re: #749 aceofwhat?

1. A family gift is a very private affair, wholly unlike a “transaction” such as a purchase, an investment, a hire, a utility bill, or a job. I find it far more repulsive to have the state intrude on the former.

And again, that’s an assertion, not an argument. That you find it repulsive doesn’t matter.

2. The government is not required for the proper adjudication of a well-planned estate. Even if they were, that does not in itself identify the subject matter as more or less fit for taxation than any other subject.

Only a perfectly-planned state escapes probate, and even then, the contracts and legal mechanisms drawn up to avoid probate are likewise provided for and safeguarded by the government. Without the government, inheritance becomes a killing affair. History shows this well enough.

. A family gift is only “income” in the IRS definition of the term. Elsewhere in the land of clear thinking, gifts and income mean two different things.

Sure. And if anything, gifts should be taxed more highly than income, by that definition. Income is something someone worked for.

4. No ethical reason should be required to state that a tax is unfair. Rather, a tax needs to state an ethical reason why it is fair.

Right. And the estate tax is fair because it’s taxing unearned income, or a gift, or whatever you want to call it. Money is changing hands, and it’s not fair to not tax that money because it’s inheritance, but tax someone else for actually working hard to earn the same amount of money.