By DAVE HAMRICK
Editor-at-large

How America reacts to the proposal to do away with the inheritance tax will say a lot about whether we are losing the battle for freedom in this country.

But not for the reasons you may think. The national debate over the inheritance tax thus far has focused on the wrong questions.

Here's how the debate has gone so far:

Republicans have been pushing for repeal of the inheritance tax, saying that it penalizes that most American of institutions, the family farm.

A salt-of-the-earth farmer passes away owning very little liquid wealth, but hundreds of acres of good farming soil. He wants to pass the farm along to his children, and at least one of them wants to keep the enterprise going.

But in walks the federal government, thrusting its greedy hands into the pockets of the deceased and demanding money... lots of money.

Though farmer Brown had only a couple hundred thousand dollars in his Roth IRA, his 1,500-acre farm is worth $2.5 million if developed as a subdivision with swimming pool and tennis courts. Therefore, his heirs will be taxed as if they had almost $3 million in a safety deposit box somewhere. They owe the feds about a million and a half.

With only $200,000 in the Roth IRA, they have no choice. They have to sell the farm to pay the taxes.

It's an awful scenario, but those who argue on the other side of the debate will tell you that it's rare — extremely rare — that the inheritance tax causes that sort of problem.

Much more common is the scenario in which the rich, fat cat techno tycoon passes away leaving his heirs, who are lazy, stupid and greedy, millions in stocks, real estate and good old spendable cash.

The heirs would spend all the money on booze, fancy cars and world travel, and would probably run the family business (or businesses) into the ground.

The federal government wisely takes half of that inheritance to be redistributed to more deserving people before it can be wasted by these ne'er-do-wells. Some goes to single mothers to help educate their children, some to Medicare and some to help save the environment from other rich, fat cat corporate types.

And so goes the debate, with Democrats and Republicans arguing over who is more deserving of the money.

Both sides miss the point by a country mile.

The question is not who deserves the money more, or which of the above scenarios is more likely. Sometimes the heirs are going to be deserving, sometimes not. Sometimes the single mother is going to put the money to good use, and sometimes she's going to use it to leave the kids in a rat-infested apartment while she goes down the street to score some crack.

The question is who the money belongs to. And the answer is that it belongs to the man or woman who earned it, through investment or labor, and it is that person's right to leave it to whomever he or she chooses.

Those who want to redistribute this wealth may argue that earnings are always taxed, and the government has a right to tax this inheritance.

I would agree, except for one insignificant but powerful fact: whether you're talking about farmer Brown or some fat cat tycoon, the person who earned this wealth paid taxes on every dollar of those earnings as they came in.

Or the wealth will be taxed in due course. If the money is in an IRA and the heirs liquidate that IRA in order to receive their inheritance, then the interest and capital gains will be taxed accordingly.

If it's in real estate and that land is sold, again the proceeds will be properly taxed.

There is simply no logical justification for the government to rifle the pockets of the dead and snatch away half of the accumulated wealth of a lifetime of hard work and wise investing, especially considering that the government already took half of every dime as it was earned.

If the majority of Americans think that it's good and right that the government redistribute this wealth, then we may have won the Cold War, but our victory is hollow. We have lost sight of the ideal of freedom.

Back to Opinion Home Page | Back to the top of the page