>>Let's have a 90% federal inheritance taxes on estates over, say, $20,000,000.
>>Sure, they will be evaders, but we'll get a lot of it, as we used to before Reagan came along.

High death duties have a checkered history. Many/most jurisdictions removed them.

But if you want them back- why $20M? Why not $200K. Why is it fair for somebody to inherit $200K through no prowess of their own when others who are already behind, get nothing? How dreadfully unfair. Why not tax $180K of it and distribute that to 9 others so everybody feels they get the same opportunity. That has more leveling effect and is fairer than only taxing the rich, leaving one person with $2M which still puts them out of reach of most of society with no perceived equalization of opportunity or leveling effect- unless you propose to distribute the taxes as $2M each to 8 others to equalize to the wealthy person? If you don't, we both know that (assuming the $20M isn't locked in some fantastic perpetual vehicle to shield all of it from tax) the person taxed down to $2M still has an easier road to turning it back into $20M while those who only got $20K remain burdened by debt and can't afford university for their kids.