The first $11 million of an estate ($22 if it is a couple's estate) is already tax free.
If you inherit stock, or land, or any other money making asset, it does not make sense to not tax it just because it was not sold.
If you inherit stock, or land, or any other money making asset, it does not make sense to not tax it just because it was not sold.
I definitely think it would make sense to make an exception to a hypothetical "you aren't taxed until you sell it" rule for things that are either directly analogous to wealth (e.g. stocks) or that directly generate wealth (e.g. a factory or business).
I could also see land and housing being an exception, although I also don't like the idea of someone being forced to sell the family homestead. Do you know if they appraise the value of things like land based on its current use or potential use? For example, what if the value of the mineral rights for the family homestead was much greater than the residential value?
Taxable gain in pretty much all of the Western World results from "dispositions" of items, which includes non-sale transactions.
Also, the kind of stock we are describing was issued as compensation, and taxation was either reduced or deferred depending on the circumstances, so it is entirely appropriate to tax certain non-sales gains related to the stock.
If that's the case it is generating some sort of money.
Taxes like this exist to prevent the hoarding of wealth through generations