SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home The Taxman Cometh

JONATHAN CHAIT JULY 30, 2010

The Taxman Cometh

Last week, USA Today published a story about all the "ordinary folks" who might get hit with the estate tax.

A $1 million exemption would affect a lot of families that are well out of Steinbrenner's league. "You take a home, an IRA or 401(k) retirement account, some other savings and you get to $1 million pretty easily," says Richard Behrendt, senior estate planner for Robert W. Baird and a former IRS attorney.

Families who live in areas with high property values are particularly vulnerable, says Clint Stretch, tax principal for Deloitte Tax who lives outside Washington, D.C. "People in my neighborhood bought a house for $32,000 in the '60s, and now it's worth $1 million," he says. "If they've got anything else, they would be paying an estate tax."

It's silly to pretend that people "get to $1 million pretty easily." In 2003, the last time the threshold was set at $1 million, only 1.24% of estates were eligible - the 98th percentile of all American families. Last year, under the new threshold of $3.5 million, that number went down to 0.3%. To help put this in perspective, the height of the top 0.3% of American males is 6'7", or the median height of an NBA player. Only 1.8% of those estates fall under the category of "farms or small businesses." Should the threshold revert next year, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities projects that only 44,000 estates will pay any estate tax.

Not only that, but, in Stretch's example, if you have "anything else," your heirs would only pay tax on the anything else. That is, a $1.1 million estate would be taxes as $100,000 -- even assuming zero estate planning, which is unrealistic. Indeed, fewer than half of estates that file estate tax returns actually pay estate taxes.

Finally, an amusing coincidence at the end: 

As repeal of the estate tax loomed at the end of 2009, wealthy families had an incentive to keep ailing parents or grandparents alive until Jan. 1. This year, in what sounds like an episode of Law & Order, heirs stand to benefit if wealthy benefactors die before midnight on Dec. 31.

Not only does it sound like a Law & Order episode, it was a Law & Order episode.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 5 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

5 comments

Those height percentiles simply cannot be correct. Over one out of every hundred guys is 6' 7"? I must live in the short part of my town.

- ATuring

July 30, 2010 at 12:03pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

For Democrats, or Chait, to even consider a $1 milllion exemption is dumb. Dumb. The Democrats need to be out front with a $5 million exemption ($10 million per couple). I don't care about the statistics, people hate the estate (death) tax, especially if they believe, even irrationally, it could apply to them. By proposing to increase the exemption, it takes this issue completely off the table. How anybody, Chait included, could see this any differently would confirm Rogers' dictum.

- rayward

July 30, 2010 at 12:28pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

ATuring: Only one out of every 334, actually. But it might be that they cluster geographically: I remember having a lot more trouble seeing over crowds when I was living in Austin than I do in Chicago.

- austinexpat

July 30, 2010 at 12:55pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It is discouraging in the extreme how many Americans are against the estate tax, as if it would affect other than a tiny percentage of them. The abysmal general political and economic knowledge of the average person in America is pathetic.

- liberal reformer

July 30, 2010 at 4:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

While it's wrong to force someone to sell their business to pay taxes, after you rectify that issue, it is far less economically painful to collect revenue from children who haven't received their inheritance yet (with simple planning the estate tax is currently collected only after both spouses die,) then it is to collect income taxes from people while they are earning it. If collecting taxes from an estate before it is distributed to heirs means we can have lower income taxes or lower payroll taxes, it's a good idea. Besides, estate taxes on the transfer of land on death are at least 600 years old.

- Nusholtz

July 30, 2010 at 4:34pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close