RE: Obamacare Tax Penalty (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


LookieNoNookie -> RE: Obamacare Tax Penalty (11/24/2013 5:07:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

What is the reasoning behind there being a tax penalty if you aren't covered by health insurance?

Is it just a stick used to coerce you into purchasing?

If Joe Schlabotnik isn't covered by insurance, what is the $95 or 1% of his income (whichever is greater) going towards?

The idea is to get everyone to buy health insurance. The reasoning goes that no one will want to pay the fine so they'll go out and get health insurance.


We're seriously considering just paying the fine.

The cheapest coverage offered to us is $700 per month X12 = $7200.00. Now that plan which we're paying $700 a month for has a $10,000 deductible. So, since we haven't hit $10,000 in medical bills in 15 years...chances are that we're paying $700 and not getting any coverage.

We're thinking that it may just be best to pay the $1000.00 fine and put the remaining $6200 into a managed care account and actually have that money go towards our medical bills.


Noooooooo......don't do that because Obama said vibrantly clearly....he would not raise taxes on those below 200K (couples below 250K), and since the Supremes have stated unilaterally that indeed, ACA was (and is) a tax....if you make less than 250K as a couple....I'm thinking you shouldn't owe it because....he promised he wouldn't raise taxes on anyone below 250K.




LookieNoNookie -> RE: Obamacare Tax Penalty (11/24/2013 5:08:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
But, what is that penalty going to be used for?

Just a guess but I expect it's going to be put into the general spending fund.


So, it's not really doing anything regarding health care.


Not specifically. But if it goes into the general fund and costs associated with the ACA are paid out of the general fund then it actually would be paying for some aspect of health care.


I have a bridge....call me....

(I switched all the lighting to LED and....it's all Solar powered too).




LookieNoNookie -> RE: Obamacare Tax Penalty (11/24/2013 5:11:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: BitaTruble
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
What is the reasoning behind there being a tax penalty if you aren't covered by health insurance?

To help states off-set the costs of exchanges.


It's not paid to the States. It goes to the Federal Government.

quote:

quote:

Is it just a stick used to coerce you into purchasing?

Of course, otherwise healthy people wouldn't buy insurance.


As Yachtie noted, it's a pittance, really. Someone making $40k will pay $400, unless the cost of an acceptable policy is cheaper. For someone who is healthy, it might be worth the "gamble" to not buy insurance.

quote:

quote:

If Joe Schlabotnik isn't covered by insurance, what is the $95 or 1% of his income (whichever is greater) going towards?

The money goes into a special fund which will be overseen by the Sec of Treas - specifically, according to the ACA text, money collected will be divided among the states who have set up exchanges to help offset the cost of setting up/running the exchanges. Each of the 50 states will be allocated a % of the money based on certain criteria and may only be used for specific costs associated with setting up and running the exchanges.
The max penalty is the greater of 1% of income (not to exceed three times the mandate fee for any given individual) or $95 for the first year. $95 x 3 = $285 per person max for 2014. This fee must be paid with your federal return no later than April 15th, 2015.
There are many exceptions to get around paying the fee but refusing to answer the question on the tax form of whether or not you even had insurance yields an automatic fee of $1000 per incident. That makes it cheaper to pay the fee than to refuse to answer the question on the new federal tax forms.
The easiest exemption for most Americans is to just let one of their utility bills lapse for a month so they get a shut-off notice then pay their bill before they get disconnected. Shut-off notice proves hardship exemption but utility companies only notify credit reporting companies of disconnects, not over-due bills so it doesn't effect your credit either... and .. it's not illegal.
I'm sure there will be attempts to put regulations put into place so that doesn't happen in the future.. but for 2014, it's pretty much a free ride to avoid paying any fees.


Thanks for the info. I haven't seen the 3x part before. I thought the initial year was the greater of $95 or 1% of your income.



You also pay a tax on "Cadillac" policies.

If you can afford to pay for insurance that allows you to get (more than the allowable standard) a heart transplant on Mars while getting a hand job from Pamela Anderson (all expenses paid)....you're going to be taxed for having MORE than the masses.






DesideriScuri -> RE: Obamacare Tax Penalty (11/24/2013 5:54:40 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie
You also pay a tax on "Cadillac" policies.
If you can afford to pay for insurance that allows you to get (more than the allowable standard) a heart transplant on Mars while getting a hand job from Pamela Anderson (all expenses paid)....you're going to be taxed for having MORE than the masses.


I never have understood the tax on employers when the insurance is fantastic.




graceadieu -> RE: Obamacare Tax Penalty (11/24/2013 10:28:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

What is the reasoning behind there being a tax penalty if you aren't covered by health insurance?

Is it just a stick used to coerce you into purchasing?


Pretty much. For pooled risk to work, you need a large pool. The easiest way to create that is to require everyone (who can afford it) to join the pool. But if you don't make there be any consequence for violating the law, the law is rather toothless, yeah?

I do seem to remember reading that the fines will go to providing care for uninsured people.




graceadieu -> RE: Obamacare Tax Penalty (11/24/2013 10:37:24 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

There is the claim that people not purchasing insurance makes health care more expensive for everyone. That may be true, if one gets charity care, but isn't true if one does not get health care during that year. If I didn't have any prescriptions filled and didn't go to the Dr. for anything, treating all my medical care needs with over-the-counter medications and/or self-administered First Aid, paid for out of my pocket, how did my not purchasing insurance increase anyone's costs?


Sure, if one is totally healthy and will be so forever. But let's say one has heart disease, but doesn't know it because they didn't go to the doctor. Or maybe they did, but they couldn't afford to get the prescription filled. Yeah, they didn't incur much medical costs this year. But next year, they have a heart attack and need a $100,000 emergency double bypass surgery. They obviously can't pay, and so everyone else that uses the hospital has to. It's always much cheaper to provide preventative care early on than to treat people when the disease has progressed.




graceadieu -> RE: Obamacare Tax Penalty (11/24/2013 10:41:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

What is that "contribution" going towards? Is there a tax involved in the purchase of insurance that isn't being paid if we're not purchasing insurance? Is that what the penalty covers?

There is the claim that people not purchasing insurance makes health care more expensive for everyone. That may be true, if one gets charity care, but isn't true if one does not get health care during that year.



It's obvious, Desi. How are insurance companies profitable? Because more pay in than what gets paid out. The ACA is designed for those needing insurance. A healthy 20 something doesn't need insurance, except for the ruberic of "what if," which you and I know is a specious argument.

The ACA will, from its onset or soon after, have a higher payout than intake unless those who's need is specious participate. It's forcing me, who's not in need, to help your aunt Mary who is.

Forget about getting caught up in the dollars and cents bullshit. It's a scheme, with a little Ponzi in it too.



Sure. That's also how the healthy insurance you get from your job works, and how your car insurance works, and your home or renters insurance, and your business liability if you're self-employed. It's called shared risk. And sooner or later, we'll all be Aunt Mary.




ExquisiteStings -> RE: Obamacare Tax Penalty (11/24/2013 11:31:17 PM)

 To OsideGirl: Not to nitpick, but well, yeah, to nitpick: 700 multiplied by 12 = 8400.  And here I thought MY math teachers sucked.

ES




joether -> RE: Obamacare Tax Penalty (11/25/2013 4:46:58 AM)

The amount of 'totally ignorant morons' on here is amazing. Go to a library and READ THE DAMN BILL! Its been around for over three and a half years!

DesideriScuri,

I'm going to try to answer your question in the OP. Before I do that, I need you to consider a few things (call it a disclaimer):

A ) I remember asking this question way back in June of 2010 after I read the whole damn bill. VERY dry and dull read without pictures (sorry conservatives). And the document explains what happens with the penalty in a few different places. Just like with the 'grandfathered' clause I mentioned in another thread related to the ACA about which policies by insurances could remain in effect after the Jan 1, 2014 date. And it explains it in several different places in the 2400+ page document. There are no easy answers....

B ) The penalty comes in a few steps itself. For 2014 income tax form, its $95 or 1% of your gross income which ever is higher (if filing by yourself). For a family its another value all together (I think its around $392, but don't hold me to it). 2015 Income tax for single filer is $350 and the following years there after its $695 or 2.5% of your gross income.

C ) If your interested in the bill, you can find it HERE. Its 2409 pages long. But after you remove the front and back end of it, adjust the margins and single space the 'guts' its only about 680 pages long (rough estimate).

So you want to pay the $95 or 1% of your gross pay because you hate the President that much. The money is added on to your final charge after calculations (in theory, see below for why). That way if you have a big refund, the charge is deducted from your refund. If you end up paying, the IRS (in theory here again) will send a mailing to notify you of the charge and set up payment transaction. I think, the IRS may send along a document asking to verify your health insurance (in the event you actually forgot it when you paid your income tax form). The money itself first goes to the IRS and then onto the US Government before being sent (...I think...) to the group that handles the mechanics of the ACA: The Health and Human Services side of the US Government. They use the money to pay a number of elements found throughout the whole of the ACA. Its really to many to list here in any sane format....trust me!

An why is it done this way? I'm going with the idea that back in 2009 when the bill was drafted, the administration believed most people who would be subjected to the penalty would instead obtain healthcare coverage. While it cost more, the benefits lasted for the full year. So 'yes', the Administration figured most of those dealing with the decision for the penalty would take the wiser course of action. What the administration never predicted was the number of total idiots in the nation that would take the penalty to be spiteful at the President and Democrats (can you say 'childish'?). So the numbers within were based on the assumption there would not be a high percentage of individuals taking the penalty. I have no idea what the percentage is in the document off hand (its in the document). So the number paying the penalty will offset circumstances in a number of ways. What are those ways? I don't think I could exactly explain it right now without some hard numbers released.

What happens if you DONT pay the penalty? Well, the IRS has not exactly stated how it will define and carry out this mechanic just yet. However as history has shown us, the IRS is open to several different paths of leverage on you, the citizen. But before we get to those, the IRS would check to see if your the person filing meet anyone of the nine exemptions in the mandate. Yes, there are exemptions (do a Google search if your curious). If none of those exemptions apply, then:

1 ) The IRS simply tacks on the charge to your refund and thus, reduce it by the amount according to the ACA.

2 ) The IRS simply applies this charge to the following year's income tax amount and each year there after until its paid.

3 ) The IRS has charged filers an interest on unpaid taxes, and its likely this charge could meet the same circumstance.

4 ) The IRS can garnish your wages, or in the highly unlikely event of seizing your property to the amount needed to 'zero you out'.

In essence, you will be penalized for not holding a plan during the income tax document and the IRS is open to prosecution. HOWEVER, The ACA limits the IRS's ability to perform this in a direct manner. What that means exactly is anyone's guess right now.

While not a complete answer to your question, I hope this points you in the direction of the answer your looking for. You might just write to your representative to ask how the penalty charge is applied AFTER the IRS obtains it from you (in what ever way it does).




DesideriScuri -> RE: Obamacare Tax Penalty (11/25/2013 6:44:21 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
The amount of 'totally ignorant morons' on here is amazing. Go to a library and READ THE DAMN BILL! Its been around for over three and a half years!
DesideriScuri,
I'm going to try to answer your question in the OP. Before I do that, I need you to consider a few things (call it a disclaimer):
A ) I remember asking this question way back in June of 2010 after I read the whole damn bill. VERY dry and dull read without pictures (sorry conservatives). And the document explains what happens with the penalty in a few different places. Just like with the 'grandfathered' clause I mentioned in another thread related to the ACA about which policies by insurances could remain in effect after the Jan 1, 2014 date. And it explains it in several different places in the 2400+ page document. There are no easy answers....
B ) The penalty comes in a few steps itself. For 2014 income tax form, its $95 or 1% of your gross income which ever is higher (if filing by yourself). For a family its another value all together (I think its around $392, but don't hold me to it). 2015 Income tax for single filer is $350 and the following years there after its $695 or 2.5% of your gross income.
C ) If your interested in the bill, you can find it HERE. Its 2409 pages long. But after you remove the front and back end of it, adjust the margins and single space the 'guts' its only about 680 pages long (rough estimate).
So you want to pay the $95 or 1% of your gross pay because you hate the President that much. The money is added on to your final charge after calculations (in theory, see below for why). That way if you have a big refund, the charge is deducted from your refund. If you end up paying, the IRS (in theory here again) will send a mailing to notify you of the charge and set up payment transaction. I think, the IRS may send along a document asking to verify your health insurance (in the event you actually forgot it when you paid your income tax form). The money itself first goes to the IRS and then onto the US Government before being sent (...I think...) to the group that handles the mechanics of the ACA: The Health and Human Services side of the US Government. They use the money to pay a number of elements found throughout the whole of the ACA. Its really to many to list here in any sane format....trust me!
An why is it done this way? I'm going with the idea that back in 2009 when the bill was drafted, the administration believed most people who would be subjected to the penalty would instead obtain healthcare coverage. While it cost more, the benefits lasted for the full year. So 'yes', the Administration figured most of those dealing with the decision for the penalty would take the wiser course of action. What the administration never predicted was the number of total idiots in the nation that would take the penalty to be spiteful at the President and Democrats (can you say 'childish'?). So the numbers within were based on the assumption there would not be a high percentage of individuals taking the penalty. I have no idea what the percentage is in the document off hand (its in the document). So the number paying the penalty will offset circumstances in a number of ways. What are those ways? I don't think I could exactly explain it right now without some hard numbers released.
What happens if you DONT pay the penalty? Well, the IRS has not exactly stated how it will define and carry out this mechanic just yet. However as history has shown us, the IRS is open to several different paths of leverage on you, the citizen. But before we get to those, the IRS would check to see if your the person filing meet anyone of the nine exemptions in the mandate. Yes, there are exemptions (do a Google search if your curious). If none of those exemptions apply, then:
1 ) The IRS simply tacks on the charge to your refund and thus, reduce it by the amount according to the ACA.
2 ) The IRS simply applies this charge to the following year's income tax amount and each year there after until its paid.
3 ) The IRS has charged filers an interest on unpaid taxes, and its likely this charge could meet the same circumstance.
4 ) The IRS can garnish your wages, or in the highly unlikely event of seizing your property to the amount needed to 'zero you out'.
In essence, you will be penalized for not holding a plan during the income tax document and the IRS is open to prosecution. HOWEVER, The ACA limits the IRS's ability to perform this in a direct manner. What that means exactly is anyone's guess right now.
While not a complete answer to your question, I hope this points you in the direction of the answer your looking for. You might just write to your representative to ask how the penalty charge is applied AFTER the IRS obtains it from you (in what ever way it does).


Joether, I'm going to respond to your post with constructive criticism. Please take it in the manner intended.

1) You presented a ridiculous amount of information, most of it, though, wasn't germane (or Tito, Michael, Janet, etc.). I put in red bold the only part that answered my question.

2) The tone of your posts is quite disappointing to me. You often provide a shitload of info, which I appreciate. However, making Conservatives out to be morons really diminishes you and your responses, in my eyes. I understand that how I think of you is likely of little consequence, but it's feedback.

3) Yeah, there isn't anything else. I just wanted there to be a third thing. [:D]






leonine -> RE: Obamacare Tax Penalty (11/25/2013 9:50:29 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie
The ACA is designed for those needing insurance. A healthy 20 something doesn't need insurance, except for the ruberic of "what if," which you and I know is a specious argument.

I know that young people believe they're immortal and indestructible, but you and I are old enough not to agree with them.

Seriously, the problem here is trying to build a single payer health system out of a private insurance healthcare system, which is kind of like trying to rebuild a freeway to work like a railway by chaining all the cars together.

In a single payer, everyone's taxes pay in, regardless of their age and actuarial status, so that the system can afford to treat them when they need it - including a healthy 20yo who didn't think he needed insurance till he got hit by a truck.

Insurance systems try to fudge round that all kinds of ways, from putting a time limit on chronic treatments, up to and including ruling some people uninsurable, to make up for the fact that 20yos believe they don't need insurance so don't contribute to their funds. The faults are blindingly obvious from outside, but so is that you don't fix them by keeping the insurance system.




mnottertail -> RE: Obamacare Tax Penalty (11/25/2013 10:00:43 AM)

They get in a car accident and what should we do, all these indestructables, give them a do not gurney or help file?




papassion -> RE: Obamacare Tax Penalty (11/25/2013 12:44:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

What is the reasoning behind there being a tax penalty if you aren't covered by health insurance?

Is it just a stick used to coerce you into purchasing?

If Joe Schlabotnik isn't covered by insurance, what is the $95 or 1% of his income (whichever is greater) going towards?

The idea is to get everyone to buy health insurance. The reasoning goes that no one will want to pay the fine so they'll go out and get health insurance.


We're seriously considering just paying the fine.

The cheapest coverage offered to us is $700 per month X12 = $7200.00. Now that plan which we're paying $700 a month for has a $10,000 deductible. So, since we haven't hit $10,000 in medical bills in 15 years...chances are that we're paying $700 and not getting any coverage.

We're thinking that it may just be best to pay the $1000.00 fine and put the remaining $6200 into a managed care account and actually have that money go towards our medical bills.


Sounds logical. Are you and others aware that you can set up a Health Savings Account (HSA) to pay out of pocket healthcare expenses now or in the future? Contributions to your HSA lower your taxable income. HSA's are not a use it or lose it thing. Talk to your accountant.




papassion -> RE: Obamacare Tax Penalty (11/25/2013 1:01:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: leonine


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie
The ACA is designed for those needing insurance. A healthy 20 something doesn't need insurance, except for the ruberic of "what if," which you and I know is a specious argument.

I know that young people believe they're immortal and indestructible, but you and I are old enough not to agree with them.

Seriously, the problem here is trying to build a single payer health system out of a private insurance healthcare system, which is kind of like trying to rebuild a freeway to work like a railway by chaining all the cars together.

In a single payer, everyone's taxes pay in, regardless of their age and actuarial status, so that the system can afford to treat them when they need it - including a healthy 20yo who didn't think he needed insurance till he got hit by a truck.

Insurance systems try to fudge round that all kinds of ways, from putting a time limit on chronic treatments, up to and including ruling some people uninsurable, to make up for the fact that 20yos believe they don't need insurance so don't contribute to their funds. The faults are blindingly obvious from outside, but so is that you don't fix them by keeping the insurance system.


Single payer has its limitations and faults too. Just like people here waiting for organs they need. There are only so many organs available. Single payer systems usually have less advanced medical machines available and thus have limited capacity for all more complex health procedures. And if you are older, and a younger person needs a procedure, too bad, so sad.

Also, you need the young, that don't really need health insurance, to pay in to "subsidize" the old. Then you let the young up to age 26 get a free ride with their parents! You don't see a problem here? (that leaves only a small band of "young and healthy" left to pay in to finiance the system.)




MarkfromHouston -> RE: Obamacare Tax Penalty (11/25/2013 1:06:19 PM)

Actually the only way ACA obamacare works is if the 20 somethings sign up and pay into the system. If they do not then it WILL NOT WORK, and so far they are not signing up. The pool needs a lot of healthy people paying into the scam in order to work. This is just another government run Ponzi scam, if you pay in today then later you will reap the rewards because someone else will be paying in so we can pay you. It is a lot like the other huge Ponzi scam the government runs... Social Security. It works up until people start living longer, receiving a higher percentage of what they paid into the system and the economy takes a dump, then it goes broke because the government stole the money.




OsideGirl -> RE: Obamacare Tax Penalty (11/25/2013 1:33:47 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ExquisiteStings

 To OsideGirl: Not to nitpick, but well, yeah, to nitpick: 700 multiplied by 12 = 8400.  And here I thought MY math teachers sucked.

ES


I've been sick for 9 days. I've barely slept, got my period in the middle of it, I'm coughing up a lung, have still been running two companies and have been living on cold medicine.

So, yeah, in my haze I fucked up my math. Feel Superior?




papassion -> RE: Obamacare Tax Penalty (11/25/2013 1:44:18 PM)

For your info. Thehealthsherpa.com is a site that will give an estimate of what health insurance in your area will cost you. Just fill in the easy questions like zipcode, your age, do you smoke, and what plan you want. (bronze,, silver, etc) Will also give an estimate of the government subsidy you will get determined by your income. This is NOT a sign-up site and is not 100% accurate but fairly good info.

Make sure you click on the correct heading. Some are fishing sites.




RottenJohnny -> RE: Obamacare Tax Penalty (11/25/2013 2:38:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie


quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
But, what is that penalty going to be used for?

Just a guess but I expect it's going to be put into the general spending fund.


So, it's not really doing anything regarding health care.


Not specifically. But if it goes into the general fund and costs associated with the ACA are paid out of the general fund then it actually would be paying for some aspect of health care.


I have a bridge....call me....

(I switched all the lighting to LED and....it's all Solar powered too).

Are you gonna pay for the shipping? Michigan needs a few new bridges.




joether -> RE: Obamacare Tax Penalty (11/25/2013 4:04:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
1) You presented a ridiculous amount of information, most of it, though, wasn't germane (or Tito, Michael, Janet, etc.). I put in red bold the only part that answered my question.


The reason for that, is to completely answer the question and NOT give a 2nd grader's answer to the question. It shows that I took the time to study the question and give background material in the event you had...further...questions. At the same time, others would read this thread and may have similar questions on 'where does that money go' if they pay the penalty rather than the insurance plan.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
2) The tone of your posts is quite disappointing to me. You often provide a shitload of info, which I appreciate. However, making Conservatives out to be morons really diminishes you and your responses, in my eyes. I understand that how I think of you is likely of little consequence, but it's feedback.


Your one of the few conservatives on here that is NOT a moron. There are a few others, but listing them would imply the other conservatives on here are total morons. I'm sure you can figure out which people are dumber than 'three rocks in a box' by observing the discussions on here. Most of the moron conservatives on here really do a disservice to their political viewpoint in the long run. Your original question is not a simple '5 minute Google search' for an answer. Had to open up the 'guts' of the ACA and my notes to recall what it said about the question in particular. I know I'm leaving a section out, but I cant remember where in the document it originates; hence the disclaimer.

Maybe I'm a bit tired when some conservative moron comes on here, bitches about something in science that says "This person has no clue what they are talking about". And notice what happens after that? People on this board try to answer and educate the person. To which they come back a month or two later with similar level of B.S. and show they did not learn one damn thing! An there are the ones that blast some situation or event on the President when he is not at fault for it (for example). Or 'diss' someone in government they hate (i.e. Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid, Barack Obama, etc.). But its not "President Obama did a poor job on this issue" its "Obamafail is an idiot why did libtards vote for him?". The first is an example of showing a fairly decent level of respect and being mature. The second is what I find conservatives often behave as: Junior High School Mentality. I make it a point in my posts to show a fair level of respect for the office the person holds/held and getting their name correct. 'Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich', 'Newt Gingrich', 'Mr. Gingrich' shows respect and maturity for someone I really do not like.

Its stuff like that, that conservatives do that force me to arrive at the viewpoint that the grand majority of conservatives are total morons. I have plenty of evidence to show for it. I would truly like to think that most conservatives are intelligent, educated, wise and mature on any one given subject. Imagine the discussions DS! But that is not what we get here. Imagine the discussion if we approached the 2nd amendment like reasonable adults who consider the other's viewpoint and background before rattling off talking points. For example, I feel conservatives will be the ones to kill the 2nd amendment off, NOT, the liberals. A thread for another day, right?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
3) Yeah, there isn't anything else. I just wanted there to be a third thing. [:D]


HOLY COW MAN! You knew if I responded it would be a few lengthy set of answers?

must stop typing.....must....hit.....'ok'...button....

....must tap....

...............'ok'.........button.......

.......................................................must resist not typing more stuff......




LookieNoNookie -> RE: Obamacare Tax Penalty (11/25/2013 4:33:17 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

The amount of 'totally ignorant morons' on here is amazing. Go to a library and READ THE DAMN BILL! Its been around for over three and a half years!

DesideriScuri,

I'm going to try to answer your question in the OP. Before I do that, I need you to consider a few things (call it a disclaimer):

A ) I remember asking this question way back in June of 2010 after I read the whole damn bill. VERY dry and dull read without pictures (sorry conservatives). And the document explains what happens with the penalty in a few different places. Just like with the 'grandfathered' clause I mentioned in another thread related to the ACA about which policies by insurances could remain in effect after the Jan 1, 2014 date. And it explains it in several different places in the 2400+ page document. There are no easy answers....

B ) The penalty comes in a few steps itself. For 2014 income tax form, its $95 or 1% of your gross income which ever is higher (if filing by yourself). For a family its another value all together (I think its around $392, but don't hold me to it). 2015 Income tax for single filer is $350 and the following years there after its $695 or 2.5% of your gross income.

C ) If your interested in the bill, you can find it HERE. Its 2409 pages long. But after you remove the front and back end of it, adjust the margins and single space the 'guts' its only about 680 pages long (rough estimate).

So you want to pay the $95 or 1% of your gross pay because you hate the President that much. The money is added on to your final charge after calculations (in theory, see below for why). That way if you have a big refund, the charge is deducted from your refund. If you end up paying, the IRS (in theory here again) will send a mailing to notify you of the charge and set up payment transaction. I think, the IRS may send along a document asking to verify your health insurance (in the event you actually forgot it when you paid your income tax form). The money itself first goes to the IRS and then onto the US Government before being sent (...I think...) to the group that handles the mechanics of the ACA: The Health and Human Services side of the US Government. They use the money to pay a number of elements found throughout the whole of the ACA. Its really to many to list here in any sane format....trust me!

An why is it done this way? I'm going with the idea that back in 2009 when the bill was drafted, the administration believed most people who would be subjected to the penalty would instead obtain healthcare coverage. While it cost more, the benefits lasted for the full year. So 'yes', the Administration figured most of those dealing with the decision for the penalty would take the wiser course of action. What the administration never predicted was the number of total idiots in the nation that would take the penalty to be spiteful at the President and Democrats (can you say 'childish'?). So the numbers within were based on the assumption there would not be a high percentage of individuals taking the penalty. I have no idea what the percentage is in the document off hand (its in the document). So the number paying the penalty will offset circumstances in a number of ways. What are those ways? I don't think I could exactly explain it right now without some hard numbers released.

What happens if you DONT pay the penalty? Well, the IRS has not exactly stated how it will define and carry out this mechanic just yet. However as history has shown us, the IRS is open to several different paths of leverage on you, the citizen. But before we get to those, the IRS would check to see if your the person filing meet anyone of the nine exemptions in the mandate. Yes, there are exemptions (do a Google search if your curious). If none of those exemptions apply, then:

1 ) The IRS simply tacks on the charge to your refund and thus, reduce it by the amount according to the ACA.

2 ) The IRS simply applies this charge to the following year's income tax amount and each year there after until its paid.

3 ) The IRS has charged filers an interest on unpaid taxes, and its likely this charge could meet the same circumstance.

4 ) The IRS can garnish your wages, or in the highly unlikely event of seizing your property to the amount needed to 'zero you out'.

In essence, you will be penalized for not holding a plan during the income tax document and the IRS is open to prosecution. HOWEVER, The ACA limits the IRS's ability to perform this in a direct manner. What that means exactly is anyone's guess right now.

While not a complete answer to your question, I hope this points you in the direction of the answer your looking for. You might just write to your representative to ask how the penalty charge is applied AFTER the IRS obtains it from you (in what ever way it does).


Just for the record...since you enjoy reading political docs....

The Social Security bill originally said that "no benefits would be taxed". Today up to 85% are.

It was made law that "no more than 1% of one's wages would be taxed"....today it's nearing 16%.

Originally it was law that "no portion of Social Security taxes shall be used for anything other than SSI benefits" (ed: "shall" is a legal word which means...."nothing else other than what was stated"...."never"...."not at all").

Lyndon Johnson changed that and put SSI into the general fund wherein which all spending could include SSI, and does to this day.

There's more and it runs several pages.

I'm very glad that you're as confident in your governments promises as you appear to be.

(I however, am not).




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
5.859375E-02