Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
I never said taxed as income. For most people, the largest asset in an estate is a home, which has been taxed at the time of purchase. But if we are going to treat disposition by inheritance like every other transfer of property, then I guess some sort of tax on transfer is appropriate. Query though, why we don't tax the recipient based on value of the property at the time it is acquired. That would seem to be consistent with Ty's (not Wonk's) theory for the tax in the first place.
|
Houses aren't "taxed" at the time of purchase, other than a recordation tax (which is pretty low).
Hey, if you want to get rid of the estate tax, then just charge the inheritiance to the income of the recipient. But I don't think that really solves any of your concerns--it's still a tax on something that you claim was previously taxed.
