Standard taxation. I am only opposed in this thread to estate taxation. If I had to agree to that at all it would not exceed the max tax rate the deceased ever paid.

One Post talking some sense. Let's eliminate income tax altogether and go VAT!

Well it makes sense to tax consumption over productive activities, but we have to use a mechanism to eliminate the severely regressive nature of sales taxes.

"Standard taxation" isn't a thing.

Then what are current income and sales taxes.

Then what are current income and sales taxes.

I thought the issue was economic efficiency

How do you propose we fund our governments at the state local and federal level?

Child #1 won't be able to live those 18 years on 6 million bucks? That's 333k a year, or roughly 480,000 a year with a 30% tax rate if the parent was alive making money.

I already said that it currently would be enough to do well on. It's more about the morality of the difference I mentioned and how fair it is.

No, you said that Child #1 wouldn't be supported financially because of the estate tax. I simply pointed out that Child #1 would be supported financially with at least 6 million dollars.

The estate tax is an interesting moral dilemma. Should the very act of dying remove your claim to the direction of the money you would have owned had you simply lived? Here is an example:
1) 30 year old has a child, and dies 6 months later.
2) 30 year old has a child, and dies 60 years later.

Why isn't the child in #1 not entitled to the 18 years of financial support that the child in #2 got simply because a parent died?

In reality, that's pretty much what we have now, but I'm more talking in the abstract. If a man who lives to 90 gets to control the money he has for 90 years why does a man who lives to 30 not get to do the same?

That is why I agree with denis that it is more fair to simply tax wealth accumulation better rather than the arbitrary idea that your family deserves the money less because you died.

In reality, that's pretty much what we have now, but I'm more talking in the abstract. If a man who lives to 90 gets to control the money he has for 90 years why does a man who lives to 30 not get to do the same?

So your point is that it's unfair that some people live till 90 and other people only live till 30?

Hard to disagree with that.

I'd say that if you ranked the 50 most unfair things about that inequality, the estate tax wouldn't even be in the "receiving votes" category.

You following me?

Good to see Baby McCown is now a fiscal conservative.

In reality, that's pretty much what we have now, but I'm more talking in the abstract. If a man who lives to 90 gets to control the money he has for 90 years why does a man who lives to 30 not get to do the same?

That is why I agree with denis that it is more fair to simply tax wealth accumulation better rather than the arbitrary idea that your family deserves the money less because you died.

Bmac stands for nothing other than annoyance.

Also, and exemption for people who die who still have children is "what we pretty much have now" is inaccurate.

The estate tax is an inclusive tax, so it impacts someone the same way regardless if they have children or not.

One Post, why such a strong feeling about taxes?

I think if you look at what I wrote in this thread I haven't really expressed a strong opinion or feeling, I've really just identified what I think are inaccuracies or less than precise comments.

Whatever you want to call it though, level of interest is probably heightened because I do tax work professionally.

Millionaire Trump Adviser Says Americans Can 'Buy A New Car' With $1,000 Tax Cut

President Donald Trump’s chief economic adviser — Gary Cohn, the former Goldman Sachs president worth an estimated $266 million — appears to be completely clueless about what the average American family spends on a car, vacation or home improvement project.

Hours after falsely claiming that “the wealthy are not getting a tax cut” under Trump’s tax reform plan, Cohn appeared at a White House press briefing and spoke to what middle-class Americans have to look forward to. Based on the administration’s assumptions, he said, a typical family that has two children and earns $100,000 per year can expect annual tax savings of approximately $1,000.

“If we allow a family to keep another thousand dollars of their income, what does that mean?” he asked. “They can renovate their kitchen. They can buy a new car. They can take a family vacation. They can increase their lifestyle.”

The rather tone-deaf comment came in response to a question about how Trump — who could see savings of more than $125 million per year under his own plan — can claim the proposal doesn’t benefit him personally.

Dodging the question entirely, Cohn said: “I think what the American people are concerned about is their financial position. I think what they’re concerned about is when they go to work every week and they get their paycheck at the end of the week, how much do they get to keep? How much goes in their pocket versus how much goes to the government?”

“Our tax plan is aimed to return more income back to hard-working Americans,” he added.

In an interview on Thursday with ABC’s “Good Morning America,” Cohn falsely claimed that Trump’s plan doesn’t offer a tax cut to the wealthy. He also said he “can’t guarantee” that certain middle-class families — the very people the Trump team says its plan aims to help — wouldn’t see their taxes increase.

“There’s an exception to every rule,” Cohn told George Stephanopoulos. “I can’t guarantee anything. You can always find a unique family somewhere.”

That's silly. He was obviously talking about making down-payments.

That's silly. He was obviously talking about making down-payments.