Time to Repeal the Wealth Destroying "Death Tax"

By The Cato Institute , Individual Liberty, Free Markets, Peace - October 01, 2009

Icoemail3
Comments(5) | (0)

by Daniel J. Mitchell

The politicians in Washington impose double taxation on interest, dividends and capital gains, but the "death tax" wins the prize for being the most self-destructive part of the internal revenue code. Adding an extra layer of tax when someone dies is an unsavory combination of bad economics and immoral grave robbing.

The current policy is especially foolish since every economic theory — even Marxism — agrees that saving and investment are the keys to long-run growth and higher living standards. Simply stated, some of today's income has to be set aside to finance tomorrow's growth, much as a farmer has to save some of his seed for next year's crop.

The death tax (technically called the estate and gift tax) mandates the confiscation of as much as 45% of the wealth of entrepreneurs, investors or business owners. Economists warn that the death tax reduces the capital stock. That sounds like jargon, but it means all of us have lower living standards because of less investment, fewer machines, less technology and diminished innovation.

Ironically, other nations have figured out that the death tax does a lot of damage in a competitive global economy. Many people will not be surprised to know that a free-market paradise such as Hong Kong has eliminated its death tax, but it is certainly newsworthy that European welfare states such as Austria and Sweden also have repealed this unfair tax. Australia, Russia and New Zealand are among the other nations that have figured out how senseless it is to penalize wealth creation.

There may be a bit of good news on the horizon. Assuming Congress does not change the law, the death tax disappears in 2010. But since the death tax comes roaring back to life in 2011 (with an even higher tax rate of 55%), this creates a bit of a quandary. I'm sure the successful people affected by the death tax love their children, but how many of them are willing to jump off a bridge before the end of next year to keep the IRS from seizing the lion's share of their wealth?

This content is inappropriate
Loading

Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content, so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.

Explanation:


Regarding Article
OPINION:Time to Repeal the Wealth Destroying "Death Tax"

Thank You for your Comment

We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.

  • caelum
    Uh, Right Now?

    We can debate on the validity of the estate tax (I'd personally do away it given different conditions ). But, to eliminate it in this economy would be a destruction of our deficit and public debt. We are in a liquidity trap and we need to get out of it, but once out of it we need to have tax revenue to pay off the public debt in order to prevent crowding-out over the long turn. Eliminated the estate tax at this point in time would be fiscally impossible. I would be a fan of phasing it out over time, something to like 15 - 20% drop and then eventually eliminate it. But to do that now would be disastrous. Even reducing it the way I'd favor and phase it out over time would cost upward of $600 Billion.

    This economy is not the right time to eliminate it, you just can't fiscally do it.

    - caelumUS October 1, 2009 12:11PM

    Reply to this Recommend (0) Icon flag

    Thank You for your Comment

    We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.

  • countryboy
    Tax,tax's sucks,suckers

    The death tax is the worst tax the US haves.But smart people find ways around it.
    But its still not right if I wont to leave someone something when I die that they have to sell it to pay for the tax's on it.

    - countryboyUS October 1, 2009 6:33PM

    Reply to this Recommend (0) Icon flag

    Thank You for your Comment

    We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.

  • Submariner
    Estate Tax bad - Gift Tax good

    I think the reason this still exists is to keep the wealthiest of us from collateral shennanigans.

    The case where someone dies and property incurs taxes that make it impossible for inheretors to own that property is not something that should be possible.

    But except in the case of an individuals estate, I see no reason why gift's should not be taxed.

    I mean, money is not property. It is 'tender'. And it has no real value, in most cases. And it is monetized debt. Real estate property should pass from individual to individual with no impediment, but money is not any such thing. And any other entity should not be protected, either. It just provides another way for the upper class to avoid paying for their mistakes; or making the middle class pay for it.

    People need to get a realistic view of how our monetary system works to continue this discussion.

    - Submariner October 1, 2009 10:52PM

    Reply to this Recommend (0) Icon flag

    Thank You for your Comment

    We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.

    • countryboy
      Tax

      I got problems with taxing property. If a wont to leave a car or a house to some one I should be able to leave them a gift and not have it taxed.
      Money is a income any way you get it,I don't like it but income is taxed

      - countryboyUS October 2, 2009 5:44PM

      Reply to this Recommend (0) Icon flag

      Thank You for your Comment

      We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.

      • Submariner
        No tax?

        I'd be willing to test a complete lack of taxation on a microcosmic scale (a middle class population in a state representative of many averages) so long as a minimum quality of life is guarunteed for the lowest classes during this experiment with moneys from outside the petri dish, and so long as the upper classes can not profit from external sources or to external sources during that period.

        It would be interesting to test the idea. I suspect that even with a positive feed at the bottom that such a group would self-destruct after a period of time. Especially after a generation of those educated only in family inculcation matured to adulthood.

        - Submariner October 2, 2009 7:47PM

        Reply to this Recommend (0) Icon flag

        Thank You for your Comment

        We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.

See Related...