It does not matter if Paris Hilton gets benefit from the Estate Tax repeal. It matters that the money made has already been taxed and it is not fair to tax it again. Also you fail to mention the heirs of a large family farm that may be long on assets such as land and short on cash. Under current law they would have to sell the farm to pay the tax. The "stick it to the rich" attidude on the left ingnores the pain caused the little guy caught in the web.

Whether or not the money has ever been taxed is an issue. Bill Gates Microsoft billions have never been taxed. Warren Buffet's wealth has largely never been taxed (the Berkshire Hathaway shares have simply appreciated over the years and it one reason why Buffet likes to ''buy and hold'' - he hates to pay cap gain taxes). I believe the current law would at least subject the estate to capital gains taxes on the passed on shares but I'm not so sure.

Another issue is the trust - a trust never dies so is it exempt from estate taxes under the current system? Trusts were one thing Bush referred to when he famously said that the rich don't pay the Estate tax because they have good advisors. Teddy Kennedy lives off such a trust.

Finally there is life insurance - a huge loophole - where one takes out insurance on the wealthy person. When the person dies, the payout goes to the policy owner tax free and can be used to pay estate taxes.

I work with the Coalition For America's Priorities to raise awareness about the planned vote in the Senate next week to repeal the estate tax. I would urge everyone to contact your Senators and tell them the country can't afford a complete repeal at a cost of over $1 trillion dollars. You can contact your Senators and find more information on the effects of a repeal at the Coalition's website,

http://www.coalition4americaspriorities.com/takeaction.htm

To address some misconceptions out there about the estate tax. First, the claim that the income is being taxed twice is untrue. phrase "Double taxation?is a rhetorical device meant to confuse the issue. The fact is, much of what is taxed in an estate has not been previously taxed. The bulk of the largest estates, which consist of unrealized capital gains, would never have been taxed were it not for the estate tax.

Second, Only 3 of every 10,000 people who die leave a taxable estate in which a family business forms the majority of the estate. A recent Federal Reserve study found that the average small business is worth $702,566, well below the level at which estate taxes kick in. Virtually all small family businesses can be protected by simply raising estate tax exemption levels.

As with family businesses, the issue of family farms has also been distorted. On April 8, 2001, the New York Times reported that the pro-repeal American Farm Bureau Federation could not cite a single case of a family farm lost due to the estate tax. Furthermore, only 3 of every 10,000 people who die leave a taxable estate in which a farm forms the majority of the estate. Like businesses, family farms can be protected by raising exemption levels.

Aside from the fact that much of the wealth under discussion is not taxed twice, I've never understood why it shouldn't be. Almost all goods are taxed when transferred. For example when I buy a vehicle, I pay a sales tax; if I sell it to you, you pay a sales tax; if you sell it back to me I pay again. Same when something is given. Why should a transfer of money be so different?

Repeal the estate tax. Let’s see if I have this right.

Example 1: A person wants to buy a gadget factory that costs $100.00. That person would have to finance his purchase and pay not only the purchase price but also finance costs as well or $100.00 +.

Example 2: A person inherits a gadget factory valued at $100.00 with $90 debt against it. Would the government tax the ten dollars at a 55% rate? Maybe. If so it would be $5.50. If the government would tax the full $100.00 in this example I would have a problem with that.

Example 3: A person wins a gadget factory valued at $100.00 as a lottery prize. The tax would be $55.00. The person finances $55.00 with the $100.00 asset as collateral. The asset would guarantee a favorable interest rate. A little stiff, but a better deal than the person in example one.

Example 4: A person inherits a gadget factory valued at $100.00 free and clear of debt with no tax liability if the “death tax” is repealed. A ridiculous deal as opposed to the person in example one.

Example #1 is not going to happen very often if example #4 is allowed. How could they compete? America, the land of opportunity. We will see.

Steve's last name must be Walton, because families like theirs are the only ones that believe the tripe that he just spewed.
Good job by everyone else debunking his myths. I know it didn't take long, but it was worth it and much appreciated.

From what I understand, it costs more money to run the estate tax program than the amount they take in. Now I'm not a fan of making rich people richer, but we might just want to get rid of the tax since it doesn't make the government any money.

Shawn, by your reasoning, the estate tax program would have to cost a trillion dollars a decade to run. This seems unlikely.

Oh surely--repealing the estate tax makes a great deal of sense--if you're filthy rich!!!
Hey, what good is it to "own the gov." if you can't get the good ol' boys to reduce your tax load...?
Yeah sure, get rid of that nasty estate tax, then pass on the financial burden to the other guy, through INCREASED TAXES...
Actually, the way I understand it, this country really isn't in financial trouble; or at least what trouble we're in is directly due to the orchestrations of our entirely corrupt gov.
Early 2001 had the trade deficit shrinking, a stunning rise in real estate values, plus lower energy prices (Business Week, July 2001).
Personnally, I think that what we need is to repeal the property taxes of individuals...People don't truely "own" their home if there's always a looming threat that one is going to have to sell just to pay for the property taxes... How many trees are being harvested to pay the tax on large parcels...
Anyway, isn't the big question here: how much money has the USA spent on Iraq and Afghanistan, all because the airlines inexplicably failed to install a single dollars worth of hardware: a simply bar to latch the cockpit door closed... HUH...!!!!

aciphex