"Key Democrats predicted the federal estate tax will expire after Dec. 31 because an impasse among lawmakers will prevent an agreement on extending the current levy before Congress takes its holiday break.
The lawmakers said Congress would likely seek to restore it retroactively next year. [...] A temporary expiration would hand a victory to congressional Republicans who enacted legislation in 2001 to phase out what they call the “death tax.” It also would subject tens of thousands of heirs who otherwise wouldn’t owe taxes to capital gains rates if they liquidate inheritances. [...]
Unless Congress acts, the estate tax would be replaced next year by a capital-gains tax on all but the first $1.3 million in inherited assets, including homes, stock certificates, stamp collections and livestock.
Heirs who sell those assets would pay from 15 percent to 28 percent in taxes on any appreciation in value since the assets were acquired. Current law imposes capital-gains taxes only on any increase in value after the assets are bequeathed.
[Rep. Earl] Pomeroy [D-ND] said some 61,000 Americans would face taxes under the capital gains regime, versus about 6,000 estates that would face a tax under an extension of the current law. [...]
A prominent proponent of taxing large estates, Bill Gates Sr., father of Microsoft Corp. founder Bill Gates and co- chairman of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, urged Congress to retain the tax.
“Society has a just claim on these fortunes,” Gates told reporters yesterday on a conference call organized by United for a Fair Economy, a Boston-based advocacy group in favor of keeping the estate tax."
Read the full article by Ryan J. Donmoyer on Bloomberg.com
"For most of the past decade, the House voted to repeal the estate tax. So, it’s worth a smile and a nod to see that the House finally recognizes the need for an estate tax. The not-so-good-news is that continuing 2009 law would increase the federal deficit by $234 billion over 10 years—that’s quite the generous tax giveaway to the massively wealthy. But don’t we have more pressing needs for that revenue? How about healthcare, clean energy, education, infrastructure, jobs, and deficit-reduction?"
Read the full op-ed by Lee Farris in The Oneida Daily Dispatch.
On January 26th, Oregon voters will be asked to affirm the state's revenue package, and fair taxation activists in the state are pushing hard for voter turnout to vote YES on Measures 66 and 67. If the measures are voted down, it would mean drastic cuts for state services and jobs.
If you are a resident of Oregon be sure to read up on these important measures and, most importantly, be sure to vote!
"Several wealthy people today added their voices to a campaign to get Congress to extend and strengthen the estate tax, calling it a key incentive for people to leave money to charity. [...]
The [press teleconference] was organized by United for a Fair Economy [...] The group is pushing Congress to act before its holiday recess to renew and increase the tax that applies to large estates when people die — which is set to expire at the end of the year.
The wealthy participants said the tax is a small price to pay to support government services like education and research that allow people to become prosperous in the United States. It also encourages philanthropy, they said, because people with large fortunes can make gifts to charity without paying taxes on them. [...]
[United for a Fair Economy] favors a proposal by Rep. Jim McDermott, Democrat of Washington, which would apply a 45-percent tax, with a $2-million exemption per spouse, and index the exemption to inflation. It would also tax assets above $5-million at 50 percent, and above $10-million at 55 percent.
Lee Farris, the group’s estate-tax policy coordinator, says extending the current law, rather than returning to the higher rates that are now set for 2011, would amount to a '$391-billion tax break to the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans over 10 years, at a time when economic inequality has skyrocketed.'
United for a Fair Economy proposes that Congress extend the current rate for one year, but strengthen the tax after that."
Read the full article in the Chronicle of Philanthropy.
"The U.S. Congress is moving toward a stopgap measure to prevent the federal estate tax from expiring Dec. 31, postponing a broader fight over levying the fortunes of multimillionaires when they die.
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus said he would seek to attach the temporary fix to year-end legislation, possibly a defense spending bill. It would draw from a permanent solution adopted by the House on Dec. 3 that freezes the current tax imposing a top rate of 45 percent on estates valued at more than $7 million per couple.
'There’ll be an extension, one-year, two-year, we don’t know,' said Baucus, a Montana Democrat. [...]
The current defense spending bill expires Dec. 18. Baucus said he is considering that measure or another as a way of getting the temporary estate-tax measure adopted.
A prominent proponent of taxing large estates, Bill Gates Sr., father of Microsoft Corp. founder Bill Gates and co-chair of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, urged Congress not to let the tax expire.
'Society has a just claim on these fortunes,' Gates told reporters today on a conference call organized by United for a Fair Economy, a Boston-based advocacy group in favor of keeping the estate tax. “The facts are clear: The estate tax raises substantial revenue from those with the capacity to pay it.” [...]
John Bogle, founder of The Vanguard Group Inc., the largest U.S. manager of stock and bond mutual funds, said he has had plenty of time to plan a substantial estate, providing for his wife, children, and grandchildren. Still, Bogle, 80, said he is 'proud and pleased to pay' taxes on his fortune when he dies."
Read the full article by Ryan J. Donmoyer on Bloomberg.com
// <![CDATA[ /*[CDATA[*/var so = new SWFObject("http://marketplace.publicradio.org/www_publicradio/tools/media_player/s_player.swf", "marketplace_morning_report_2009_12_15_marketplace_morning_report0450_20091215_64s_player", "319", "83", "8", "#ffffff");so.addParam("quality", "high");so.addParam("menu", "false");so.addParam("wmode", "transparent");so.addVariable("name", "marketplace/morning_report/2009/12/15/marketplace_morning_report0450_20091215_64");so.addVariable("starttime", "00:02:05.4");so.addVariable("endtime", "00:03:27.8");so.write("marketplace_morning_report_2009_12_15_marketplace_morning_report0450_20091215_64s_player");/*]]*/ // --> // ]]>
BRETT NEELY: The House has already voted to extend the estate tax through next year and beyond. It will apply to estates larger than $3.5 million. Now it's the turn of the Senate, which is occupied with health care.
A group of some of America's wealthiest people are campaigning for the federal estate tax, which affects estates larger than $3.5 million, to extend beyond 2011. [...]
Members of the Gates and Rockefeller families say the tax is essential to preventing an aristocracy, says Lee Farris. She's an organizer with the group United for a Fair Economy that's working with the families.
LEE FARRIS: Our country is founded on being a meritocracy, where you have to get ahead on your own merit.
BRETT NEELY: In the big picture, the estate tax is pretty small. Fewer than 1 in 400 families ever pay it, according to the Tax Policy Center. And it will raise about $14 billion this year, compared to over $800 billion from the income tax. [...]
See the full transcript of this news report on American Public Media's Marketplace.
"The best solution [to funding healthcare] is for Congress to adopt the House proposal to slightly raise income taxes on couples with incomes above $1 million and individuals with incomes over $500,000 [...] Another progressive alternative is the Senate proposal to raise the Medicare payroll tax on income over $250,000 for married couples ($200,000 for individuals).
To make health care work and address the most vital needs of our nation, we need a fair tax plan. The funding fight over health care will set the stage for other battles in Congress, including over attempts by right-wing forces to cut back on the estate tax — the only tax mechanism in federal law to reverse the concentration of wealth in fewer and fewer hands.
Let’s hope increased taxes on the rich stay in the final health care bill and we get back to the principle in America that taxes should fall most heavily on those who can best afford to pay them."
Read the full article by Karen Scharff and Bob Cohen on Syracuse.com.
"For the first time in decades, Washington is daring to tackle financial
reform. It took the collapse of the whole sector and the resulting
public outrage to get them started, and it will take pressure to keep
them going. It’s not certain that Congress and the Obama administration
will have the courage to prioritize the long-term health of our economy
and the legitimate interests of the public over the self-serving
demands of their friends on Wall Street.
Three steps are essential: regulating executive compensation, separating financial “casino” activities from regular banking, and creating a consumer financial protection agency."
Read the full article in The Register Citizen.
"President Obama's Afghanistan troop surge decision caused considerable rancor among liberal House Democrats Tuesday at the same time they are being asked to vote this week on a measure cutting taxes for millionaires. [...]
The House bill would set the estate tax at 45 percent with an exemption for up to $3.5 million in inherited assets per individual, at a $234 billion cost. That figure would not require offsets under a deal House leaders struck with members of the Blue Dog Coalition, provided the Senate passes statutory pay/go language.
But that is an abstract concept to liberals weighing the cost of war and a tax cut for a small group of wealthy families. The House bill would head off the estate tax's scheduled 2011 increase to 55 percent, with the threshold lowered to $1 million. It would protect all but about 5,500 families, or the richest 0.2 percent from the tax, according to the Tax Policy Center.
That's not good enough for those who argue multimillionaires are still getting a free ride. 'I feel that it's a contradiction to vote on a tax break for people worth $3.5 million and above while we're sending troops overseas without any idea how we're going to pay for it,' said Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., co-chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
Rules Chairwoman Louise Slaughter called the $234 billion cost a 'pretty astonishing figure' and suggested some of those revenues should be set aside to help pay for the war. 'The money is going to be needed here if indeed they get enough votes to pay for this adventure here in Afghanistan,' Slaughter said. [...]
Advocacy groups such as United for a Fair Economy have been plugging a higher estate tax rate and lower exemption as critical particularly given the state of the economy and need to create jobs. They support a bill from Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., that would set the exemption at $2 million per spouse, adjusted for inflation, with a progressively rising estate tax rate based on the value of an estate. For estates worth up to $5 million, the tax would be 45 percent, rising to 50 percent for up to $10 million and 55 percent for those above $10 million. That would cost about $203 billion, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation.
In an alert to UFE members Tuesday, senior organizer for estate tax policy Lee Farris wrote the McDermott bill was the best policy 'because our country needs funds for long-overdue investments in health care, education, clean energy, and other public services -- not more tax breaks for the heirs of the richest 1 percent.'"
Read the full article on RiehlWorldViews.com
"Congress needs to act on an estate bill to prevent the rate from going to zero next year. Advocacy groups such as United for a Fair Economy have pushed for a higher estate tax rate and lower exemption as critical particularly given the state of the economy and need to create jobs. They support a bill from Congressman Jim McDermott (D-Washington) that would set the exemption at $2 million per spouse, adjusted for inflation, with a progressively rising estate tax rate based on the value of an estate. For estates worth up to $5 million, the tax would be 45 percent, rising to 50 percent for up to $10 million and 55 percent for those above $10 million."
Read the full posting on Rotor.com.
Dear Estate Tax supporter,
In case you haven't already heard, the Senate failed to extend the estate tax at its 2009 level before the end of the year.
Because the Senate failed to act, the estate tax will disappear for one
year starting Jan. 1, 2010. That failure is fiscally irresponsible and
Now, Senate leaders are rightfully pledging to act in early 2010 to reinstate the federal estate tax retroactive to January 1, 2010 (see background below).
Call toll-free 800-830-5738 or 202-224-3121 (Capitol switchboard) and ask to be connected to your two US Senators and your Representative, or call their direct line. Then, ask for the staff person who handles taxes, or tell the person who answers the phone:
- My name is _____________. I am a constituent.
- I urge you to pass an extension of the estate tax very early in 2010, and make it retroactive to Jan. 1, 2010.
- I support an estate tax that is stronger than 2009 law, because our country needs funds for middle class investments in health care, education, clean energy, and other public services – not more tax breaks for the heirs of the richest 1 percent.
- I strongly oppose any efforts to weaken the estate tax, such as the Lincoln-Kyl proposal for a $10 million exemption per married couple and a 35% rate.
PLEASE CALL YOUR SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVE IN THE FIRST WEEK OF JANUARY!
Email me, Lee Farris, at email@example.com to let me know what you heard and how it went. If you get a reply email or a letter from your legislator, please send me a copy.
Last month, we held a major press event with Bill Gates Sr., Vanguard founder John Bogle, Richard Rockefeller, and SEIU's Anna Burger. Together they called on Congress to pass a stronger estate tax, and joined UFE in support of the Sensible Estate Tax Act by Rep. Jim McDermott (HR 2023) which represents a middle ground between the 2009 and 2011 estate tax laws.
You can read and hear their statements online, and see all the resulting media coverage, including The Wall Street Journal, NPR, and Fox News.
The Americans for a Fair Estate Tax coalition also condemned the Senate failure extend the estate tax in a letter to all Senators (PDF).
THIS IS THE YEAR! 2010 is
hugely important for the estate tax, so please stick with us, as we'll
be in touch with monthly updates and calls to action.
We need as much support as possible, so please share this alert with anyone you know who may want to get involved. And, post it on blogs, Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, and everywhere else you communicate.
Thanks for taking action,
Senior Organizer on Estate Tax Policy
United for a Fair Economy
Senator Baucus, chair of the Senate Finance Committee, has said that he
wants the Senate to pass a retroactive extension of the estate tax law
early in 2010. UFE urges the Senate to act as soon as possible, and to
make the estate tax stronger than 2009 law, which has a $7 million
exemption for married couples ($3.5 million for individuals) and a 45%
rate on amounts above the exemption.
The absence of the estate tax in 2010 will actually hurt farms and small businesses. In 2009, about 5500 estates nationwide will pay estate tax; of those, only about 100 are farm and small business estates. But in 2010, as many as 71,000 estates, including many farm and business estates, may have to pay capital gains tax on assets they sell that are worth more than $1.3 million.
In 2010, debate over the permanent estate tax will be taking place, and the Senate will be the main battleground. There are several plans already on the table:
- The Sensible Estate Tax Plan. Working with UFE and others, Rep. Jim McDermott (WA) introduced a bill - the Sensible Estate Tax Act, HR 2023 (PDF) – that sets the exemption at $4 million per married couple ($2 million per individual) and establishes a progressive rate structure starting at 45%, with a higher rate of 55% on estates above $10 million. The McDermott bill would result in billions more revenue and would be much more effective at reducing economic inequality than the Obama proposal. The bill is the most fiscally responsible bill of all current proposals.
- The Obama Plan. President Obama has repeatedly said that he wants to return to pre-Bush tax rates on wealthy people earning more than $250,000. Yet his proposal for a permanent new estate tax law would lock us into the weakest version of the estate tax from the Bush-era tax cuts. Obama's proposal calls for a $7 million exemption per married couple ($3.5 million per individual) and a 45% tax rate. Compared to current law, the Obama proposal reduces the estate tax by $234 billion over 10 years. The House passed this proposal (HR 4154) sponsored by Rep. Pomeroy, on Dec. 3rd.
- The Gut-the-Tax Plan. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Federation of Independent Businesses and 44 other organizations have called for a weakened estate tax with a $10 million exemption per married couple and a 35% tax rate. Senators Lincoln and Kyl are expected to introduce this proposal to effectively gut the estate tax. In 2009, 10 Democratic Senators voted for a similar plan: Baucus-MT, Bayh-IN, Cantwell-WA, Landrieu-LA, Lincoln-AR, Murray-WA, Bill Nelson-FL, Ben Nelson-NE, Pryor-AR and Tester-MT.
- The Keep-Pushing-for-Repeal Plan. Although not currently politically feasible, opponents like Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform, and the American Family Business Institute (AFBI), continue to lobby for permanent repeal of the estate tax. AFBI recently announced an effort to campaign against estate tax supporters in the Senate and House. Their main target is Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid-NV.
Did You Know...
- The estate tax has been cut five times since 2001, with the result that few people, including farmers and small business owners, pay it – 99 in 100 people do not pay it. In 2009, a married couple could pass on $7 million tax-free. That's more than the average American earns in four lifetimes!
- Repealing the estate tax would increase the federal deficit by $1.3 trillion dollars over 10 years. Those taxes would likely be shifted from multi-millionaire inheritors to the struggling middle class.
- Cutting the estate tax again would give a huge tax break to the very same corporate executives and Wall Street speculators who wrecked the economy and then paid themselves multi-million dollar bonuses after taxpayers bailed them out.
- The anti-estate tax campaign has been funded by a few super-wealthy families (PDF) who own giant companies like Mars Candy, Gallo Wines, and Wal-Mart.
P.S. Remember to call toll-free 800-830-5738 or 202-224-3121 (Capitol switchboard) to support a strong estate tax, and ask to be connected to your US Senators and your Representative, or call their direct lines.
United for a Fair Economy has been working to preserve the estate tax for ten years. If you would like to support this work, please make a contribution today!
"The latest employment figures sadly unsurprising: with about 35 percent of black men aged 16 to 24 unemployed, the epidemic of joblessness in Black America encapsulates a nationwide crisis. Although high unemployment and deep racial disparities are nothing new, the depth and length of the recession has prompted progressive economists and community groups to warnof an impending "social catastrophe."
The Economic Policy Institute, a progressive think tank, has outlined the racial and ethnic dimensions of the crisis, noting that the mainstream statistics reflect only part of the problem:
[...] Altogether, 17.5% of the labor force is underemployed—more than 27 million Americans, including one in four minority workers. [...] we can expect a third of the work force, and 40% of workers of color, to be unemployed or underemployed at some point over the next year.
NAACP President Ben Jealous said in a recent joint statement by civil rights groups, 'Black people in the U.S. are the canaries in the coal mine... What we get tends to hit everybody later.'
A deep recession would see median U.S. family income decline by 4% and Black income decrease by 6%. Thirty-three percent of Blacks and 41% of Latinos would be in danger of falling out of the middle class into poverty compared to 25% nationally.
Of course, there are reasons to focus on the black unemployment crisis other than what it might portend for white unemployment.The figures spell out how systemic inequality is woven into the fiber of the economy. United for a Fair Economy's research on the racial wealth divide depicts a chronically skewed distribution of opportunity: poverty rates among blacks and Latinos is more than double that for whites, and even among the so-called middle class, economic stability is eroding faster for people of color."