Steinbrenners heirs save millions in taxes
- Thread starter pd1
- Start date
Yes, I guess it'll have to because if it's any more than that, they'll just have to sell it...right?
So, middle sized farms have the green light on taxing it away from the family.
And oh so sorry if you're successful and have a large family farm, but you guys only have to sell part of the land...and you can just keep on truckin.
So, middle sized farms have the green light on taxing it away from the family.
And oh so sorry if you're successful and have a large family farm, but you guys only have to sell part of the land...and you can just keep on truckin.
I think the argument for estate taxes has less to do with "the dependants didn't earn it, so let's tax it" but has more to do with the idea of limiting generational wealth and power to continue for centuries - so we don't have the same lineage consistently in power moving forward. (think Kennedy's for example - which shows that it doesn't work very well)
I'm sure another big reason is to spread the wealth.... I would expect Obama to subjet anything over $250K to the tax, as that is his magic threshold for "richness"....... Yea, I know he was originally talking about income levels....
Off topic, but I've never understood why the tax brackets stop at $250K - everyone pays the same rate above that. Why aren't there more levels, with increasing margical tax rates? Like 40% at $500K, 50% at $1M, etc....... Why is $250K the magic number???
Proper estate planning could help in this matter. Anyway, the marginal rate for a 5 million estate with a 3.5 million exemption and 45% rate in place is roughly 14%. I can live with that for now.
I would certainly prefer this than to raise income tax on anyone earning less than $300K
- Feb 26, 2001
- 13,593
- 164
- 63
- Feb 26, 2001
- 13,593
- 164
- 63
You get money from your customers that's already been taxed who got it from their customers and it was taxed and then you pay employees who get taxed and then they buy stuff and the people they buy stuff from gets taxed. . . .
- Feb 26, 2001
- 13,593
- 164
- 63
....but George Bush left Obama with a great budget. Thats what I keep reading. :shrug:
Yep Turf--farms and small businesses are a couple of biggies under this as most do not have lots of cash and have to liquidate property and business to pay taxes.
How many times do you have to tax a dollar and the gov still operate in the red--when you earn it-spend it or save it.
Stamps going up-- cause post office billions in red again--and then they have convinced "some" to believe they will "save " money by taking over healthcare.:nooo:
if that`s your situation,you have my condolences...not much different than armed robbery,imo...
you work your whole fricking life to build something to leave to your children,and some g.d. bureaucrats that never worked in the private sector decide you made too much...
but give em credit,guys...they`re shrewd...and patient...these mofos targeted specific areas of our society long ago...they knew exactly where to strike.... journalism, education and entertainment...it's taken 2-3 generations but's its paid off. .....
now we`re in the same situation that failed in europe...they`re fighting to exricate themselves...and obama is fighting to follow their failed policies...to sink our economy...kill the private sector...
the bigger the govt gets, the more the politicians and bureaucrats can skim off it... the more they skim off the govt, the bigger they want it to become.....
Last edited:
A lot of generalizations in this thread, but essentially a good discussion on the topic. One thing that struck me in one of the earlier posts... something about what has the government done for all of us, compared to what the Steinbrenner heirs would do for us. HONESTLY, how many of us actually think that the Steinbrenner heirs would do more good for the country overall than the government would?
There is always a comparison about charity and taxation. I've always (PERSONALLY) considered part of my taxes to be a kind of charity. I also consider my taxes to take care of countless areas that make my life good, safe, and improve my community and country. I think taxes ensure the way of life that I have come to enjoy and count on. I also know that many who do contribute to charity do it specifically to avoid paying more in taxes.
NOTHING is absolute. I would wager that some of the Steinbrenner heirs and subsequent family members are not worthy of having that kind of money to work with. I also know that Steinbrenner has taken advantage of the systems in place in this country (and in baseball, for sure) to enrich himself personally, at the expense of the rest of this country (and baseball, for sure).
The wealthy have more opportunity, more options for increasing their wealth, simply because of their control of vast sums of capital. More ways to avoid responsibility, and increase their own personal scenarios. Is that wrong? Probably not. It's the system we live in. It was established long ago, by wealthy white men who left another country to try to establish their own methods for making more money (essentially). The establishment of America was designed to support and protect the wealth of those that owned land, and were white, and were male.
Not much has really changed in subsequent years. Is our government (the elected leaders) representative of our population? Not even close. And those that have benefited the most from this country are the ones that are currently squawking the most. Those that have enriched themselves BECAUSE of how this country is run and maintained, are bitching about how this country is run and maintained. These rich white men left another country specifically because they did not feel represented or valued by their society. They came here, and established a country that ensured they were the only ones that were represented or valued.
And, so it goes...
There is always a comparison about charity and taxation. I've always (PERSONALLY) considered part of my taxes to be a kind of charity. I also consider my taxes to take care of countless areas that make my life good, safe, and improve my community and country. I think taxes ensure the way of life that I have come to enjoy and count on. I also know that many who do contribute to charity do it specifically to avoid paying more in taxes.
NOTHING is absolute. I would wager that some of the Steinbrenner heirs and subsequent family members are not worthy of having that kind of money to work with. I also know that Steinbrenner has taken advantage of the systems in place in this country (and in baseball, for sure) to enrich himself personally, at the expense of the rest of this country (and baseball, for sure).
The wealthy have more opportunity, more options for increasing their wealth, simply because of their control of vast sums of capital. More ways to avoid responsibility, and increase their own personal scenarios. Is that wrong? Probably not. It's the system we live in. It was established long ago, by wealthy white men who left another country to try to establish their own methods for making more money (essentially). The establishment of America was designed to support and protect the wealth of those that owned land, and were white, and were male.
Not much has really changed in subsequent years. Is our government (the elected leaders) representative of our population? Not even close. And those that have benefited the most from this country are the ones that are currently squawking the most. Those that have enriched themselves BECAUSE of how this country is run and maintained, are bitching about how this country is run and maintained. These rich white men left another country specifically because they did not feel represented or valued by their society. They came here, and established a country that ensured they were the only ones that were represented or valued.
And, so it goes...
Dogs and Turf, I used to agree with you on the family farm, but after seeing all the subsidies they have been given, I'm not so sure its not time for the government to get some of their money back. Click on this link-- it will take you to your state. You can then enter your county. The farmers in my area are living much better than I am and receiving many thousands of dollars for free. 90% or more inherited their farms, and work maybe 6 weeks out of the year, but constantly bitch about not making any money. They can drive their 1 ton ford 30 miles to town to drink coffee, but yet they are not making any money.
Heres the link: Do you think they deserve what they are getting? I won't hold my breath.
http://farm.ewg.org/
Heres the link: Do you think they deserve what they are getting? I won't hold my breath.
http://farm.ewg.org/
It's not his situation. No family farm has ever been lost due to estate taxes.
Work your whole life to build something (i.e. increase it's value) and not once have you been taxed on that increase in value.
10 point program of Communism (Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifesto )
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of the population over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.
Let's go to number three on that list. "Abolition of all rights of inheritance." So, what does the death tax do? It abolishes the right of inheritance to at least a portion of one's estate. The higher the death tax percentage, the more the right of inheritance is dissolved, and the better our progressive friends like it. Lower the rates and they scream bloody murder. :0074
Also BBC is right about one thing: I don't have a farm.
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of the population over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.
Let's go to number three on that list. "Abolition of all rights of inheritance." So, what does the death tax do? It abolishes the right of inheritance to at least a portion of one's estate. The higher the death tax percentage, the more the right of inheritance is dissolved, and the better our progressive friends like it. Lower the rates and they scream bloody murder. :0074
Also BBC is right about one thing: I don't have a farm.
I know taxes are necessary, however they should be fair. I am a proponent of no death taxes and flat tax across the board taxes no exemptions on all income, no matter if you make 500 per year or 500 million per year, fair is fair, everyone should pay the same rate no matter of income. don't get me started on property taxes, sales taxes, etc...
Dog, why didn't G Bush reduce spending when he gave out the biggest wealth distrubtion in our history with his tax cut which took a 500 dollar billion hit to the deficit and created nothing called a job?. Dogs with the largest wealth distrubution in the history of our country those eight years you as well as me, were on the wrong side of that deal. Why after getting screwed by this shift of wealth you still feel you were on the right side and still stick up for those tax cuts that were not funded by spending cuts and took a 5 hundred billion dollar hit on the deficit? I find it truly amazing that u support these cuts but in fact they fucked u right up the ass. Are u just this ignorant and backwards or do u just like to vote against ur best interest over and over again?
