… and by golly, how dare parents and grandparents pass the property and assets they spent a lifetime earning on to their own kids!
President Barack Obama is proposing new taxes on the wealthiest Americans that would limit their profits from investments and make it harder for them to pass assets to heirs. […]
He would increase the top tax rate on capital gains and dividends to 28 percent from 23.8 percent. The rate was 15 percent when Obama took office in 2009, meaning that he’s proposing to almost double it over his two terms in office.
He would also impose capital-gains taxes on asset transfers at death, ending what the White House calls “the largest capital gains loophole.” Under current law, assets held until death aren’t subject to those levies, creating an incentive for wealthy people to hold onto them. Heirs only have to pay capital-gains taxes when they sell and only on the value above what the assets were worth at death.
Of course, Obama’s Marxist Dreams from his Father don’t really touch the uber-wealthy who cuddle up the The State. It is barrier to keep the moderately wealth, the entrepreneurs and small business owners from moving upwards.
And it is further accomplished by shackling the lower classes with an blatant appeal to covetousness.
The administration argues that all the gain that occurred before the parent’s death unfairly escapes tax. In a fact sheet distributed on Saturday, the administration said the current treatment of inherited assets—which it refers to as the “trust fund loophole”—is “perhaps the largest single loophole in the entire individual income tax code.”
“This proposal is probably the most impactful way that we could address the manifest unfairness in our tax system while also supporting greater middle-class opportunity,” a senior administration official said Saturday of the proposed changes to inherited asset taxes.
Among other things, the current policy reduces disputes over prices paid for assets long ago. But critics of the current rule say it is outdated. The administration argues it would unlock capital by removing an incentive for holding valuable assets for generations.
As if forcing Miss Finklestein to sell her great-grandmother’s painting by Monet because she is unable to pay The State for the privilege of keeping it in the family (especially after finally recovering it after the Nazi’s had confiscated it) is going to put a bonus into her neighbor, Mr. Smith’s, paycheck.
The administration’s proposal would treat bequests and gifts—other than those to charitable organizations—as taxable events, requiring tax to be paid.
And let’s not forget, outright class bribery
It also would create or expand several significant tax breaks for low- and middle-income households, for instance by establishing a new $500 credit for families in which both spouses work, and by tripling the value of the child care credit to $3,000 per child. The changes also would significantly expand the availability of the child-care credit to more middle-income households.
What’s that you say, having one mom or dad at home is wrong? Let’s nudge those people out of the awful thought-crime of raising their own kids!
This is what they are, this is what they do.
My contempt and hate for them knows no bounds.
they’ll tax your soul if you let them
oh but don’t you let them
why don’t the rethuglicans do the reply to the sotu in the house of reps which they control right after baracky? they give him face time nationwide then run back into some taped location to give the response.
Ending the “stepped-up” basis, i.e. taxation of accrued gains at death, is not something which would only effect the “ultra rich.” Family farmers would be effected, as well as many middle class people who inherit real estate or small business interests from parents. The insidious thing about this, is that the value of assets at death–including the accrued gains–is used to determine whether someone pays estate tax already. Taxing the gains as income, (because that’s what the capital gains tax is), essentially adds an additional level of taxation to the mix.
The good news, is that the House and Senate are unlikely to pass such legislation.
And BTW, tax credits/child care credits for two earner households only constitutes an attack on women who seek to stay home and be mothers. #War On Women, indeed.
I will consider support for this after a no-loophole 75% tax on all income/gains elected officials and their campaign organizations receive over 60K annually for lifetime (even after they leave office). Just to be fair and all.
Just call out my name, HF.
Long time, etc.
funny week old news
Ohio country club bartender plotted to poison, shoot John Boehner
no way thug way?
orangeman has no principles or balls. he could of told mr woody wilson hussein concerning baracky’s gig:
NO CONSTITUTIONALLY
communist news – heil slavery:
>While not required to deliver a speech, every president since Woodrow Wilson, with notable exception of Herbert Hoover,[5] has made at least one State of the Union report as a speech delivered before a joint session of Congress. Before that time, most presidents delivered the State of the Union as a written report.[3]
Since Franklin Roosevelt, the State of the Union is given typically each January before a joint session of the United States Congress and is held in the House of Representatives chamber of the United States Capitol. When a presidential inauguration occurs in January, the date may be delayed until February.[3]
What began as a communication between president and Congress has become a communication between the president and the people of the United States. Since the advent of radio, and then television, the speech has been broadcast live on most networks, preempting scheduled programming. To reach the largest television audience, the speech, once given during the day, is now typically given in the evening, after 9 pm ET.
Also, in recent decades, newly inaugurated presidents have chosen to deliver speeches to joint sessions of Congress in the early months of their presidencies, but have not officially considered them State of the Union addresses.[6]<
link
>Before that time, most presidents delivered the State of the Union as a written report.[3]<
effin ezra klein havard loser
Masquerade, charade.
Tomato, tomatoe.
We pause this SOTU for our musical interlude.
my bet: beck does sniper for his show tomorrow. missing the constitution.
That’s exactly the set of lyrics that came to mind for me as well geoffb.
Inasmuch as George Harrison was talking about Britain of that era, it really underscores just how socialist the Obama bunch are; as if anyone here didn’t know that already, or any of the Class Warrior!/SJW low information voters even comprehend or care.
As long as they keep getting their Obamaphones…
My regards to all.
nyt news
Marine Le Pen: France Was Attacked by Islamic Fundamentalism
carlos sims grabs the megaphone
Thomas Piketty smiles out from behind the Obama SOTU mask.
Marine Le Pen in the NYT
Shelter From the Storm
Praise You In This Storm
>The Power of the Powerless” (October 1978) was originally written (“quickly,” Havel said later) as a discussion piece for a projected joint Polish Czechoslovak volume of essays on the subject of freedom and power. All the participants were to receive Havel’s essay, and then respond to it in writing. Twenty participants were chosen on both sides, but only the Czechoslovak side was completed. Meanwhile, in May 1979, some of the Czechoslovak contributors who were also members of VONS (the Committee to Defend the Unjustly Prosecuted), including Havel, were arrested, and it was decided to go ahead and “publish” the Czechoslovak contributions separately.
Havel’s essay has had a profound impact on Eastern Europe. Here is what Zbygniew Bujak, a Solidarity activist, told me: “This essay reached us in the Ursus factory in 1979 at a point when we felt we were at the end of the road. Inspired by KOR [the Polish Workers’ Defense Committee], we had been speaking on the shop floor, talking to people, participating in public meetings, trying to speak the truth about the factory, the country, and politics. There came a moment when people thought we were crazy. Why were we doing this? Why were we taking such risks? Not seeing any immediate and tangible results, we began to doubt the purposefulness of what we were doing. Shouldn’t we be coming up with other methods, other ways?
“Then came the essay by Havel. Reading it gave us the theoretical underpinnings for our activity. It maintained our spirits; we did not give up, and a year later—in August 1980—it became clear that the party apparatus and the factory management were afraid of us. We mattered. And the rank and file saw us as leaders of the movement. When I look at the victories of Solidarity, and of Charter 77, I see in them an astonishing fulfillment of the prophecies and knowledge contained in Havel’s essay.”
Translated by Paul Wilson, “The Power of the Powerless” has appeared several times in English, foremost in The Power of the Powerless: Citizens Against the State in Central-Eastern Europe, edited by John Keane, with an Introduction by Steven Lukes (London: Hutchinson, 1985). That volume includes a selection of nine other essays from the original Czech and Slovak collection.<
http://www.vaclavhavel.cz/showtrans.php?cat=eseje&val=2_aj_eseje.html&typ=HTML
Love You With the Truth
> we did not give up, and a year later—in August 1980—it became clear that the party apparatus and the factory management were afraid of us.<
and then January 1981.
Until The Whole World Hears
A revolting idea from a revolting man. I think it’s time to revolt.
President Reagan 1981 Inaugural Address
In death we all become democrats if we live near a big city. But at least we stop overconsuming.
The “rich”are just dying to use this “loophole”
O has a point though. Remember the Hitchhiker’s Guide character who spent a year dead for tax purposes?
Anything that keeps them from taking every last effing dime of your money from you is a loophole.
[…] think the President would be proposing policies that encourage investment in markets. Not the reverse, ah, our […]
[…] think the President would be proposing policies that encourage investment in markets. Not the reverse, ah, our […]