Words denoting prestige and respect gradually lose their original meaning and association in a free society. Commercialization will tap into the prestige of the word, while radicals are always looking for something to rebel against. "Civil Marriage" is one such word. Many want its respect and benefits, but few want to adhere to the rules that made it socially respectful and State supported. [PROTOTYPES - 3 blogs]]
Allegedly, inheritance Federal taxes should not be required from legally married same-sex spouses, because the USA Constitution prescribes due process for all USA citizens.
Actually, estate or gift tax should not be imposed on anyone at all, because that money or property inherited or received as a gift has already been purchased with funds which were taxed, plus the purchase itself also triggered more taxes already paid. For any government to levy a tax on inheritance, in essence, is naming itself as "inheritor" too. Unfortunately the laws are made sometimes solely to provide income for the government. And without government we would have no laws.
In trying to protect widows, the Federal government makes a distinction between estate inherited to an individual and an estate inherited to a spouse (in practice, most commonly a widow). Large gifts obtained from an individual or a spouse are considered as inheritance, just in case the gift would become a way to avoid the inheritance tax. Of course, the law can be written differently, if a State Legislature or the USA Congress amends it, respectively. But big chunks of money always draw the attention of Legislatures, because they can find funds for the government in one easy, guaranteed sweep, for inheritances are often highly formalized, even if not disposed of by a will (intestate).
Yet, assuming that the estate (or gift) tax laws of a State have anything to do with those of the Federal government is incorrect. A particular States's laws are passed by a State legislature, and Federal laws are passed by USA Congress. Often, States adopt Federal laws as State laws, but not vice versa.
Also, each State's Legislature decides whether the estate or gift tax laws, or civil marriage laws from another State are respected or not; There are Supreme Court decisions defending each State from having to accept another State's laws (otherwise, no State could really decide their own laws), unless a State law is found to go against the favored interpretation of the USA Constitution, at the US Supreme Court level. --------- (continued in comment, below)
If a relationship between two persons is not recognized for estate or gift tax exemption or reduction, the tax defaults to that of "unmarried" relationships. If a will exists, the difference in estate (or gift) tax is that for a married couple minus that for an unmarried couple. Emotional matters or financial need do not enter into the equation, in the same way that these are not relevant in other "unmarried" cases.
The 14th Amendment relates to the responsibility of the States. The relevant part of Section 1, reads: "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities [sic] of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Due process at the Federal level, is according to the categories set by Congress, and currently "law of the land". Congress can change them, but not the States, nor the courts, nor the President, nor public opinion.
The USA Constitution (in the 5th Amendment) requires due process from the Federal government, in the context of criminal law. It reads: "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
Actually, estate or gift tax should not be imposed on anyone at all, because that money or property inherited or received as a gift has already been purchased with funds which were taxed, plus the purchase itself also triggered more taxes already paid. For any government to levy a tax on inheritance, in essence, is naming itself as "inheritor" too. Unfortunately the laws are made sometimes solely to provide income for the government. And without government we would have no laws.
ReplyDeleteIn trying to protect widows, the Federal government makes a distinction between estate inherited to an individual and an estate inherited to a spouse (in practice, most commonly a widow). Large gifts obtained from an individual or a spouse are considered as inheritance, just in case the gift would become a way to avoid the inheritance tax. Of course, the law can be written differently, if a State Legislature or the USA Congress amends it, respectively. But big chunks of money always draw the attention of Legislatures, because they can find funds for the government in one easy, guaranteed sweep, for inheritances are often highly formalized, even if not disposed of by a will (intestate).
Yet, assuming that the estate (or gift) tax laws of a State have anything to do with those of the Federal government is incorrect. A particular States's laws are passed by a State legislature, and Federal laws are passed by USA Congress. Often, States adopt Federal laws as State laws, but not vice versa.
Also, each State's Legislature decides whether the estate or gift tax laws, or civil marriage laws from another State are respected or not; There are Supreme Court decisions defending each State from having to accept another State's laws (otherwise, no State could really decide their own laws), unless a State law is found to go against the favored interpretation of the USA Constitution, at the US Supreme Court level.
--------- (continued in comment, below)
--------- (continued from comment, above)
ReplyDeleteIf a relationship between two persons is not recognized for estate or gift tax exemption or reduction, the tax defaults to that of "unmarried" relationships. If a will exists, the difference in estate (or gift) tax is that for a married couple minus that for an unmarried couple. Emotional matters or financial need do not enter into the equation, in the same way that these are not relevant in other "unmarried" cases.
The 14th Amendment relates to the responsibility of the States. The relevant part of Section 1, reads:
"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities [sic] of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Due process at the Federal level, is according to the categories set by Congress, and currently "law of the land". Congress can change them, but not the States, nor the courts, nor the President, nor public opinion.
The USA Constitution (in the 5th Amendment) requires due process from the Federal government, in the context of criminal law. It reads:
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
FURTHER READING: BIPARTISAN LEGAL ADVISORY GROUP MOTION TO DISMISS IN A RECENT INHERITANCE TAX LAW SUIT (by Paul D. Clement, et. al., August 1, 2011)
Caché copy
History and complexity of the USA 5th amendment (including "due process"): FIFTH AMENDMENT (USA), RIGHTS OF PERSONS (by U.S. Government Printing Office. Document not dated.) Caché copy
GENERAL READING: ESTATE TAX IN THE UNITED STATES (by Wikipedia, the free encycopedia, article Rev. July 31, 2011.)
Caché copy