logo
Estate tax repeal pending in Congress raises debate over charity, wealth gap

Estate tax repeal pending in Congress raises debate over charity, wealth gap

Yahoo4 days ago

Jun. 3—A proposed repeal of the federal estate tax has advocates arguing about whether it would be a long-overdue fix for small business owners and farmers, or an unnecessary move widening the gap between the haves and have nots even further.
Both U.S. Senators from Ohio are sponsors of the Death Tax Repeal Act of 2025, introduced by Republicans in the U.S. House and Senate, to eliminate the so-called death tax that is part of the federal gift and estate tax system.
"Ohio's family small business owners and farmers spend a lifetime feeding and fueling our nation, and they often hope to pass down their businesses to the next generation. I'm supporting this bill to give hardworking families and farmers relief from the costly tax burden that makes it hard — or even impossible — for them to provide for our communities for generations," said U.S. Sen. Jon Husted, R-Ohio, in a prepared statement.
Opponents say a proposed repeal of the federal estate tax would create broader wealth disparity, discourage charitable bequests and would not benefit the vast majority of Americans.
As of Monday, versions of the bill were in the House Ways and Means committee and the Senate Finance Committee.
The rhetoric around the legislation talks about farmers and small businesses, but a lot of the provisions touted have such high caps that they also help quite large estates, said Blaine Saito, an associate professor at Ohio State University's Moritz College of Law whose focus is on how tax law shapes social policy, the management of the tax system and tax law's interaction with democratic ideals.
2025 individual exemption is $13.99M
Most Americans never pay any gift or estate tax. In 2025, the exemption is $13.99 million for individuals and $27.98 million for married couples. The higher exemption of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act ends this year and will return to the base of $5 million plus an inflation adjustment for individuals. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act proposes increasing the federal estate tax exemption to $15 million a year for an individual, adjusted for inflation, and to make it permanent beginning in 2026.
"A full repeal, or even a very high exemption amount would benefit those with a lot of wealth that they can pass on to their heirs, generally the very wealthy people in society," Saito said.
Even the lower exemption rate is not likely to reach most family-owned small businesses and farms that fall below that threshold, he said.
The estate and gift tax dates to 1916 after President Theodore Roosevelt sought to break up large family trusts and end the excesses of the Gilded Age.
"Repealing the estate and gift tax would be one way of getting back toward large transfers of inherited wealth and further wealth disparities," Saito said.
Tariffs more pressing concern to business owner
Bill Castro, partner and general manager for El Meson, his family's Hispanic-fusion restaurant featuring dishes inspired by cuisine across Spain, the Caribbean and Americas, said he doesn't know what to think about a possible permanent repeal of the so-called death tax.
Three generations of the Castro family work at El Meson at 960 E. Dixie Drive in West Carrollton, founded by Castro's parents.
"I worry every day to pay my payroll, I worry every day to keep my staff working," he said, as many patrons are cash-strapped and dining out less often or only for special occasions.
For Mother's Day, El Meson had more reservations than usual, but it was offset by food prices that doubled.
"My level of reservations have increased but my level of profitability has decreased," he said.
If they want to help small businesses, Castro said lawmakers should consider not taxing server tips and doing something about the economy, particularly the tariffs that have led to escalating prices and financial concerns.
"These other issues are current, affecting us every day," he said.
Estate taxes can harm farmers
Harlan Twp. Trustee Ed Porginski, who owns Sugar Run Farms near Morrow in Warren County, said he supports a repeal of the federal estate tax. Similarly, he supported state lawmakers who permanently repealed Ohio's state-level version of the estate tax about a dozen years ago.
He raises cattle, pigs and grows crops, but mostly his business is selling beef for the freezer. He said it's unlikely any of his three children will want to take over the family farm. One of his sons raises cattle on his own property, another son is a paramedic and he doesn't think his daughter is interested, though she runs the farm's website and social media for her parents.
His support for the estate tax repeal comes from watching people he knew destroyed after losing their livelihood and farm near Mason where their family lived for generations when their parents, at about age 70, were both killed in a plane crash.
"They lost that farm, they couldn't pay their tax," Porginski said. "That was the first time I was introduced to that. That hit really close to home."
Tax exemption affects charitable giving
In 2024, the U.S. Treasury collected approximately $33 billion in estate and gift tax revenues from only about 0.1% of estates that had to pay the tax, according to the Tax Policy Center of the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution, a nonprofit, nonpartisan think tank.
Tax law change has led U.S. charitable giving to drop by billions a year since 2018.
Bequests fell by about $20 billion in 2018, the first year the higher estate and giving tax exemption took effect, according to a study by researchers at Indiana University and the University of Notre Dame.
The federal estate and gift tax, which imposes a tax rate up to 40% outside the exclusion, encourages charitable contributions by allowing dollar-for-dollar deductions for bequests.
"Despite repeated claims to the contrary, there is little evidence that wealth transfer taxes reduce capital accumulation or efficiency, and they certainly can be structured in ways that take account of the special considerations raised by small businesses or family farms," Brookings said.
Saito agreed, and said that measures that help small businesses and family farms include allowing deductions for the full cost of capital.
Brookings advocates an inheritance tax instead of an estate tax. An inheritance tax would correct the unfairness of taxing income from work, saving, or even a lottery win, but leaving inheritances untaxed.
"Our estimates show that inheritance taxes not only can raise more revenue and be more progressive than the existing estate tax, they can also broaden the income tax base, improve equity and raise economic mobility," the institution said.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

If You Invested Every Social Security Check for 10 Years, How Rich Would You Be?
If You Invested Every Social Security Check for 10 Years, How Rich Would You Be?

Yahoo

time27 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

If You Invested Every Social Security Check for 10 Years, How Rich Would You Be?

One common criticism of Social Security is that Americans would be much better off financially if the money they paid into the retirement program through payroll taxes was instead invested into private investment accounts. That same argument can be applied to Social Security checks — seniors would have much more wealth if they invested their checks as soon as they got them. Be Aware: For You: But is this a reasonable request for most people, especially those on a fixed income? To help find the answer here is a closer look at how much you could earn by investing your Social Security checks over a decade. For those seniors who can afford to invest all of their Social Security checks, the potential payoff is considerable. The following table shows how much profit you would have made if you invested every Social Security check over the past 10 years into the S&P 500, from 2015 through the beginning of 2025. The data includes the average Social Security check by year as previously reported by GOBankingRates. It also includes the average annual return of the S&P 500 from 2015 to 2025, as cited by Macrotrends (other sources might reflect different returns). Up Next: A couple things to keep in mind: The figures below are based only on yearly averages, which means they don't include month-to-month fluctuations that happen with the stock market. They also don't include other types of investments — such as crypto or real estate — that would have produced very different returns. Year Avg. monthly SS check Total SS payments for year S&P 500 return Profit/loss for year 2015 $1,341.77 $16,101.24 -0.73% -$117.54 2016 $1,360.13 $16,321.56 +9.54% +1,557.08 2017 $1,404.15 $16,849.80 +19.42% +3,272.23 2018 $1,461.31 $17,535.72 -6.24% -$1,094.23 2019 $1,455.22 $17,462.64 +28.88% +5,043.21 2020 $1,489.30 $17,871.60 +16.26% +2,905.92 2021 $1,517.98 $18,215.76 +26.89% +4,898.22 2022 $1,615.96 $19,391.52 -19.44% -3,769.71 2023 $1,696.35 $20,356.20 +24.23% +4,932.31 2024 $1,909.01 $22,908.12 +23.31% +5,339.88 2025 $1,976 $23,712 +1.96% +$464.76 Total profit/loss +$23,432.33 According to the table above, if you invested all of your monthly Social Security checks in the S&P 500 over the past decade, your nest egg would have grown by over $20,000. That kind of return should bring cheer to financial gurus, like Dave Ramsey, who recommends applying for Social Security retirement benefits as early as possible. For example, you could start collecting benefits at age 62 instead of the full retirement age of 66 or 67 and then immediately invest every monthly payment. There's just one problem with that reasoning. A large percentage of seniors don't have the financial ability to put their Social Security checks into stocks, bonds, mutual funds, exchange-traded funds, real estate, crypto or other investments. They need the money to pay the bills. For about half of U.S. seniors, Social Security provides at least 50% of their overall retirement income, according to research from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. For about one in four seniors, Social Security provides at least 90% of income. These folks have a hard enough time making ends meet, let alone tossing their Social Security checks into various investments that might or might not pay off. Nonetheless, for retirees who can afford to invest their benefit checks, there's a pretty good chance those investments will pay off and boost your retirement savings over the long haul. More From GOBankingRates Mark Cuban Warns of 'Red Rural Recession' -- 4 States That Could Get Hit Hard 9 Downsizing Tips for the Middle Class To Save on Monthly Expenses 10 Genius Things Warren Buffett Says To Do With Your Money This article originally appeared on If You Invested Every Social Security Check for 10 Years, How Rich Would You Be? Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

A $2.8 billion settlement will change college sports forever. Here's how.
A $2.8 billion settlement will change college sports forever. Here's how.

Boston Globe

time37 minutes ago

  • Boston Globe

A $2.8 billion settlement will change college sports forever. Here's how.

A: Grant House is a former Arizona State swimmer who sued the defendants (the NCAA and the five biggest athletic conferences in the nation). His lawsuit and two others were combined and over several years the dispute wound up with the settlement that ends a decades-old prohibition on schools cutting checks directly to athletes. Now, each school will be able to make payments to athletes for use of their name, image and likeness (NIL). For reference, there are nearly 200,000 athletes and 350 schools in Division I alone and 500,000 and 1,100 schools across the entire NCAA. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Q: How much will the schools pay the athletes and where will the money come from? Advertisement A: In Year 1, each school can share up to about $20.5 million with their athletes, a number that represents 22% of their revenue from things like media rights, ticket sales and sponsorships. Alabama athletic director Greg Byrne famously told Congress 'those are resources and revenues that don't exist.' Some of the money will come via ever-growing TV rights packages, especially for the College Football Playoff. But some schools are increasing costs to fans through 'talent fees,' concession price hikes and 'athletic fees' added to tuition costs. Q: What about scholarships? Wasn't that like paying the athletes? A: Scholarships and 'cost of attendance' have always been part of the deal for many Division I athletes and there is certainly value to that, especially if athletes get their degree. The NCAA says its member schools hand out nearly $4 billion in athletic scholarships every year. But athletes have long argued that it was hardly enough to compensate them for the millions in revenue they helped produce for the schools, which went to a lot of places, including multimillion-dollar coaches' salaries. They took those arguments to court and won. Advertisement Q: Haven't players been getting paid for a while now? A: Yes, since 2021. Facing losses in court and a growing number of state laws targeting its amateurism policies, the NCAA cleared the way for athletes to receive NIL money from third parties, including so-called donor-backed collectives that support various schools. Under House, the school can pay that money directly to athletes and the collectives are still in the game. Q: But will $20.5 million cover all the costs for the athletes? A: Probably not. But under terms of the settlement, third parties are still allowed to cut deals with the players. Some call it a workaround, but most simply view this as the new reality in college sports as schools battle to land top talent and then keep them on campus. Top quarterbacks are reportedly getting paid around $2 million a year, which would eat up about 10% of a typical school's NIL budget for all its athletes. Q: Are there any rules or is it a free-for-all? A: The defendant conferences (ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, SEC and Pac-12) are creating an enforcement arm that is essentially taking over for the NCAA, which used to police recruiting violations and the like. Among this new entity's biggest functions is to analyze third-party deals worth $600 or more to make sure they are paying players an appropriate 'market value' for the services being provided. The so-called College Sports Commission promises to be quicker and more efficient than the NCAA. Schools are being asked to sign a contract saying they will abide by the rules of this new structure, even if it means going against laws passed in their individual states. Advertisement Q: What about players who played before NIL was allowed? A: A key component of the settlement is the $2.7 billion in back pay going to athletes who competed between 2016-24 and were either fully or partially shut out from those payments under previous NCAA rules. That money will come from the NCAA and its conferences (but really from the schools, who will receive lower-than-normal payouts from things like March Madness). Q: Who will get most of the money? A: Since football and men's basketball are the primary revenue drivers at most schools, and that money helps fund all the other sports, it stands to reason that the football and basketball players will get most of the money. But that is one of the most difficult calculations for the schools to make. There could be Title IX equity concerns as well. Q: What about all the swimmers, gymnasts and other Olympic sports athletes? A: The settlement calls for roster limits that will reduce the number of players on all teams while making all of those players – not just a portion – eligible for full scholarships. This figures to have an outsize impact on Olympic-sport athletes, whose scholarships cost as much as that of a football player but whose sports don't produce revenue. There are concerns that the pipeline of college talent for Team USA will take a hit. Q: So, once this is finished, all of college sports' problems are solved, right? A: The new enforcement arm seems ripe for litigation. There are also the issues of collective bargaining and whether athletes should flat-out be considered employees, a notion the NCAA and schools are generally not interested in, despite Tennessee athletic director Danny White's suggestion that collective bargaining is a potential solution to a lot of headaches. NCAA President Charlie Baker has been pushing Congress for a limited antitrust exemption that would protect college sports from another series of lawsuits but so far nothing has emerged from Capitol Hill. Advertisement

Andrew Yang Is Ready to Team Up With Elon Musk
Andrew Yang Is Ready to Team Up With Elon Musk

Politico

time40 minutes ago

  • Politico

Andrew Yang Is Ready to Team Up With Elon Musk

Andrew Yang has reached out to Elon Musk with a sales pitch: Let's build a third party together. The former 2020 Democratic presidential candidate has been pushing his independent Forward Party for several years — and he sprang into action after Musk's feud with President Donald Trump erupted and Musk polled X users on whether they wanted a new political party. In an interview with POLITICO Magazine, Yang said he hasn't heard back from Musk yet, but he's optimistic. Yang also acknowledged he doesn't agree with Musk about everything, but said that his Forward Party should appeal to those across the political spectrum. And don't forget that Musk had endorsed Yang's previous presidential bid. Enormous hurdles exist to breaking through in America's two-party system. But Yang argued the American public is ready for a change, particularly if the effort gets help from the richest man in the world — who also happens to control a massive social media platform. 'Elon has built world-class companies from nothing more than an idea multiple times, and in this instance, you have the vast majority of Americans who are hungry for a new approach,' Yang said. 'I'm happy to spell it out for Elon or anyone else who wants to head down this road: A third party can succeed very quickly.' This conversation has been edited for length and clarity. I saw that you retweeted a post Elon Musk made about needing 'to create a new political party in America that actually represents the 80 percent in the middle.' Have you reached out directly to Musk about creating a new party or working with your Forward Party? I have reached out, and some mutual friends are also looking to connect us. Have you heard back yet? Not yet, but I assume he's been very busy. We have been of the opinion that America needed a new political party for a number of years, and so waiting another 24 hours is nothing. Is he someone you'd want to work with to build a third party? I want to work with people that recognize that America's political system has gone from dysfunctional to polarizing to even worse. And at this point, the fastest growing political movement in the United States is independents. They feel like neither party represents them, and the two-party system is not delivering what they want to see. And the two of you have seen dysfunction on both sides — you on the Democratic side and Musk on the Republican. If you think about what animates Elon, he wants to get us to Mars, and I feel that he's been driven these last several years by an opposition to 'wokeness,' by what he sees as excessive bureaucracy, and by waste and overspending in the federal government. And in our two-party system, he thought that Trump was the better choice. If you look at Musk's politics over the last number of years, he waited in line to meet Barack Obama, he endorsed me in a Democratic cycle, and even earlier in this cycle — 2024 — he was looking for an alternative to Trump. There are a number of things that I think Elon shares in common with a lot of other folks I talk to who want to see some kind of middle ground or balance. The problem is: In our two-party system, you get whipsawed either one direction or the other. I will say that the deficit in spending, neither party has done a good job of addressing it, because as soon as they're in power, they don't want to make the tough choices. You're coming politically from the center-left; Elon Musk is coming from arguably the hard right. How would you overcome your political differences? If you look at the Forward Party makeup, my co-chairs include Christine Todd Whitman, who was governor of New Jersey and EPA secretary under George W. Bush, and Kerry Healey, who was lieutenant governor of Massachusetts under Mitt Romney. And I would say that the three of us don't line up on every issue, but we're in lockstep on the fact that America's current political system is not delivering real solutions or results, and both parties are captive to perverse incentives. Anyone who wants to modernize and restore the American political system, so that it actually listens to people and communities, we can agree on that. And that is the mission. The fact is that the two parties do a great job of falsely segmenting us along some ideological spectrum, saying, 'Oh, you want this? You're over there. You want this? You're over there,' when in reality the current system is not going to deliver what either of those sides want. Unless what they want is strife and conflict and mistrust. But is that enough to maintain a third party or does there need to be a political or policy goal that propels the party forward? Are there any specific policies that you feel like you agree on with Musk? The three pillars that we're operating on are dignity, dynamism and democracy, which is something that most Americans can get behind. But in practical terms, if you can imagine three or four U.S. senators who are from a new party, they could work with either side to get things done and would become the most powerful legislators in the country, because their votes might be necessary to pass any legislation. And I dare say that you would have a much more interesting and balanced set of solutions as a result. What about his work to dismantle USAID and cause havoc in much of the federal government? Did you agree with that? One thing I found interesting was that a number of moderate Democrats signaled over the last 24 hours that they would be open to receiving Elon as an ally as a result of his feud with Donald Trump, despite him being essentially one of their primary boogeyman over the last number of weeks. I don't have to agree with everyone's past decisions in order to agree that the primary mission has to be getting our political system back in a place where it's actually responsive to both the views and the needs of the American people, and right now, we don't have that. Anyone who's kept up with me over the last number of years knows that I've been driven by the fact that AI is going to transform our economy in ways that push more and more Americans to the side. That is playing out before our eyes right now in real time, with [Anthropic CEO] Dario Amodei coming out saying that entry-level white collar work is going to be automated, and that we need to think bigger about solutions. I think that Dario is right. I've been making the same case since 2019, 2018. I'd ask anyone who is reading this right now, 'What is the current plan when it comes to the economic changes that are going to be brought by AI?' The answer is, 'Not much.' Because our current political class does not have to address that issue, or any of a panoply of other issues in order to keep power. They have done an expert job of gerrymandering the country into red zones and blue zones, such that all of us are looking up, wondering, 'What the heck is going on?' Speaking of AI, do you think Musk could be a good partner on that? If you look back at the [2020] cycle, he was openly saying that AI was going to have a massive impact, and he did endorse me while I was running as a Democrat on some of those solutions. Musk has become very polarizing to much of the country. Who are the people you think you'd attract if you built a third party with Musk? Again, people have come to the Forward Party from all different walks of life and different ideologies. Elon has a very, very significant following and megaphone, and you can see that with the number of people that have voted on his post about starting a third party. It's about 5.3 million votes, with 81 percent saying yes, it is time to create a new political party, and Forward has gotten thousands of new followers just in the last 24 hours, because we are the preeminent effort to modernize and rationalize America's broken political system. I'm thrilled that others are waking up. Do you think Elon Musk is actually serious about creating a new party? What do you think he wants out of all this? I haven't spoken to Elon recently, but I think there are several things that are animating him, and very, very high on his list is America's financial solvency. I think he's deeply frustrated by the fact that he wanted to reduce waste in government, and then the Republicans turn around and propose a bill that would increase the deficit by two and a half trillion dollars. If your goal is to have the government on a positive fiscal path, that's not the way to do it. I think Elon's frustration is shared by lots of other Americans who realize that when push comes to shove, politicians don't want to make the tough choices that would be necessary to put us on a sustainable path — certainly politicians from the current parties. I saw [JP Morgan CEO and Chair] Jamie Dimon speak the other day, and he seems to share similar concerns and had a number of very sensible proposals. But you realize that it would take a figure, in my view, who's not of the two major parties to make some of these solutions happen. Is that person Elon Musk? I think there are any number of people that if they were to be elected as an independent or a Forward Party member, they would then be able to propose the common-sense solutions that most Americans say we need. One figure that I'm very excited about that recently declared that he was running for governor of Michigan as an independent is [Detroit Mayor] Mike Duggan, who has turned around Detroit, and before that, turned around a hospital chain. Someone like Mayor Duggan would make very sensible choices for the state of Michigan, free of party constraints. You can imagine someone doing that at the national level. Millions of Americans would love to see that happen. I have a feeling that the right independent ticket could galvanize a tremendous amount of energy, because more and more Americans sense that the status quo isn't working and that neither party has our interests at heart or wants to solve the tougher problems. Elon Musk is clearly still very new to politics. Why do you think he knows what it would take to build a third party that could actually overcome all the hurdles that exist in our 2-party system? Elon has built world-class companies from nothing more than an idea multiple times, and in this instance, you have the vast majority of Americans who are hungry for a new approach, as evidenced by the overwhelming response to Elon's poll and to every other poll that shows that not only are half of Americans saying they're independent, but more than two thirds are saying that the current political system is not working. I'm happy to spell it out for Elon or anyone else who wants to head down this road: A third party can succeed very quickly. Just to throw some numbers out to you, there are over 500,000 locally elected officials around the country, and up to 70 percent of those races are not meaningfully contested. Up to 10 percent of those positions go unfilled, and thousands of those positions are technically non-partisan, which includes many, many mayors and county executives. So if the Forward Party were to simply start recruiting and contesting at scale, which you could do with a certain level of resources, you could have thousands, even tens of thousands, of locally elected officials within one cycle. You could have several U.S. senators and a very serious presidential ticket within the next several years. At some point you have to wonder, 'OK, when do the American people raise their hands and say, 'I get it. This system is not meant to deliver good things. It's meant to deliver me thinking that my neighbor is bad and out to get me'?' Eventually, enough of us have to get together and say, let's create a positive, independent political movement that can drive us towards solutions, and also is able to say, 'You and I don't agree on everything, but you're a good person. I believe in your good will.' I don't think that goodness or character are somehow confined to any one party or another. I don't think that people on the opposite side are my enemies, and let's create a system that actually will make us feel good about our future. Even if every last measure does not line up with me, I know that the people who are adopting it actually are making earnest, sincere efforts to move us forward. Do you think Musk is a good person? Or does the desire to recruit people who also want to create a third party trump any character assessments? I'm someone who tends to judge people by their actions more than anything else. And Elon Musk has done more for sustainability on this planet than virtually any other human, and that's something that I think is incredibly estimable and admirable. I've been in public life now for a number of years, and I'm sure I've said or done things that people can brandish and say, 'Oh, I disagree with this person.' I live my life trying to use actions as the guiding principle. I try to hold other people to a standard where actions and impacts are much more important than statements or misstatements. If Musk were serious about building a third party, what do you think the path would look like with the help of his money and social media platform? It would be very straightforward. I've spent several years looking at it. You can start with candidates like Mike Duggan, who are running as independents in very significant races, in this case, for the governorship of Michigan. You could energize tens of thousands of local candidates and wind up with thousands of elected officials very, very quickly. You could create a fulcrum in the U.S. Senate. I call it the Legislator Liberation Fund, where you could offer to buy out senators or members of Congress from their contract with their current party by funding their next election, and they could vote their conscience. There are a lot of legislators who are on the verge of retirement who might take that and say, 'Okay, I don't have to grovel before the donors for the last number of years. I can actually try and fix American politics.' There are multiple members of Congress I've spoken to whose ears are very, very open to that kind of offer. In the scheme of things, none of the things I'm talking about are that expensive for someone with a certain level of resources. I'll give you the opportunity to make a direct sales pitch to Musk: What would you say to him in this moment to get him on board and help fund the Forward Party or the creation of a new party? Elon, the political class will never get serious about putting America on a path to sustainability, and you've seen it up close. You know that if it's going to happen, it's going to be from some new force in American politics. Help us build it.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store