Anteater |
04-27-2017 08:03 AM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by elphenor
(Post 1828325)
this for instance is super bonkers
almost nobody (probably literally nobody) rich enough to qualify for the 40% marginal is going to choose not to own a sizeable estate in the US just because the sheer amount of money you have to be drowning in
US property and stock are investments for future profit there is not multi-millionaires who truly believe "might as well not have"
|
Meh. People who are wealthy at the level you are talking about have their pick of lucrative real estate development opportunities all over the planet. They might buy a property here, but they'll set up their estate elsewhere if it saves them millions to do so. And that's the truth: if you don't see that then then you might want to go actually spend some time studying what the uber-wealthy actually do. Trust me, the U.S. isn't do or die for any of them.
See, I'm all for taxing the living bejesus out of the rich and out of their corporations, but the estate tax isn't the way to go about it because it's basically just a cheap windfall that the uber-rich already work to evade when it could be replaced with something that brings in more revenue (like I suggested earlier). You need a tax code that encourages real accountability for both the government (as in, what the taxed money is actually used for instead of **** all hearsay) and also for the numerous brackets we currently have that already make things more complicated than they really should be. Get rid of the loopholes and create more specific criteria that keeps the wealthy from taking evasive action. It can be done. :)
|