The article discusses the Republican opposition to the estate tax, branded as the 'death tax', highlighting how recent reforms raised the exemption limit significantly to benefit the wealthy. The author critiques the justification for these changes and contrasts it with existing tax structures, questioning the morality of inheritance. Citing Mary Wollstonecraft’s views on the negative societal impacts of inherited wealth, the article suggests that the tradition of inheritance is not justified solely by its historical prevalence. It calls for a re-examination of the moral implications associated with hereditary wealth amidst broader tax debates.
Trump justified the change based on his claim that it is unfair that people pay taxes twice: once when they earn the money, once more when their assets are inherited. This ignores the fact that those inheriting the assets did not pay the first taxes on it, so they are not paying the tax twice.
While inheritance is seen by some as an ancient tradition and a right, there are rational arguments against allowing it at all. Also, as with any tradition and common practice, it would be a fallacy to infer its traditional nature and common practice justify it.
Mary Wollstonecraft argued that hereditary wealth is morally wrong because it produces idleness and impedes people from developing their virtues. While complicated to sort out, this does present an empirical claim: one could do a statistical analysis of the impact of hereditary wealth on idleness and virtue.
Interestingly, while conservatives aggressively oppose estate and inheritance taxes, they also use an argument against welfare that would also apply to the continuation of inherited wealth.
Collection
[
|
...
]