[AnimalMuppet]

No, but be careful where you draw the line. In particular, don't draw it between "real estate" and "financial assets". Real estate can easily be a financial asset. Instead, the trick is to draw it between "family farm" and "billionaire who bought 100,000 acres of prime farmland".

[ohashi]

Seems straight forward enough, put a value cap on it. $10 million? 20 million? Is anyone going to feel bad for the poor soul who can't pay the tax bill on a free 20 million dollar home?

We have a limit on gifts and according to this is 13 million. Just make it that.

What would be the downside here other than extremely wealthy having to pay some taxes upon death?

[xboxnolifes]

Make inheritance count toward the gift limit. Have the full $13M limit left on your gifting exemptions? You pass down $13M in inheritance tax free.

[Veserv]

That is literally already how it works.

[throwaway22032]

It's simple really, many people don't see it as a "free home".

It's your home. It's no more free or unfree, earned or unearned than anything else.

The home that I grew up in is.. hell, I'd consider it to be "mine" and my siblings more than almost anything else I have.

[ohashi]

If that home is over 10, 13 or 20m dollars... you can pay tax on it. If you have siblings, I assume it would be divided between you, so multiply value by siblings.

If you got a home worth that much, you can pay some taxes on it.

https://www.mansionglobal.com/articles/more-than-1-500-homes...

1,500 homes sold for over 10m in a year. We're talking about the richest of the rich. That's exactly who should be paying some taxes. The people bitching about losing 'their' home this way... are either a) delusional or b) looking for a way to protect their incredible wealth.

Is your family home worth more than 10 or 20m dollars?

[throwaway22032]

I can pay taxes on one dollar. It's the principle.

In my country our threshold is significantly lower by the way - it's around a million, so bog standard houses get hit by it.

I think that inheritance taxes are wholly equivalent to wealth taxes, e.g. "you have a thing, I like that thing, give me that thing", and therefore morally wrong.

I could agree with them on the basis that the money were minimal and solely used for security e.g. police and military, it's an insurance policy against theft, the Government has a monopoly on force and that's better than warlords.

It's not used that way though, so I reject the premise.

[ohashi]

Basically, you don't believe in government except to protect you from others who might take, while you have would have to ability to take advantage of others freely. No basic humans should be satisified by the government.

That's exactly what the ultra wealthy seem to generally believe too. Sorry that many of us reject your premise that you should be freely protected to screw over everyone else and think that's a moral decision (it's not, but I won't waste my time).

[machomaster]

No house costing a million is just a bog standard house. It's a mansion; if not in size then at least in value.

[throwaway22032]

The greatest privilege I suppose I have is that I am able to consider a bog standard three bedroomed terraced family house as being normal regardless of how much bad Governmental policy has managed to inflate the market value.

[ok_dad]

In Hawaii my house is 870k for a three bedroom built in the 50s on a medium plot. I still agree with your argument other than that.