Your stats confirm just how wide the US income /wealth gap is, lamonte 7.
The percentage of one's income paid in tax is more germane to the issue than the amounts. For example, in 1970 corporations paid more than 30% of all US income taxes. In recent years, with corporate profits at all time record highs, they pay 6 to 7%. With incomes for so many Murkins in a downward spiral for the past 40 years, of course they are paying smaller amounts of taxes.
The $5.43 million cap on tax free inheritance Van Buren is focused on is a relatively minor factor in tax avoidance opportunities for the 1% when you consider how the IRS treats capital gains on inherited assets.
Capital gains for heirs are based on the difference between the asset value on the date of the parent's death and the date the asset is sold by the heir.
A real life example: In 1974 I bought a rental house for $15,000 that I sold for $92,000 in 2002.
My taxable capital gain: $77,000. My friend's parents bought a rental house for $19.000 in 1972 that he inherited in 2000 when it was valued at $142,000. He sold it in 2002 for $145,000. His taxable capital gain: $3,000. Had I put my property into my dad's name when I bought it in 1974 and inherited from him when he died in 1998, I would have been taxed on a few thousand dollars capital gain instead of $77,000.
Anti-estate tax forces serially call it the "death tax" and claim that it represents double taxation. Based on the example I presented, the capital gains treatment of inherited assets proves that many inherited assets are NEVER taxed.
The most glaring example of double taxation IS Social Security where the payroll withholds are after tax and most of the benefits are fully taxable. We pay income tax when they withhold, and again if and when we collect benefits.