Wednesday, Aug. 16, 2006 | 7:39 a.m.
You've got to love letter writer Charles Gould's generous nature ("With estate tax, you pay tax man twice," Aug. 10). But it is a little misplaced: Instead of giving to charity, he seems to prefer to give his money to the super-rich. I'm not talking about people who are just well-to-do. I am talking about the wealthiest 5 percent of Americans who happen to own (approximately) 50 percent of the shares traded on the New York Stock Exchange.
Now, personally, I believe that it does take tax revenue to run the government and those taxes have to come from somewhere. If a super-rich person leaves $100 million and the estate tax is 1 percent (a rate that has been proposed), the heirs may have to pay $1 million in taxes.
My yearly "contribution" is about $10,000. I would have to work 100 years to pay that $1 million in taxes. That's on wages I earn, not money I happen to inherit. Most of the super-rich do not "earn" their money. Many of them have inherited money that has been in their family for generations. Many receive dividends on their investments that, by the way, is technically "unearned" income.
I agree that the estate tax is very unfair. But I believe it is unfair to the middle class. We have to shoulder the burden of paying more taxes because the super-rich don't want to pay any. I definitely do not share Mr. Gould's brand of generosity.
Bob Litt, Las Vegas
archive
