Fixing social security

[Alpine01]

Ranchers would never go for that

Right. Make their children sell the ranch/farm just to pay taxes that someone in DC decides that property is worth before the fact. Because some politician in DC obviously knows better. Stop them from actually farming or ranching on that land so some housing developer can make a killing off of it.

 

[VikingsGuy]

So you would also be ok with unrealized losses being refunded to those same estates from the Govt. right?

Losses are deductions not credits in a given tax year - so of course loses would net against gains.

 

[VikingsGuy]

Right. Make their children sell the ranch/farm just to pay taxes that someone in DC decides that property is worth before the fact. Because some politician in DC obviously knows better. Stop them from actually farming or ranching on that land so some housing developer can make a killing off of it.

Why would ranches be treated different than a similarly value small business one may want to pass down to the kids?

 

[Alpine01]

Why would ranches be treated different than a similarly value small business one may want to pass down to the kids?

Because the value of small businesses typically isn't associated with the property they use (land or building); rather it is the intellectual property they have developed, the customer base they have developed, the product that comes out of that building, etc. Ranchers and farmers have their "wealth" tied up in the land they use. Small farmers are leveraged to the hilt each year to buy/pay for the seed, fertilizers, etc. and won't realize income until they can sell the wheat/corn/barley/etc. several months later. Ranchers are similar, they don't realize income until they sell an animal. Excluding corporate farms/ranches, most farmers/ranchers are land rich and cash poor.

If you want to watch a very entertaining show on the subject and also learn a little, I would highly recommend you watch Clarkson's Farm. Start with Season 1. It's on Amazon so you have to pay for it.

 

[Alpine01]

Losses are deductions not credits in a given tax year - so of course loses would net against gains.

And you can carry over those losses ...

 

[Alpine01]

Losses are deductions not credits in a given tax year - so of course loses would net against gains.

Nope. Again, you are taxing wealth, not income. Losses/deductions only apply to "negative income".

To illustrate that point, assume you are a person who has just recently retired after working 40 years. You put money into a 401K that whole time. That port-folio is worth (on paper), $5M. That is your wealth. Now as a retiree, you draw out $50,000 a year to live on (income) but the Govt comes in and wants to tax you at 20% of your wealth. You now owe $1M to the USG because of the wealth you have in your 401K. How are you going to pay that $1M tax bill? You have to raid your 401K to do it (sell off your wealth). That is what you are asking farmers/ranchers, or their children, to do just so the USG can take another bite at their apple and make jealous/greedy folks feel better that these "wealthy people" are paying their "fair share".

 

[brymoore]

Nope. Again, you are taxing wealth, not income. Losses/deductions only apply to "negative income".

To illustrate that point, assume you are a person who has just recently retired after working 40 years. You put money into a 401K that whole time. That port-folio is worth (on paper), $5M. That is your wealth. Now as a retiree, you draw out $50,000 a year to live on (income) but the Govt comes in and wants to tax you at 20% of your wealth. You now owe $1M to the USG because of the wealth you have in your 401K. How are you going to pay that $1M tax bill? You have to raid your 401K to do it (sell off your wealth). That is what you are asking farmers/ranchers, or their children, to do just so the USG can take another bite at their apple and make jealous/greedy folks feel better that these "wealthy people" are paying their "fair share".

The same example would apply to businesses.

 

[KG92]

You need to look up the definition of jealousy.

Free markets are the best way to allocate money for the living. It is illogical for the dead to be considered part of a free market. I am not inviting govt into your life, I am inviting them after your death.

Then feel free to invite them into your own funeral.

But I’m going to go ahead and pass my hard-earned money on to my kids, not to Ukraine and Gaza.

Different strokes, I guess.

 

[VikingsGuy]

Because the value of small businesses typically isn't associated with the property they use (land or building); rather it is the intellectual property they have developed, the customer base they have developed, the product that comes out of that building, etc. Ranchers and farmers have their "wealth" tied up in the land they use. Small farmers are leveraged to the hilt each year to buy/pay for the seed, fertilizers, etc. and won't realize income until they can sell the wheat/corn/barley/etc. several months later. Ranchers are similar, they don't realize income until they sell an animal. Excluding corporate farms/ranches, most farmers/ranchers are land rich and cash poor.

If you want to watch a very entertaining show on the subject and also learn a little, I would highly recommend you watch Clarkson's Farm. Start with Season 1. It's on Amazon so you have to pay for it.

And why does that mean a ranchers kid should get millions of value tax-free and a contractor's kid would have to pay estate taxes on the multimillion dollar construction business?

Also, I grew up with actively farming grandparents, worked on farms in summer, and worked in ag industry for years - so I get how farms work.

 

[VikingsGuy]

Nope. Again, you are taxing wealth, not income. Losses/deductions only apply to "negative income".

To illustrate that point, assume you are a person who has just recently retired after working 40 years. You put money into a 401K that whole time. That port-folio is worth (on paper), $5M. That is your wealth. Now as a retiree, you draw out $50,000 a year to live on (income) but the Govt comes in and wants to tax you at 20% of your wealth. You now owe $1M to the USG because of the wealth you have in your 401K. How are you going to pay that $1M tax bill? You have to raid your 401K to do it (sell off your wealth). That is what you are asking farmers/ranchers, or their children, to do just so the USG can take another bite at their apple and make jealous/greedy folks feel better that these "wealthy people" are paying their "fair share".

Nope - we are talking about taxing an estate or trust value. Estate taxes have nothing to do with income.

Any even if the kids get $1 it is one more dollar than they created.

I favor full value to the creators of value, products and services. Each generation has its own chance to be a creator. I see no reason why the birth lottery lets a few get Scott-free.

 

[VikingsGuy]

Then feel free to invite them into your own funeral.

But I’m going to go ahead and pass my hard-earned money on to my kids, not to Ukraine and Gaza.

Different strokes, I guess.

Pretty sure when you are dead you are doing nothing. It is only this evil government that is providing legal frameworks that allow you to bestow wealth after your passing. And I am saying we would have a better and harder working society if the govt did not facilitate transfer of wealth from one creator to one non-creator at death.

 

[Marshian]

Pretty sure when you are dead you are doing nothing. It is only this evil government that is providing legal frameworks that allow you to bestow wealth after your passing. And I am saying we would have a better and harder working society if the govt did not facilitate transfer of wealth from one creator to one non-creator at death.

Most peoples children are by far their most precious thing in life and while they are near the end, they will do every thing in their power to evade what you are suggesting and rightfully so. Even if your system was water tight and no way to get around this, then many people, myself included would squander it like a mofo before turning it over to Uncle Sam. No time to dabble in hookers, blow and exotic vacations like in your 70s and 80s. Big Fin’s logic would be inverted. I would make sure to run out of money before time if I knew it was gonna be taken from my relatives anyways.

 

[VikingsGuy]

Mist peoples children are by far their most precious thing in life and while they are near the end, they will do every thing in their power to evade what you are suggesting and rightfully so. Even if your system was water tight and no way to get around this, then many people, myself included would squander it like a mofo before turning it over to Uncle Sam. No time to dabble in hookers, blow and exotic vacations like in your 70s and 80s. Big Fin’s logic would be inverted. I would make sure to run out of money before time if I knew it was gonna be taken from my relatives anyways.

You earned that right. Plus, don't forget I said $10million exemption. 99.9% of Americans would never hit that number so their calculus doesn't change. And maybe there could be some arrangement for operating family businesses/ranches/farms so it doesn't screw that up. I always find it interesting that the 99.9% that pay the bulk of the taxes, and do the bulk of the work in this country yell so loud for the tax treatment in favor of the 0.1% who has already gotten every tax break possible along the way so they can pass on fortunes to kids and grandkids that never lifted a finger.

 

[406dn]

As I posted earlier, I am conflicted over this.

I do know for a FACT, that the way, more than a few get ahead, is they were born into it.

I also know that having worked a lifetime to create some wealth, you hope that it helps your kids and grandkids, when you die.

Presently in 2024 the estate tax exempts 13.61 million dollars/ per individual, double that for a couple. So, basically 27 million and change. If they have three heirs, a 9 million dollar, head start. That seems like a pretty generous leg up.

 

[Marshian]

You earned that right. Plus, don't forget I said $10million exemption. 99.9% of Americans would never hit that number so their calculus doesn't change. And maybe there could be some arrangement for operating family businesses/ranches/farms so it doesn't screw that up. I always find it interesting that the 99.9% that pay the bulk of the taxes, and do the bulk of the work in this country yell so loud for the tax treatment in favor of the 0.1% who has already gotten every tax break possible along the way so they can pass on fortunes to kids and grandkids that never lifted a finger.

Fair enough, I didn’t realize the 10 million part. As a general rule I’m wary of more taxation but to this point, I digress

 

[SAJ-99]

Right. Make their children sell the ranch/farm just to pay taxes that someone in DC decides that property is worth before the fact. Because some politician in DC obviously knows better. Stop them from actually farming or ranching on that land so some housing developer can make a killing off of it.

I like how people use this hypothetical scenario and don't acknowledge the size of the taxable exemption or the question on how a young family who wants to farm could ever start?

The entire tax code was made by American aristocracy for its own benefit. And many serfs defend it. Sort of explains how we got in the situation we are in.

 

[406dn]

I like how people use this hypothetical scenario and don't acknowledge the size of the taxable exemption or the question on how a young family who wants to farm could ever start?

The entire tax code was made by American aristocracy for its own benefit. And many serfs defend it. Sort of explains how we got in the situation we are in.

Kind of an example of whoever holds the gold, makes the rules.

 

[Benfromalbuquerque]

Since we are wandering around with new subjects.

I am conflicted about estate taxes, I can see each side.

While it is not often enforced with vigor, we do recognize that business monopolies are not in the public interest. The oil company that I retired from was a splinter, from the Standard Oil empire of J.D. Rockefeller.

If a business entity can become too large, it makes sense that individual estates can become large enough, to no longer be in the public interest. I have no real idea where that line is.

There are examples of very wealthy people realizing that their heirs do not need or perhaps deserve to inherit all of an estate. Off the top of my head, Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Bezos' ex wife Mackenzie Scott, have given large amounts of money to charitable causes.

This all makes logical sense. Considering how most companies are taxed the company is an entity, just like you and me. If not taxed in the estate then the entire wealth transfer circumvents taxation which would not be acceptable as an entity of any sort.

Though busting trusts, monopolies that control entire industries is entirely separate from busting personal assets. Which makes sense because if one company holds all the eggs then that strangles free enterprise or the very manner in which that same company became so successful. As the dollar isn’t backed by precious metal any more then it’s all of us doing business that give value to the USD. Allowing individuals to build unfathomable wealth is fine as the money is only of value because of the business which is already controlled so as not to dominate that industry.

 

[longbow51]

Basically we need to decide whether we want family farms and ranches or are better off having everything controlled by, for lack of a better term, Gov/Corporate Ag complex. Because, when has that ever gone wrong?

The capital cost of entry is too high to allow new players into the market unless they are mostly hobbyists with primary incomes derived from other sources, i.e. Ted Turner.

With land costs being what they are, the 27 million offset is not nearly enough to cover a large ranching/farming operation. So, I do think there needs to be some adjustment there.

Everything controlled by one entity just doesn't seem best to me, and I get the contractor argument/other small business argument. Food supply seems different. Particularly if you listen to WEF and their desire to limit farming and ranching and see what is happening in Europe. Looks like there's resistance happening now, but maybe better to not get there in the first place.

Otherwise, I'm retired already, and don't have 27 million, and if I did I wouldn't give it to my granddaughter; sure pathway to ruin. I wouldn't make her work a bunch of jobs through college like I did either though. Happy medium somewhere.

I'd find something better to do with it than leave it to the government, though.

 

[Alpine01]

And why does that mean a ranchers kid should get millions of value tax-free and a contractor's kid would have to pay estate taxes on the multimillion dollar construction business?

Also, I grew up with actively farming grandparents, worked on farms in summer, and worked in ag industry for years - so I get how farms work.

Contractor's kid shouldn't either. I don't agree with how estate taxes are levied for anyone. Just more Govt overreach on collecting taxes on the same stuff over and over. Not right for small business nor farmers/ranchers.