Tuesday, April 14, 2009

the estate tax

rather than discussing the in and outs of the estate tax from a political perspective, i am truly only interested in the moral question it involves. is it wrong or right to levy an estate tax, (or, death tax?)

the argument on one side is based on a basic premise. that premise suggests that a person's earned money should be theirs to do with as they please.

the argument on the other side is a bit more nuanced. it involves several concepts and may be a bit difficult to grasp on the whole. first and foremost would be the idea that since everyone dies and cannot take any material with them when they pass, they should not have the ability to control funds after they leave.

piggy-backing on that idea would be the idea that every man should make his own way in the world without advantage. while members of the wealthy class may bristle at that idea, a substantial case can be built based on the evidence of the children of advantage. it seems the less people have to work in their lives, the less balanced people they make and the less real value they are to society. this idea will resonate with some people and it will not resonate with others. (i would defer to voltaire and born rich to make the point.)

also playing in this equation is the idea that individuals should be of some value to society. this is only true if there is a certain implicit agreement among countrymen. in the u.s. the laws would suggest this agreement does exist. doing business with others is encouraged. all forms of social interaction, too. a man can certainly go off and live a hermit's life but even then the laws check him l'est he show anti-social behaviors.

this issue, whether there should be an estate tax and/or how heavy a tax it should be, is essentially an example of class warfare.

in that way it can be boiled down to a few precise points.
  • it takes money to make money.
  • opposition to the estate tax is an attempt by those who have money to hold on to their money even through generations.
  • upward mobility is at an all-time low in the u.s.
  • americans have always agreed on the principle of majority rules, which essentially means that if the huge majority of people who are not wealthy agree in principle with the estate tax and the idea that transferring wealth across generations should be allowed on a limited basis.
as an alternative i would think capping the amount of money transferable down to the next generation at $3 million would be fair. that is a great start for one or more persons on their lives and any greater amount of wealth that would move into the tax base would be a boon to the country.

the estate tax is a complicated issue but it is worthy of any one's time to understand all that is involved and at stake. personally, i think support for the estate tax is simply the right thing to do.

1 comment:

Unknown said...

Your analysis ignores the idea that people have families in an effort to see their progeny "have it easier" than they did, or "more opportunities" than they did. Why should the State take a portion of a citizens net worth at the end of their life, simply because they died? Does everybody have to earn 40% more than they thought in order to leave behind a legacy?

Our tax laws and other civil laws consider the special relationships within the family currently and the rights of the family group are given special consideration. Why should this be ignored when considering the estate tax?

I think easier arguments could be made that the government spends too much money and and attempts to manage way more than it can afford. As a result, more money is sought after through the system of taxation.

In general, I think that taxes should be carefully considered before being implemented.