The offset, such as it is, is that estates below a certain threshold pay a lower rate of 18%. So the tax was designed to make the wealthy pay more, irrespective of whether it does a good enough job there.

But to be clear, if someone wants to argue for say a 45-50% estate tax (or even a higher CG rate), that's fine! My point in the article was just that this should be done as an oped, not a faux-bombshell news feature.