can’t wait till season 12 when trump sends the justices to gitmo and replaces them with justice Bongino
I would agree with Alito, Thomas, and Kavanaugh. Not so sure about Roberts and ACB, and maybe not Gorsuch, either. Somehow (I'm not sure how), I get the impression that Roberts, ACB, and Gorsuch like the "R" after Trump, but not necessarily Trump, himself. Only Christy and that other guy won't pardon him. Even Haley would. As I mentioned just above, I think there are three constituencies: Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson Roberts, ACB, and Gorsuch Kavanaugh, Alito, and Thomas. The top and bottom can't be separated. The group in the middle might be able to. And I do agree to this. Though not in as absolute terms as you are saying.
Pleas tell me that this is correct When EJ Carroll and AG James start seizing and liquidating Trump properties, he's going to be liable for the capital gains taxes on them, since they've appreciated substantially since he bought them.Which means he'll owe the IRS $100M's, too.His house of cards is imploding. pic.twitter.com/wIbLFkO4a9— Monty Boa (@MontyBoa99) March 1, 2024
If it is the case that he will be "selling" them, then yes. But it depends on how the transfer is done. As an example, I am going to take over the deed to my dad's property (when he dies). Since it will be a transfer, and not a sale, he will not be subjected to any capital gains tax (that I would have to pay as executor of his estate).
Death transfer is different. It is something GOP have been fighting and winning to never get taxed. Any money or property bequeathed to you from a dying family member is almost always tax free. It allows for continued generational wealth.
Right; and it is about the least meritocratic and libertarian thing imaginable. I have spent a lifetime trying to find just one self-professed libertarian who will agree with me that it would make more sense for the state to inherit most of one's wealth when one dies, to be used for social security, Medicare, housing the homeless, caring for veterans, etc. The meritorious can already jump start their kids with proper food and healthcare and good education and first cars, even first houses; there's no reason to enable a world where the kids of the people who work for the meritorious will have to work for the kids of their parents bosses, however mediocre or worse they may be. Even as a hypothetical it seems to be repugnant to people who insist that Utopia should be a meritocracy; all I ever get out of the discussion is called "comerade..."
Yeah, like DT and TJ said, death is different - when you have the property transferred to you, you get a "stepped up basis" meaning that the value for capital gains purposes is readjusted upon the death to the value at the time of the death, so you don't pay capital gains on any value above the original value of the property, only on value above the "stepped up" value of the property (*). This also works for stocks - my aunt passed away in December 2022 and all of the stock in her portfolio got a stepped up basis so when we sold it for distributing among her greedy nephews (me and my brothers), her estate didn't have to pay significant capital gains. As DT and TJ say, it's about keeping the money in the family, which primarily benefits families that already have money. (*) note that in California, for Proposition 13 purposes, the property tax you pay is not based on the "stepped up" value of the property, but on the original value that the decedent was paying. Which is some pretty major bullshit - if you keep the property, your property taxes are below market value, and if you sell the property, your capital gains are minimized. It's the best of both worlds - it's pretty awesome to inherit wealth.
Not quite. What’s true on death is that property gets a stepped up basis to its fair market value on the date of death. That makes a (potentially large) difference if and when the property is subsequently sold. I’m also in the camp that feels this is a totally inegalitarian situation that just perpetuates wealth within families.
It has to be hard for a guy like Weissmann who dedicated his life to DOJ to have to see such a corrupt and sordid outcome to this trial. I could hear it in his voice in his last summary when he was trying to remain professional. But at some point legal analysis just doesn't make sense anymore. Trump claims he is immune from criminal suit. He has no legally cognizable reason to have opposed Jack Smith's efforts to obtain a speedy resolution of that issue by the courts. Instead, he fought to slow walk the issue, and the S Ct is now complicit in that endeavor.— Andrew Weissmann (weissmann11 on Threads)🌻 (@AWeissmann_) March 2, 2024
I'm not. Why should the death of someone become a taxable event? First off, the money has already been taxed. And secondly, unless you want a society with 100% redistribution of income, why would money left to one's kids be what is targeted? I think the more relevant issue is how can we ensure that more families have wealth to perpetuate.
It isn't really money that is the issue-- each generation's drop cases can be relied on to piss that away. It is ownership, control-- when they run businesses into the ground, they trash employee lives...
Are folk seriously arguing against the death tax, a tax that affects almost no one in this country yet is used to fund all kinds of social programs?
So has the money from income tax, corporation tax etc. Truth is, the rich aren’t taxed properly because they use debt to finance their lifestyles rather than income. A death tax makes little difference - to redistribute wealth properly you need a small asset tax rather than an income tax. (Zakat is excellent at that - you pay 2.5% of your excess wealth annually to the poor, and you pay it annually regardless of whether there’s a taxable event like when you sell or realise a capital gain - it’s based on your total asset value excepting your necessary assets like main home etc).
if I take my money and pay you to fix my car, the money I’m paying you has already been taxed so why should you pay income tax on it? When it’s you getting money from me for you doing some work it seems silly to argue your income from fixing my car shouldn’t be taxed. Why then should you be exempt from tax if you didn’t even do any work???? Look at it this way…inheritance taxes are taxes on unearned income. We tax earned income so not taxing unearned income is perverse. Get it? Death isn’t a taxable event. You getting money from someone else’s death is the taxable event.
I stand to inherit millions from my parents. I plan to give most of it away, and don’t really care about how much the govt takes away in taxes, even if it was most all of it. I’m a strong believer in the Carnegie Way. Dad has helped me and my siblings plenty already.
Do you need a new best friend? Or better yet, Would your parents like to adopt two adorable grandkids? I am buying a Real Salt Lake Jersey as we speak.
Mostly, the $$$ is put in a charitable trust for us to administer after my parents pass. We could largely pay ourselves, but I think most of us won’t.
A step up in basis has zero impact until said property - real or otherwise - is sold. So not only does the inheritor receive the benefit of inheriting property, they receive the benefit if and when they sell.of having an increased basis solely due to it being inherited. If anything, I would flip the argument around:- if you don't want death to be a "taxable event", why isn't the basis left unchanged on inheritance?
Going back to this question - he's not transferring property to E. Jean Carroll. The judgement is for money, not property. He's selling the property (*), and if there are capital gains on the sale, he will owe taxes on those capital gains. The proceeds from the sale will go to Carroll. (*) The forced sale of property means that it may not be at an ideal price, but here's where we start playing a very small violin. Lots of people have to sell assets in an emergency situation - to pay for unexpected medical needs, for example. The market doesn't wait for everything to be great if you have to sell - you get what you can get because you need the money more than you need the assets. Trump will almost certainly complain about this, but it happens quite a bit to people who aren't named Trump.
Is that the actual process? I have heard/read it as "selling" by the media, but none of them are experts in this area as far as I know, so I used a more generic term.