Tuesday, April 05, 2005

The Seattle PI now advocates socialist income redistribution.

Under the guise of “Insuring government” (Like there’s any risk to government?) The PI comes out swinging, demanding that $250 people per year in this state come up with $129 million… for the state… when they die.

That, ladies and gentlemen, is sick.

Now, I’ll never be at risk of having the requirement of paying this state death tax, or any other death tax, when I die. I’ll never be in that type of exclusive economic company. But for those like Bill Gates, Sr., who think the death tax is such a great idea, I believe they can make provisions in their respective wills to give everything they own to the state when they die… if that is their desire.

But to place a requirement on ANYONE to fork over hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of already-taxed dollars to a greedy state bureaucracy, all in the name of “insuring government,” is some of the most senseless babble I’ve ever read in ANY newspaper.

But then, I’ve only been reading them for 40 years or so.

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER EDITORIAL BOARD
Tuesday, April 5, 2005
Estate Tax: Insuring government

The debate about estate taxes often comes down to this simple proposition: If I die, I won't be able to pass along my business to my children.

But that very statement is not always true. Indeed, for many business owners or wealthy individuals, the largest cost associated with the estate tax is not the money that will eventually be paid to government; it's the recurring premium for a life insurance trust. This is called estate planning -- and financial planners, insurance companies and attorneys know all sorts of maneuvers to limit exposure and protect family enterprises.

Of course, a narrative about business owners saving insurance premiums isn't nearly as good an argument as the dire consequences of losing a family business to a greedy tax. A Brookings Institution study a few years ago found only two of each 1,000 people actually passed along estates that included ownership of small businesses (or farms). It seems reasonable enough that those two groups of owners could manage their affairs and make certain they are well insured.

More...

No comments: