The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Breaking News => Topic started by: Rebel on November 16, 2012, 01:09:12 PM
-
(http://global.fncstatic.com/static/managed/img/fn2/video/reporter_lajeusse_111612.jpg)
Rancher Kevin Kester works dawn to dusk, drives a 12-year-old pick-up truck and earns less than a typical bureaucrat in Washington D.C., yet the federal government considers him rich enough to pay the estate tax -- also known as the "death tax."
And with that tax set to soar at the beginning of 2013 without some kind of intervention from Congress, farmers and ranchers like Kester are waiting anxiously.
"There is no way financially my kids can pay what the IRS is going to demand from them nine months after death and keep this ranch intact for their generation and future generations," said Kester, of the Bear Valley Ranch in Central California.
Two decades ago, Kester paid the IRS $2 million when he inherited a 22,000-acre cattle ranch from his grandfather. Come January, the tax burden on his children will be more than $13 million.
For supporters of a high estate tax, which is imposed on somebody's estate after death, Kester is the kind of person they rarely mention. He doesn't own a mansion. He's not the CEO of a multi-national. But because of his line of work, he owns a lot of property that would be subject to a lot of tax.
---MORE--- (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/16/ranchers-farmers-brace-for-death-tax-impact/)
I foresee a LOT of family farms being snapped up by major corporations. Good job, libs. You wanted it, now...
(http://www.conservativecave.com/Smileys/default/Own_it.png)
-
Uh huh.
Bye-bye small family farm.
Of course, it's been going on for generations because of high taxes, but now it's going to happen at the speed of light.
Bye-bye.
-
In California, there are a lot of ordinary houses that cost the much, or nearly. $1 million is ridiculously low, a lot of family businesses will be forced out of business with this atrocity.
-
In California, there are a lot of ordinary houses that cost the much, or nearly. $1 million is ridiculously low, a lot of family businesses will be forced out of business with this atrocity.
Yeah, but Green Giant and Birdseye will contribute more to politicians who will, ultimately, control GG and Birdseye. Fascism is the vehicle to Communism.
-
You limp noodles got what you wanted.
:ownit:
-
DUmmies constantly bitch about corporate owned farms and the food they produce, yet they support the taxes that are killing family farms. Frelling idiots.
-
DUmmies constantly bitch about corporate owned farms and the food they produce, yet they support the taxes that are killing family farms. Frelling idiots.
The only "small" farms they're really interested in supporting are either the ones concealed with camouflage netting or the ones that don't even produce enough food to sustain the occupants.
-
DUmmies constantly bitch about corporate owned farms and the food they produce, yet they support the taxes that are killing family farms. Frelling idiots.
Quixotic.
-
Can't he divide up his property and sell it to his kids for $1.00?
Or is that now against the law too?
-
Can't he divide up his property and sell it to his kids for $1.00?
Or is that now against the law too?
You used to be able to gift $20,000/year/child tax free, still, that would take a while to divy up a million bucks.
The tax is assessed on the value of the estate at death. Outside of forming a corporation, his kids are ****ed.
-
You used to be able to gift $20,000/year/child tax free, still, that would take a while to divy up a million bucks.
The tax is assessed on the value of the estate at death. Outside of forming a corporation, his kids are ****ed.
I'd form the corporation.
-
You used to be able to gift $20,000/year/child tax free, still, that would take a while to divy up a million bucks.
The tax is assessed on the value of the estate at death. Outside of forming a corporation, his kids are ****ed.
He should look at how DEMOCRATS shelter their fortunes to pass on to their kids.....Think Ted Turner and his thousands of arces .
-
You used to be able to gift $20,000/year/child tax free, still, that would take a while to divy up a million bucks.
The tax is assessed on the value of the estate at death. Outside of forming a corporation, his kids are ****ed.
You can get the estate taxes financed over a lot of years. Also, the local land appraiser isn't looking to get tarred and feathered so he or she will hopefully give you a very conservative appraisal. Plus, a lot of farmers and ranchers don't pay income taxes because of severe losses they may have sustained over time as well as a great deal of machinery that's depreciating. Those income tax credits can help pay it. That's a short summary and glimmer of hope. That being said, estate taxes are very difficult for farming and ranching families to overcome and usually result in the sale of a portion of their land in order to pay down the debt. A neat twist is that all this inflation that has happened and will continue to balloon being caused by overspending in government is artificially driving up the price of land far and beyond what the land can pay for based on production revenue...therefore the estate taxes are ever more improbable to handle easily. Estate taxes accomplish the one thing they were created to do: Redistribute wealth. It isn't enough going through droughts, blizzards, government manipulation in the markets, etc, now you have estate taxes so that you'll enjoy knowing an impossible burden will be left for your children thanks to your business success (or survival).
-
Forward planning can get around Estate taxes. Forming a corporation as already been stated for example. Then there is also transfer of ownership of bits & pieces of the operation spread over xxx amt of years.
-
Just more class envy, evil rich farmers, like Stalin in Russia.
I could write a short book on this subject.....but I'll keep it real short.
Think it about it. Once most of the farming is done by corporations, it'll make government take over, control and collectivizing of the farms much easier for the socialist government. Then the starving to death of the unwanted, unproductive, unconnected Bill Ayers 25+ million of useful fools can begin. Mass murder without having to pull the trigger and getting blood on your hands.
With combines costing 300 thousand and up, tractors at 150 a thou and up, land at 5 thou an acre and up, 5 million ain't that much.......and the farmers wife still has to work a job to cover the family with health insurance.
-
Does anyone out there agree that from 1933 to 1989, were really great years for the US? We won a world war, helped suppress the growth of Communism worldwide (under the guise of totalitarian dictatorships), invented the personal computer, broadcast, internet, TV, radio, sent a man to the first other world (moon), etc.
That said, the top marginal tax rate from 1933 to 1989 ranged from 50% - 91% over the entirety of that time. Marginal tax rates this steeply graduated are not fair. I agree 100%. That said, they work. Not only do they work, but they, so far, are the ONLY effective model at raising the middle class and the poor. If you live in Australia in 2012, and you make $180K/yr, you pay over 50% in income taxes. And guess what? People are still getting rich, trying to get rich, and virtually no poverty, with public debt at a cool 26% of GDP.
Steeply graduated marginal tax rates along with effective deductions are the ONLY model that has produced middle class and raised up the poor, both in our own history, and the example in the 170+ countries on earth. This, by the way, is the ONLY measure by which we measure the success of a country. If it wasn't, then India, with lots of billionaires, and over 700 million people living on less than $2US/day, would be a successful country comparatively.
-
The world is much smaller now than it was a few decades ago. Businesses find it much easier to exist in several countries. The rich have no problem moving to places where they can maximize their wealth. We can raise taxes, and watch more and more businesses and wealth move out of our country. Or we can cut spending, lower corporate tax rates, keep overall taxes low, and regain jobs.
-
... If you live in Australia in 2012, and you make $180K/yr, you pay over 50% in income taxes. And guess what? People are still getting rich, trying to get rich, and virtually no poverty, with public debt at a cool 26% of GDP.
...
Most people aren't getting rich here and those that are getting rich won't be for long the way that stupid scarlet witch is running the country.
A fairly good number are happy to be "poor" leeches or the public servants responsible for maintaining the leeches.
Government is also in the process of gutting services for the taxpayers and the defence force and backing down or putting off their promises to the taxpaying class because they promised to spend vastly more on the moochers and looters than they're likely to be earning.
This ain't no utopia just because we pay more taxes - The ONLY reason we've gone anywhere is because of the resources boom. Take that away and we're stuffed.
-
Good Lord, we have another idiot. :whatever:
I don't think things were so great in 1933 or 1943. Maybe you should pick up a book, Bob.
-
So many facts wrong in so few words Bob.
-
Why, people were so thrilled with the great money they were making in 1933 that they were jumping out of windows.
-
Does anyone out there agree that from 1933 to 1989, were really great years for the US?
No!
Next question please.
-
I'd form the corporation.
Most that I know have done that. Stupid libs.
-
1933-1989, that's a weird choice for a golden age. The reason the 50s has been so idealized is because the 30s and 40s were so horrible in multiple ways. The purely-relative peace of the 50s seemed great by comparison, despite the ever-present fear of global nuclear war which was brought to the edge of disaster in the 1960 Berlin Crisis and the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. If you just want to talk about economic prosperity, the 1975-1999 era (From the end of the burden of sustaining the Viet Nam war to the end of the internet boom) would be it, but tax rates moved around quite a bit in that period, though they were a lot lower than at any time from the 30s to the mid-70s.
-
yes sir the greatest periods of economic expansion in the USA in the last 50 yrs came when Kennedy , Reagan & Bush raised taxes. Oh wait, never mind. :whatever:
-
Does anyone out there agree that from 1933 to 1989, were really great years for the US? We won a world war, helped suppress the growth of Communism worldwide (under the guise of totalitarian dictatorships), invented the personal computer, broadcast, internet, TV, radio, sent a man to the first other world (moon), etc.
That said, the top marginal tax rate from 1933 to 1989 ranged from 50% - 91% over the entirety of that time. Marginal tax rates this steeply graduated are not fair. I agree 100%. That said, they work. Not only do they work, but they, so far, are the ONLY effective model at raising the middle class and the poor. If you live in Australia in 2012, and you make $180K/yr, you pay over 50% in income taxes. And guess what? People are still getting rich, trying to get rich, and virtually no poverty, with public debt at a cool 26% of GDP.
Steeply graduated marginal tax rates along with effective deductions are the ONLY model that has produced middle class and raised up the poor, both in our own history, and the example in the 170+ countries on earth. This, by the way, is the ONLY measure by which we measure the success of a country. If it wasn't, then India, with lots of billionaires, and over 700 million people living on less than $2US/day, would be a successful country comparatively.
Financially, the 30's-through the early 60's sucked compared to today.
50 years ago, GDP was just over half a trillion. Today, it's over 30 times higher, while CPI is about 7 times higher than 1962.
Back in "the good old days" of 91-94 percent marginal rates, loopholes abounded, and the income at which said rates kicked in would be over $4 million/year in today's dollars, compared to the marginal rate kicking in at about $400K/year today.
Also consider that 50-75 years ago, the percentage of taxpayers who had either a zero or negative federal tax burden was pretty much ZERO. EVERYONE kicked in. Check the Tax Foundation or the IRS website archives for a listing of brackets. Only in the last 40 years with the advent of the welfare state (thanks to the "Great Society") do we see a significant percentage of the population with a zero/negative federal tax burden, to the point where half effectively pay no taxes or, thanks to EIC, etc., get more back than they pay in.
But you already knew all this, I'm sure.