Ron Wyden is killing little old ladies
The way the U.S. Senate has handled federal taxes over the last decade -- and particularly over the last two years -- is nothing short of scandalous. Among many other goofball moves, the Senate has insured that the federal estate tax, which is imposed on rich people's fortunes when they die, went out of existence for this year only, but will rise again come January 1.
It's a long story, but it's clear where the fault for this insanity lies. The House voted late last year to avoid the miracle tax-free-year scenario by simply extending the estate tax through 2010, but the ne'er-do-wells in the Senate went home for the holidays without seeing the job through. They had a million excuses, but the main problem was that they're mostly all filthy rich themselves, and in the pockets of people who are even filthier richer.
And so now we're faced with the situation in which if a wealthy American dies in the next two months, the federal government will take none of his or her fortune, whereas if that individual dies single or widowed one second after midnight on New Year's Day, Uncle Sam will take 55% of his or her net worth in estate tax. Not surprisingly, some rich elderly folks who are nearing the end of their lives and whose remaining quality of life isn't so great anyway are contemplating pulling the plug on themselves in order to more than double what they get to leave their kids.
Can you blame them?
Ron Wyden is one of the major culprits here. Over the years, he's frequently said he wanted to repeal the estate tax, and although he flip-flops around a lot about it, there is no doubt he's no champion of keeping it. For example, his Wikipedia page (which his people no doubt watch carefully) notes: "Wyden is critical of the estate tax, which he feels is inefficient, and has voted repeatedly to abolish it." He and his Senate pals wouldn't vote for the House extension, but they wouldn't abolish the tax permanently, either, because that would alienate the blue base. And so they just decided to jerk people around.
Whatever Wyden says his vote would be now, as a senior majority player on the Senate Finance Committee, he's quite responsible for the fact that the estate tax issue has remained so obscenely unresolved. His opponent, Jim Huffman, would be no more progressive, to be sure. But at least you'd be sure where he stood.
| Posted at 7:43 AM | Permalink |
|
Comments (11)
Wonder what Wyden's wife thinks of his support for the heavy estate tax?
Posted by Nonny Mouse | November 1, 2010 8:50 AM
Couldn't Richie Rich of any age just give everything away today so as to avoid the tax if they wait til next year?
If so, it is sad to think that anyone would prefer death to the ordinary everyday poverty of the merely average community member.
Posted by pdxnag | November 1, 2010 8:59 AM
Between Christmas and New Year there will be a few untimely deaths. Anyone who thinks people don't kill for sums of this kind is naïve. Mark, I don't see anything humorous about this post. It's just another back door endorsement of Oregon's own Jim DeMint.
Posted by Allan L. | November 1, 2010 9:05 AM
PDXNAG, it all depends on whose death is under consideration. And I may be wrong but I am not sure the gift tax is similarly under suspension. And then there is the awkward problem you touched on so lightly, that once you give it away, you no longer have it.
Posted by Allan L. | November 1, 2010 9:08 AM
I still don't understand those who believe the government is entitled to any of a persons wealth that they've already paid taxes on.
Posted by Joey Link | November 1, 2010 10:17 AM
"I still don't understand those who believe the government is entitled to any of a persons wealth that they've already paid taxes on."
It could be because people like Bill Gates have billions in unrealized capital gains that they haven't already paid taxes on.
Posted by Anon Too | November 1, 2010 10:41 AM
As usual, emotions and misconceptions abound.
Actually this whole argument is academic. Regardless of whether or not the Republicans take control of the Senate tomorrow, the Senate math for 2012 is such that in 2013 Republicans will have a filibuster proof majority, and in the House they will have close to a 100 vote margin after 2012, because of redistricing, gerrymandering and reapportionment.
Result: In 2013 Estate taxes will be abolished, taxes on dividends and interest will be abolished, capital gains taxes will be abolished and the corporate income tax will be down to 25% or lower.
What this does for Federal programs I will leave to your imagination. The U. S. has foregotten the lessons of 2001-09, and now it will face the consequences.
Posted by Sid | November 1, 2010 12:32 PM
wouldn't it be nice if the rich [and that means you Dudley Do Right] would Man Up and pay a fair share. Do we want to put a guy in charge of schools who dodges taxes?
Hearing as we did this week that 'do no evil' Google is in fact sneaking around dodging taxes , you wonder what exactly they define as evil...
Posted by billb | November 1, 2010 3:37 PM
you wonder what exactly they define as evil…
Here's a hint: it has to do with taxes, but not with evading or cutting them.
Posted by Allan L. | November 1, 2010 4:37 PM
the Senate math for 2012 is such that in 2013 Republicans will have a filibuster proof majority
Say what? Racial demographics are weighing heavier on the Republicans (whose only truly enduring appeal is to older, affluent, conservative whites) with each passing year. A filibuster-proof Senate majority is probably already beyond the party's reach forever.
Posted by Semi-Cynic | November 1, 2010 10:07 PM
"The way the U.S. Senate has handled federal taxes over the last decade -- and particularly over the last two years -- is nothing short of scandalous."
At least this election won't bring change that way.
Every one of these Senators is sold out to different masters - I don't care which party they claim to represent.
Posted by Steve | November 2, 2010 6:37 AM