Comments on: Tough luck for dumb luck http://www.trustsestateslaw.com/2009/04/tough-luck-for-dumb-luck/ comments on New York wills, trusts, estates, and elder law Wed, 13 Jul 2011 13:24:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: yair http://www.trustsestateslaw.com/2009/04/tough-luck-for-dumb-luck/comment-page-1/#comment-64 yair Wed, 29 Apr 2009 21:59:00 +0000 http://trustsestateslaw.com/2009/04/tough-luck-for-dumb-luck/#comment-64 Saul, i don't think people think like that. when they work they aren't thinking about estate tax. at least not people younger than 60. they do think about income tax, but income tax is not being raised to 50%. it is being raised from 35% to 39.5%. the guy paying more is thinking about how to increase his revenue to get back that 4.5%. a guy who made $1,000,000 in 2008 and paid $350,000 in income taxes is not going to say "why should i work so hard 2009 if i'm going to have to pay $45,000 more." (though i do believe that the hike is only on $750,000 not on the first $250,000) Saul, i don’t think people think like that. when they work they aren’t thinking about estate tax. at least not people younger than 60. they do think about income tax, but income tax is not being raised to 50%. it is being raised from 35% to 39.5%. the guy paying more is thinking about how to increase his revenue to get back that 4.5%. a guy who made $1,000,000 in 2008 and paid $350,000 in income taxes is not going to say “why should i work so hard 2009 if i’m going to have to pay $45,000 more.” (though i do believe that the hike is only on $750,000 not on the first $250,000)

]]> By: Saul Elnadav http://www.trustsestateslaw.com/2009/04/tough-luck-for-dumb-luck/comment-page-1/#comment-63 Saul Elnadav Wed, 29 Apr 2009 16:14:00 +0000 http://trustsestateslaw.com/2009/04/tough-luck-for-dumb-luck/#comment-63 I don't think that the argument that taxes are a disincentive to hard work relies solely on people making purely conscious decisions. The argument is that as the reward for additional effort is reduced, people are less inclined to make the effort. Put simply, would you work as hard as you work now if your salary were cut in half?<br /><br />Robert Frank is arguing that because luck and circumstances, not just effort, play a big role in success, taxing those who benefit most from society is justified. Even if that were true and acknowledged, I don't see how you can disassociate effort and reward in people's brains. It may be that on a macro level raising taxes is on the whole beneficial. But I don't think the argument that it stifles hard work is specious. I don’t think that the argument that taxes are a disincentive to hard work relies solely on people making purely conscious decisions. The argument is that as the reward for additional effort is reduced, people are less inclined to make the effort. Put simply, would you work as hard as you work now if your salary were cut in half?

Robert Frank is arguing that because luck and circumstances, not just effort, play a big role in success, taxing those who benefit most from society is justified. Even if that were true and acknowledged, I don’t see how you can disassociate effort and reward in people’s brains. It may be that on a macro level raising taxes is on the whole beneficial. But I don’t think the argument that it stifles hard work is specious.

]]> By: yair http://www.trustsestateslaw.com/2009/04/tough-luck-for-dumb-luck/comment-page-1/#comment-62 yair Wed, 29 Apr 2009 15:58:00 +0000 http://trustsestateslaw.com/2009/04/tough-luck-for-dumb-luck/#comment-62 1.it is a tax on money that has already been taxed once. so a rich guy in the top bracket who already paid his 39.5% would now have his estate taxed another 50% or so. which leaves us to taxing that guy on whatever he hasn't spent during his lifetime 70% . it just seems unfair that if a guy was frugal, uncle sam gets it. <br />2. if there were no estate tax you'd be out of a job.<br />3. Gefen is probably correct. I doubt anyone will be working less just because Obama is raising taxes for the people in the top bracket 1.it is a tax on money that has already been taxed once. so a rich guy in the top bracket who already paid his 39.5% would now have his estate taxed another 50% or so. which leaves us to taxing that guy on whatever he hasn’t spent during his lifetime 70% . it just seems unfair that if a guy was frugal, uncle sam gets it.
2. if there were no estate tax you’d be out of a job.
3. Gefen is probably correct. I doubt anyone will be working less just because Obama is raising taxes for the people in the top bracket

]]> By: Avrohom Gefen http://www.trustsestateslaw.com/2009/04/tough-luck-for-dumb-luck/comment-page-1/#comment-61 Avrohom Gefen Wed, 29 Apr 2009 14:19:00 +0000 http://trustsestateslaw.com/2009/04/tough-luck-for-dumb-luck/#comment-61 Although I am not a proponent of high taxes, I find the "disincentive" argument specious. Realistically, how many people will make a conscious decision to work less because the government will be taking 40-50% of their earnings? If anything, high taxes may have the opposite effect; work harder to earn more money to achieve your goals because you only get to keep half of it. Although I am not a proponent of high taxes, I find the “disincentive” argument specious. Realistically, how many people will make a conscious decision to work less because the government will be taking 40-50% of their earnings? If anything, high taxes may have the opposite effect; work harder to earn more money to achieve your goals because you only get to keep half of it.

]]> By: Saul Elnadav http://www.trustsestateslaw.com/2009/04/tough-luck-for-dumb-luck/comment-page-1/#comment-60 Saul Elnadav Wed, 29 Apr 2009 03:44:00 +0000 http://trustsestateslaw.com/2009/04/tough-luck-for-dumb-luck/#comment-60 The floor is open for comments. The floor is open for comments.

]]>