Originally posted by finnegan" for the very wealthy, and the only people likely to experience these types of taxation,"
The purpose is not to avoid fraudulent transfer. It is to avoid legal transfers designed to legally avoid tax, primarily inheritance taxes. Gifts to children sound sweet but, for the very wealthy, and the only people likely to experience these types of taxation, this is about the intolerable scale of inherited wealth and privilege, which ensures that the ...[text shortened]... omy needs more wealthy kids enjoying a priviliged life on the back of their family trust?
. .
...and people who realize that as long as the wealth has not been acquired by force, threats of force and fraud you have no claim on it and it's none of your business.
1 edit
Originally posted by WajomaMoney is taxed whenever it changes hands in the stream of commerce. I don't see a moral difference between that and changing hands via a gift. Is it more moral to tax a transfer of wealth because it was done in exchange for a service than if it was done as a gift?
" for the very wealthy, and the only people likely to experience these types of taxation,"
...and people who realize that as long as the wealth has not been acquired by force, threats of force and fraud you have no claim on it and it's none of your business.
I'd love for someone to explain the logic behind that distinction.
Originally posted by sh76Well, the logic is that taxation is bad, so we shouldn't do it. But we still need someone to pay for our government, so we just have to wait for the fairy queen to provide tax dollars.
Money is taxed whenever it changes hands in the stream of commerce. I don't see a moral difference between that and changing hands via a gift. Is it more moral to tax a transfer of wealth because it was done in exchange for a service than if it was done as a gift?
I'd love for someone to explain the logic behind that distinction.