# Romney: Let's get rid of estate taxes because dodging them is too much work and too pricey **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [September 27, 2012, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-lets-get-rid-of-estate-taxes-because-dodging-them-is-too-much-work-and-too-pricey/636030 "2012-09-27T15:35:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2012, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-lets-get-rid-of-estate-taxes-because-dodging-them-is-too-much-work-and-too-pricey/636030/61 "2012-09-27T20:04:43Z")
> [@Bridget\_Burke](#): > > Just how many multi-millionaires with dementia have heirs unwilling to help? I’m sure the offspring, out of the kindness of their hearts, will gladly find expert lawyers & accountants to ensure that as much as possible of the estate will be passed on. After the death of the person occurs is often too late. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2012, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-lets-get-rid-of-estate-taxes-because-dodging-them-is-too-much-work-and-too-pricey/636030/62 "2012-09-27T20:07:58Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > I asked you first. What is this, fourth grade? :rolleyes: If you have an argument to make for a rate \<100% based on something more than a vague claim to a “basic human right”, and in spite of your party’s preachings, you have every opportunity to make it. Any time at all. > [@](#): > > “Let the market decide who adds value and reward them accordingly. Let those people keep their wealth and pass it on to their heirs.” And the heirs? Are the heirs subject to the same “market”, the same pressures and decisions you hold so dear as are others who chose less-wealthy parents? You know they are not. So what follows from that realization? ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2012, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-lets-get-rid-of-estate-taxes-because-dodging-them-is-too-much-work-and-too-pricey/636030/63 "2012-09-27T20:09:02Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > What’s a death tax? It’s what people who are opposed to estate taxes call them. Just like people on either side of the abortion debate are either “pro-choice” or “pro-life” people on either side of this debate call it the “death tax” or the “estate tax”. Consider your ignorance fought. Free of charge. > [@](#): > > I thought we were talking about the Estate Tax, you know, so that rich people cannot avoid taxes by gifting away all their possessions with no consequence yet still have de facto control over it. Whatever are you talking about? Care to state this clearly and make an argument that I can respond to rather than this throw-away line? ---
**Author:** ![Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/96bed5/32.png) [@Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Patty_O_Furniture)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2012, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-lets-get-rid-of-estate-taxes-because-dodging-them-is-too-much-work-and-too-pricey/636030/64 "2012-09-27T20:14:30Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > Just like people on either side of the abortion debate are either “pro-choice” or “pro-life” people on either side of this debate call it the “death tax” or the “estate tax”. > > Consider your ignorance fought. Free of charge. And it was worth every penny. I think a better analogy would be calling the pro-choice folks “pro-abortion”. ---
**Author:** ![Honesty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f04885/32.png) [@Honesty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Honesty)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2012, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-lets-get-rid-of-estate-taxes-because-dodging-them-is-too-much-work-and-too-pricey/636030/65 "2012-09-27T20:15:09Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > If those things were taxed at 55% then you are right: Many might think there is no point. You’d see less people buying vacation homes, investing in the stock market and holding down jobs. Did you know taxes were much higher than 55% a half century ago? Stop whining, the previous generation didn’t. You know, if anyone, including yourself, feel taxes are too high: there’s nothing stopping you from going to the Secretary of State and renouncing your citizenship. _Nothing in the world is stopping you_. If the deficit is truly an “issue” as Republicans are making it to be then the government ought to squeeze the wealth of the rich to assuage this terrible, all-encompassing “problem”. - Honesty ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2012, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-lets-get-rid-of-estate-taxes-because-dodging-them-is-too-much-work-and-too-pricey/636030/66 "2012-09-27T20:16:50Z")
> [@Yllaria](#): > > Life makes the unprepared pay in many, many ways. Make a will before you’re senile. Plan your estate as you accumulate it. The estate tax can’t be made into a safeguard for procrastinators, people who are afraid of lawyers, people who can’t make a decision, etc. And I say this as someone who has more than one dead relative who said “I want you to have . . .” while writing no will, so that all of their property went first to a recent spouse and then to his/her heirs. > > **shrug** Their choice. I can respect this attitude. “A fool and their money were lucky enough to get together in the first place.” - Gordon Gekko. But, ultimately, I disagree. Why not set a tax policy that is fair? If we need more income then raise it using other methods which aren’t so easily avoided. Set a tax that is paid by all, not just those lacking good lawyers. > [@](#): > > Nitpick, here. **You are paying for the highway system.** Agreed. In that regard the analogy doesn’t work. But, you get my point. Why this hostility to passing wealth along from one generation to the next? It seems that some posters are fine with that on a global level but adamantly opposed to it at an individual or family level. It has nothing to do with raising revenue or good tax policy. It’s much more visceral. They seem to hate that there are winners and losers in life and want to force a fairness upon everyone, even if it results in the loss of family owned businesses, farms, estates, houses and money. People should be able to pass on their wealth. We should be trying to get everyone in this country to be wealthy, not ensuring everyone is equal but poor. ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2012, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-lets-get-rid-of-estate-taxes-because-dodging-them-is-too-much-work-and-too-pricey/636030/67 "2012-09-27T20:20:44Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > Set a tax that is paid by all, not just those lacking good lawyers. Whatever happened to personal responsibility? ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2012, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-lets-get-rid-of-estate-taxes-because-dodging-them-is-too-much-work-and-too-pricey/636030/68 "2012-09-27T20:22:56Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > What is this, fourth grade? So, you refuse to answer? I have answered you. My position on the death tax overall is the same as Romney’s. I’ll even post it again so you don’t have to go back to page one to read it: > [@](#): > > Eliminate the Death Tax > Government should not tax the same income over and over again. The federal > estate tax, also known as the “death tax,” does exactly that by taxing the wealth that > Americans have been able to accumulate after already paying taxes throughout their > working lives. This tax also creates a series of perverse incentives that encourages > the most complicated and convoluted tax-avoidance schemes at tremendous cost > to all involved. Finally, it can have catastrophic effects when a small family-owned > business, in the course of passing to the next generation, creates tax liabilities that > the family cannot meet without breaking up the business itself. > The federal estate tax has become a political football in recent years. The tax > was temporarily eliminated in 2010, was reinstated in a last-minute deal between > Congress and President Obama at a top rate of 35 percent for 2011 and 2012, and is > slated to bounce up to 55 percent in 2013. As president, Mitt Romney will work to > eliminate the tax permanently. All told, the negative effects on savings, investment, > and job creation show how pernicious an estate tax can be. For those reasons, it > should be stricken from the books as soon as possible. So, I have put up. It’s time for you to put up or shut up. > [@](#): > > And the heirs? Are the heirs subject to the same “market”, the same pressures and decisions you hold so dear as are others who chose less-wealthy parents? Yes. Yes they are. According to your logic, people who inherit wealth will be entitled, arrogant, “lazy little shits”. So, they’d probably be at a disadvantage, right? ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2012, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-lets-get-rid-of-estate-taxes-because-dodging-them-is-too-much-work-and-too-pricey/636030/69 "2012-09-27T20:26:13Z")
> [@Honesty](#): > > Did you know taxes were much higher than 55% a half century ago? Yes. I did. Did you know that although the rates were that high no one actually paid that much because of the way taxes worked back then? > [@](#): > > You know, if anyone, including yourself, feel taxes are too high: there’s nothing stopping you from going to the Secretary of State and renouncing your citizenship. So anyone who disagrees with you on tax policy has to leave the country. That’s an interesting mindset you’ve got there. If someone wants there to be zero death tax, like Romney and myself, certainly we should be kicked out. What about if someone wants the rate to be 50% instead of 55%? Should they be dropped out of a C-130 cargo jet over the Atlantic too? Sheesh. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2012, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-lets-get-rid-of-estate-taxes-because-dodging-them-is-too-much-work-and-too-pricey/636030/70 "2012-09-27T20:27:11Z")
An important point which often seems ignored in debate about the estate tax is that a very large portion of a very rich estate is likely to have the form of _ **unrealized capital gains** _. That is effectively income (or “paper” income) which _ **has never been taxed** _ and will not be taxed except via the estate tax. (If you buy Apple at $20 per share, die when it’s worth $100 per share, and your heirs sell it for $110, they will pay tax _only on the $10 profit since their inheritance_.) One can argue that the computation of estate tax is inappropriate – it doesn’t distinguish gains from cost – but, since so much wealth has the form of unrealized capital gains, it shows much ignorance to argue that the estate tax is double taxation. To the contrary, without it, much capital gains _escape any taxation whatsoever._ ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2012, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-lets-get-rid-of-estate-taxes-because-dodging-them-is-too-much-work-and-too-pricey/636030/71 "2012-09-27T20:28:52Z")
> [@Patty\_O\_Furniture](#): > > And it was worth every penny. > > I think a better analogy would be calling the pro-choice folks “pro-abortion”. That analogy doesn’t work because calling it the “death tax” isn’t insulting to the group of people on the other side of the issue. It’s a framing of the issue itself. Just like “pro-choice” and “pro-life” is a framing of that issue. In any case, even if you don’t like it that term is here to stay. About half the people in this country disagree with you on this issue and they’re going to call this tax the “death tax” for the rest of your life. Might as well get used to it. Arguing with it is like pissing into the wind. ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2012, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-lets-get-rid-of-estate-taxes-because-dodging-them-is-too-much-work-and-too-pricey/636030/72 "2012-09-27T20:31:23Z")
**septimus** , I agree with you. That is an issue. Check out post #40. ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2012, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-lets-get-rid-of-estate-taxes-because-dodging-them-is-too-much-work-and-too-pricey/636030/73 "2012-09-27T20:31:53Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > I address that in the next sentence: > > “Let the market decide who adds value and reward them accordingly. Let those people keep their wealth and pass it on to their heirs.” > > Do you not read the whole thing? > > Why take away the wealth every generation? Just for fairness? Then we’re back to the roads and bridges analogy. Generation Y didn’t build them so why do we let them use them to drive to work? I quoted the whole thing, so yes, I did read the whole thing. But what you say addresses my point, really doesn’t. First you’ve got the standard the-market-will-reward-those-who-deserve-it bit, which is fine. And from that you leap to let-them-pass-it-on-to-their-heirs. I just don’t see any connection between those two statements. You seemed to put them together as if one would reinforce the next, but I see them as contradictory. What value have the heirs provided that they are being rewarded for? If the market is so good rewarding those who add value, what good does it serve to exempt the heirs from the market? I never said the wealth should be taken away, for fairness or any other reason. I just thought that your premise contradicted your conclusion. ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2012, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-lets-get-rid-of-estate-taxes-because-dodging-them-is-too-much-work-and-too-pricey/636030/74 "2012-09-27T20:32:51Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > Government taxes transactions. Families moving money around isn’t something that’s normally taxed. That’s true, it’s not normally taxed; estate taxes only affect a very small percentage of people. So, the question is: why those people? I agree that being able to pass along one’s wealth to one’s heirs is a right with a lot of historical basis. But that used to include the right for the king to make his son king as well, and we don’t allow that sort of power transfer any more. Extremely large amounts of money translate into power as well, and part of maintaining a free and democratic society is limiting the accumulation of dynastic wealth. Certainly, we shouldn’t take 100%, just as we shouldn’t tax income 100%. And perhaps the exclusion should be 10 million instead of 5, since it is possible to be land-rich and cash-poor and have to sell the family farm. Maybe the rate should be 20% for the first billion and only go up after there? There are lots of reasonable discussions to have about this. Capitalism is awesome. But it tends to help the winners win more. There are so many things, from network effects, to class, to economies of scale that help people from rich families remain rich and increase their riches. The few things we have to help out the poor (like a progressive taxation structure and an estate tax) certainly aren’t tipping the balance the other way. They’re just putting some minor brakes on the unbalancing of society. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2012, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-lets-get-rid-of-estate-taxes-because-dodging-them-is-too-much-work-and-too-pricey/636030/75 "2012-09-27T20:40:03Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > When you use the phrase “death tax” I can’t take you seriously. It isn’t paid by the dead, it’s paid by the living who get a windfall. Its actually paid by the estate not the heirs. > [@](#): > > Give each heir say a million dollar exception but close all the dodges. The exemption is $5 million per estate right now. > [@Debaser](#): > > It would be if property taxes were easily avoidable and only a few senile people were actually affected by them. But it affects a lot more than that. There is only so much you can legally and effectively shelter from the estate tax. This is why so many heirs want to get rid of it. If it were really just a matter of legal fees, they wouldn’t have a problem with it but in the end, they do get nailed by it. > [@Debaser](#): > > I was being a bit hyperbolic. But, only a bit. there is a big difference between 55 (its 35% now) and 100% that’s more hyperbole, thats a distrotion that allows you to use an argument that wouldn’t work if you used the actual facts. > [@](#): > > However, it is going to rise to 55% next year, which is an absurdly high rate. We are in one of the lowest tax environments we’ve had in a century and I still hear people acting like we NEED tax cuts and some relief from these HIGH tax rates. So when I hear people cmoplaining that the tax rates of teh Clinton era are too high, you just lose credibility. BTW, there is almost no way that we see the estate tax lapse to teh default 55% rate next year. That is one issue that Republicans will not obstruct. > [@Debaser](#): > > True, one is a common good. But that has nothing to do with the point of the analogy. I made the analogy in response to **BobLibDem** claiming that people inheriting estates are getting a “windfall”. The ownership of the highways doesn’t change hands. They belong to the government that we all pay taxes to. If you personally owned a highway, then I would support an estate tax on your transfer of the highways to your heirs. > [@](#): > > It’s a cornerstone of human civilization that we as families and as a society work to build things that we pass along to our heirs to own and improve. As a society we do it with roads and bridges, as families we do it with businesses and homes. The analogy is fine. Societies are not subject to the estate tax, people are. Those highways are not your property taht you pass down to your kids. If the government wanted to tear up tehb highways in your area and replace them with railroad tracks, they wouldn’t have to pay you to do it. > [@Peremensoe](#): > > Personal wealth has already been taxed as income. (There’s room for improving the rates and structures of that.) Not always. > [@](#): > > I know of a large old family farm that was broken up and sold to developers because the family had no great money when the patriarch died… Cite please. > [@Debaser](#): > > Who are you to decide who “deserves” their wealth? Governments have proven very bad at this over the years, you know. > > Let the market decide who adds value and reward them accordingly. Let those people keep their wealth and pass it on to their heirs. I don’t agree taht the market is particularly good at allocating wealth but its better than any other method I can think of. I don’t see why the ability to transfer that wealth tax free is a natural extension of that idea. > [@](#): > > Yes, I agree that capital gains and other taxes should be paid upon liquidation of the asset. So, if I inherit a stock portfolio worth three million that was purchased for two million I will owe taxes on one million if I liquidated it. Or I could keep it but would still have to pay eventually when I did sell. > > Problem solved. No need for an estate tax. Now you are talking about a different method of taxation. You’re talking about a transferred basis (or a basis of zero where basis cannot be established). I would prefer a mark to market at death. Of course this does little to reduce dynastic accumulations of wealth, which seems to be important to some people. > [@Debaser](#): > > I’m not sure. I go back and forth on that. For instance, with someones home it isn’t right for them to owe huge amounts of taxes on it when their grandmother bought it back in the 1950’s for $20,000. It puts people in a position to have to keep the home or owe huge taxes if they sell. But they’ll have a lot of money to pay those taxes if they sell. > [@](#): > > and not some arbitrary death tax of 55% that you are slapping people with. You make it sounds like we just inveted this “arbitrary” tax to “slap” people with. The estate tax is almost 100 years old. Its only 3 years younger than the income tax. > [@](#): > > Let people hand the cash over for free. I still don’t understand why a $5 million exemption isn’t enough? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2012, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-lets-get-rid-of-estate-taxes-because-dodging-them-is-too-much-work-and-too-pricey/636030/76 "2012-09-27T20:42:07Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > **septimus** , I agree with you. That is an issue. Check out post #40. So why can’t we have mark to market at death taxed on the decdant’s final tax return and a modest yet progressive estate tax on anything over some large exemption. ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2012, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-lets-get-rid-of-estate-taxes-because-dodging-them-is-too-much-work-and-too-pricey/636030/77 "2012-09-27T20:42:38Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > I never said the wealth should be taken away, for fairness or any other reason. I just thought that your premise contradicted your conclusion. Fair enough. I think one follows from the other. It’s a question of who in our society our wealth belongs to. Who owns the results of our lifetime’s of hard work? The state? To take away after we die so our heirs can start again? Or our own families? That the market works to reward people and that is a powerful force for good. It’s a lot better than a government deciding who gets the wealth. To me, allowing inheritances reinforces that concept. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2012, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-lets-get-rid-of-estate-taxes-because-dodging-them-is-too-much-work-and-too-pricey/636030/78 "2012-09-27T20:45:28Z")
If I pay you ten million dollars for a widget, you are taxed on that money. If I bequeath ten million dollars to you, you should be taxed on that money. Being upset at the estate tax as some kind of double-taxation, shows a misunderstanding of how taxes work. Aside from that the estate tax has a good societal reason for existing. It weakens dynasties. ---
**Author:** ![Honesty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f04885/32.png) [@Honesty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Honesty)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2012, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-lets-get-rid-of-estate-taxes-because-dodging-them-is-too-much-work-and-too-pricey/636030/79 "2012-09-27T20:49:57Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > Yes. I did. > > Did you know that although the rates were that high no one actually paid that much because of the way taxes worked back then? > > So anyone who disagrees with you on tax policy has to leave the country. That’s an interesting mindset you’ve got there. > > If someone wants there to be zero death tax, like Romney and myself, certainly we should be kicked out. What about if someone wants the rate to be 50% instead of 55%? Should they be dropped out of a C-130 cargo jet over the Atlantic too? > > Sheesh. LOL. Dude, no one is trying to kick you or Romney out of the country. Frankly, I’d much rather kick out the undocmented workers and illegal residents. I’m pointing out that there are options to protect your investments. Didn’t Eduardo from Facebook pull a similar maneuver? I don’t know what would be a fair rate on estate taxes but let me pose this as an Economics question. I’m not an economist so please correct me if the general thrust of the question needs to be refined: In general, wealthy tend to be savers which does not contribute to the economy as much as those who spend such as the poor and middle-class. For example, it is my understanding that Bush’s first economic stimulus had the most palpable impact on the economy since he put money directly in the hands of the poor and middle-class. This is due, in part, to amount of times the money is taxed as it moves in circulation. It is also my understanding high savings rate of the wealthy contributes to inflation because their economic activity is either not taxed or taxed at a proportional lower rate. With that said, it seems reasonable to assume that abolishing the estate tax would inexorably keep the total nation’s _personal_ wealth recycling among several dozen wealthy families with very little trickle down. I’m curious as to what you think would be the repercussions of abolishing the estate tax. - Honesty ---
**Author:** ![Debaser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3da27b/32.png) [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2012, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-lets-get-rid-of-estate-taxes-because-dodging-them-is-too-much-work-and-too-pricey/636030/80 "2012-09-27T20:53:19Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > there is a big difference between 55 (its 35% now) and 100% that’s more hyperbole, thats a distrotion that allows you to use an argument that wouldn’t work if you used the actual facts. At the time I wrote this I was assuming that people would be in the thread arguing for a 100% death tax. I’ve seen it before on the SDMB. I’m honestly surprised no one has. **ElvisL1ves** seemed to be making that argument out of the gate, but now won’t commit to giving me an actual number. Maybe someone else far left will come along and make an argument for it. But, you’re right. I shouldn’t have assumed the positions of my opponents and should have responded to the actual posts of those I was debating. Since then I’ve been doing so. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-lets-get-rid-of-estate-taxes-because-dodging-them-is-too-much-work-and-too-pricey/636030.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/romney-lets-get-rid-of-estate-taxes-because-dodging-them-is-too-much-work-and-too-pricey/636030.md?page=5)