Locking due to rule 6, leaving it up to be fair to the ones who took their time to respond.
Live long and prosper.
!askusa@discuss.online is that way
But isn’t this overtly political?
I thought that was supposed to be more “chill” conversations
Tax is always a political discussion, but op is a bot and doesn’t respond to anything it posts.
I am not a bot.
That’s exactly what a bot would say.
No true bot fallacy
Textbook bot defense.
Seems more “question about something that concerns everyone in the country” that politics
Can I assume that the people that it’s meant to impact will find a way to skirt their assets around it?
I think we should have a progressive inheritance tax similar to federal income tax (except maybe the 0% range could be a little larger), and by the time you’re in the $400k+ bracket, that rate is 95%+ (or even more potentially). But as with all taxes that primarily target the wealthy, the trick is to proactively close as many loopholes as possible (i.e. parent sets up non-profit and makes kid president), otherwise the tax will barely accomplish anything.
No it should be closer to 100% over a certain amount.
the gift limit is 19K. above that gifts are taxed progressively.
maybe inheritance limit should be like 100x that? so if you inherent 1.9 million you get taxed or maybe its like 190K but the tax at that value is like 1%
deleted by creator
