Equal Opportunity and Inheritance Taxation

Article by Anne L. Alstott

Equality of opportunity is understood to be one of the bedrock principles supporting the taxation of inheritance. The familiar idea is that inherited wealth offers an unjustified head start for some individuals at the expense of others. In political theory, this principle is closely identified with the branch of liberalism known as resource equality. But the resource equality ideal has not been fully translated into the legal literature. The major legal writings on inheritance taxation use the term “equal opportunity” quite generally and often blend equal opportunity with goals that are distinct, like wealth equalization.

This Article revisits the topic of inheritance taxation to see whether a single-minded focus on equality of opportunity, interpreted as resource equality, can shed new light on questions of legal design. I conclude that the present estate tax and major proposals for inheritance taxation only weakly track the equal opportunity principle. A system of inheritance aimed at equality of opportunity would look radically different from current law and from classic proposals for reform. It is an open question whether an inheritance tax structured along these lines could be made politically attractive, and in this Article, I do not attempt that task. Instead, my aim is to show the surprising gap between both current law and major reform proposals, on the one hand, and equal opportunity, rigorously interpreted, on the other.

I draw out four implications of equal opportunity for the design of inheritance taxation. First, the equal opportunity principle supports inheritance taxation in combination with a social inheritance, meaning a government expenditure program that would pay a universal, public inheritance. Second, in an equal opportunity regime, gifts and inheritance received from close relatives would be taxed, while those received from peers, spouses, friends, and strangers would be exempt. This counterintuitive rule would reverse the standard result, which is to tax inheritance from parents, children, and other close relatives at rates equal to or lower than those at which inheritance from others is taxed. Third, the equal opportunity view implies no penalty on so-called “generation-skipping transfers,” which occur when a grandparent leaves her wealth to her grandchildren rather than to her children. Fourth and finally, equal opportunity suggests higher rates of taxation on gifts and bequests received by younger individuals than on those received by older individuals.



121 Harv. L. Rev. 469 (2007) | DOWNLOAD PDF | LEXIS NEXIS | WESTLAW



MORE FROM THIS ISSUE

ARTICLE: Timing Rules and Legal Institutions

NOTE: The Case for Compulsory Voting in the United States

NOTE: Oversight and Insight: Legislative Review of Agencies and Lessons from the States

RECENT CASE: North Carolina Supreme Court Finds No Jurisdiction over New York Trust. — Skinner v. Preferred Credit, 638 S.E.2d 203 (N.C. 2006), reh'g denied, 643 S.E.2d 591 (N.C. 2007).

RECENT CASE: New Jersey Supreme Court Holds that Restrictions in Common Interest Community Do Not Violate the State's Constitution. — Committee for a Better Twin Rivers v. Twin Rivers Homeowners' Ass'n, 929 A.2d 1060 (N.J. 2007).

RECENT CASE: Ninth Circuit Removes Bar on Admission of a Defendent's Reading Material To Show Intent To Solicit a Minor. — United States v. Curtin, 489 F.3d 935 (9th Cir.2007) (en banc).

RECENT CASE: Tenth Circuit Invalidates Oklahoma Statute Barring Recognition of Out-of-State Adoptions by Same-Sex Couples. — Finstuen v. Crutcher, 496 F.3d 1139 (10th Cir. 2007).

RECENT CASE: Ninth Circuit Holds that 18 U.S.C. § 924(C)(1)(A) Defines a Single Firearm Offense. — United States v. Arreola, 446 F.3d 926 (9th Cir.), superseded on denial of reh'g and reh'g en banc, 467 F.3d 1153 (9th Cir. 2006), cert. denied, 127 S. Ct. 3002 (2007).

RECENT CASE: Texas Supreme Court Holds that Trial Court Lacks Subject Matter Jurisdiction over Professional Negligence Claim Against Professional Counselor/Church Pastor. — Westbrook v. Penley, 231 S. W.3d 389 (Tex. 2007).

RECENT PUBLICATIONS: Recent Publications

IN MEMORIAM: In Memoriam: Clark Byse


Harvard Law Review
Gannett House
1511 Massachusetts Ave
Cambridge, MA 02138

Editorial Office:
617-495-7889
617-496-5053 (fax)

Business Office:
617-495-4650
617-495-2748 (fax)