# Republicans Plan to Make Death Tax a 2010 Election Issue

Actually both taxman and Dr Shade are wrong. The worth of the families estate is far more than \$1.2M. There is presumably a house, farm structures and equipment and savings. This could easily raise the family estate for the small farm to \$3M. Dr. shade neglected to subtract out the lifetime exclusion of \$1M. This leaves 0.55*\$2M = \$1,200,000.00! They would need to sell the farm to pay for this tax bill.

Taxman - I think you're the one that needs to take some remedial math classes. It's fairly easy to see that Dr. Shade is correct. Assuming the family has to sell 108 acres to pay for the death tax, of the total 240 acres, at \$5000 per acre, their overall revenue on that sale would equal \$540,000. 108 x 5000 = \$540,000...That even seems like it is low...if you take the overall value of the farm 240 x 5000 = 1,200,000 x 0.55 = 660,000 tax liability. I am assuming however that Dr. Shade was only accounting for a possible shortfall of cash to make the \$660,000. Like you said taxman...basic math...seems like Dr. Shade was way more right than you.

Not sure where you learned basic arithmetic, but the tax liability on that estate would be \$110,000, not \$540,000.

and leave something to our families , the goverment will take 55 % of it . Hell of an incentive . Something wrong with this picture ?

There's a farmer who owns about 240 acres of land and each acre of land is worth approximately \$5000. He dies and wills his farm to his son. Unfortunately, the farmer doesn't die in 2010 but in 2011 and he fits the bill for the estate tax. The son must now pay for his inherited family farm via the death/estate tax. Because the rate is 55%, the son will have to pay \$540,000 to the government. Since he is a farmer, he has very little cash on hand. The best way to pay this tax will be to sell a part of the family farm with all profits going to the government.

He will need to sell at least 108 acres of his land assuming that each acre is still worth \$5000. 108 acres...that's 45% of the farm that is gone to another farmer, the government, or housing developers and leaving a total of 132 acres left for the son to enjoy. And do we need to get into the taxes taken out of the profit for selling the land?

"Oh, but this scenario isn't real life!" Tell that to my uncle and cousin in Illinois.

Do you own less than \$3.5 million in assets? Or do you and your spouse own less than \$7 million in combined assets? If you don't, you won't face the estate tax.

If you do, congratulations on your success. You're still MILLIONAIRES. What are you complainng about?

Do you own less than \$3.5 million in assets? Or do you and your spouse own less than \$7 million in combined assets? If you don't, you won't face the state tax.

If you do, congratulations on your success. You're still MILLIONAIRES. What are you complainng about?

Bill, I realize that when your as clueless as you are you have to make up everything. You are truely uneducated and I would be surprised if you ever saw the inside of a school building of any kind after this last remark.

BILL: "All north and all south Democrats voted against some of the civil right bills."

I don't know what this is supposed to mean. Northern Dems were most heavily in favor of civil rights legislation and it was basically their legislation.

By party and region

Note: "Southern", as used in this section, refers to members of Congress from the eleven states that made up the Confederate States of America in the American Civil War. "Northern" refers to members from the other 39 states, regardless of the geographic location of those states.

The original House version: yea / nay

* Southern Democrats: 7-87 (7%-93%)

* Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0%-100%)

* Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94%-6%)

* Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85%-15%)

The Senate version:

* Southern Democrats: 1-20 (5%-95%)

* Southern Republicans: 0-1 (0%-100%)

* Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98%-2%)

* Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84%-16%)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964

Pretty obvious that it was a NORTHERN democratic bill isn't it, Bill you stubborn fool. You are the one who denies history. Here is the explanation you need to read and understand.

"...the Republican Party exploited white Southern resentment against the cause of civil rights and integration. The "Southern strategy" as it was later called, enabled Republicans to end the Democratic Party's previous domination of the South following the Civil War."

http://intrepidliberaljournal.blogspot.com/2009/06/billy-graham-rise-of-republican-south.html

So I ask you once again, Bill. If there was no difference between northern and southern democrats why the obvious discrepancy in voting patterns on the 1964 Civil Rights Act? Why did northern Democrats in both the house and the senate support the legislation at a greater rate than even northern Republicans? And where did all those former southern Democrats go, Bill? They're not around anymore. Did they go to the GOP to better pursue their racist agenda there as the GOP so willingly encouraged them to do? I think you better stop reading right wing spin and read a little peer reviewed scholarly history.

Myth: You actually own stuff. Nope, you don't. You just rent your life from the government. Try not paying your taxes and see who gets your "stuff" and you might lose the "illusion of freedom" as well.

Myth: Private Property. Try building something on your land that the government doesn't want you to build. Try building it without obeying the hundreds of regulations promulgated by every government official from the local inspector to the EPA. If the government finds an "endangered" fly on your property it instantly becomes worthless. Don't pay your property taxes (rent to the government) and find out who really owns "your property".

Myth: The Bill of Rights and The Rule of Law. The only rule is the tyranny of the majority filtered through "judicial whimsy", based on the judge's personal ideology.

I'm not even a Libertarian but I can see the system is way out of whack.

A longer tether than others have is only relative freedom.

The death tax is double taxation. To take money willed to others after a tax has been paid previously is unfair and unconstitutional. At most the recivers of the estate should pay is a standard tax based on the income. Mr OBAMA and the left just trying a to redistrubute the wealth. I doubt if it were his children recieving these he would try so hard.

Its always easy to talk about redistribution until its yours they take away Ill give up my share when Obama gives up his. That will never happen. Idealogs justify until it affects them when they feel pain then they reconsider.