> and that their children then have access to that non-profit and all of its assets, again without income or estate tax
That shouldn't matter as long as they don't start to enjoy the benefit of those assets.
This means tax rules should separate the estate as a business/investment from the personal use of the funds/wealth.
Sure, at some point it becomes neigh impossible, like let's say Bill and Melinda went to Africa on their marriage anniversary, was that business or personal? (And yes, at that level of wealth, influence, income it's always both.)
When an owner (or close relative or friend of an owner) of a family trusts/foundations/estates/NGOs/church/non-profit conducts business through said entity, that entity should pay some tax corresponding to said expense as if some part of that expense were income to the owner/relative/friend.
That shouldn't matter as long as they don't start to enjoy the benefit of those assets.
This means tax rules should separate the estate as a business/investment from the personal use of the funds/wealth.
Sure, at some point it becomes neigh impossible, like let's say Bill and Melinda went to Africa on their marriage anniversary, was that business or personal? (And yes, at that level of wealth, influence, income it's always both.)
When an owner (or close relative or friend of an owner) of a family trusts/foundations/estates/NGOs/church/non-profit conducts business through said entity, that entity should pay some tax corresponding to said expense as if some part of that expense were income to the owner/relative/friend.