>>>Doesn't it seem a shame to destroy family farms with a tax that raises very little money?
>>
>>I already answered that it should be set up so that family farms are below the exemption. How many family farms do you think land above the current exemption of $5M+?
>
>If we think it is wrong to take a family farm away from the family when the farm is worth $2m, or $3m or up to $5m
>then why are we forcing more successful families to suffer the loss of the their farm?
>
>To raise tax money that is a rounding error in the federal budget?
>It is simply not a significant source of revenue.
>
>So what is the point? Punish the rich?

At some point, it's not just a "family farm." If it's worth $100M and has, say, 100 paid employees, is it still a "family farm"? What, exactly, is a "family farm"? Is it one in which only family members work there? One with a limited number of outside employees?

Tamar