Betty Friedan 360x1000
9albion
George M Cohan and Lerarned Hand 360x1000
1gucci
4albion
Mark V Holmes 360x1000
storyparadox2
Office of Chief Counsel 360x1000
lifeinmiddlemarch1
Anthony McCann2 360x1000
12albion
2paradise
7confidencegames
1transcendentalist
3confidencegames
11albion
1paradide
Thomas Piketty2 360x1000
11632
2lafayette
1albion
499
Margaret Fuller5 360x1000
Maria Popova 360x1000
Tad Friend 360x1000
399
Stormy Daniels 360x1000
2transadentilist
199
14albion
Ruth Bader Ginsburg 360x1000
Margaret Fuller3 360x1000
10abion
storyparadox3
Adam Gopnik 360x1000
2jesusandjohnwayne
1theleasofus
2defense
Storyparadox1
1empireofpain
2confidencegames
Margaret Fuller 360x1000
Gilgamesh 360x1000
Brendan Beehan 360x1000
13albion
1confidencegames
3defense
2gucci
Edmund Burke 360x1000
5confidencegames
1trap
Margaret Fuller4 360x1000
Spottswood William Robinson 360x1000
Thomas Piketty3 360x1000
2theleastofus
George F Wil...360x1000
1lauber
Lafayette and Jefferson 360x1000
Richard Posner 360x1000
Susie King Taylor 360x1000
Mary Ann Evans 360x1000
Anthony McCann1 360x1000
7albion
lifeinmiddlemarch2
Margaret Fuller1 360x1000
Samuel Johnson 360x1000
6albion
Margaret Fuller 2 360x1000
4confidencegames
1madoff
Learned Hand 360x1000
LillianFaderman
3paradise
1lookingforthegoodwar
2albion
2lookingforthegoodwar
1lafayette
Maurice B Foley 360x1000
1jesusandjohnwayne
1defense
Margaret Fuller2 360x1000
AlexRosenberg
1falsewitness
299
8albion'
6confidencegames
Susie King Taylor2 360x1000
3theleastofus
2falsewitness
3albion
Thomas Piketty1 360x1000
James Gould Cozzens 360x1000
5albion
2trap
Originally Published on forbes.com on July 12th, 2011

______________________________________

Other tax bloggers put forth reform proposals all the time.  Robert FlachThe Wandering Tax Pro, who scorns the expensive and unreliable software the rest of use, is putting out a rework of the Code in several installments.  I’ve generally held back my thoughts.  My attitude has been “It is what it is.  Deal with it.”  I look at the developments and report on them to the extent there is practical utility, humor and matter for reflection.  All this talk of tax reform and simplifying the Code and all has finally caught up with me.  My proposal would eliminate an entire Subtitle, close to 100 sections.  Not only that it can be made revenue neutral with minor changes to one single section.  What is even better, the people affected by the increase that creates neutrality will be pretty much the same people who will benefit from the eliminated tax.
Since it is always good to start with dessert, let’s talk about the Subtitle to eliminate.  That would be Subtitle B Estate and Gift Taxes.  Pretty radical.  Even when there was no estate tax, in 2010 there was still gift tax.  In addition there had to be a complex mess of carryover basis rules to worry about.  No carryover basis in my proposal, even for gifts.  The basis in property acquired by gift will be its fair market value at the time of the gift, just as inherited property basis is value at date of death.
Is there a simple way to make this revenue neutral and also address the other concerns that created a perceived need for the estate tax ? Yes.  For starters let’s overshoot.  You could more than make up for eliminating the estate and gift tax by repealing one  sub-section of Subtitle A (Income Tax). That would be 102(a), which says:
Gross income does not include the value of property acquired by gift, bequest, devise, or inheritance.
That would, of course, be going too far.  Presumably we would not want to tax transfers between spouses.  That could be covered by slightly tweaking the language of Section 1041 (It now says that property transfers between spouses are treated as gifts.  That would be replaced with a gross income exclusion).  Revenue neutrality would be obtained by putting in dollar exclusions rather than wholesale repeal of the subsection.  Just for talking purposes I would throw out an annual exclusion for gifts of $25,000 and a life-time exclusion of $1,000,000 for bequests.  That would be computed at the individual recipient level.  If  each of your grandparents gives you $25,000, your adjusted gross income goes up by $75,000.  The exclusions would only apply to individuals not to trusts.  Individuals would be allowed to apply their exclusions to transfers to trusts, but there would have to be a provision that makes sure they are actual beneficiaries to avoid trafficing in exclusions.  Finally, donors of gifts over $25,000 and executors of estates would be required to withhold income tax.  That reporting would be much simpler than what is required now.
Having transfer taxes integrated with income taxes would create much more simplicity.  You would not have monstrous transactions like installment sales to intentionally defective grantor trusts that play on the incosistencies between two separate systems.  There would still be issues about when a gift is a complete gift and how long an estate can stay open.  Most of that has already been addressed.
I doubt that this proposal will make into the mix.  I’m fairly certain that the primary purpose of  the Estate and Gift Tax is to serve as a white collar jobs program transferring wealth from the upper class to the upper middle class.