Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Donkees

(31,418 posts)
Sun Feb 3, 2019, 09:44 PM Feb 2019

Bernie Sanders's estate tax plan would reduce the federal debt and help even the playing field

By Editorial Board February 3 at 6:57 PM

Excerpts:

IT WILL not be a question of whether prominent 2020 Democratic presidential candidates favor hiking taxes on the very wealthy. It will be a question of how they propose to do it. Sen.?Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) last month suggested a wealth tax of 2 percent per year on fortunes of more than $50 million, an idea that is constitutionally questionable and logistically difficult. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) entered the scene Thursday with a better plan: substantially hiking the estate tax on huge inheritances, an alternative to taxing someone’s fortune during his or her lifetime.

Mr. Sanders wants to roll back the GOP reform — and more. He would insist that estates worth more than $3.5 million pay at least 45 percent on money over that threshold, with higher tax brackets scaled to the size of the fortune in question. The rate would be 77 percent — the top rate from 1941 to 1976 — on estates worth more than $1 billion. Because such a plan would spur estate planners to seek legally creative ways to avoid inheritance taxes, Mr.?Sanders would also close some loopholes currently used as tax avoidance vehicles. Mr. Sanders estimates that his plan would raise $315 billion over a decade.

That revenue is badly needed. Federal debt as a share of the economy has spiked. Rising generations face huge challenges paying for the health care and pensions of their retiring parents. Meanwhile, the very wealthiest Americans have done extremely well in recent decades, with a drift toward an ever-higher concentration of national wealth at the top. Weak inheritance taxes have contributed to this trend. Critics charge that the estate tax taxes income twice, first when it is earned and second when it is inherited. Yet it also serves as a backstop against avoidance of other types of taxation, in which the wealthy excel.

Rich heirs would still be rich after paying a Sanders tax. But their unearned head start over their less fortunate cohort would be shorter, and the government would have more resources to help promote opportunity for everyone else.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/bernie-sanderss-estate-tax-plan-would-reduce-the-federal-debt-and-help-even-the-playing-field/2019/02/03/61c41caa-266b-11e9-90cd-dedb0c92dc17_story.html

9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
1. Not against it, but it won't even eliminate 25% of annual deficit, much less touch the debt.
Sun Feb 3, 2019, 09:52 PM
Feb 2019

Sanders, like most politicians, isn’t leveling with us.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
4. Cut the Deficit 25% and the Debt still goes up. Sanders needs to be honest, all but the
Sun Feb 3, 2019, 10:03 PM
Feb 2019

poor are going to have to pay more to do anything about the Debt.

at140

(6,110 posts)
6. National debt is never coming down,
Sun Feb 3, 2019, 11:15 PM
Feb 2019

it is politically not possible, no matter who is in charge.

Voltaire2

(13,061 posts)
5. So you are opposed to returning the estate tax
Sun Feb 3, 2019, 10:31 PM
Feb 2019

To its 2009 level and adding a progressive increase to the rate that would only affect very large estates?

Oh and the median home price in CA is around $400,000

still_one

(92,219 posts)
8. Depends where you live. In the Bay Area or Los Angeles they are much higher than that. In general
Sun Feb 3, 2019, 11:32 PM
Feb 2019

the 2009 estate tax rate is fine, however, it costs more to live in different areas of the country. That and other things should be taken into consideration. That is what I am saying.

The republican tax cuts went out of their way to penalize states that have high state income tax and high property taxes, by limiting those deductions, to reduce the likelihood of itemizing deductions. In addition, they eliminated the personal exemption(which applies to everyone), interest on home equity line of credit, unless it is used only for home improvement, not for education or medical expenses, and generally eliminating the casualty deduction,unless it is in an area declared as a national disaster by the President.



Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»Bernie Sanders's estate t...