In fact, people who are against tax in general ought to be less hostile to inheritance taxes than other sorts.
However disliked they are, they are some of the least distorting.
Unlike income taxes, they do not destroy the incentive to work - whereas research suggests that a single person who inherits an amount above $150,000 is four times more likely to leave the labour force than one who inherits less than $25,000.
Unlike capital-gains taxes, heavier estate taxes do not seem to dissuade saving or investment.
Unlike sales taxes, they are progressive.
To the extent that a higher inheritance tax can fund cuts to all other taxes, the system can be more efficient.
The right approach is to strike a balance between the two extremes.
The precise rate will vary from country to country.
But three design principles stand out.
First, target the wealthy; that means taxing inheritors rather than estates and setting a meaningful exemption threshold.
Second, keep it simple.
Close loopholes for those who are caught in the net by setting a flat rate and by giving people a lifetime allowance for bequests; set the rate high enough to raise significant sums, but not so high that it attracts massive avoidance.
Third, with the fiscal headroom generated by higher inheritance tax, reduce other taxes, lightening the load for most people.
A sensible discussion is hard when inheritance taxes prompt such a visceral reaction.
But their erosion has attracted too little debate.
A fair and efficient tax system would seek to include inheritance taxes, not eliminate them.