What makes the estate tax so interesting, of course, is that it's about our mortality as much as it's about our money. Maybe this is obvious, but it strikes me that in the case of estates, people are amassing their fortunes with the specific goal of influencing events beyond their deaths -- seeking, in some fanatical capitalistic sense, immortality. And while calling it fanatical may be incendiary, and human nature obviously plays a role, there is something vaguely distasteful about it. Didn't Martin Luther's revolution involve just this sort of revulsion?
I'm not, of course, saying the earthly results of this behavior are always bad; in fact they're probably usually for the best. But at the same time, I don't see any reason why we should create a special incentive for people to use their wealth in this way. Yet this is exactly the state of things sans estate tax -- wealth transfers are taxed during our lifetimes, so by contrast not taxing them in death amounts to an incentive. IMHO, our tax policy should be abyss-neutral.
One of my favorite scenes from one of my favorite movies, Chinatown, deals with this phenomenon. "Fanatical" and "distasteful" are mild terms for what John Huston's character is engaged in.
Jake Gittes: Why are you doing it? How much better can you eat? What can you buy that you can't already afford?
Noah Cross: The future, Mr. Gitts! The future!
Hmmm. I will have to see that to know what you're talking about, I guess!
Yes, it's one of the all-time greats, though it certainly isn't an uplifting sort of story. Highest recommendation.
I'd like to point out that capital gains in an estate would still be taxed when the estate is liquidated. See:
http://www.janegalt.net/blog/archives/005285.html
Post a comment