Estate tax emerges as key Democratic beef in Obama's compromise
December 12th, 2010
03:37 PM ET
12 years ago

Estate tax emerges as key Democratic beef in Obama's compromise

Washington (CNN) - House Democrats will allow a vote on the tax compromise reached by President Barack Obama and Republicans but will try to change the deal, especially an estate tax provision they believe is beneficial to the wealthy, one of their leaders said Sunday.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, who heads the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, told reporters that the package will get a vote in the House despite a threat by House Democrats last week to prevent it from reaching the floor.

Filed under: Congress • President Obama • Taxes
soundoff (14 Responses)
  1. Four and The Door

    Democratic politicians never met a tax increase they wouldn't vote for. But good luck getting them to reduce spending, entitlements, earmarks, adding new government departments and agencies...

    What is it about private industry and personal ambition outside of government that they so hate?

    December 12, 2010 03:43 pm at 3:43 pm |
  2. Right Leaning Independent

    Just like a Dem to try and steal more money from a dead persons estate that they paid taxes on their whole lives. Disgusting that these folks want more of our money to spend needlessly. I hope Repubs abandon this entire bill and take it up next year making tax breaks retroactive and eliminating the death tax entirely... This would serve the Dems right!!!!!!!!!!!

    December 12, 2010 04:22 pm at 4:22 pm |
  3. Tess

    Yes, to the Tax Cuts for ALL. ALL taxpayers should benefit.
    Leave the estate tax provision alone.
    Keeping the tax rates the same DOES Not Add to the Deficit. Unnecessary Federal Government Spending Adds to the Deficit.
    If you want to change anything, extend the unemployment benefits for only 2 more months not 13 months. 13 more months of extended benefits WILL ADD to the DEFICIT.

    December 12, 2010 04:28 pm at 4:28 pm |
  4. jean2009

    Let them all expire

    December 12, 2010 04:33 pm at 4:33 pm |
  5. the real ib

    The estate tax is one of the worse taxes ever. A person pays all their life to leave something to the kids and then some if not all of it has to be sold in a lot of cases to pay for this robbery of a dead person. Disgusting

    December 12, 2010 04:35 pm at 4:35 pm |
  6. vic nashville tn

    We are talking about Tax cut for rich when 10% Americans don’t have job and Middle class losing their standard of living ridiculous

    Government must focus on creating jobs NOW

    December 12, 2010 04:54 pm at 4:54 pm |
  7. duke of hazard

    Don't worry vic, Barry Soetoro will rescue us all.

    December 12, 2010 05:18 pm at 5:18 pm |
  8. GuyinVA

    Who gets a tax cut, Vic? If this is passed, anyone with the audacity to die (The Audacity of Death – sounds like a great book) with $1 million or more, has to forfeit 35% of their family's inheritance. If they manage to kick the bucket before 2011, it's all tax free. From 0% to 35% doesn't seem like a tax cut to me. This is a leftist temper tantrum based on their belief that all money is government money to be doled out as needed. This is evidenced by their belief that by not raising taxes, the government somehow incurs a cost. Cost comes with spending money, not failing to forcibly take from a hard working person. The belief that a wealthy person having money somehow robs a person of lesser means of their money is ridiculous.

    December 12, 2010 06:28 pm at 6:28 pm |
  9. jules sand-perkins

    The concept of taxing a person's legacy to his children is extreme immorality, expecially when those taxes are then given by the government to persons who never done enough work to have anything to leave to their own children.
    When the recipient of my estate taxes is then giving birth to children to qualify for monthly government handouts, the scam becomes laughably evil.
    How welfare-motivated mothers–Dads too–must giggle at respectable people who get up and go to work in the morning!

    December 12, 2010 07:31 pm at 7:31 pm |
  10. jules sand-perkins

    I can comprehend the conceivable morality of, as a last resort, emergently taxing estates to fund WARS to defend our nation.
    However, it is never moral to tax a successful person's estate to give money to those who do not support themselves with some kind of productive work.
    Having babies that will be trained to avoid work does not constitute productive work, even if you call it "labor."

    December 12, 2010 07:48 pm at 7:48 pm |
  11. Marcus in Greensboro, NC

    The tax cuts haven't created jobs in the 10 years they have been around, and I doubt they will over the next 2 years. These tax cuts did add to the deficit, because they weren't paid for. There was never anything setup to pay for the loss of revenue of the tax cuts. The estate tax only effects those at the top anyways, so I really could careless about it. Obama compromised because Senate Democrats keep getting in the way of everything. They never do anything together, and they even crossed the aisle to vote against the $250,000 and $1,000,000 limits on the tax cuts. If they keep doing things like this what do they expect to happen? He showed leadership by getting something done, and I applaud him for his efforts. If things get tweaked, hopefully it will be in a way where most of the provisions in the compromise stay in place. I like everything, but keep tax rates the same for millionaires who have not done anything productive with the money over the past 10 years.

    December 12, 2010 08:01 pm at 8:01 pm |
  12. jules sand-perkins

    Any tax money used to fund abortions for impoverished, unmarried women is well spent, as it prevents welfare payments.
    Some priests, seeing that such abortions may lessen the availability of altar boys and tithes, are likely to pronounce these abortions sinful.

    December 12, 2010 08:06 pm at 8:06 pm |
  13. Albo58

    The ghoul tax needs to be eliminated NOW! The Dimwits trying to tax dead people comes as no surprise since they use a lot their votes to win elections!

    December 12, 2010 08:20 pm at 8:20 pm |
  14. roccyraccoon

    Of by and for the people – not of by and for the rich. How many jobs did the rich create with the Bush era tax cuts? the answer is – some. The extra staff they hired to look after their newly bought homes and yachts. Tax cuts for the rich only increase the chasm between the rich and the rest of the world. Obama caved again. What about "hope and change"? I thought I remember him saying that we ALL had to feel the pain through this recession ( depression)? I guess that he forgot that the politicians and rich are exempt. When is government and the rich going to give up 20% of it's buying power like the middle class did over the past ten years? People- time to wake up and realize that politicians ARE the rich. Why would they be willing to give up cash when they can smile at you while they empty your pockets. See through the lies. Contact your politicians and let them know that you are fed up with politics as it is today. I did and it feels great. Bernie Sanders should be president.

    December 12, 2010 08:53 pm at 8:53 pm |