Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Furball on September 04, 2003, 06:43:21 AM
-
Just curious, do any other countries have inheiritance tax apart from this POS country?
Here if someone dies and they leave belongings that total over £250,000 (pretty much every house here in the south east is more than that alone) The deceased relative has to pay 40% tax to the government on it.
So, theoretically if my mother passed away tomorrow (god forbid) and left the house to me, i would have to move out of my home, sell it, and pay 40% to tony ****ing blair.
My grandfather recently passed, and this situation has got me mighty pissed. He started his own business, worked hard for his money, paid taxes all his life, fought for this country. And now relatives have to pay taxes on his possesions that have already been taxed twice already (income tax, and tax when purchased)
And what do we get for paying all these taxes? **** roads, **** healthcare, **** government and to top it all - crappy weather.
All our money does is pay for asylum seekers and slackers.
Anyone recommend a nice country for a 19 year old to move to?
-
Russian Federation has it too :mad:
The good thing about it is that when you inherit realty (in my case - a flat in a military town near Moscow) - they calculate it's price using "Technical inventarisation" price, that is 10-20 times less then market price.
After dealing with all the heritage documents I came to a conclusion that instead of inheriting anything you'd better persuade your relatives to present (gift) the property to you. Otherwise you will soon descover dozen of relatives who remembered about your family's very existance only when they understood they can get something from your heritage. The other thing you'll discover will be the fact that even if you have testament (will) that you inherit 100% of the property - it doesn't mean anything, and other long-forgotten relatives will get up to 50% because of some strange law :mad:
-
problem here is if you are presented a gift, and within 7 years the person who presented you the gift dies, you still have to pay 40% tax on it.
Guess russia is off my potential country to move to list! ;)
-
over $500,000 ??
classifies you as "rich" - yes you can afford it :)
-
Originally posted by Eagler
over $500,000 ??
classifies you as "rich" - yes you can afford it :)
£250,000 = about $350,000 - 400,000
You saying that if you died tomorrow all the things you leave will not be more than that? including your estate?
-
They have it in The US also...but I think it starts at $1 Million and larger...and it's 33%. There are ways around it if you plan your estate well.
-
Well, I doubt assylum seekers get most of our money. And the social budget is only a fraction of total taxation income.
The best way to do it is to legally avoid the inheritance tax with some smart accounting. There are ways to do it if you get the right advice.
£250,000 houses are not average anywhere except London and the wealthy South Eastern suburbs.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
Well, I doubt assylum seekers get most of our money. And the social budget is only a fraction of total taxation income.
Where does all the money go? what really works in this country?
trains?.... no
roads? .... no
healthcare? ... if i wasnt lucky enough to be covered by private healthcare, i would be dead now from a problem with appendix, so definately not.
Pensions? .... no
Sports scheme's/Education? ... no
War? ... maybe
People claiming benefit that dont need it? ... maybe?
Originally posted by Dowding
£250,000 houses are not average anywhere except London and the wealthy South Eastern suburbs.
You cant help where you live, £200,000 will only buy a small house or decent flat around here. And as for london you will be looking at a near 7 figure average.
-
Originally posted by Furball
problem here is if you are presented a gift, and within 7 years the person who presented you the gift dies, you still have to pay 40% tax on it.
Guess russia is off my potential country to move to list! ;)
Damn. They are smart.
I thought that times have changed since Beatles wrote "Taxman"...
State needs taxes to feed people collecting taxes, people supervising people collecting taxes, people deciding how much taxes they need to feed people collecting taxes, etc. ad nauseum...
Last year Russian government dismissed State Tax Police. The reason was that the money they collect (in fact - force to pay) are not enough to feed them.
In 1996 the number of state administration empoyees in Russia was 2 (two) times bigger then USSR had in 1989, including Party officials. USSR population was almost 300 millions, while RF is only 150 millions. Guess why we have no money for teachers and doctors, not even speaking about fundamental science.
-
Originally posted by Furball
Where does all the money go? what really works in this country?
trains?.... no
roads? .... no
healthcare? ... if i wasnt lucky enough to be covered by private healthcare, i would be dead now from a problem with appendix, so definately not.
Pensions? .... no
Sports scheme's/Education? ... no
War? ... maybe
People claiming benefit that dont need it? ... maybe?
You cant help where you live, £200,000 will only buy a small house or decent flat around here. And as for london you will be looking at a near 7 figure average.
Are you sure that you speak about UK, not Russia, and London, not Moscow?... :eek:
-
Furball, I think the best you can hope for is to win a double rollover and go buy a small island somewhere.
(http://image1ex.villagephotos.com/extern/640697.jpg)
-
Boroda, this is a great country with great people - ruined by bad government.
The thieving liars in power at the moment are the worst of them all.
-
1) Do you have any idea how much money the government receives in taxation?
2) Do you have any idea how much of that is spent on assylum seekers?
I think answering those questions will put things in perspective for you.
As for house prices in the South East - well, it is the centre of the universe isn't it? It always will be expensive.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
1) Do you have any idea how much money the government receives in taxation?
2) Do you have any idea how much of that is spent on assylum seekers?
I think answering those questions will put things in perspective for you.
As for house prices in the South East - well, it is the centre of the universe isn't it? It always will be expensive.
i didnt just say asylum seekers, i said
All our money does is pay for asylum seekers and slackers.
Notice AND slackers, genuine people needing help is fine, its just these good for nothing milkers im talking about. And no i do not know the actual figures, its just the impression i get from what i see and hear day in day out.
And Dowding im beginning to understand more and more you just post on here to disagree and start arguing with people.
and why are you going on about the south east being centre of the universe for? i never implied anything like that at all.
Why not piss off to another thread and bug them instead? or even better piss off from here all together. .
-
The U.S. "Death Tax": I wouldn't complain furball, ours is much worse, the highest in the world in fact. It actually employs a small corporation of Gov't employees just to collect and maintain income of this tax. .65 cents of each dollar collected goes toward this.
What is the rate of the estate, gift and generation-skipping tax
(which is really a Death Tax)?
After utilization of a $625,000 exemption, the rate of tax is 37% and once assets have reached the size of $3 million, the rate of tax is 55%.
What is the applicable lifetime exclusion amount?
The applicable lifetime exclusion amount is $625,000 in 1998 –- scheduled to increase in uneven increments to $1 million in 2006. It is the amount that an individual can pass, free of gift tax during life or estate tax at death to anyone they choose.
How much revenue is raised by the Death Tax?
A little over 1% of the government’s revenue was generated from the death tax in 1998.
What size estates file estate tax returns?
89% of all taxable estates filed in 1995 were $2.5 million or less in size.
Estates of what asset size pay estate taxes?
54% of all estate taxes paid in 1995 came from net taxable estates of $5 million or less.
What country has the highest rate of Death Tax?
Japan has an inheritance tax of 70%, but after credits and exemption it is an effective tax rate of 30.3%. The United States has the highest rate of estate tax in the world at the rate of 55% and an effective rate of 44%.
Is the Death Tax a disincentive for the growth of family businesses?
In a study conducted by The Tax Foundation it was found that to match the disincentive effect of the estate tax, income taxes would have to be raised up to roughly 70% or almost twice the top marginal income tax rate of 39.6%.
When is the "Death Tax" due?
The tax is due 9 months after the date of death, and is payable in cash.
What is the history of estate, gift and generation-skipping taxes?
The Death Tax was initiated in 1916 to fund World War I. It was maintained in the tax code through the 20’s and 30’s to help prevent the concentration of wealth. Since that time, anti-trust laws have eliminated those concerns, but to date the Death Tax remains intact.
What is the cost to collect the Death Tax?
It costs approximately 65 cents for every $1.00 of revenue for the collection and compliance costs of the death tax.
What is the general public’s attitude towards repeal of the death tax?
In national polls, focus groups and instant response sessions – 75% of respondents believe that the death tax should be repealed.
How many family businesses are there in America?
Within the definition that the family controls the business either by stock or through management, 91% of all businesses in America are family owned.
How does the death tax affect the succession of the family business to future generations?
More than 70% of family businesses do not survive the second generation; 87% do not make it to the third generation.
What is the generation –skipping tax?
The generation-skipping tax or GST is a tax on assets that you pass on to your grandchildren at an effective 80% rate, once you have utilized your GST exemption.
Have the assets that are taxed with the death tax been taxed before?
Yes. Those assets have been taxed with income tax and capital gains tax, as well as other taxes.
How many states have repealed inheritance taxes?
Twenty states have repealed inheritance taxes, five states (Delaware, Indiana, Kansas, North Carolina and Alaska) most recently in 1998 and 1999.
What is the economic effect of repealing the death tax?
In a study done by The Center for the Study of Taxation, it was determined that if gift, estate and generation-skipping taxes had been repealed in 1971, by the year 1991 there would have been 262,000 more jobs, $46.3 billion more in GDP and $398.6 billion more in capital.
How does the small business community view the death tax?
Unfavorably. 150 trade and industry organizations have formed the family business estate tax coalition, whose sole purpose is to repeal the death tax.
-
socialism is a bad thing... the more of it you have... the worse off you are.
lazs
-
President Bush pushed hard for a phase out of our "Death Tax." I may be wrong but it seems that Congress balked on this.
Many of those that cry about freedom lost don't give a rats bellybutton about the freedom to spend your own money, go figure.
-
When my grandfather died in the late 70's, the farm depression and Carter's inheiritance taxes almost sank our family farm. It was years before we dug ourselves out.
-
Originally posted by Dune
When my grandfather died in the late 70's, the farm depression and Carter's inheiritance taxes almost sank our family farm. It was years before we dug ourselves out.
No dis to your grandfather, mind you...but what was the debt owed vs. estate-worth percentage?Its wise to consider this if you own a business that relies on equipment debt vs. estate worth. (I know this because it happened to our neighbor in Minnesota where I was raised)
-
Here it's 5 % to 55 % depending of the amount and 0 if you are living in Corsica.
-
Originally posted by Furball
£250,000 = about $350,000 - 400,000
You saying that if you died tomorrow all the things you leave will not be more than that? including your estate?
thanks for the correction
yes, it would be over that - that is why I have a full time food tester :)
-
My point still stands - money spent on assylum seekers is a drop in the ocean in terms of taxation income. I think you'd be surprised if you looked into it, as I suggested.
As for the social security expenditure - I assume you mean employment benefit or income support? There are holes in the system, sure, and they get exploited - but there is no system in the world that is fool-proof.
And prices are high in the South East for a reason.
-
Just went through this a couple of years ago. Here you'll get hit with estate tax if the estate is worth over $375,000, and you have an option of using the value of the estate at the date of death or at 6 mo out from the date of death. While the estate is active after death, it is subject to tax on any income earned from the time it is opened. This is, basically, just a personal income tax filing for the deceased and you can use any tax benefits that would normally be able to carry over from the previous tax year just as if the person had not died. ie, if the deceased had a large capital loss that they could have carried over from the previous tax year, you can still use this against the estate's taxable income.
On the other end... Cash received from an inheritance is not taxable income - as it would have been taxed as income to the estate or the deceased. Property & untaxed money (retirement accts, etc) that you recieve as a beneficiary are taxable to you as income. In the case of retirement accts, they aren't taxable until you withdraw the money.
SOB
-
two words....TRUST FUND
-
Seems like what Furball is concerned with is...he doesn't have money or maybe no income? How would he pay the taxes on the house, etc... if he suddenly becomes owner. What if it ain't so easy to get a job? Then what?
I feel for ya Furball. That's gotta be the worst situation I can think of. Dunno what I'd do. Sometimes things work out though. If you worry about it too much, you'll lose your mind. Long as you have friends, you're not gonna starve.
Being philosophical about it, it could even be a blessing in disguise if that happened. You never know who you might meet as a result, and it could change your life dramatically for the better. You could invent something and become a millionaire, for example. The famous painter Goya didn't become famous 'til he worked in a restaurant and bounced some drunk who was molesting a princess (maja), out the door. She got him into the royal academy and he became court painter. Never would have happened if Goya wasn't in the right place at the right time, in addition to painting. Without that, he would have most likely been unrecognized as the father of modern painting.
I just use that example cause I'm an artist, and I all too understand about the no income part. And about what it's like to fall through the cracks of society, though I'm not saying you have Furball. I have. I've been workin on 2 etchings that took about 6 months apiece to do. One year, and I'm just about dead mentally and physically. I sure ain't doing it for my health...LOL. All speculation work. Gambling with my life, so to speak. But I feel I have to do it to survive.
Best thing is to keep in shape, physically and mentally, so you can handle anything that comes along.
Les
-
Thankyou very much for your concern leslie. But i am not worried about me, its the situation my gran, father and aunt are in that makes my blood boil.
I hope your etchings make you a lot of money, not too much though - or the money grabbing taxman will get'cha! :D
-
Thanks Furball. :D
Les
-
America has something on the order of a 40% inheritence tax.
-
Where I never inherited anything, or ever will, can I get a tax credit?:D
-
Hmmm, but when we here in the USA talk about eliminating the death tax, or marriage taxes...the democrats blare out about how badly we need the income to support those living off the government....etc etc
You've made a good point, its unfair and pretty much anyone with any common sense agrees. Then, you have democrats... :p
-
Originally posted by LePaul
Hmmm, but when we here in the USA talk about eliminating the death tax, or marriage taxes...the democrats blare out about how badly we need the income to support those living off the government....etc etc
You've made a good point, its unfair and pretty much anyone with any common sense agrees. Then, you have democrats... :p
Don't the republicans have the power to do anything they want? I thought they are the majority and have the pres. Yet they still point at the Democrats, it's getting old. They have the power to eliminate alot of taxes, but they don't. But I guess it's just alot easier to point at the Democrats. We voted the republicans in, point at them.
-
Inheritance tax = theft. Pure and simple. The money has been earned and all taxes paid on it already (and those are theft too).
-
They did, Sixpence. They just don't have enough votes to make it permament, which is why you're likely to see an outbreak of elderly 'accidents' in 2010.
-
thats probably the tax I dis-agree with most. usually I don't care much about taxes that hit the rich (first of all I'm not included :p , second if you have money the system is working for you and you can afford to pay).
but this one is just wrong. as mentioned before the money has already been taxed (kind of like how pissed I get when I have to claim my tax refund as income, they took too much and when they give it back they think I just made more money).
also it destroys family heritage, family homes, and especially farms are lost after being in familys for generations because there isn't enough liquid assets to cover the taxes on the property.
at the very least the law needs to be modified to exempt property until it is sold, so when you pass down family heirlooms and realestate it is not taxed unless it is sold out of the family.
-
Originally posted by Fatty
They did, Sixpence. They just don't have enough votes to make it permament, which is why you're likely to see an outbreak of elderly 'accidents' in 2010.
Explain "elderly accidents" please Fatty. What does 2010 have to do with it. I'm confused, as always.:confused:
Les
-
Originally posted by capt. apathy
usually I don't care much about taxes that hit the rich (first of all I'm not included :p , second if you have money the system is working for you and you can afford to pay).
that's a really cool sentiment. We should extend that for all goods, bread, sausage, cars, houses...
You don;t pay with dollars, but with a percentage of your salary. Thus the poor could afford everythign what the rich can.
-
Any attempt to remove the inheritamce tax only benefits the "rich" and is no doubt racist in some way... Bush Is worse than Hitler!!!! Anyhow that the opposition argument from the left which aims to steal yet more hard earned money from small business entreprenours and succesful individuals... :D
-
Yes apathy you just think that way and yopu guarnatee that you will be a "not rich" and jelous fool you are now... :)
BTW apathy Mietla does have a good point, that way all people could afford their necceties and some luxuries too no matter what income they brought in. This way the economy would grow because more people would be buying stuff, since in effect their wages are more powerful... Yea you know mietla hit the jackpot.. Mietla... ;) ;)
-
I wasn't even sarcastic. Once you accept some tax/fee/charge in principle, there is no limit on how high and haw far it can go.
Once you decide that income tax is moral/acceptable, nothing prevents the gov. from making it 100%. The only limit you could maintain is a 0, like in abolish it, make it unconstitutional (or rather obey the constitution since Amendment 16 was never properly ratified to begin with).
Same with Captain' statement. Once you accept a notion that "ability to pay" is a determinant of a price of death, the same argument holds for any event (marriage, moving to a new house, Birthday), activity (driver's license), or a purchase (bread, car, house, a yacht or even a corporation).
You want to buy Microsoft? The price for Bill Gates is $40,000,000,000, but Joe Blow on wellfare can buy it for $14.75.
-
I was being sarcastic, not you. :)
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Any attempt to remove the inheritamce tax only benefits the "rich" and is no doubt racist in some way... Bush Is worse than Hitler!!!! Anyhow that the opposition argument from the left which aims to steal yet more hard earned money from small business entreprenours and succesful individuals... :D
It is the Bush administration watching huge oil companies consolidate into one. Small oil is getting crushed.
-
Originally posted by Sixpence
It is the Bush administration watching huge oil companies consolidate into one. Small oil is getting crushed.
This opinion of yours has what exactly to do with inheritance taxes?
-
Furball:
First off, what your government is spending your money on is: "Waste and Corruption". The vast majority of all govenment money is spent on this. Every now and then they goof and actually build a road or kill a terrorist, but this is generally accidental.
You wrote:
Boroda, this is a great country with great people - ruined by bad government.
The thieving liars in power at the moment are the worst of them all.
These statements are more-or-less true of all countries. As far as "thieving liars" go, the one running the USA at the moment is not too bad in my opinion, but I'm certain you can find plenty of US citizens who disagree with me on this.
You might want to search the internet for "country rankings of economic freedom" or something similar. You might find a place you like better. IMO in this regard the USA is significantly better than the countries I have been to in Western Europe, but... it is far from optimal. Maybe you can move to Guernsey.
Hooligan
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
This opinion of yours has what exactly to do with inheritance taxes?
You mentioned small business getting wiped out by the left.
-
Wiped out by government imposed taxation is one thing, forced out of busssiness by competitive inefficiency in another... Like for example when Wal-Mart comes into a town it will often lead to smaller stores closing down beacuse they are unable to compete with Wal-Mart on a price or selection level. Wal-Mart simply enjoys enormous economies of scale and is very demanding of its suppliers even requiring them to upgrade theitr whole businesses so they dont hurt Wal-Marts efficency. This way Wal-Mart has such low prices. In fact no store can compete with them on price, even a giant like K-Mart could not they got clobbored. So a small mom and pop cannot compete direcytly with Wal-Mart. And none of this involves illegal schemese like predatory pricing either, Wal-mart is just incredibly efficient. The benefit to consumers is lower prices and more selection.
But if that same store was forced out of bussiness by death tax there would be no benefit to the community, just a loss.. I'm assuming little of that tax revenue willl come to the community through services or budget as death tax is only 1% of tax revenues nationwide and 65% of that 1% goes to to admin duites for tax collectors.
-
Walmart cannot control supply
-
Explian more what you are saying.
-
I'll try to make it simple, non-monopoly gives you competition and lower prices. Monopoly wipes out competition, gives you higher prices and no alternative.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Wiped out by government imposed taxation is one thing, forced out of busssiness by competitive inefficiency in another... Like for example when Wal-Mart comes into a town it will often lead to smaller stores closing down beacuse they are unable to compete with Wal-Mart on a price or selection level. Wal-Mart simply enjoys enormous economies of scale and is very demanding of its suppliers even requiring them to upgrade theitr whole businesses so they dont hurt Wal-Marts efficency. This way Wal-Mart has such low prices. In fact no store can compete with them on price, even a giant like K-Mart could not they got clobbored. So a small mom and pop cannot compete direcytly with Wal-Mart. And none of this involves illegal schemese like predatory pricing either, Wal-mart is just incredibly efficient. The benefit to consumers is lower prices and more selection.
But if that same store was forced out of bussiness by death tax there would be no benefit to the community, just a loss.. I'm assuming little of that tax revenue willl come to the community through services or budget as death tax is only 1% of tax revenues nationwide and 65% of that 1% goes to to admin duites for tax collectors.
Wal Mart is successful because it cuts out the middle man. Salesmen. Wal Mart, imo, unethically tries to bypass company salesmen to deal directly with wholesalers. Some do and some don't. The ones who don't eventually go out of business.
Les
-
If youre worried about monopoly why not just say so upfront.. And dont patronize me..
Wal-Mart is not a monopoly. Neither are any of the Oil companies now.
And frankly fear of monopoly is no blank slate reason to stop all mergers, acquisitions, or in our case putting out of business inefficent companies. In fact that last point is clearly a part of competitive markets - if you cannot produce efficiently given cutrrent market conditions you will have to go out of business in the long term otherwise you will continue to incurr operating lossess.
-
I believe there are 4 big oil companies, there has been alot of mergers in big oil. They now can control supply= monopoly.
That's how you get gouged at the pump, and not at walmart.
-
Wrong. Monopoly = One... :)
If there are four big ones then depending on market share of the top four then its an oligopoly.
Oddly enough rivals in an oligopoly have very little pricing power - the reasons why this is true are very complicated and I dobut you would belive me or accept why thats true.
Anyway one of the big reasons for such a structure is due to increasing costs of operation like for example federal and state gasoline and environmental regulations that make it more expensive to produce gas so small operations cannnot generate the economies of scale to produce efficently given current conditions. Lets ignore the merits of such regualtions for now but I will add that they are soewhat similar in theit effect as are taxes, like inheritance taxes which do hurt transfer of small business assets..
Gasoline is "expensive" due to world conditions beyond anyones control, then of course due to supply/demand issues like in summer it costs more since more people will want to drive and thus there is an increae in demand, also there is some geographic price discrimination and finally lets not forget taxes which are admittedly merrcifully low in the USA comparec to europe. But of course there is some higher price doue to the ologopilistic market structure of this business - but not in the incorrect and simplistic way you state it and not to that extent.
-
Damn Grunhertz, I hope your not talking to me. The monopoly you've described is only in your mind. Are you trying to tell me there are no decent people left in this world? Some people go out of business, before they'll stiff their salesmen.
Les
-
All i know is what I see at the pump.
If the trend of big oil continues to be that of mergers, you will get more control of supply and prices. The proof is in the pudding. How many taxes and regulations have been implemented the last year with a republican pres? Then look at the prices. I don't think taxes and regulations had anything to do with it.
BTW http://www.biodiesel.org/ Just do it!
-
Leslie are you saying oligopoly does not exist? :)
But no I was not responding to you.
As for the middlemen I would always seek to cut them out of the loop if possible, why pay for their services if I could accomplish the same thing myself and acheve a cost savings for my business. They dont deserve my money, they have to earn it otherwise if they are of no use to the transaaction why increase my costs? It makes no sense.. Just think about it when you are pumping your own gas - think about the poor station attendants who are now unemployed because stations are mostly self service.
Nobody has any inherent right to your money unless they provide value in exchange for it - or steal it through laws or with guns. ;) But I do support income taxes, even progressive ones, sigh..
And if youre a salesman then make sure you are able to provide that value somehow. :)
-
Sixpence the gas prices are very high due to instability in mid east. The gas companies would love nothing more than for the mideast to calm down so crude prices would fall. They could then charge less for a gallon at the pump, this would then cause an increase in quantity demanded, and most likely lead to rise in their revenues and profits. You see they are not "all powerful" as you imagine, they have underlying operational costs too...
-
You can back date a number of years of inheritence tax and if the person has died then also a number of years in advance. i.e. You're only allowed to receive £X of money per year. However if haven't received anything off the person giving then you can claim for the past 'x' many years as well. If you also give so much to charity (which is less than taxation rate) you can also keep more. So you could get a fair bit tax free though I'm unsure of other accounting to help you even more, though like Dowding mentioned, it can be done.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Leslie are you saying oligopoly does not exist? :)
But no I was not responding to you.
As for the middlemen I would always seek to cut them out of the loop if possible, why pay for their services if I could accomplish the same thing myself and acheve a cost savings for my business. They dont deserve my money, they have to earn it otherwise if they are of no use to the transaaction why increase my costs? It makes no sense.. Just think about it when you are pumping your own gas - think about the poor station attendants who are now unemployed because stations are mostly self service.
Nobody has any inherent right to your money unless they provide value in exchange for it - or steal it through laws or with guns. ;) But I do support income taxes, even progressive ones, sigh..
And if youre a salesman then make sure you are able to provide that value somehow. :)
Salesmen have always been an American tradition. They work hard, and should be paid. Don't you agree?
Les
-
Sure but only if they provide value, they are no better or worse than any people but you just dont go giving others money if they dont provide value in goods or services to youn no? I reread the post you wrote and it seems you thought I advocated somehow screwing salesmen after a deal was agreed to, obviously thats unethical.
However if it's possible, on yor end and theirs, to deal with a wholesaler or even better the manufacturer directly then I would take that opportunity and enjoy the lower cost if thtats the case. There is nothing unethical about that, in fact it is the only ethical and smart thing to do IMO for your business if there is a significant cost savings attached.
-
I haven't provided any value, so I guess you don't owe me anything, Grunherz.;)
Les
-
LOL :)
But do you see what Im saying?
-
The oil company mergers happened under Clinton, not that the Republicans have any problem with big business.
The main drivers of volitility in the US marketplace is a downstream refining and distribution system that has been pared to the bone in the past decade. In summer, it operates at 98 percent efficiency which -- when combined with a balkanized reformulated gasoline landscape of 17+ speciality blend clean fuels -- any major disruption (pipline break, refinery fire, etc.) and the system is strained and it's hard just to shif supply to make up a regional shortfall. We got to this point, because it was not efficient for the oil companies to maintain excess capacity downstream. Crude prices are high, but they mainly impact the base price and not the swings.
Back closer to the inheritance tax... there are a lot of small gasoline station dealers who would love for this to be an issue. They just won't be in business long enough. Smaller station operators (dealers), some in the industry for many decades -- $1 or $2 million or maybe in assets if they own the dirt -- the typical small business everyone in Wash. says is their friend.
Now, big oil (the only real money is in exploration and production, not nearly as much in refining and not at all in retailing) wants to shed it's traditional dealer network -- the franchisees that helped make the companies what they are since before WW2. So they offer crappy new contracts at renewal time, and if the dealer balks they mess with rents, adjust supply price (company store down the block selling on the street for less than their wholesale price), set minimum gallon limit clauses, etc. and drive them under, which doesn't take long. They then close the stations or convert them to company stores or sell them to branded jobbers or set up a highly restrictive commission agent system that changes the relationship entirely. And, even though there is some legal recourse, the cost is usually too high to make the stand. There are legislative solutions, but again, small business can't buy politicians nearly as easy as big business.
Next time someone in Washington says "It's for small business..." take a look at who else benefits. As often as not, small business will only benefit by coincidence :) Of course, the same applies to "Its for the farmers..." since ADM is usuall at the top of the benefit chain in that sector.
Charon
-
What I am talking about Leslie is the fact that the death tax will gradually decrease, reaching 0 in 2010.
But in 2011, it will revert to 55%.
-
I bet that 2010 will give us an unusual number of elderly "accidents", and untimely deaths...