Patting the wrists, rolling the eyes.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Is the estate tax calculated on market value at death or at acquisition value? I don't remember.

It's assessed against the value of the estate at death, or, if the alternate valuation date is chosen, the value six months after death.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Because the deceased have no property rights. They're dead.

And the deceased's family has property rights in the deceased's body (which is why we can't take all bodies for dissection) and confidential information that affects them (e.g., that the deceased had some inheritable physical problem).

Trying to head this off at the pass.

We may end up in the "confidentiality of tax records and medical records after death" morass, though.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Because the deceased have no property rights. They're dead.

Then why do we enforce wills?

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by taxwonk
It's assessed against the value of the estate at death, or, if the alternate valuation date is chosen, the value six months after death.

So in a sense, the cap gains are taxed*? I'm just asking. Please don't hurt me.

*well, you get a buy if you the estate is below the exemption, but.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Then why do we enforce wills?

Good point. We should take all the money.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by taxwonk
The money frequently hasn't already been taxed. Most of the estates subject to the estate tax have a large component of inherited wealth. To suggest that it hasn't been taxed is as absurd as suggestiung that my fees shouldn't be taxed because they were already taxed to the client who earned them before me.

And property rights are not illusory. However, that doesn't mean that the government cannot properly assess an excise on the privilege of passing large amounts of property from one generation to the next.

How could it not have already been taxed? s it from before there was income tax? If you're saying it was inherited, wasn't there an inheritance tax then? The silver lining to a solid (100%) inheritance tax- assuming we could make it retroactive- is we'd put the fucking Kennedys on the street. Turn the compound into condos I say.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Then why do we enforce wills?

Because the state, in the exercise of its common law sovereign powers, has chosen to honor them. It was not always the case that the sovereign did, however. And the change, when it came about, came about in exchange for the imposition of an excise on the deceased's property passing under a will.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Because the deceased have no property rights. They're dead.

Wait- so if i give you 100$ to put in my casket at my funeral you're going to keep it? You're the kind of lawyer who gets the jokes going.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
So in a sense, the cap gains are taxed*? I'm just asking. Please don't hurt me.

*well, you get a buy if you the estate is below the exemption, but.

Only if you view the estate tax as a second income tax. If you view it as an excise, then no, they aren't. And if the whackadoos in Congress manage to repeal the estate tax permanently, then they escape entirely.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Because the state, in the exercise of its common law sovereign powers, has chosen to honor them. It was not always the case that the sovereign did, however. And the change, when it came about, came about in exchange for the imposition of an excise on the deceased's property passing under a will.

Is this true? That the there was a quid pro quo?

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
How could it not have already been taxed? s it from before there was income tax? If you're saying it was inherited, wasn't there an inheritance tax then? The silver lining to a solid (100%) inheritance- assuming we could make it retroactive- is we'd put the fucking Kennedys on the street. Turn the compound into condos I say.

An inheritance tax is not an income tax. And inherited money is not subject to income tax. Surely this isn't a complex concept for you, Hank. Club is generally obtuse. I personally think it's deliberate, to replace his lack of debating skills. You I expect better from.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Only if you view the estate tax as a second income tax. If you view it as an excise, then no, they aren't. And if the whackadoos in Congress manage to repeal the estate tax permanently, then they escape entirely.

I had thought, but maybe this died in committee or something, that after the estate tax went away, there wasn't going to be a step-up (the person inheriting would have the same basis as the decedent). It would not surprise me if this had been pork-traded out.

Given the size of the excise tax, I don't have so much of a problem with the step-up in value. If they didn't get the step-up, I would think you would have to value the estate's assets at their adjusted basis instead of current market value, and that seems screwy, because if something appreciated enough, it seems like even if you sold it, it's possible that between cap gains and the estate tax you would end up having to pay out of pocket.

Ignoring the exclusion, of course.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Wait- so if i give you 100$ to put in my casket at my funeral you're going to keep it? You're the kind of lawyer who gets the jokes going.

Perhaps, but unlike you, I'd declare it as income.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Club is generally obtuse. I personally think it's deliberate, to replace his lack of debating skills. You I expect better from.

Are you still upset that I forgot to put you on one of my lists?

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Is this true? That the there was a quid pro quo?

Yep. Go back to the Chronicles if you really want to research the answer. Start with the Statute of Wills.