> > Full Text: Captioned as: Alan Wolfe is director of the
Center for
>
> > One possible explanation of this reversal of fortune is
that even
> > poor Americans someday hope to be rich enough to have an
estate;
> > these days, after all, anyone owning a house in a
desirable
Rubbish. "Anyone" only means "any of my friends." Most people's homes aren't worth nearly $675,000, much less the $2 million exemption that will be in force for a couple in 2006.
> > before you die. But once you are dead, there are only
two options:
> > It can be left to those you designate, usually your
children, or it
> > can be left to everyone in the form of general tax
revenue.
No. The charitable deduction is open-ended.
> > Americans prefer strengthening ties among people they
know to the
> > alternatives of either looking out for no one or looking
out for
> > everyone. Estate tax repeal corresponds to the basic
moral instincts
> > of most Americans. That is why, unlike tax-cutting
across the board,
> > it is a winning political issue.
Speculative.
It is true that the unpopularity of the tax grossly outstrips its actual incidence.
There's an important justification for the tax that is distinct from the class warfare appeal cited by Fitch. It is that the E&G tax hits some income that would otherwise never be taxed (tho it double taxes some income too). The individual income tax exempts income as it is accrued in the form of capital gains or increased value of a business or form. When the asset is sold, a tax applies but at reduced rates and with assorted preferences; even so, mere deferral of a tax is equivalent to a tax reduction. Only an estate tax (or inheritance tax) would hit these untaxed accumulations. Failure to do so is blatantly unfair to those earning other types of income. I always use this argument first because I think it means more to people than restraining the accumulation of great wealth. In the latter regard, the tax is pretty weak, tho not insignificant.
mbs