Bruce Bartlett

Of all the tax cuts enacted during the Bush administration, none has been more controversial than repeal of the estate tax. Even though it represents only a very small part of the total revenue loss from the 2001 and 2003 tax bills -- and isn't really repealed, anyway, since it comes back in 2011 after disappearing for just one year -- left-wing activists have focused inordinate attention on the estate tax. They are still hoping to prevent its permanent repeal and are working overtime to fight the effort in Congress.

 Advocates of estate taxation have made two important converts, who have given their campaign a lot of credibility and publicity. They are Bill Gates Sr., father of the Microsoft guy, and George Soros, a billionaire investor. Since the estate tax is supposedly a tax on great wealth, and since these two men are extremely wealthy, it gets peoples' attention when those who appear to be victims of the tax support it. It may make those with modest wealth feel guilty about supporting estate tax repeal.

 In January, Soros had this to say: "The estate tax is the least damaging of all our taxation because it does not interfere with wealth creation. It increases social equality. It is so obvious estate taxation is a valuable taxation and we should keep it."

 Of course, it is true that a tax cannot affect someone who is dead. But to say that the estate tax has no effect on the living is ludicrous. It has an enormous impact on the work incentives of the living, once they are past the point of providing for themselves in retirement. For those who is well-to-do late in their working lives, one can reasonably add the estate tax rate to the tax rates they already pay on income and capital gains. This raises their overall tax rate to virtually confiscatory levels.

 Also, many studies have shown that estate taxes drain capital from small businesses, force them to pay heavily out of current earnings for life insurance to pay the tax, encourage the sale of family businesses to larger competitors and lead to other actions that may not be justified economically. That is why economists have long held that the estate tax is especially pernicious.

 For example, Adam Smith: "All taxes upon the transference of property of every kind, so far as they diminish the capital value of that property, tend to diminish the funds destined for the maintenance of productive labor."

 C.F. Bastable: "Succession duties first of all possess the grave economic fault of tending to fall on capital or accumulated wealth, rather than on income; they therefore may retard progress."

Bruce Bartlett

Bruce Bartlett is a former senior fellow with the National Center for Policy Analysis of Dallas, Texas. Bartlett is a prolific author, having published over 900 articles in national publications, and prominent magazines and published four books, including Reaganomics: Supply-Side Economics in Action.

Be the first to read Bruce Bartlett's column. Sign up today and receive delivered each morning to your inbox.

©Creators Syndicate

Due to the overwhelming enthusiasm of our readers it has become necessary to transfer our commenting system to a more scalable system in order handle the content.

Check out Townhall's Polls on LockerDome on LockerDome