Ranchers, farmers brace for 'death tax' impact (Should be titled, The Death of the private farmer)

This should be reitterated:

A farmers wealth is determined by the value of their land which means real estate, that they have no control over.

Real estate prices continually go up, and there is absolutely nothing they can do about that.

That is where their "wealth is"

Well, the first so much of an inheritance is not taxed anyway, you can inherit a farm worth a couple hundred grand with no inheritance taxes paid. It can also be left by adding the name to the deed. If you inherit more than that you should be paying taxes on it, you only pay taxes on the part that exceeds the exemption anyway.

Originally posted by hawkiye

Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
The estate tax was created to destroy small businesses and family farms - it doesn't touch the bankers or big corporation. ...

Now we are supposed to pretend the Republicans are saving small farmers? Really? You don't think this is yet another tea bag/rupert murdoch tempest in a tea pot to protect THEIR trust funds?

Its not partisan don't be distracted by the fake partisan divide they are both on the same page working together to steal your wealth and property...

Whether that's true or not -- you have to vote for the SANER position. I cannot reward the flat earth, anti science, pro war and anti-labor party with a vote. Occasionally, they have to pretend to stand for their own rhetoric.

reply to post by VitriolAndAngst

Whether that's true or not -- you have to vote for the SANER position. I cannot reward the flat earth, anti science, pro war and anti-labor party with a vote. Occasionally, they have to pretend to stand for their own rhetoric.

But you will reward the pseudo science, carbon tax, communistic redistribution, spend and theft us into oblivion, still pro war side of the coin and call that SANER? Oh wait they are pretty much the same... Voting for crap or crap with mold on it is still voting for crap...

This fits in with the implamentation of Agenda 21 "Global Agenda for the 21st century".

Please google "Defend Rural America" They will provide links to the actual Agenda 21 manual. Read it for yourself!!!!

This the United Nations global "how to live manual" that was signed in 1992

Now the UN rules - supersede our US rules. THIS IS SERIOUS!!!

Originally posted by oper8zhin

Originally posted by TDawgRex

Farming is not a cheap no brainer business. Buying equipment and maintaining is outrageously expensive, and then there is the weather factor and the shrinking family as well to run the farm.

When I was 5 years old, the farm was 200+ acres that also had forest on it so it wasn’t all tillable land.

... FOX News..."

Since you have a very Right Wing/Conservative ideology, lemme break this all down in terms you may understand:

1) This sounds like a lot of whining to me! The farm is most likely not going your way as you most likely were TOO LAZY and failed to make reasonable judgments. And that is why everything is not perfectly PEACHY!!

2) Tough luck... as equipment and stuff cost money, if you are NOT WEALTHY enough to afford it all, it is YOUR FAULT for being LAZY in the FIRST PLACE!!

3) You had 200 acres and was reduced to 40??? That would most likely point to HORRIBLE INVESTMENTS and lack of HARD WORK to me, and you just need to take "personal responsibility"

4) We all got it tough, and when the farm goes, dont even THINK about taking any "socialized" safeguards to keep any children from starving, as that is just a bad, bad, bad "liberal lefty" thinking.

5) Your on your OWN, America is a society that says TOUGH LUCK, pull your own self up as we dont wanna help any of our fellow citizens.

Just providing Right wing/Conservative logic to help you understand where you may have gone wrong!! ISNT A CONSERVATIVE AMERICA JUST GREAT when you arent winning in life??!!

OH, AND YEA... FOX NEWS!!!

edit on 17-11-2012 by oper8zhin because: (no reason given)

I am not a farmer, my friend is and he been asking for my help figuring out the financial. He is not alone, I am looking at right in front of me.. There no way, I looks for way to cut down on his bills.. There is non.. Unless he need to go on off grid..

death of the private farmer started a long time ago and wha the larger farms cant buy up, companies like that of monsanto are turning the rest into serfs.

reply to post by TDawgRex

I'm sorry for your families lose, but I would not blame it on the govenment and taxes. I would blame it (and my family loss considerable land as well) on factory farming and the consolidation of land and wealth. The costs you speak about could be easily mitigated - (a family trust for one, better management for another - perhaps going organic and away from factory methods whether it be GMOs or huge amounts of chemical fertilizers & pestisides - these are all very expensive.) Perhaps your family bought the Agro-Giant (and pushed by local government land agents) line as did millions of other farmers around the world.

Put the blame where it, move on and open your mind. Do you care about farming and the land or just your own cash flow?

reply to post by FyreByrd


My cousin went organic many years ago. It's a hell of a lot more expensive than the GMO crops as organic has a tendency to fail more often.

Thus he has to charge a higher margin just to cover costs. His farm is his business, not jst to feed his family, but others as well. He could feed his family well on four acres and half the livestock.

Something tells me that you really don't know to much about agriculture.

Why the hell should we tax anyone based on the amount of income they HAVE. If I saved 10 grand a year for the next 10 years, I would have 100k. If I invested wisely I could be a millionaire. I would be "rich" by any definition.

I'm never going to be a millionaire, but if I was better at not spending money I could easily do it. As could anyone who makes a decent wage (and anyone CAN make a decent wage if they work hard enough to get there).

Anyway if we let them get away with this crap, it'll trickle down to the poorest of poor people. Why should we be taxed on what we HAVE? The money was taxed when we made it. Why tax it again? Infact, I "pay" 38% income tax. I do have decent loopholes but I can't count on them being there in a year or a month, so I keep my withholdings the way they are. Then I pay 6% sales tax. of course I travel a lot, so I pay up to 10% sales tax sometimes. What do you think I do with my money? Whats 38% plus 10%? Don't forget extra fees like the $100 or so a year for car registration (we don't pay property tax on cars here, thus higher registration), I pay $89.25 every 4 years to department of homeland security to make sure im not a terrorist, $75 every 4 years to the state for my drivers license (it's a trucker license), this MCCA crap tacked onto my car insurance (Michigan thing), $110 every 4 years to have my second amendment rights, tolls to drive on certain roads, tickets for stupid crap (I drive 100,000 miles a year, cops can be dicks), ...........gas taxes are high as hell in some states as well....

Most people are probably paying over 50% in taxes if you get down to it and include things that the government really doesn't have the right to charge us. I'm not saying we should get rid of drivers licenses but why am I paying $200 a year for something that well.....the state isn't doing anything except changing the picture every 4 years? And does DHS really think a terrorist is going to jump through their hoops to haul hazmat? lol and supposedly taxes added onto gas pay for roads and just because I have a license doesn't mean I *use* it. And they waste the road tax money to a ridiculous degree, improperly filling potholes in the winter repeatedly because the plows rip out the improper patches and then when it melts they come patch it again......uhm, a steam roller is required to do it right..

Originally posted by kaylaluv
reply to post by TDawgRex

 

I haven't read the whole thread, but I know there are ways around this tax. My in-laws own a small ranch with about 100 acres. They have already met with a tax attorney, and he has told them how to get around it. I don't know the details, but it involves moving the ownership of the land over to the three sons now, while my in-laws are still living there. It's set up so that my in-laws are in essence "renting" the land from their sons, and continue working their cattle. Part of the money they make off the cattle is "paid" to the sons, who own the land (not really paid to the sons, but it goes to pay for property tax, etc.). Like I said, I don't know exactly how it works, but the tax attorney is setting it all up, so it's totally legal.

My in-laws are doing this primarily because this land has been in the family for many generations, so it's more for sentimental reasons than anything. None of the sons wants to work cattle, but they want to keep the land in the family.

Life insurance sufficient to cover the estate tax is what people who plan properly use. If profits from the farm are insufficient to cover the insurance premiums then you are likely betetr off selling anyways. The estate tax is not new and any farmer who loses their land because of it simply failed to properly plan. The heirs will do pretty well any time there is significant estate taxes but yes they may lose the family business in the process..

Originally posted by Unity_99
Its highly illegal and you guys are responsible for stopping it. You know phone calls and writing in and visiting their office in large numbers.

House payments/morgage payments and property tax ALL COMES OUT OF AFTER TAX DOLLARS, THAT IS TAKE HOME, NOT GROSS INCOME. Its's all been taxed.

What this tax does is eliminate anyone but the super wealthy from passing their property to their poor children. IF you pass on your 300 000 dollar home to your single mother daughter, she owes suddenly over 150 000 and if she doesn't have it must lose the property, or have a buyer lined up like a vulture waiting for your illness to kill you so she has to sell and can't just live in it.

BUT BUTTOM LINE IS UNLESS SHE IS ALREADY WELL OFF, SHE DOESN'T GET TO LIVE IN HER RIGHTFUL HOME.

DON'T ALLOW IT.

edit on 17-11-2012 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

You don't pay any estate tax if you have $300,000. It's more like $1.2 million before you pay estate tax. The rate is lower than 55% for the first $2.5 million over that amount. Someone with $5 million pays about $4 million.

This right here:

"The idea behind the estate tax is to prevent the very wealthy among us from accumulating vast fortunes that they can pass along to the next generation," said Patrick Lester, director of Federal Fiscal Policy with the progressive think tank -- OMB Watch

This is not a function of government, nor is it Constitutional. The government has no power to dictate who is wealthy, who remains wealthy, or who gets to be a beneficiary of illegal redistribution.

Free country? No effing way.

Originally posted by TDawgRex
I know people are going to say, "Oh, it's FOXNews...", but this IS going on and nothing good can come from it.

www.foxnews.com...

Two quick paragraphs from the article.

Many Democrats argue the tax promotes equality among classes, especially in capital gains -- or stocks passed from one generation to another. Since stocks are only taxed when they are sold, the government can't profit from long-term investments without the estate tax.

And

"Very large portions of very wealthy estates are tied up in stocks and they have never been taxed," said Lester. "The estate tax is one of the ways we make sure the wealthy pay a little bit more as an overall share of their wealth and income compared to low-income individuals."

This is right out of "Atlas Shrugged". Since when is the Government in the business of "Making a Profit?"

Maybe since they decided to spend us, the nation, into debt...ya think?

My family on my Father’s side has been farming in Wisconsin for generations. Farming is not a cheap no brainer business. Buying equipment and maintaining is outrageously expensive, and then there is the weather factor and the shrinking family as well to run the farm.

When I was 5 years old, the farm was 200+ acres that also had forest on it so it wasn’t all tillable land.

Because of taxes and operating costs and weather, it has been sold piecemeal down to 40 acres. It’s still being operated by my cousin, but under the upcoming tax laws, he doubts his sons will be able to take it over.

And another American farm will bite the dust and go to seed.

I thought that this maybe should go into a different forum, but decided upon Political Madness since this is madness thinking that by sweeping a broad tax brush will just hurt the big businesses. It hurts the little guy as well.

There are a myriad of ways around the "death tax", which was around for a verrrry long time until being phased out in recent years. I don't like the death tax, and I'm not saying people should have to "loophole" around it, but, seeing as that is the situation we find ourselves in, why not just do what you need to do to avoid it? No sense in going kicking and screaming into bankruptcy when a short consultation with an attorney could result in completely avoiding it. The big guys, and the ultra wealthy do it, why wouldn't a family farmer?

Its unfortunate that D.C. Won't put together a tax code that can address situations so that a few powerful familiies don't accumulate most of the nation's wealth and just hold it, but, the tax code is stupid, and we all should be fighting stupid with smart, not stupid with ignorance.

reply to post by oper8zhin


What kind of nut are you? I'm guessing an angry nut. Angry that someone doesn't want welfare?

reply to post by sligtlyskeptical

Life insurance sufficient to cover the estate tax is what people who plan properly use. If profits from the farm are insufficient to cover the insurance premiums then you are likely betetr off selling anyways.

Trusts are what people who properly plan use. Life insurance payouts are taxed also as part of the estate so it does no good. Trusts do not require premiums and do not die therefore are not subject to so called death theft to put it in simplified terms...

Originally posted by misskat1
This fits in with the implamentation of Agenda 21 "Global Agenda for the 21st century".

Please google "Defend Rural America" They will provide links to the actual Agenda 21 manual. Read it for yourself!!!!

This the United Nations global "how to live manual" that was signed in 1992

Now the UN rules - supersede our US rules. THIS IS SERIOUS!!!

All courtesy of G.H.W.Bush, the great environmentalist.
Just like his son!!
(sardonic laugh, might as well if we're all going to hell)

This will cause much uproar, instability, and then no moron with a provocative message of "wealth distribution" will be listened to. He will be hung for this sort of crap.

Keep messing with the way the country is and you will be living in a country you might not like anymore. Maybe one day we will condone hanging trouble makers.

More taxes for more public spending. More social programs that will make people simply ask for more. And more. And more. Until we are Europe and everyone wants to collect and not produce.

Welcome to the world we Brits have to live in! We've had these taxes and more for years and it makes dying & death a nightmare! Inheritance tax, v.a.t.,death duty, gift tax (just in case you thought of giving your property to your heirs) they get you every which way. We are, apparently, the most taxed country in the world. I know of people who have been driven to near suicide when parents have died, just having to deal with the red tape and unfairness of it all. There's no compromise with the Tax Man! Oh and God forbid you should save some of your already taxed earnings, coz you'll be taxed on those too!

This is right out of "Atlas Shrugged". Since when is the Government in the business of "Making a Profit?"

Since we all decided that living in a civilization is better than living as a pastoral nomad. Taxes suck...but they are a reality of modern life. Now...hold that thought for a moment and hear me out.

I thought that this maybe should go into a different forum, but decided upon Political Madness since this is madness thinking that by sweeping a broad tax brush will just hurt the big businesses. It hurts the little guy as well.

Of course it does. Especially when the national discussion is boiled down to idiotic simplicity on whether or not taxes are "good" or "bad". Imagine what would happen if all that effort expended on taking the completely unrealistic and indefensible position of "all taxes are bad" was channeled into communicating how a raising taxes on The Peasants is bad and it's time to start taxing the bejeebies out of the obscenely wealthy instead. You know...Obama's whole tax plan.

Don't get me wrong...I'm not a big Obama supporter. Especially when it comes to warmongering, drones, torture, and signing off on police-state martial law bills....but economically the guy has a pretty sound and pragmatic vision for the future. No surprise, really..he didn't come up with it. It's the Clinton Plan. By comparison to today...the '90's sure were a good time, weren't they?

The REAL problem with taxation isn't the "percentages" or the "loop holes". It's that we ascribe taxation rates based upon a two-dimensional paradigm where the X vertice is "annual income" and the Y vertice is "rate of taxation". Sure, it's "simple" and all...but sooner or later it will produce lousy results because we experience the world around us in FOUR dimensions (length, width, depth, and time). Moreover, according to everything we know about the physics which governs the world and universe around us...these dimensions are Relative in their natures...not Classical (i.e. Newtonian or Linear).

Therefore a TRULY sound tax code MUST be built on a four-dimensional data model in which:
X = Annual Income
Y = Rate of Taxation
Z = Total Net Worth (RELATIVE to the rest of the population as a percentile rank)
T = Time Series (i.e. DURATION of time spent at percentile rank Z)

A tax plan which took THESE variables into account would allow us to TRULY "raise taxes on the rich" without screwing the little guy for the first time in human history. After all...I can TOTALLY sympathize with the mom & pop homebuilder who just lost money and/or struggled desperately to break even 5 years in a row who now might finally have a good year again 2013. Let's say the guy profits $250K next year. At first glance it sounds swell to make a guy knocking down $250K a year to cough up a lousy $10-$15K in taxes in order to basically save the country from imminent ruin. Christ...it's the PATRIOTIC thing to do. However...this guy DIDN'T make $250K this year. He only made $50K this year because he broke even the last five years. Hell...he could have pretty easily wound making only $30K per year the last five years if lost money on a couple spec houses.

Now...compare that to douchebag corporate exec who has been raking in $250K per year since 1998 whether his company is making money or not or the young guy who had his first "big year" of his entire life just in time to enjoy getting clobbered with a tax hike. BIG DIFFERENCE IN MORE WAYS THAN ONE! The guy who just FINALLY made $250K or just finally made it AGAIN is much more likely to take that cash and REINVEST IT back into the economy. Our Hypothetical Home Builder hasn't bought a new truck in a MINIMUM of 5 years and quite possibly a lot longer, some of the tools need replacing, and he no doubt would like to hire some additional help since he's probably been doing his job + 2-3 more in order to cover for the people he had to lay off when everything went to hell. The young guy might want to look at buying a house and putting perhaps MORE THAN the minimum 20% down, etc.

However, the corp. exec ALREADY HAS a brand-new car, a house, and a cabin up north. They are far more likely to gamble it away in the Wall Street Casino or buy luxury goods. Unfortunately, buying the wife another $20K worth of jewelry doesn't employ as many people as buying $20,000 worth of manufactured tools.

But MOST importantly...it would allow us to tax the no-talent, lazy, and not particularly intelligent 3rd, 4th, & 5th generation silver-spooners like Romney, Trump, and the Rockefellers an appropriate 80% of their net worths or so in order to reward MERIT instead of essentially being born to nobility like in Medieval Europe.

The catch? The COMMON MAN has GOT to step up the level of their thinking and realize that "simple solutions" aren't adequate and "complex solutions" don't NECESSARILY equate to "clusterf#$%k".