Click here to view La Crosse Area Weather
Home > Opinion > Story
 Advertisement 

Published - Sunday, November 26, 2006

POST COMMENT | READ COMMENTS (36 comment(s))

Estate tax fails to meet standards of a ‘good tax’


.
As I write this, I’m looking at a Web cam image of my parents on a cruise ship in the Mediterranean. They are busy spending my inheritance on expensive trips like this one. My father, an accountant by training, tells me he is just trying to avoid the estate tax. A tax which I oppose on principle, even though my dad is making sure it will never affect me.

A few confessions to make: In 2006 you won’t need to file an estate return unless your gross estate exceeds $2 million. Even then, you may not pay a tax if you qualify for certain deductions. Estimates are that only the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans will be subject to the estate tax, but that doesn’t mean the other 98 percent of Americans shouldn’t care.
Because, as economists are often wont to say, who pays the tax (as in from whom the tax is collected), is not necessarily the same as the person who pays (as in who is affected by) the tax. Not only are the heirs affected, but so is everyone else in our economy, through slower economic growth.

I am not arguing that we should not pay taxes. Rather I’m arguing that this particular tax does not meet the standards of a good tax. I know “good tax” sounds like an oxymoron, but a good tax is simple, easily understood, seldom changes, is neutral to different choices and promotes economic growth.

The estate tax fails at least the last two principles since it treats saving and wealth accumulation differently depending on how much you have saved. It does not treat the savings over $2 million as it does the first $2 million. And in so doing it discourages economic growth by discouraging capital accumulation.

Let’s say I had another set of parents, a more austere couple, they eschew the globetrotting for a life of ramen noodles and coupon clipping so that they can provide me and my future family with a financial safety net. Why should the government impose a tax on them that they will not impose on my actual parents?

Why would a fair tax system penalize someone for self-sacrificing behavior intended to make their children and grandchildren better off? Why are we penalizing those who live frugally and through their frugal behavior are laying the seeds of economic growth for the rest of us to enjoy? Not only should we not discourage that behavior, we should probably do more to encourage it.

As anybody who has noticed the rising amount of U.S. debt held by foreigners should realize, it is not occurring because typical Ameri-cans save too much, but because they are saving too little. So let’s not penalize people for saving more.

If it’s the deficit that worries you, find somewhere else to raise revenue or, better yet, cut spending. I offer the expenditures in Iraq as a starting place because I know Keith would agree with me on that one.

Keith argues that private wealth accumulation is due to our public institutions and markets and therefore should be taxed more heavily. Keith is confused. I’d like to point out that our system of progressive taxation will not be affected by eliminating the death tax, in fact it will be improved as there will be more incentive to accumulate wealth for your children rather than pass your current income on to them now when they are likely to be in a much lower tax bracket.

It’s not clear that the tax is very effective at raising revenue either. Wealthy Americans can afford to hire accountants, lawyers, and estate planners to figure out ways to avoid paying the estate tax. Even though this might be one of the nicer things lawyers do for people, it isn’t a very productive use of society’s resources. So, Keith, please join me in setting those lawyers free — and encouraging economic growth for all — by ending the estate tax.

Taggert J. Brooks teaches economics at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse.
.



 Advertisement 
 Tell us what you think...

 Comments »

dchrist wrote on Dec 27, 2006 12:07 AM:

" "please join me in setting those lawyers free ...by ending the estate tax." please, can you imagine lawyers actually working for a living? "

Clyde wrote on Dec 2, 2006 7:51 AM:

" What is the worst thing those who inherit large sums of money do? SPEND the money, Right? By spending the $$$'s they will pay sales tax and the $$$ fed into the economy to pay wages, buy more goods and pay taxes, you know trickle down! THAT IS BAD, REALLY BAD! The gov't needs to take that money instead and give it to gov't employees instead! Maybe start up a few more programs to employ even more gov't employees! Forget the economy, gov't needs those $$$$ NOW! We need MORE PROGRAMS NOW! "

Bucko wrote on Dec 2, 2006 7:47 AM:

" You have to understand that the money does not have your name on it! It says The United States of America on it and the treasurer is just letting you borrow it until congress can figure out how to get it all back from you. SERIOUS, there are libs that really think ALL money belongs to the gov't. "

To:RanDomino wrote on Dec 1, 2006 8:15 AM:

" That is not the point. The point is it is my money. I should be able to keep it, donate it, whatever. "

Clyde wrote on Nov 30, 2006 10:54 PM:

" Dr. Brooks: answer this contention for me please. I contend that taxes recovered from gov't employee wages do not positively impact tax revenue in the same way private sector employee wages do. The gov't wages are paid from the tax pool and any with holding is only an illusion of paying taxes to the individual. i.e. giving your child an allowance for chores and taxing the allowance paid does not increase the wealth of the allowance giver or the the family unit. The child does believe they are being taxed and their taxes are contributing to the wealth of the parent. "

Bucko wrote on Nov 30, 2006 10:24 PM:

" "The next time your boss talks to you about giving you a raise, say "NO WAY, I DO NOT BELIEVE IN TRICKLE DOWN!" "KEEP THAT MONEY BECAUSE I WANT YOUR ESTATE TO BE TAXED MORE!" "

RanDomino wrote on Nov 30, 2006 7:31 PM:

" You know what the incentive is under a progressive-tax system for making more money? THE REST OF THE MONEY. Oh no, I'm only making $3 million instead of $10 million! I'll starve! "

Nerstor wrote on Nov 30, 2006 9:41 AM:

" Please contact me Dr. Brooks. I am interested in your thoughts about the past and current numbers regarding unfunded private sector pension funds. I would also like to know what you think about the disproportunate benefits jobs like yours, Schools, County, and City employees are receiving (ex: post retirement health coverage, retirement, WFR, etc), the statistics reflecting funding or the lack of, and the affect on our financial health as government entities and individuals. I also would like to discuss the phrase, "gaming the system". I will send you some info and an invitation for me to buy lunch this week. "

Bucko wrote on Nov 30, 2006 6:08 AM:

" I like Thomas Paine and all but in colonial times there was no income tax to get $$$ away from all. Useage taxes mostly. There were very few taxes compared to today. "

Taggert J. Brooks wrote on Nov 29, 2006 9:32 PM:

" To Brian G. Smith: I know plenty of economic history. My point was that this tax is not a good tax from an economic standpoint, nor is it a fair tax from a moral standpoint. However you miss the counter factual, how much faster could the economy have grown had we not taxed estates? And the arguement that more money is needed to defend larger estates is empty in my mind. I hardly think our efforts in IRAQ are improving the security of our weath. Do remember that many US citizens hold foreign financial assets which have not done well in the face of this war. Markets do not like war, so you can't justify the high cost of defense as a necessity for protecting markets. "

Taggert J. Brooks wrote on Nov 29, 2006 9:25 PM:

" To the person who called me Mr. Brooks, its Dr. Brooks. And the opening paragraph WAS a little tongue in cheek, like the sentence previous to this one. :) And I am in complete agreement, I have no right to others income, however this is different. My dad has always said "a moment of pleasure means a lifetime of hell". I assume I'm the hell and I want money for it. And for the record I think my mother disputes the moment of pleasure part. "

Nestor wrote on Nov 29, 2006 4:18 PM:

" Lert me throw in our farmers into this. What a sticky wicket. Many of those that are farming will want to pass the farm on to their children. Although if we make an exception is should fairly pertain then to all family owned and transfered business. You close one gate and open another all too often. "

A question to the fake Brian G Smith from Mr Kennedy wrote on Nov 29, 2006 4:06 PM:

" Your ideal seems to be the total elimination of the gap between the rich and poor through forced taxation and redistribution of wealth. Does that pretty much sum it up? There is a name for this, but I can't think of it....you seem pretty learned with all your big words and whatnot. What is the name of that economic system? "

Eater of the Dead wrote on Nov 29, 2006 3:49 PM:

" Re whoever the 11:48am poster is (Brian G Smith or the impostor). Sorry, fair is fair. Some homeless people may think thousands is too much. As other posters pointed out-a flat percentage does compel the rich to pay more, and at least gives the appearance of fairness and capitalism. If you're not down with that, I've got 2 words for ya:"Legalized Robbery". "

Well, I guess.... wrote on Nov 29, 2006 1:50 PM:

" Brian G smith just does not wish to answer the question posed, and instead will just ramble on about Thomas Paine. Bottom line:the AMOUNT does not matter. The issue is do you have the right to pass on to your children what you earn, or can the Government take it because it is too much? A flat percentage should satisfy the liberals who want to take what isn't theirs from those who earn it. Case closed. "

Brian G Smith wrote on Nov 29, 2006 11:48 AM:

" No one deserves Billions...sorry. No one. I'm advocating the end to all corporate subsidies and corporate welfare. Are they not corporate socialism? You all may think the Heinz heirs or the Marrs Candy heirs deserve billions based on the womb the exited.....I and others far greater and wiser than myself believe in the contrary. Again...please read the writings of Thomas Paine that best exemplify what motivations lay behind the forging and founding of the US. All you supporters and apologists for our modern corporate barons are subverting this great nation. You better pick sides soon........storm clouds ahead. "

Your parents are spending YOUR inheritance, Mr. Brooks??? wrote on Nov 29, 2006 11:44 AM:

" Mind telling the reading populace why you believe YOU have a right to the possessions of others? It's not YOUR INHERITANCE, it's THEIR ASSETS.... THEY earned it, not you. They can spend it any way they see fit, and if they see fit to bestow something to you upon their deaths, all the better for you. Don't expect to have your palm liberally greased just because you hold your grubby hand out. Now, if your opening paragraph was written tongue-in-cheek (and I hope it was), I apologize. "

Progressive Minds? wrote on Nov 29, 2006 4:42 AM:

" Inherited Rich you mean like the Kennedys, who expect to pay NO inheritance tax ever since they all draw from a foreign based trust fund? "

To:Brian G Smith wrote on Nov 28, 2006 4:39 PM:

" I am confused-do you agree or not agree with the point made in the 8:42am post? You make a great arguement for socialism. Are you advocating socialism? "

"Alot of the RICH are LIBERALS" wrote on Nov 28, 2006 2:20 PM:

" "It takes a progessive mind to be rich"? Most of people with big money inherited it. There are also many ways to protect these monies from taxes. 'Trusts' for example. The problem is not in transfering the control of these funds, but ultimately spending it. A case in point is our new Majority leader. Publicly liberal. Privately a staunch conservative and advocate of keeping ones wealth. Hope she receives a sliver from riding that fence. "

Dear Bucko wrote on Nov 28, 2006 11:57 AM:

" Alot of the RICH are LIBERALS. I'd argue a greater majority. It takes a progresive mind to be rich.....unless you inherited alot of wealth. "

Dear Eater wrote on Nov 28, 2006 11:55 AM:

" That's right....no one deserves inheriting billions. Two million is plenty. A man who dies rich dies in disgrace. America was FOUNDED against the evils of inherited power and wealth.....aristocracy. Bills have to be paid. The Defense of this Nation is the biggest cost and the majority of that should be paid those that have the most to lose...the most to protect. Will a Taliban takeover of the US affect a Los Angelas ghetto kid as much as it would affect the DuPonts or Hilton's??? Hardly. - Brian G Smith "

Read Thomas Paine....not Ayn Rand wrote on Nov 28, 2006 11:49 AM:

" Methinks supporters for the elimination of the "Estate Tax" know little US and World History. Professor Taggart, for example, is claiming the Estate Tax has hindered or burdened our economy....POPPYCOCK. The US economy has been the ENVY of the globe for two centuries. Estate Taxes were used numerous timeperiods to pay for WAR Costs and then repealed when the wars concluded. They became a permanent fixture early in the 20th Century and have been modified numerous times. The US currently has a National Debt that threatens our future more than a handful of radicals, the primary source of this Debt is Defense related. Just as richer folks have to pay higher insurance to cover their larger assets so do they have to pay more in Defense to protect the greater quantity of assets they have garnered under the US system. - Brian G Smith "

Bucko wrote on Nov 28, 2006 7:06 AM:

" Don't assume that Paris H. is to inherit much. If her father is one thing, he is not stupid. Do you think in his imagination Paris will ever aquire the capacity to manage the Hilton Corp? Plus she is charging $150k to visit your New Year's eve party. People are throwing money at her with very little need for Grand Daddy's money. "

Bucko wrote on Nov 28, 2006 6:59 AM:

" I owned a business for about 6 years and employed about 20 people. Once I was asked,How many people work here? I answered,"About half!" Many people I encountered in my bossing experience true opinion was I had some how had gotten money away from poor people. Since I was "rich", I must have made someone else poor! Of course I drove the oldest car and almost never went on vacation, and in my best year never made more than any part timer and would be very satisfied if I only earned equal to the money I paid in total taxes. "

Eater of the Dead wrote on Nov 27, 2006 8:42 AM:

" Brian, you are right. She doesn't "deserve" it. But, by that logic, no one "deserves" an inheritance of any kind. The only fair way is to eliminate the tax, or tax everyone the same PERCENTAGE. That way, the rich still pay more, so that should satisfy the liberals. Tax everyone or tax no one. "

To:Brian G Smith wrote on Nov 27, 2006 8:23 AM:

" Pretty scary. You advocating the Government taking someones money simply because it is deemed they "don't deserve it". Have you read "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand? If not, you should. "

Taggert J. Brooks wrote on Nov 26, 2006 11:48 PM:

" Middle Class- I'm amazed at the naked envy. Not pretty. Don't assume- I would not call this trickle down (a totally useless label btw), though the arguement for eliminating the estate tax is a supply side arguement. I grow tired of the "middle class" defining what is fair, or good for the economy. The point I was making is that the middle class may not pay the tax, but they are none the less effected by the tax through lower growth. Google tax burden or tax incidence for a more thorough explanation. "

Bucko wrote on Nov 26, 2006 7:15 PM:

" The rich are easy to spot. They are any one who earns ONE DOLLAR more than a Liberal. And we need a tax system that will get that DOLLAR from them so things can be fair. "

The estate tax is small potatoes wrote on Nov 26, 2006 6:17 PM:

" Given all the ways that the rich find to weasel out of paying the same percentage of their income as you and I do, the estate tax isn't even a drop in the bucket compared the billions of dollars you and I have to make up for--money that's shuffled between shell corporations, hidden in Burmuda, and specifically exempted from taxation thanks to the good-ole-boy system in the state and federal legislatures. But the Right has snookered America with this "issue" that's more of a red herring compared to the real thieving going on. "

Whatever you want to believe wrote on Nov 26, 2006 1:04 PM:

" Personally, I am opposed to someone coming into money when they did not work for the wealth or undertake any of the risks associated with earning it. As an economics professor, the writer certainly knows that extra taxes do not necessarily stifle economic growth. If the government spends this new money, which they no doubt will, it will actually increase economic growth. As for decreasing government spending, we all know where a huge chunk of the spending is going right now. Admittedly, much of this does not come back and get invested in our own country. We all know what the fix for that is. "

Paris Hilton deserves her billions..... wrote on Nov 26, 2006 10:49 AM:

" NOT !!!! America is a meritocracy. Taxes are needed to pay for the Global War On Terror so Paris Hilton can continue to live her free and lavish life with peace of mind. Right wingers claim our very lifestyle is at stake in the GWOT. Well, Estate Taxes help pay the GWOT and this protects the rigged US system which allows for such outrageous accumulations of personal and familial wealth. The US economy has done quite well with the Estate Tax in tow for centuries....to listen or read emotive bloviators claim it's burdened our economy is nothing short of hilarious lunacy. - Brian G Smith "

To:Middle Class wrote on Nov 26, 2006 10:01 AM:

" So, you believe that is "fair" as well as "good"? So, people should be punished for being successful? "

Assume wrote on Nov 26, 2006 9:10 AM:

" Sounds like the old "trickle-down" theory of economics again that has widened the rich-poor gap in this country. It was debunked during the Reagan era and keeps rearing its ugly head. The basic assumption the letter writer makes is that those who save are the ones who will pay. I doubt anyone in the middle class will be saving enough by cutting coupons to bump up against the estate tax ceiling. Get real! "

Well said wrote on Nov 26, 2006 12:17 AM:

" Although, I would disagree that a progressive tax is good in any way,shape,form, or matter. "

Middle Class wrote on Nov 25, 2006 11:58 PM:

" Any tax that only taxes the wealthiest 2% of Americans meets my standards of a "good tax". "


PLEASE NOTE: Comments on stories that frequently update through the day disappear with each update.
The comments above are from readers. In no way do they represent the views of the La Crosse Tribune.

Click here to report offensive or inappropriate comments. Please identify the comment you're concerned about, the story to which the comment was attached, the date of the comment and the person who made the post.

 Post a comment (150 word limit) »

Log In - If you have already signed up with The LaCrosse Tribune, please sign in now!
Member ID:
*Password:
  Forgot Your Password?
 
Sign Up - To encourage intelligent and meaningful conversation, The LaCrosse Tribune requires all commenters to register before posting comments. It's quick, it's easy, and it's free! Just fill in the information below to get started!

**Your Member ID and password will be required to log in. Your comments will appear under your user name.

Do not use usernames or passwords from your financial accounts!

Note: Fields marked with an asterisk (*) are required!

Create a Member ID:
*Choose a password:
*Re-enter password:
E-mail Address:
Year of Birth:
 

(children under 13 cannot register)

First Name:
Last Name:
Company:
Home Phone:
Business Phone:
Address:
City:
State:
Zip Code:
 

NEWSPAPER ADS

LACROSSE JOBS

TOP HOMES

HomeSeller
Top Homes


 
 
Dailies
La Crosse Tribune
Winona Daily News

Weeklies
Coulee News
Courier Life News
The Chronicle
Houston County News
Tomah Journal
Vernon Broadcaster
Westby Times

Regional
Inside Preps
My LIVE! Entertainment
Best of River Valley
Business Report
Healthy Living Today
Strictly Golf
River Valley Bike Trails
River Valley Blogs
River Valley Outdoors

Shoppers
Tri-County Foxxy

Marketplace
Newspaper Ads
Local Website Directory
7 Rivers Rentals
HomeSeller
Wheels Website
Outdoor Motors
Jobs

Portals
La Crosse NET
Winona NET

Classifieds
River Valley Classifieds

Links
Lee Enterprises

About Us | Classifieds | Contact Us | Terms of Use | F.A.Q. | Privacy Policy | Requests | Search | RSS | Videos | Advertiser Directory | Add to My Yahoo!
Copyright © 1997 - 2009 The La Crosse Tribune. All rights reserved.
Material from this site may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or distributed. A Lee Enterprises subsidiary.