investors following a nationwide survey. The notice asks crypto investors to provide details of their total cryptocurrency holdings, and the source of their funds.

In addition to India, South Korea has announced today that they will be collecting 24.2% tax on virtual currency exchanges. Under current laws, all corporations with income of over 20 billion won (US$18.7 million) are required to pay 22 percent and 2.2 percent of corporate and local income taxes on their income.

If that was not enough, South Korea also announces that they will require cryptocurrency exchanges to share user data with banks, in a potential move to impose taxes on the transactions, an official at financial authorities said Sunday. They have also banned creating anonymous cryptocurrency accounts until banks install a system to ensure only real-name bank accounts and matching cryptocurrency accounts to be used for deposits and withdrawals. Banks are expected to introduce the system, which will require cryptocurrency exchanges to share users' transaction data with banks, late this month or early next month, according to the official.

I know it seems like every week (or more) we report on how Cryptocurrency is going to die. It hasn't yet, but if one thing can swiftly put a nail in the coffin it's governmental regulation and taxes. Will it crash? I have no idea, but with plenty of news stories we don't even cover coming out near daily with more regulation, rising hardware costs, and even environmentalists getting mad at the amount of electricity being used, it does seem likely that the end is near.

Bithumb, one of South Korea's major cryptocurrency exchanges, is expected to pay about 60 billion won in corporate and local income taxes as its estimated earnings reached 317.6 billion won last year, according to Yujin Investment & Securities. Bithumb reported 49.23 billion won in earnings on 49.27 billion won of sales for the first seven months last year.

I am not sure why that would be the death of Cryptocurrency - sounds more like a cleaning up of it. If one opens up a business in a Country, usually you agreed to the laws of that Country. Contest anything unreasonable. Now if one hopes and supports government regulation and taxes unfairly so something is shutdown that is another matter.

I do believe most of the coins will fold and become worthless but not all, those that last may change things more than the internet has. It also may not but I see some sound potential.

Now if I buy a bar of gold let say $1300, pay taxes when buying it. I let it sit and 5 years later it is now valued at $3000. I should not have to pay a dim in tax until I change it back into $. What? Every quarter I am suppose to determine and pay capital gain tax when it is still the same bar of gold that has not changed? In this case only when I sell it and get additional money which mostly is due to the losing value of the $ and not the increasing value of Gold, it is still the same real value. Inflation is a very severe tax, I really should not have to pay any tax in this case when the I had no real gain here. I know that is not how it works with the IRS rules.

So I buy electricity, equipment, my time and effort and mine coins (like buying that piece of Gold) I already paid the Golds tax. The coins I earned in my paper wallet increase in value from 8 cents and 2 quarters down the pike it is 19cents, still the same number of coins in the paper wallet - should I pay capital gain tax? I would say no unless I convert it into $, if I do this every quarter yes - pay capital gain or earn income . Then one day they are worth $10 a piece - the only time I can see realistically to pay tax is when I convert them into $, if I ever do. So yes I see the exchanges is source point for taxes and bank accounts where you convert your coins into $. Anything before that is limbo man.

 

[Deleted member 93354]

1. An ever increasing proportion of the nations wealth being concentrated in the hands of the few is bad for society.
2. It isn't stealing from the dead, it's taxing the living. Why should silver spooners have 100 million in income completely tax free just because they won the genetic lottery while I'm working my ass off for my money and paying over 20%?

Actually it is stealing from the dead and living.

Here's the deal, while Federal Tax has an exception up to a few million on estate tax, state and local taxes do not and you get taxed heavily on them. This is what probate it for.

Now imagine I'm a poor slob of a child who has to live at home, or my parents pass away before I get to college. Could you imagine paying 15% or more on your parents house? Or paying taxes and not having enough for college?

What if it's a family farm and every family member works it. The land is worth millions even though you BARELY make a living on it. Or the land cannot be subdivided because of zoning laws, meaning you have to sell the entire thing to pay for the probate.

Now do you see the evils?

 

[Deleted member 93354]

lol all the plebs have to use "regular" accounts. The big guys get to use the anonymous swiss accounts.

The government does not take kindly to such offshore accounts and the swiss have released information about holdings in their banks belonging to foreign nationals. Same with the Cayman's and other tax haven countries with anonymous accounts.

Nice try.

 

[Deleted member 93354]

I am not sure why that would be the death of Cryptocurrency - sounds more like a cleaning up of it. If one opens up a business in a Country, usually you agreed to the laws of that Country. Contest anything unreasonable. Now if one hopes and supports government regulation and taxes unfairly so something is shutdown that is another matter.

I do believe most of the coins will fold and become worthless but not all, those that last may change things more than the internet has. It also may not but I see some sound potential.

Now if I buy a bar of gold let say $1300, pay taxes when buying it. I let it sit and 5 years later it is now valued at $3000. I should not have to pay a dim in tax until I change it back into $. What? Every quarter I am suppose to determine and pay capital gain tax when it is still the same bar of gold that has not changed? In this case only when I sell it and get additional money which mostly is due to the losing value of the $ and not the increasing value of Gold, it is still the same real value. Inflation is a very severe tax, I really should not have to pay any tax in this case when the I had no real gain here. I know that is not how it works with the IRS rules.

So I buy electricity, equipment, my time and effort and mine coins (like buying that piece of Gold) I already paid the Golds tax. The coins I earned in my paper wallet increase in value from 8 cents and 2 quarters down the pike it is 19cents, still the same number of coins in the paper wallet - should I pay capital gain tax? I would say no unless I convert it into $, if I do this every quarter yes - pay capital gain or earn income . Then one day they are worth $10 a piece - the only time I can see realistically to pay tax is when I convert them into $, if I ever do. So yes I see the exchanges is source point for taxes and bank accounts where you convert your coins into $. Anything before that is limbo man.

While official taxation and tracking through registered clearing houses and banks MIGHT legitimize it some, there are still other significant risk. This assumes government is willing to turn a blind eye to illegal transactions as it's primary purpose. And the biggest is all the competing standards of crypto. Imagine if there's 500 different crypto currencies. None of them are interchangeable without going to cash then reinvesting in the new crypto, each with a tax on the transaction. Sounds like money market but with crypto being so unstable, you can't use it any where of reason without paying a huge cushion during purchase.

Technically speaking there is no theoretical limit against the number of crypto currencies that can be programmed. And just like streaming providers, they are cannibalizing themselves the more services are offered.

 

[CookieFactory]

Speculation is the worst aspect to our Economy. Ruins everything. Eventually the Government would look at it. Now with all the bubble money they'll be in there sooner.

Nope. Speculators fulfill a useful role in free functioning markets. Speculation money fuels innovation (which is never a sure thing) and thus speculators are rewarded for taking on out-sized risks. It’s literally “venture capitalism” in purest sense of the term.

 

[TwistedAegis]

Someone didn't pay attention to the lesson on percentages in Elementary school. The 1% already (and still do) pay an overwhelmingly majority of the taxes.

Because they make a overwhelming amount of the income, and own an overwhelming amount of the wealth. As in, nearly 40% of the wealth in the US at the 1% level. And the top 0.1% own more than the first 90%. The poor put upon bastards.

Not to mention that all of the services people like to argue about have their own taxes...eg. roads. We have the gasoline tax, car registration, DOT load permits, etc.

And nearly none of those direct taxes actually pay for the full costs. Roads especially.

 

[TwistedAegis]

Nope. Speculators fulfill a useful role in free functioning markets. Speculation money fuels innovation (which is never a sure thing) and thus speculators are rewarded for taking on out-sized risks. It’s literally “venture capitalism” in purest sense of the term.

I'm not as hardcore anti-speculator. But I feel where we've gotten so far out of whack, and continued to double down on in this tax bill, is favoring speculation in the tax code so heavily over actually working for a living. I think it's why it's more expensive to buy a quality chair that probably everyone had in their house 100 years ago vs some cheap particle-board garbage made by a machine, but the CEO of that particle-board furniture company is a billionaire.

 

[CookieFactory]

I'm not as hardcore anti-speculator. But I feel where we've gotten so far out of whack, and continued to double down on in this tax bill, is favoring speculation in the tax code so heavily over actually working for a living. I think it's why it's more expensive to buy a quality chair that probably everyone had in their house 100 years ago vs some cheap particle-board garbage made by a machine, but the CEO of that particle-board furniture company is a billionaire.

You might be surprised at how much costs then vs now. In 1900 the average US annual wage was about $450 (https://panam1901.org/visiting/salaries.htm). Used dining room chairs went for $0.39 - $1.39 (https://mclib.info/reference/local-history-genealogy/historic-prices/1904-2/).

Today the average annual wage is ~$45K. One can buy two new all wood chairs from Amazon for $120 (Ashley Furniture Signature Design - Leahlyn Dining Upholstered Side Chair - Pierced Splat Back - Set of 2 - Medium Brown https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00EUL2B16/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_LKLAAbDDYCJB1) or $61 used.

Obviously these prices are anecdotal but provides an order of magnitude comparison.

 

[Spaceninja]

The government does not take kindly to such offshore accounts and the swiss have released information about holdings in their banks belonging to foreign nationals. Same with the Cayman's and other tax haven countries with anonymous accounts.

Nice try.

Probably the dumb ones. The smart ones made the right campaign contributions.

 

[tetris42]

Actually it is stealing from the dead and living.

It's not stealing, it's taxes. You can think it's an unjust rate, or the tax shouldn't exist, but they were citizens like everyone else and obeyed the laws same as us. Besides, I think the dead won't mind and the living who are actually affected will be richer than the average person ever will be AFTER their taxes.

Now imagine I'm a poor slob of a child who has to live at home, or my parents pass away before I get to college. Could you imagine paying 15% or more on your parents house? Or paying taxes and not having enough for college?

Again, priorities. What's worse, a college student who has to sell his house and live in something modest, or underfunding organizations so that children in poverty can eat, funding agencies to get the lead out the water, etc. The college student has to deal with life, but will have the value of an entire

What if it's a family farm and every family member works it. The land is worth millions even though you BARELY make a living on it. Or the land cannot be subdivided because of zoning laws, meaning you have to sell the entire thing to pay for the probate.

So let's go for a worst case scenario and say it's 20 people on the farm family and it's worth millions like you said, so 2 million? So that's 100k per person, then what 40% to taxes, leaving every family member $60,000 to get their lives in order. If they cooperate, they can pool their money to get another farm. Good god life is hard for them.

Now do you see the evils?

In a complete vacuum of everything else, sure. If people so wealthy they have millions in assets to pass on to their children getting a less than optimal rate was the worst problem we had to worry about as a society, then I guess we're in some sort of Utopia to prioritize that over everything else.

 

[Lizard Testes]

Actually it is stealing from the dead and living.

Actually it isn't.

Here's the deal, while Federal Tax has an exception up to a few million on estate tax, state and local taxes do not and you get taxed heavily on them. This is what probate it for.

It's not "a few million." A married couple can leave their heirs over 11 million completely tax free. Are you being deliberately misleading? You you also appear to be lying about state taxes. Most states don't tax estates at all and those that do aren't particularly heavy.

Now imagine I'm a poor slob of a child who has to live at home, or my parents pass away before I get to college. Could you imagine paying 15% or more on your parents house? Or paying taxes and not having enough for college?

What if it's a family farm and every family member works it. The land is worth millions even though you BARELY make a living on it. Or the land cannot be subdivided because of zoning laws, meaning you have to sell the entire thing to pay for the probate.

Now do you see the evils?

These are dumb 0.01% cases. Sell the house, go to college. BFD. There are also ways to deal with the 20 million dollar family farms that make up like 0.0001% of all estates, that you for some reason are extremely worried about.

Paying taxes on income isn't evil. Getting money from mom and dad is not some super special and sacred income that deserves special rights that no other income does.

 

[Deleted member 93354]

It's not stealing, it's taxes. You can think it's an unjust rate, or the tax shouldn't exist, but they were citizens like everyone else and obeyed the laws same as us. Besides, I think the dead won't mind and the living who are actually affected will be richer than the average person ever will be AFTER their taxes.

But I know plenty alive that are pissed the government will reach into their pockets AFTER they are dead. They don't spend their money on purpose so they can give to their grandkids to help them through college etc... What's the point is the government is just going to take it from you?

And when's the last time you saw someone write into their will, "I want to give the government MORE money after I'm dead"

Again, priorities. What's worse, a college student who has to sell his house and live in something modest, or underfunding organizations so that children in poverty can eat, funding agencies to get the lead out the water, etc.

Raise taxes on something else. Bad water, raise funds to infrastructure projects and the EPA. Then raise base taxes. More people need food, raise funding to social services and then raise taxes.

And don't try that "Save the kittens" bull shit on me. It's a strawman.

"Save The Kittens" legislation: If you don't vote for saving the kittens legislation, then you hate kittens and that makes you a monster. Never mind they are charging each person alive $5000 per year to pass it.

Those are the kind of BS games congress plays.

 

[Deleted member 93354]

Actually it isn't.
Most states don't tax estates at all and those that do aren't particularly heavy.

And where's your link to state probate laws? They go through every little thing in your house and assign a value to it. My aunt's historic photos from WWII were taxed because they had value. The were pictures of her dead husband. And she was broke. She didn't have 2 cents to her name.

 

[tetris42]

But I know plenty alive that are pissed the government will reach into their pockets AFTER they are dead.

I can say I've never heard a dead man complain about how much money he does or doesn't have. I guess we'll just agree to disagree on that point.

They don't spend their money on purpose so they can give to their grandkids to help them through college etc... What's the point is the government is just going to take it from you?

To still bestow the REMAINING millions of dollars? You act like if you gift 11 million dollars and your kids only get to keep 6.5 million there's no point to anything. Never mind that this gift is a higher sum than the vast majority of people will earn in their entire lives.

Raise taxes on something else. And don't try that "Save the kittens" bull shit on me. It's a strawman.

"Save The Kittens" legislation: If you don't vote for saving the kittens legislation, then you hate kittens and that makes you a monster. Never mind they are charging each person alive $5000 per year to pass it.

Those are the kind of BS games congress plays.

Well first off, I will agree with you our government certainly does not spend all of it wisely, however at least SOME of what it does is substantially helpful to society. Regardless, let's look at your point, "raise taxes on something else."

The people this affects all have the following in common:
1. They all beneficiaries of substantially wealthy people.
2. They're getting this money for free. It's a gift.
3. The wealth they're receiving is so high the tax literally doesn't kick in until it's more money involved than the vast majority of working people will ever see in their lives.

So we're talking about rich people getting money for free. I'm sorry, but I cannot think of a BETTER area to tax first. What would you suggest that's more deserving than that?

 

[Deleted member 93354]

I can say I've never heard a dead man complain about how much money he does or doesn't have. I guess we'll just agree to disagree on that point.

To still bestow the REMAINING millions of dollars? You act like if you gift 11 million dollars and your kids only get to keep 6.5 million there's no point to anything. Never mind that this gift is a higher sum than the vast majority of people will earn in their entire lives.

Well first off, I will agree with you our government certainly does not spend all of it wisely, however at least SOME of what it does is substantially helpful to society. Regardless, let's look at your point, "raise taxes on something else."

The people this affects all have the following in common:
1. They all beneficiaries of substantially wealthy people.
2. They're getting this money for free. It's a gift.
3. The wealth they're receiving is so high the tax literally doesn't kick in until it's more money involved than the vast majority of working people will ever see in their lives.

So we're talking about rich people getting money for free. I'm sorry, but I cannot think of a BETTER area to tax first. What would you suggest that's more deserving than that?

Does that mean a dead man's wishes can be ignored even if he has a will? Hell why don't we take everything. After all he's dead and can't complain. In other words, that argument is weak. Step up your game. I'm not an idiot.

No, at the STATE level they get taxed. Why the heck do you think you have to go through state probate? You could have 5 cents to your name, if they find something of value, then it will get taxed.

Taxes are supposed to benefit the living. You get no benefit from taxation in death. Taxes were already paid while they were living. It is essentially double taxation against a portion of the population who can't fight back and that is nothing short of pathetic.

Tax something else.

Now I'll agree that if you have $11,000,000 in wealth that should get taxed. But people who owned little to nothing get taxed too at the state level and that is wealth that could benefit decedents even though it might not be enough. Small amounts like $10,000 here or $20,000 there might save a lot of headaches for some people.

Oh one other thing: Wealth rarely if ever transcends from one generation to the next. Over 86% of millionaires are new millionaires, meaning they built it from nothing.

 

[tetris42]

Does that mean a dead man's wishes can be ignored even if he has a will? Hell why don't we take everything. After all he's dead and can't complain. In other words, that argument is weak. Step up your game. I'm not an idiot.

No, at the STATE level they get taxed. Why the heck do you think you have to go through state probate? You could have 5 cents to your name, if they find something of value, then it will get taxed.

Taxes are supposed to benefit the living. You get no benefit from taxation in death. Taxes were already paid while they were living. It is essentially double taxation against a portion of the population who can't fight back and that is nothing short of pathetic.

Tax something else.

Now I'll agree that if you have $11,000,000 in wealth that should get taxed. But people who owned little to nothing get taxed too at the state level and that is wealth that could benefit decedents even though it might not be enough. Small amounts like $10,000 here or $20,000 there might save a lot of headaches for some people.

Okay, I misunderstood, I thought you were saying something different. If we're talking about taxes that affect the average Joe earning around 31k a year (currently the median individual income), then yeah, there's a lot of room for tax optimization and maybe it shouldn't exist. If we're talking about the federal estate tax that doesn't kick in until it's 11 million, then I think trying to get rid of or soften that is insanity.

 

[Big_Rig_Stig]

Great which bank are you going to use to exchange your cypto for cash?

<crickets>

Ask El Chapo, I'm sure he knows.

 

[Big_Rig_Stig]

I'm playing the devil's advocate here. You're argument is other people need that money. If someone makes enough money to still be wealthy after paying all assigned taxes and penalties, do they deserve to be able to pass that money on to their children or inheritors without a tax penalty? What is the right answer?

The right answer is "that's the price you pay for the privilege of living in a civilized society". If you (or the 1%) don't like it, there are plenty of places they can emigrate to. We can fill that void with decent people who understand the "why" of taxes.

1. What is the cut off. Is it based on total estate value or just liquid assets? Are stocks included? Retirement funds?

Irrelevant. Estate tax was created to prevent the very problem we're facing now (vampirous 1%ers sucking every penny they can out of everyone's pockets, without returning anything of value to society), which we've been thru at least once in our history (industrial era), and the world has been thru more times than we can count--and each and every one of those instances invariably led to a major collapse of civilization and society. We should've learned our lesson already, but too fscking greedy to care.

2. Should the value of the estate be weighted the same in a big city like San Francisco, as it would be in the country? Meaning... a 10 million dollar home in SF is a nice place. a 10 million dollar home in the country is a freaking estate with multiple houses and structures.

Since the value of a dollar is dependent on the area it's used/earned in, that already fixes itself.

You approach this as... "Well X person shouldn't get ALL of that value because they didn't do the work to earn it." So the wealthy will just reassign their wealth to overseas accounts not managed or tracked by the Federal Government/IRS and pass along control to the kids/inheritors when they die. Simple, and for them... rather easy.

They've been doing exactly that for 30+ years, and every election cycle the 1% chisel open more loopholes to allow them to hide even more money from taxes (which is still tax evasion, & therefore a crime and an act of treason) while giving nearly NOTHING to the society that enables them--and the bribery to Congresscritters doesn't count as "giving back.

If they (or you) don't like supporting our society, GTFO. We've devolved nearly into a third-world "sh*thole" because those 1%ers are too effing narrow-minded, mean and greedy to understand the need to support the society you live in.

 

[Big_Rig_Stig]

Just making sure, because this rant, "You make them pay their goddamn taxes and if they don't, you get out the guillotines." counters that. You are asking the ones who created the tax shelters to make them pay their taxes. Just saying.

By the way, I do not disagree with the sentiment,....it is the "how" I am scratching my head over. I mean, if the money never sits foot in the U.S. and is sitting in a bank the U.S. cannot touch, then....how? Sure, chopping off their heads would be fun and all (twisted sense of humor chumps,...lighten up) but it would not solve the problem.

Sure it would: roll a dozen or so heads, and they'll either skate out in the dead of night, or they'll roll over and cough up. The ones that leave will leave significant cash behind; and, even tho we *might* have trouble getting the rest, a number of nations will help grab that money, because they'll get a cut.

AND, after it's all done, we've gotten rid of most of the worst sociopaths and their pet Congresscritters, and we can fix the broken laws and make things *right*. And come out better than we came into it.

 

[Big_Rig_Stig]

I don't have an easy answer for that so much as where the priorities should lie. The rich have many benefits most of us never will already. If they don't like a law, they can move, find ways around it. Like you said, a "nice place" in San Francisco has enough value so they never have to work again a day in their lives if they're willing to live someplace else.

You're trying to determine my view; I'm not against people being wealthy. I'm FOR everyone having base needs met. Food, shelter, clean water, etc. If we're NOT doing that as a country, then I don't see additional benefits for the wealthy being a reasonable priority. So if resources are distributed so that no child in the country should be going hungry, great (child hunger in the USA is about 13%). If no one is homeless due to being unable to find work or mental health care, great, THEN talk about what's fair distribution. Until then, the wealthy seem to be doing alright, we don't have to worry about making their lives easier.

#ThisShitRightHere

 

[Big_Rig_Stig]

Someone didn't pay attention to the lesson on percentages in Elementary school. The 1% already (and still do) pay an overwhelmingly majority of the taxes.

Not to mention that all of the services people like to argue about have their own taxes...eg. roads. We have the gasoline tax, car registration, DOT load permits, etc.

...and yet, you just gave them a HUGE tax refund, by raising MY taxes.

How is it that ~500 people pay more taxes than ~200million others??

And using Republican/Breitbart talking points aren't allowed.

 

[Big_Rig_Stig]

lol all the plebs have to use "regular" accounts. The big guys get to use the anonymous swiss accounts.

The Swiss comply with all IRS laws, you can't hide money there anymore.

The Caymans? Seychelles? Oh yeah. But they take 20% off the top for the privilege.

 

[Big_Rig_Stig]

If only the world was that simple.

Like you wouldn't be begging and screaming and promising ANYTHING if your head were in that hole.

 

[Big_Rig_Stig]

Actually it is stealing from the dead and living.

Here's the deal, while Federal Tax has an exception up to a few million on estate tax, state and local taxes do not and you get taxed heavily on them. This is what probate it for.

Now imagine I'm a poor slob of a child who has to live at home, or my parents pass away before I get to college. Could you imagine paying 15% or more on your parents house? Or paying taxes and not having enough for college?

What if it's a family farm and every family member works it. The land is worth millions even though you BARELY make a living on it. Or the land cannot be subdivided because of zoning laws, meaning you have to sell the entire thing to pay for the probate.

Now do you see the evils?

Stupid.

Farms are exempt from estate taxes. All estate taxes begin at some level: used to be $650k, then went up to $2m, now it's $11m. EVERYTHING UP TO THE LIMIT IS EXEMPT. And then, what's paid after is a percentage of the REMAINDER, it's NOT EVERYTHING BEING TAXED. If you inherit $12m today, you pay taxes on only $1m of that.

So no poor 1% child is ever going to do without that silver spoon and a ready pile of coke to use with it. In your scenarios, NO ONE is gonna get taxed for anything; and if you can live on $11m+(remainder)*.5, then it's YOU that's doing something wrong, not society.

 

[Deleted member 93354]

Stupid.

Farms are exempt from estate taxes. All estate taxes begin at some level: used to be $650k, then went up to $2m, now it's $11m. EVERYTHING UP TO THE LIMIT IS EXEMPT. And then, what's paid after is a percentage of the REMAINDER, it's NOT EVERYTHING BEING TAXED. If you inherit $12m today, you pay taxes on only $1m of that.

So no poor 1% child is ever going to do without that silver spoon and a ready pile of coke to use with it. In your scenarios, NO ONE is gonna get taxed for anything; and if you can live on $11m+(remainder)*.5, then it's YOU that's doing something wrong, not society.

I'm not talking fed level. I'm talking state and there is no exception in most states.

 

[Big_Rig_Stig]

But I know plenty alive that are pissed the government will reach into their pockets AFTER they are dead. They don't spend their money on purpose so they can give to their grandkids to help them through college etc... What's the point is the government is just going to take it from you?

And when's the last time you saw someone write into their will, "I want to give the government MORE money after I'm dead"



Raise taxes on something else. Bad water, raise funds to infrastructure projects and the EPA. Then raise base taxes. More people need food, raise funding to social services and then raise taxes.

And don't try that "Save the kittens" bull shit on me. It's a strawman.

"Save The Kittens" legislation: If you don't vote for saving the kittens legislation, then you hate kittens and that makes you a monster. Never mind they are charging each person alive $5000 per year to pass it.

Those are the kind of BS games congress plays.

Personally, I'd rather spend everything before I die. That way, my money does the most good for more.

Your argument is even worse because it supports sociopathic behavior & rewards it financially. It also destroys a society and its economy--it already happened in 1929,and is happening now, this is the bubble before the burst.

We're not trying to save kittens: we're trying to save HUMAN lives by preventing the very same mistakes that cost millions after the first crash.

 

[Big_Rig_Stig]

I'm not talking fed level. I'm talking state and there is no exception in most states.

Most states have little to no estate taxes. Texas has none, for instance. The rest are minor compared to the federal rate.

Face it: parroting the Republican party line isn't going to work here.

 

[Deleted member 93354]

Most states have little to no estate taxes. Texas has none, for instance. The rest are minor compared to the federal rate.

Face it: parroting the Republican party line isn't going to work here.

Again show me a link to state probate laws. I know for a fact most states have taxation.

I am fiscally conservative. Nothing more. I am neither Republican or Democrat. Parties are for the weak minded fools who don't mind being played by the system. I call bull shit on both of them because I'm an independent critical thinker who researches and therefore less likely to be influenced by talking parrots.

I really dislike Trump.

Obama was awful covering up one scandal after another by protecting crooks.

Gwb was a nice guy but not a good president

Clinton well he played the political game but he is a slimeball. The Clinton's are just slimeball in general.

 

[Big_Rig_Stig]

Again show me a link to state probate laws. I know for a fact most states have taxation.

I am fiscally conservative. Nothing more. I am neither Republican or Democrat. Parties are for the weak minded fools who don't mind being played by the system. I call bull shit on both of them because I'm an independent critical thinker who researches and therefore less likely to be influenced by talking parrots.

I really dislike Trump.

Obama was awful covering up one scandal after another by protecting crooks.

Gwb was a nice guy but not a good president

Clinton well he played the political game but he is a slimeball. The Clinton's are just slimeball in general.

I live in Texas, I went thru two dead relatives who left me some money, and the state itself didn't get a dime in estate taxes. Nor did the feds, and back then the line was $650k.

Also,this: https://www.actec.org/resources/state-death-tax-chart/#TX

"Prior to September 15, 2015, the tax was tied to the federal state death tax credit", meaning you saw no impact until you went over the limit, and then didn't see an impact outside the federal tax.

That chart is interesting: the majority of states tie their estate taxes to the federal rate, meaning the HUGE majority of inheritors are seeing little to no impact, until they cross the limit. And if you can't survive on $11+million and more, you're living your life wrong.




...how the hell did we end up here, anyway??

 

[Grimlaking]

I think this thread has gone off the rails.

To be clear...

I agree that the estate tax is a good thing. Limits in implementation of it make a lot of sense. Taxing the ultra wealthy more heavily also makes sense.

BUT.. then you have stuff like what the Waltons do... giving their kids jobs and using that as a vehicle to transfer wealth under the rug.

The ultra wealthy WILL find a way.

 

[Lizard Testes]

Again show me a link to state probate laws. I know for a fact most states have taxation.

I am fiscally conservative. Nothing more. I am neither Republican or Democrat. Parties are for the weak minded fools who don't mind being played by the system. I call bull shit on both of them because I'm an independent critical thinker who researches and therefore less likely to be influenced by talking parrots.

I really dislike Trump.

Obama was awful covering up one scandal after another by protecting crooks.

Gwb was a nice guy but not a good president

Clinton well he played the political game but he is a slimeball. The Clinton's are just slimeball in general.

https://taxfoundation.org/does-your-state-have-estate-or-inheritance-tax/

Not most, and all the states with estate taxes have exemptions.

So what's your source for "knowing for a fact" that most states tax inheritance/estates?

Some of the states probably do have shitty inheritance taxes but we're talking SIX states MAX, not "most of them." Take that up with your shitty state legislature, we're really talking about the fed taxation here.

Also if we pick one of these states at random, say, Iowa, all directly linear relatives are completely exempt from it (children, grandchildren, parents, etc). It's only taxed if you're leaving it to nieces/cousins/siblings/friends/etc.

And if it's less than 25,000 there's zero taxation, and for close relatives it's 5-10%.

This is a far different picture than the BS picture you're trying to paint with your "facts" and anecdotes.

 

[KenRico]

You can just book the profits overseas like Apple and the big corporations , right ?

Kenny