• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

How Wal-Mart’s Waltons maintain their billionaire fortune

Status
Not open for further replies.

Espresso

Banned
if_SHVoXmyEE.jpg

America’s richest family, worth more than $100 billion, has exploited a variety of legal loopholes to avoid the estate tax, according to court records and Internal Revenue Service filings obtained through public-records requests. The Waltons’ example highlights how billionaires deftly bypass a tax intended to make sure that the nation’s wealthiest contribute their share to government rather than perpetuate dynastic wealth, a notion of fairness voiced by supporters of the estate tax like Warren Buffett and William Gates Sr.

Estate and gift taxes raised only about $14 billion last year. That’s about 1 percent of the $1.2 trillion passed down in America each year, mostly by the very rich, former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers estimated in a December blog post on Reuters.com. The contrast suggests “our estate tax system is broken,” he wrote.​

‘Unbelievable’ Savings

Alice Walton’s mother and brother poured more than $9 billion into trusts since 2003 that fund charitable projects like Crystal Bridges and are also designed to protect gifts to heirs from taxation. Another Walton pioneered a tax-avoidance maneuver that is now widely used by U.S. billionaires.

“I hate to say it, but the very rich pay very little in gift and estate tax,” said Jerome Hesch, a lawyer at Berger Singerman LLP in Miami who reviewed some of the Walton family’s trust filings for Bloomberg. “At the Waltons’ numbers, the savings are unbelievable.”

A family spokesman, Lance Morgan, said in a statement that “any charitable or estate planning practices employed by the Walton family are broadly available and commonly used.”

Morgan represents the branch of the family that includes Wal-Mart founder Sam Walton’s three surviving children and eight grandchildren. Their Wal-Mart stake is worth enough to fill a large backyard swimming pool with solid gold.​

Amassing Billions

Spurred by historically low interest rates that magnify the tax savings, the richest Americans have amassed at least $20 billion in trusts like those used by the Waltons. They include Elaine Marshall, the Koch Industries Inc. director, and Fidelity mutual funds’ Johnson family.

A 40 percent tax is levied at death on estates of more than $5.25 million for an individual or $10.5 million for a couple. Total lifetime giving to heirs that exceeds those thresholds is also taxed at 40 percent, preventing people from avoiding the estate tax through early handouts.

Closing just two estate tax loopholes -- ones that the Waltons appear to have used -- would raise more than $2 billion annually over the next decade, according to Treasury Department estimates. That doesn’t count taxes lost to the type of charitable trusts the Waltons used to fund projects like the museum; the department hasn’t estimated that cost.​

waltons3-460x307.jpg

‘More Unfair’

In a sign of just how much money is at stake, the IRS is trying to collect as much as $2.8 billion from the estate of the Michigan industrialist William M. Davidson, according to a petition filed by Davidson’s family in U.S. Tax Court in June. The IRS is challenging the validity of some of Davidson’s maneuvers, which were different from the ones the Waltons use.

“The whole tax structure since I came to Congress actually has gotten more and more unfair,” said James McDermott, a Washington Democrat who’s been in the House since 1989 and has sponsored unsuccessful bills to close estate-tax loopholes.

Guarding the Waltons’ wealth as it passes from one generation to the next is the task of a handful of staffers laboring in an unmarked suite in Bentonville, above a bike shop called Phat Tire. Walton Enterprises LLC manages the world’s biggest fortune in a nondescript office that even employees of the coffee shop next door have never heard of.

The family’s estate-planning efforts are well shielded from public view. The wills of Alice’s parents, Sam and Helen, on file in an Arkansas probate court, reveal little about their financial arrangements. That of her brother John, who died in 2005, was sealed by a Wyoming judge.​

Waltons’ Model

Still, professional planners have sometimes held up the Waltons as a model. Patriarch Sam Walton, who founded Wal-Mart in Bentonville, cultivated an image as a regular guy from Oklahoma who enjoyed quail hunting and drove a beat-up Ford pick-up truck. He also showed unusual foresight about estate planning.​

iv6PQOY9Dxtk.png

According to his autobiography, “Made in America,” Sam Walton started arranging his affairs to avoid a potential estate tax bill in 1953. His five-and-dime-store business was still in its infancy and his oldest child was 9.

That year, he gave a 20 percent stake in the family business to each of his children, keeping 20 percent for himself and his wife.

“The best way to reduce paying estate taxes is to give your assets away before they appreciate,” he wrote in the book.​

Rockefeller Riches

Sam’s retailing success made his family the richest since the Rockefellers, who themselves were pioneers in estate-tax avoidance. As soon as the tax was enacted in 1916, John D. Rockefeller, then the world’s richest man, circumvented it by simply giving much of his fortune to his son. Congress closed that loophole eight years later by adding a parallel tax on living gifts to heirs.

Not all of Rockefeller’s Gilded Age contemporaries sought to found dynasties. Andrew Carnegie donated almost his entire fortune to charity, building thousands of libraries across the country. In this era, Warren Buffett and William Gates III have pledged publicly to give away all but a nominal amount to philanthropy.

“We shouldn’t have a situation where gimmicks allow rich people to avoid estate taxation,” Gates’s father, William Gates Sr., the author of a 2004 book that advocated for the estate tax, said in an interview. “A value in our lives is having children who make their own way to some extent. It’s unfortunate to have people who, when Mom and Dad pass on, they leave you a billion dollars for which you’d done nothing.”​

Money Talks

At the end of the 1990s, an effort to repeal the estate tax gathered force, supported by a group of billionaire families and their lobbyists at Patton Boggs LLP, a Washington law firm. Walton Enterprises paid Patton Boggs to lobby on tax matters during that time.

A Patton Boggs lawyer, Aubrey Rothrock, said in a statement that the Waltons’ lobbying supported “private foundation reforms to create new incentives for charitable giving” and did not involve “the specific issue of repealing the estate tax.”

Aided by Democrats such as Blanche Lincoln, an Arkansas senator, Congressional Republicans in 2001 passed a temporary measure that would phase out the tax over 10 years. The tax was restored in 2011.

As a senator, Lincoln was one of the few Democrats to whom the Waltons donated. She’s now a lobbyist whose clients include Wal-Mart.​

Much more at Bloomberg News.

Interesting article. It's worth reading if you have the time (it's long).
 

Azih

Member
Elites gonna elite. I don't know why people who aren't in that (by definition) tiny club forget that and start herping derping about DEATH TAXES!.
 
I don't even understand why this happens. Well, I guess I kind of do, they're greedy assholes. But still, they have more money than anyone will ever need, why not just pay taxes into the system which allowed them to amass such a fortune in the first place? I can almost understand tax avoidance by someone who is busting their ass to try and get a business off the ground and needs every penny they can get, but when the super wealthy do it, it just seems ridiculous.
 
I don't even understand why this happens. Well, I guess I kind of do, they're greedy assholes. But still, they have more money than anyone will ever need, why not just pay taxes into the system which allowed them to amass such a fortune in the first place? I can almost understand tax avoidance by someone who is busting their ass to try and get a business off the ground and needs every penny they can get, but when the super wealthy do it, it just seems ridiculous.

you don't usually end up a billionaire by playing it fair.
 
I don't even understand why this happens. Well, I guess I kind of do, they're greedy assholes. But still, they have more money than anyone will ever need, why not just pay taxes into the system which allowed them to amass such a fortune in the first place? I can almost understand tax avoidance by someone who is busting their ass to try and get a business off the ground and needs every penny they can get, but when the super wealthy do it, it just seems ridiculous.
Just because someone takes 100 from your left pocket and puts 20 in your right pocket doesn't mean you owe them 20.
 

Azih

Member
I blame the gov't more for allowing it.

Govt allows it because it's mostly made up of the rich elite themselves sure, but they're still dependant on voters. So the real question is why do non elite voters not vote against it?

Well where do non elite voters get most of their information from? And who controls that?
 

TxdoHawk

Member
I don't even understand why this happens. Well, I guess I kind of do, they're greedy assholes. But still, they have more money than anyone will ever need, why not just pay taxes into the system which allowed them to amass such a fortune in the first place? I can almost understand tax avoidance by someone who is busting their ass to try and get a business off the ground and needs every penny they can get, but when the super wealthy do it, it just seems ridiculous.

At any given point these people can stop investing, sell their companies, and live the rest of their life comfortably. But they don't! They do things like this because the ultra-rich are never satisfied. If they were easy to please, they'd never have the drive to amass all that money in the first place.
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
At any given point these people can stop investing, sell their companies, and live the rest of their life comfortably. They do this because the ultra-rich are never satisfied. If they were easy to please, they'd never have the drive to amass all that money in the first place.

I've called it a glitch in human psychology before. We suck at handling big numbers, but we like to see them go up, so we're never satisfied even when we reach the point where the money starts becoming almost literally meaningless
 
They've got more money than they could possibly use and they're main concern is making sure no one else gets it. Its a sickness.

(Also, did these people earn it or did they inherit it?)
 

Stet

Banned
I've called it a glitch in human psychology before. We suck at handling big numbers, but we like to see them go up, so we're never satisfied even when we reach the point where the money starts becoming almost literally meaningless

That's what Cookie Clicker is all about.
 

thelatestmodel

Junior, please.
At some point there has to be a too much money mark, I am curious as to what people think that is.

I'm OK with people having a LOT of money, like 50 million dollars. That could be spent in a lifetime, doing wonderful things and living out your dreams, and setting up your family so they don't have to worry.

When you start getting into the realms of having more money than you could ever spend, however, then you have to start figuring out how you can use it in a responsible way. I can think of like 2 people who do that (Bill Gates, Warren Buffett).

It's hard to put an exact figure on it but hopefully you kind of get what I mean.
 
I don't really blame them for doing this. I am a thousandaire and if someone wanted to take 50% of my savings I would do everything in my power to not pay. I think their actual business practices are far worse.
 

Eusis

Member
They've got more money than they could possibly use and they're main concern is making sure no one else gets it. Its a sickness.

(Also, did these people earn it or did they inherit it?)
In the case of the Walton's it probably IS a bit of both, but more inheritance. They do run Walmart after all.
 

thefro

Member
At some point there has to be a too much money mark, I am curious as to what people think that is.

Once you have more money than you know what to do with it and it's basically sitting in your large company not really doing anything innovative.

At that point you need to think about giving lots of it away to charity like Gates & Buffett.

Someone like Elon Musk I'd be fine with holding tens of billions as he'd probably be funding new crazy ventures with it.
 

Miletius

Member
I'd be angry but it's predictable. This just reinforces for me the fact that the ultra-rich play by different rules.
 
The field of investment management is built around the principle of conserving and growing capital. There are college courses around tax strategies to conserve as much money, and formulas that tell you the advantages/disadvantages between gifting assets, tax exempt vs tax deferred investments, when to gift to who, going through the estate process, etc..

There are different kinds of trusts, but the reason why so many wealthy people start foundations... I wouldn't say it's entirely out of the goodness of their hearts. Foundations are as much vehicles for asset growth, as they are for saving money on taxes. As long as they spend a certain percentage each year (around 5%) on charity, they are considered a foundation subject to lower taxes. They have indefinite lives.

The joke is that the 5% they have to spend, is usually less than the return they make on the investments they hold each year. Whoever is managing the money for the foundation, usually has that as the minimun return required. Everything is else is just more money in the bank.
 

FyreWulff

Member
At some point there has to be a too much money mark, I am curious as to what people think that is.

The closest objective formula I can think of is if you cannot spend down your money every waking hour before you'll die, you have too much money. Every money you earn over that amount is dead money that won't re-enter the economy. Useless to you, useless to society.
 
N

NinjaFridge

Unconfirmed Member
Come on guys, be fair. These billionaires have it tough, they need all the help they can get. Can you imagine how tough it is to be able to afford a B-2 stealth bomber?
 

Azih

Member
There's two things that you can never have enough money for.

1. Inheritance for your kids. A meritocracy will never really exist as long as people like their kids and grandkids.

2. Influence. What people use money for starts with bare necessities and then goes to comfort/luxuries/savings. For most people that's where it ends. But what do the ultra rich do when they have more money than they or even their kids could ever possibly spend? They use that money to influence society through politics and the media and you can never have enough money for that.

People on top of society need to spend a lot of effort (read money) to STAY on top and keep their family/descendants there as well.

It's nothing new. But democracy is a political system that's meant to MITIGATE that unlike all the others that basically endorse it.
 

kurbaan

Banned
To be honest I don't really see why 40% of the money you pass down to your children should be taken by the government.
 

FyreWulff

Member
Come on guys, be fair. These billionaires have it tough, they need all the help they can get. Can you imagine how tough it is to be able to afford a B-2 stealth bomber?

I don't even feel sorry for them in the slightest. Not because they're rich, but because the more money you're making, your use of the national infrastructure increases. Pay your damn bill to the society that facilitated your income.
 
I'm OK with people having a LOT of money, like 50 million dollars. That could be spent in a lifetime, doing wonderful things and living out your dreams, and setting up your family so they don't have to worry.

When you start getting into the realms of having more money than you could ever spend, however, then you have to start figuring out how you can use it in a responsible way. I can think of like 2 people who do that (Bill Gates, Warren Buffett).

It's hard to put an exact figure on it but hopefully you kind of get what I mean.

Once you have more money than you know what to do with it and it's basically sitting in your large company not really doing anything innovative.

At that point you need to think about giving lots of it away to charity like Gates & Buffett.

Someone like Elon Musk I'd be fine with holding tens of billions as he'd probably be funding new crazy ventures with it.

The closest objective formula I can think of is if you cannot spend down your money every waking hour before you'll die, you have too much money. Every money you earn over that amount is dead money that won't re-enter the economy. Useless to you, useless to society.

I agree with these points, I was just curious as to what others believed was too much. Wouldn't it be nice to see the billions of dollars accumulated go to innovations or NASA. One could only wish...
 

Trey

Member
I don't really blame them for doing this. I am a thousandaire and if someone wanted to take 50% of my savings I would do everything in my power to not pay. I think their actual business practices are far worse.

Purchasing power doesn't scale linearly.
 

Azih

Member
To be honest I don't really see why 40% of the money you pass down to your children should be taken by the government.

Look at it this way. You're walking down the street and you find a suitcase full of say 10 thousand bucks.

Ok. You do the right thing say, report it to the police and a month later the police say, hey thanks for being a good citizen, nobodly claimed it, and it's not connected to any crimes. You can keep it.

You made 10,000 for no effort at all. Shouldn't you pay tax on it? I mean you pay income tax on the money you earn by spending your entire day at some job that you probably don't like. Shouldn't you pay tax on money you got for doing nothing/good fortune?

No let's say your rich uncle leaves you 5,000,000. What exactly did you do to earn that money? Why shouldn't you pay tax on it?
 
Look at it this way. You're walking down the street and you find a suitcase full of say 10 thousand bucks.

Ok. You do the right thing say, report it to the police and a month later the police say, hey thanks for being a good citizen, nobodly claimed it, and it's not connected to any crimes. You can keep it.

You made 10,000 for no effort at all. Shouldn't you pay tax on it? I mean you pay income tax on the money you earn by spending your entire day at some job that you probably don't like. Shouldn't you pay tax on money you got for doing nothing/good fortune?

No let's say your rich uncle leaves you 5,000,000. What exactly did you do to earn that money? Why shouldn't you pay tax on it?

There are lots of reasonable arguments for the estate tax to exist, but I'm not convinced that it should exist simply because of the lack of effort you personally put into earning your inheritance. If we related effort to earnings, coal miners would be paid a lot more than most of us, or I guess in this case taxed significantly less than the rest of us.

Devil's advocate, but why should people pay taxes just because they're giving money to someone else? If other laws were in order (e.g., rich people weren't tax-dodging), income tax and federal taxes would be paid once on the earnings. Capital gains tax would be paid on the earnings those earnings make through investment. So, why should they be taxed yet again just because the money is being handed to someone else?
 

Eusis

Member
To be honest I don't really see why 40% of the money you pass down to your children should be taken by the government.
Because as I'm lead to believe wealth is more like a pool of water everyone shares, versus everyone getting their own private pools. So by amassing that much money they essentially get to keep a huge, absurd portion of that pool to themselves, while everyone else has to divide what remains. Granted with the money out of the system that long I sort of wonder if things are run to an extent as if it doesn't exist, but when you have so much money you don't even know what to do with it, and we have huge problems that can be solved by paying more of your share, then why the fuck are you avoiding it?

Also think of the raw numbers: if I made a billion a year and had 90% of that taken away in taxes that'd sound crazy... until you stop and think about how I'd still have 100 million to live off of. For anyone who is making 100k a year or so (pretty well off) it'd practically kill them, but for a billionaire even THAT big of a hit practically means nothing.
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
There are lots of reasonable arguments for the estate tax to exist, but I'm not convinced that it should exist simply because of the lack of effort you personally put into earning your inheritance. If we related effort to earnings, coal miners would be paid a lot more than most of us, or I guess in this case taxed significantly less than the rest of us.

I think his point is less "it should be taxed because you didn't work for it" and more "we tax the money you actually work to earn, why wouldn't we tax the money you just get as well?"
 

akira28

Member
Elites gonna elite. I don't know why people who aren't in that (by definition) tiny club forget that and start herping derping about DEATH TAXES!.

Because they might one day have 100 billion to hand over to their children, and they don't want the dirty feds to get any of it. At least that's what they daydream about while sitting at the computer in the unemployment office.
 
I can't be concerned about this. If I was them I would be doing the exact same thing, but I am skint as fuck. Major respect to philanthropists like Gates and Buffett, but if they've earned it then I don't see anything wrong with "fuck you, I got mine" personally.
 

Riki

Member
I can't be concerned about this. If I was them I would be doing the exact same thing, but I am skint as fuck. Major respect to philanthropists like Gates and Buffett, but if they've earned it then I don't see anything wrong with "fuck you, I got mine" personally.
I wouldn't have a problem with this if they didn't treat their employees like complete shit.
Disgusting company.
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
I can't be concerned about this. If I was them I would be doing the exact same thing, but I am skint as fuck. Major respect to philanthropists like Gates and Buffett, but if they've earned it then I don't see anything wrong with "fuck you, I got mine" personally.

Yes, well that's the thing: "earn" is a funny word without a clear definition.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom