TE||Inheritance tax
1
导读
Estate tax和inheritance tax 的区别
出自《中国翻译》1994年第6期
2
音乐|精读|翻译 |词组
Inheritance tax
继承税
本文英文部分选自经济学人Leaders版块
A hated tax but a fair one
不合情但很合理
“hated是情绪，所以用合情，fair公平即合理”
The case for taxing inherited assets is strong
征收遗产税理由很充分
NO TAX is popular. But one attracts particular venom. Inheritance tax is routinely seen as the least fair by Britons and Americans. This hostility spans income brackets. Indeed, surveys suggest that opposition to inheritance and estate taxes (one levied on heirs and the other on legacies) is even stronger among the poor than the rich.
世上任何一种税收都不招人待见，但有一种税格外让人心存怨恨。英国和美国的民众都普遍认为最不公平的当属继承税。无论来自哪一个收入阶层，大家都对继承税咬牙切齿。的确如此，有调查显示贫困人口比有钱人家更反对征收继承税和遗产税（前者是以继承人为征税对象，后者则以所遗留财产为征税对象）。
Politicians know a vote-winner when they see one. The estate of a dead adult American is 95% less likely to face tax now than in the 1960s. And Republicans want to go all the way: the House of Representatives has passed a tax-reform plan that would completely abolish “death taxes” by 2025. For a time before the second world war, Britons were more likely to pay death duties than income tax; today less than 5% of estates catch the taxman’s eye. It is not just Anglo-Saxons.Revenue from these taxes in OECD countries, as a share of total government revenue, has fallen sharply since the 1960s (see article). Many other countries have gone down the same path. In 2004 even the egalitarian Swedes decided that their inheritance tax should be abolished.
因此，政客们也非常清楚什么样的遗产政策有助他们拉选票。相对于20世纪60年代，今天，如果一个成年的美国人去世，其所留下的遗产需要征税的可能性降低了95%。不仅如此，共和党还打算就此推向极致：众议院已经通过一项税改方案，计划2025年之前彻底废除“死亡税”。二战前的一段时间内，跟个人所得税相比，英国人民更多地是交纳遗产税；而如今只有不到5%的房产足以引起税务部门的注意。该项税收作为政府收入的一部分，不仅在英国大幅缩减， 自20世纪60年代以来，经合组织（OECD）各国的政府通过征收遗产税所取得的财政收入也大幅下降（详见本刊第20页）。许多其他国家也都同声相应，甚至连主张人人平等的瑞典也于2004年决定废除继承税。
Yet this trend towards trifling or zero estate taxes ought to give pause.Such levies pit two vital liberal principles against each other. One is that governments should leave people to dispose of their wealth as they see fit. The other is that a permanent, hereditary elite makes a society unhealthy and unfair. How to choose between them?
然而低财产税或者零遗产税的趋势应该暂缓一下。这种征税将两个重要的自由主义原则摆上了擂台。一方认为政府应该让人们有自由处置自己财富的权力。另一方则认为一成不变的世袭制精英阶层会让社会变得不健康和不公平。如何从两者中作出抉择呢?
When the heirs loom
当遗产近在咫尺
Some people argue for a punitive inheritance tax. They start with the negative argument that dead people no longer enjoy the general freedom to disburse their wealth as they wish—as the dead have no rights.How could they, when they are not affected one way or the other by what happens in the world?
一些人支持征收惩罚性继承税。一个消极的看法是，死者是没有权利的，他们不再享有随意分配财富的自由。不管世界如何变化，死者都不受影响，既然如此，死者为什么要享有分配财富的权利？
That does not ring true. The logic would be to abrogate even the most modest of wills. But inheritances are deeply personal and the biggest single gift that many give to causes they believe in and loved ones they may have cherished. Many (living) people would feel wronged if they could not provide for their children. If anything, as the expression of their last wishes, bequests carry more weight than their passing fanciesdo.
这听起来不太可靠。按照这个逻辑，根本不允许任何遗愿存在。但遗产是最私人且最重要的礼物，很多人会将其用在他们所信仰的事业，赠予珍爱之人。如果不能将这些传承给他们的孩子的话，很多（现在活着的人）会觉得委屈。退一万步来说，遗产的归属体现了死者最后的愿望，远比他们生前的天马行空的想法更为重要。
Ring true ：tosoundorseemtrueorlikely.(Fromtestingthequalityofmetalorglassbystrikingitandevaluatingthesoundmade.)测试银元真假，侧面吹一下放到耳边听
The positive argument for steep inheritance taxes is that they promote fairness and equality. Heirs have rarely done anything to deserve the money that comes their way. Liberals, from John Stuart Mill to Theodore Roosevelt, thought that needed correcting. Roosevelt, who warned that letting huge fortunes pass across generations was “of great and genuine detriment to the community at large”, would doubtless be aghast at the situation today. Annual flows of inheritance in France have tripled as a proportion of GDP since the 1950s. Half of Europe’s billionaires have inherited their wealth, and their number seems to be rising.
积极的论点是，应当支持征收高额的继承税，从而促进公平和平等。继承人不费吹灰之力继承了财产，但却几乎没有付出相匹配的努力。从约翰.斯图尔特米勒到西奥多.罗斯福，自由主义者们都认为这种方式应当纠正。罗斯福警告过让巨额财富一代代地传递下去会对广大民众产生极大的切实的伤害，如果他看到如今的情形，毫无疑问会感到震惊。自上世纪50年代以来，法国每年的遗产继承量在GDP中的占比已经增长了两倍，欧洲一半的亿万富翁是继承财产获得的财富，并且这个数字似乎仍在增加。
However, in 2017, it is not clear exactly how decisive a role inheritance plays in the entrenchment of the hereditary elite. Data from Britain suggest that people tend not to lose their parents before they reach the age of 50. In rich countries the advantages that wealthy parents pass to their offspring begin with the sorting mechanism of marriage, in which elites increasingly pair up with elites (see article). They continue with the benefits of education, social capital and lavish gifts, not in the deeds to the ancestral pile.
但是在2017年，人们仍不清楚，遗产继承对世袭精英阶层的巩固作用有多大。来自英国的数据表明，在50岁之前，父母一般依然健在。在富裕的国家里，富有的父母传承给后代的优势从婚姻的筛选机制就开始了，这种机制下，精英越来越多地与其他精英结合，他们持续地受益于教育、社会资本以及奢侈的礼物，而祖上流传下来的家风却影响甚少。
Even if the link between inheritance-tax rates and inequality were clear, wealth can pay for a good tax lawyer. In the century since Roosevelt, Sweden and other high-taxers discovered that if governments impose a steep enough duty, the rich will find ways to avoid it. The trusts they create as a result can last even longer than the three generations it takes for family fortunes to go from clogs to clogs.
即便是确认了继承税与不平等之间的关系，用财富也可以聘请一个好的税务律师。自罗斯福之后的世纪里，瑞典和其他高税收国家发现如果政府征收足够高的税，富人们会想法设法地去规避这种情况发生。他们建立的信托基金打破了“富不过三代”的说法，让财富能够持续更久。
Armed with such arguments, some leap to the other extreme, proposing, as the American tax reform does, that there should be no inheritance tax at all. Not only is it right to let people hand their private property to their children, they say, but also bequests are often the fruits of labour that has already been taxed. And a large inheritance-tax bill is destructive, because it can cause the dismemberment of family firms and farms, and force the sale of ancestral homes.
持有何样的观点，一些人迈向了另一个极端。他们认为，正如美国税改那样，根本不应该征收继承税。他们称，这不仅是人们将私有财产交给子女的权利，而且遗产往往是已经征过税的劳动成果。大额继承税账单很具杀伤力，不仅使得家族企业、农场解体，还会迫使人们出售祖屋。
Yet every tax is an intrusion by the state. If avoiding double taxationwere a requirement of good policy, then governments would need to abolish sales taxes, which are paid out of taxed income. The risks that heirs will be forced to sell homes and firms can be mitigated by allowing them to pay the duties gradually, from cashflow rather than by fire-sales.
然而每项税款都受国家影响。如果良好的政策要求避免双重课税，那么政府需要取消营业税（人们用已征收所得税的收入来支付营业税）。风险在于为了避免继承人被迫出售房屋和企业的情形发生，政府可以允许继承人通过现金流而不是甩卖房屋的方式，让他们逐步支付这些税收来减轻他们的负担，
In fact, people who are against tax in general ought to be less hostile to inheritance taxes than other sorts. However disliked they are, they are some of the least distorting. Unlike income taxes, they do not destroy the incentive to work—whereas research suggests that a single person who inherits an amount above $150,000 is four times more likely to leave the labour force than one who inherits less than $25,000. Unlike capital-gains taxes, heavier estate taxes do not seem to dissuade saving or investment. Unlike sales taxes, they are progressive. To the extent that a higher inheritance tax can fund cuts to all other taxes, the system can be more efficient.
事实上，相较于其他税收，反对税收的人通常对继承税少有敌意。不管继承税多么不受欢迎，它是干预性最低的税种。继承税与其他税收有所不同：与个人所得税相比，继承税不会打击人们的工作积极性，反之有研究表明，一个继承15万以上美元的人和继承2.5万以下美元的人相比，前者不再工作的可能性要高3倍；与资本利得税相比，较高的房地产遗产税似乎也不会抑制储蓄或投资的意愿；与销售税相比，继承税是进步的。某种程度上，更高的继承税可以削减其他税的征收，使得税收系统效率更高。
Transfer market
市场转型
The right approach is to strike a balance between the two extremes. The precise rate will vary from country to country. But three design principles stand out. First, target the wealthy; that means taxing inheritors rather than estates and setting a meaningful exemption threshold. Second, keep it simple. Close loopholes for those who are caught in the net by setting a flat rate and by giving people a lifetime allowance for bequests; set the rate high enough to raise significant sums, but not so high that it attracts massive avoidance. Third, with the fiscal headroom generated by higher inheritance tax, reduce other taxes, lightening the load for most people.
正确的继承税处理方法是在两个极端之间取得平衡，具体的继承税税率因国家而异。有三条主要原则：，第一、瞄准富人，对继承者征税，而不是对财产征税，并设立一个有意义的免税门槛；第二、简单易收，设定统一的税率和遗产免税额，防止有人钻法律的漏洞，同时应设定高税率以便征收足够的税金，但不能太高，以免引发大规模避税行为；第三、随着遗产税的增收，财政充实，可减少其他税收，减轻民众负担。
A sensible discussion is hard when inheritance taxes prompt such a visceral reaction. But their erosion has attracted too little debate. A fair and efficient tax system would seek to include inheritance taxes, not eliminate them.
当然征收继承税会引发纳税人的抵触情绪（可谓触及利益比触及灵魂还难），理性的讨论是很困难的。但是继承税逐渐流失却没有引起太大的争论。一个公平有效的税收系统应欲求将遗产税纳入系统，而不是将其从系统里清除。
翻译组：
Wesley：男，自由职业，经济学人铁粉
Cyrus：男， 口译民工，经济学人爱好者
Aileen:女，大四数学狗 经济学人粉丝
Neil：男，外贸民工，经济学人铁粉
Swallow: 女，英语专业研究生，专八，CATTI三笔
校核组：
Grace：女，卫生民工，经济学人粉丝
Damon：男，建筑民工 ，经济学人铁粉
2
观点|评论|思考
大多数美国富翁建立了各种各样的慈善机构，那么为什么他们这么热衷于慈善呢?
毋庸置疑一方面是这些富翁们觉悟高,想为社会做贡献,为企业赢得更好的社会声誉,从而使公司有很好的发展.另一方面,美国遗产税特别高,而美国国税局中有条款规定，慈善基金免税. 所以很多富翁就热衷于各种慈善机构了。
当然除了做慈善,还有其他合理避税的方法,比如保险，比如设立信托基金，受家族控制,具体我们可以来看几张图了解家族信托。
看完避税方法，我们再来说说：如果真的征收高额遗产税，是否就会出现文中提到的“富不过三代"这种现象？
小编觉得可能性不大，因为真正满足遗产税起征点的这些富翁的子女，接受的教育往往都是最好的，再退一万步讲，只要他们的后代不去肆意挥霍，又或者只要稍微努力一点点，他们就肯定比我们强。因为他们父母携带的各种天然优势，资金，人脉，资源等等，都比我们强太多。例如王思聪，曾经是首富儿子，尽管网上对他褒贬不一，但是有文章也提到他不是靠父亲，而是靠他独到的眼光，获得的高投资回报。仔细想想如果不是父亲的人脉，资源等，给他创造了得天独厚的条件，那么想成功也许也并没有那么容易。
当然小编没有贬低王思聪的意思，相反小编还是很佩服他的，他除了和网红打打交道，偶尔在微博和明星怼一怼以外，似乎也没有什么负面新闻。父母有钱不是他的错，虽然给他创造了好的平台，但是至少他很努力，没有辜负他们，这就是值得我们学习的。
作为普罗大众，老老实实搬砖，踏踏实实做人，期待下辈子能投个好胎。又或者努力提高自己的知识水平，好好看经济学人，不要有仇富心理，定期买张彩票（倍投），说不定哪一天还有可能跟富二代平起平坐。
4
愿景
打造独立思考|国际视野|英文学习
小组
小编理工男，建筑底层民工，经济学人铁粉，和小伙伴(经济学人小群不超过8个人）看经济学人到现在已经将近500多天。现有一经济学人大群,如果您也有兴趣，可加入我们学习小组，群规甚严，请三思后而入群，WeChat : foxwulihua
长按关注个人公众号英文部分转自《经济学人》，非商业用途，仅限于小组学习，如有任何翻译错误，请大家留言更正，谢谢！
