Quantcast

Still think obamacare is a penalty and not a tax? Drink your kool-aid because your about to be educated.

Teri- Oregon 2012/06/29 23:10:24
You!
Add Photos & Videos

The first, and best known, of these seven taxes that will hit all Americans as a result of Obamacare is the Individual Mandate Tax (no longer concealed as a penalty). This provision will require a couple to pay the higher of a base tax of $1,360 per year, or 2.5% of adjusted growth income starting with lower base tax and rising to this level by 2016. Individuals will see a base tax of $695 and families a base tax of $2,085 per year by 2016.

Next up is the Medicine Cabinet Tax that took effect in 2011. This tax prohibits reimbursement of expenses for over-the-counter medicine, with the lone exception of insulin, from an employee’s pre-tax dollar funded Health Saving Account (HSA), Flexible Spending Account (FSA) or Health Reimbursement Account (HRA). This provision hurts middle class earners particularly hard since they earn enough to actually pay federal taxes, but not enough to make this restriction negligible.

The Flexible Spending Account (FSA) Cap, which will begin in 2013, is perhaps the most hurtful provision to the middle class. This part of the law imposes a cap of $2,500 per year (which is now unlimited) on the amount of pre-tax dollars that could be deposited into these accounts. Why is this particularly hurtful to the middle class? It is because funds in these accounts may be used to pay for special needs education for special needs children in the United States. Tuition rates for this type of special education can easily exceed $14,000 per year and the use of pre-tax dollars has helped many middle income families.

Another direct hit to the middle class is the Medical Itemized Deduction Hurdle which is currently 7.5% of adjusted gross income. This is the hurdle that must be met before medical expenses over that hurdle can be taken as a deduction on federal income taxes. Obamacare raises this hurdle to 10% of adjusted gross income beginning in 2013. Consider the middle class family with $80,000 of adjusted gross income and $8,000 of medical expenses. Currently, that family can get some relief from being able to take a $2,000 deduction (7.5% X $80,000 = $6,000; $8,000 –$6,000 = $2,000). An increase to 10% would eliminate the deduction in this example and if that family was paying a 25% federal tax rate, the real cost of that lost deduction would be $500.

The fifth new tax on the middle class, and all Americans, is the Health Savings Account (HSA) Withdrawal Tax Hike. This provision increases the additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10% currently to 20% beginning in 2013. This provision actually sets these accounts apart from Investment Retirement Accounts (IRAs) and other tax advantaged accounts, all of which remain with a 10% early withdrawal tax.

Another regressive tax that is part of this law began in 2010 and that is the Indoor Tanning Services Tax, which places a 10% excise tax on people using tanning salons. While some may regard this as insignificant, the broader implication is that this act of taxation is a blatant move by the federal government to control the behavior of citizens. This provision, as does the Individual Mandate and as Justice Kennedy said during the oral arguments on the constitutionality of the law said, “….fundamentally changes the relationship between the federal government and the citizen.”

The seventh new tax that directly impacts the middle class, along with all citizens, is the Excise Tax on Comprehensive Health Insurance Plans or the “Cadillac” Health Insurance Plan Tax. These are plans that provide extensive coverage and that are generally fully paid for, or largely paid for, by employers. This provision imposes a 40% excise tax on the employer-paid premium on taxpayers who are covered by such plans, beginning in 2018. The reason it begins in 2018 is because most unionized workers are covered by plans that fall under this definition and a deferral was made to spare union members from this tax for at least a period of time.

There are thirteen other taxes that apply to businesses and that apply to high income (over $250,000 per year) households. While these additional provisions will not impact the middle class directly, they can have serious indirect consequences for middle and low income earners. Beginning in 2014, the Employer Mandate Tax will impose an annual non-deductible tax on employers with more than 50 employees who do not provide health insurance for their employees.

The impact of this provision on low and middle income earners, and really all working Americans, is that employers will be confronted with three choices. The first is provide some level of health insurance, as many do today, and there would be no impact on employees. The second choice is to pay the penalty, which would most likely be less expensive than providing health insurance, and force employees to seek their own health insurance or purchase it through federal government controlled state exchanges. Studies have estimated that 20 million Americans will lose their employee funded health insurance as a result of this provision and employers electing this option. The third choice is for employers to lay off employees, or not hire additional employees, because Obamacare forces them to either provide health insurance or pay the new tax.

Another new tax, the Tax on Medical Device Manufacturers that begins in 2013, places a 2.3% excise tax on all items retailing for more than $100. This provision will not only drive up the cost of various medical devices ranging from mobility assistance devices to personal testing supplies, but will also impact an industry that employs 360,000 people in 6,000 plants across our country. This tax, while not a direct tax, would have significant negative impact on the middle class.

The Surtax on Investment Income for households earning $250,000 and more, beginning in 2013, will raise the Capital Gains Tax from 15% to 23.8% on investment income for these households and will raise Taxes on Dividends from 15% to 43.4% for the same households. Aside from the impact on retired citizens dependent on dividends, this provision will pull income from the private economy. In addition, the tax rate on Other Investment Income earned by Subchapter S Corporation (which many small business are organized as, allowing the owners to claim all business income as personal income) will rise from 35% to 43.4%. This part of the provision would place additional pressure on small businesses resulting in more layoffs and less hiring, impacting all American workers.

All but one of the remaining new taxes in Obamacare are directed at health industry businesses and while they will not impact middle income families directly, the additional costs will most likely be passed on to the public. The last new tax is really interesting, it is a tax on certain biofuels!

These are the facts. It does not matter if you support Mr. Obama and his new law or if you oppose it, the new taxes on the middle class or real and all Americans should understand their impact on their families and the economy. Citizens, regardless of political beliefs, should recognize that Obamacare was passed with almost no sunlight shined on these middle class tax increases and need to understand that the new law was sold with the promise that there would be no new middle class taxes. This is not partisan, it is simply the reality of politics.


Still think obamacare is a penalty and not a tax Drink your kool aid because your about to be educated

Read More: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/06/29...

Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • Arel 2012/07/03 23:54:22
    hahahaha!
    Arel
    +7
    and the Obama supporters will still see it as free health care.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • GUAPO~LMAO!~ 2012/07/04 22:45:23
    hahahaha!
    GUAPO~LMAO!~
    +1
    He is hosing the rich and the middle class.
    He is half black and the half black says we have to pay since he is a racist.
  • wtw 2012/07/04 05:00:33
    hahahaha!
    wtw
    +4
    The bottom line is it is going to cost americans more money then they currently pay! Obama lied! Obama lies more than any other president in history!
  • Muver 2012/07/04 04:41:07
    hahahaha!
    Muver
    +3
    Whatever it is, it is simply total Bull Dung....
    I want it to be repealed...
  • Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆ 2012/07/04 01:36:22
    hahahaha!
    Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆
    +5
    I knew about these taxes. And that joke of a decision highlights the issue.
  • Arel 2012/07/03 23:54:22
    hahahaha!
    Arel
    +7
    and the Obama supporters will still see it as free health care.
  • pamela Arel 2012/07/04 23:09:28
    pamela
    +1
    They sure will. Just wait until they get their paychecks and how much more they will have to pay, plus on top of that, higher deductions, more out of pocket, and full price prescriptions, which I see actually now being done. What I am seeing is already being done in our household, especially more out of pocket and full price prescriptions, and those are the presciptions we need.
  • Arel pamela 2012/07/05 22:09:43
    Arel
    +2
    It is sad that we the people have allowed our leaders to divide us in so many different ways that we are no longer paying attention to what they are doing and have done to America. Even our Supreme Court is playing politics it is shameful really........
  • 'Zedd 2012/07/03 23:51:10
  • K-ZOOMI-----0 2012/07/03 23:18:37
    hahahaha!
    K-ZOOMI-----0
    +6
    The SCOTUS decision has another (albeit a delightful one for me); Pres. Obama & Democrats (up for re-election) have to run their campaigns on DEFENDING all these TAXES. They also have to ADMIT THEY LIED all this time!
  • Technot... K-ZOOMI... 2012/07/03 23:33:44
    Technotrucker_exposingthetruth
    +4
    Ahh, you think they will admit it. They will deny, and the libs will buy!
  • K-ZOOMI... Technot... 2012/07/04 00:33:56
    K-ZOOMI-----0
    +4
    Very true about liberals and die-hard Dems. It's all the Independents that will see through this and vote against Pres. Obama.
  • Nancy~P... K-ZOOMI... 2012/07/04 01:32:48
    Nancy~PWCM~JLA~POTL
    +3
    I am Independent voter and my vote is NOT for BO
  • K-ZOOMI... Nancy~P... 2012/07/04 02:36:00
    K-ZOOMI-----0
    +2
    That is what I eluded too. :)
  • Nancy~P... Technot... 2012/07/04 01:31:29 (edited)
    Nancy~PWCM~JLA~POTL
    +3
    until they have to pick up the tab. Freedom comes with a pricetag
  • Technotrucker_exposingthetruth 2012/07/03 22:14:30
    hahahaha!
    Technotrucker_exposingthetruth
    +4
    Yeah, the libs are gonna love all this extra money they are going to get from the Obiecare law. Oh wait! They are going to be paying through the nose too! Oh Sh*t! LMAO! Good job morons.
  • Nancy~P... Technot... 2012/07/04 01:37:41
    Nancy~PWCM~JLA~POTL
    +2
    yes Robin Hood in reverse on steroids. Rob from the poor and give it to the rich. They love it! I think they are mistaken. I want the same healthcare that congress and House of Reps, Senate and Pres has. They are not buying it. Why should we be taxed for it when they have no responsibility whatsoever. Their lives are completely unchanged either way.
  • Technot... Nancy~P... 2012/07/04 01:41:36
    Technotrucker_exposingthetruth
    +1
    Add to that, how about tort reform? How about we allow competition between insurance companies across state lines? Why should people in Nebraska pay $5,000 a year in premiums for what Washington residents get for $2,000?
  • Joe Shwingding BN-ZERO 2012/07/02 17:15:52
    hahahaha!
    Joe Shwingding BN-ZERO
    +3
    Most of these have to do with rolling back the Bush tax cuts, others are Republican pet projects for healthcare, and still others are more whining about taxing the rich.
    Hardly a real unbiased assessment of the new healthcare law.
  • ehrhornp 2012/07/02 00:14:27
    hahahaha!
    ehrhornp
    +2
    Only a fool would go without heath care. But if they should be stupid enough and decide to suck off the gov. tit, there is no enforcement provision in the law for the mandate. So if a deadbeat is too out of it to buy insurance, they certainly won't pay any penalty that does not have an enforcement mechanism.
  • Teri- O... ehrhornp 2012/07/02 01:27:30
    Teri- Oregon
    +3
    they wont pay a penalty but the middle class will pay taxes so they don't have to buy insurance.
  • Nancy~P... Teri- O... 2012/07/04 01:38:58
    Nancy~PWCM~JLA~POTL
    +1
    no blood in turnip
  • Eric Echevarria 2012/07/01 14:10:23
    What?
    Eric Echevarria
    +1
    The Supreme Court said that if the individual mandate were a “penalty” they could not rule the plan constitutional and could not allow ObamaCare to stand. So they decided that the mandate is a tax. The White House is insisting that the mandate is a penalty and therefore unconstitutional.

    The internet is flooded with websites and articles telling everyone to reject ObamaCare because it is a tax and Obama promised, waaa, waaa, sniffle, that he wouldn’t raise taxes.

    If agreeing that the mandate is a penalty would render ObamaCare unconstitutional then why are these supposed anti-ObamaCare articles insisting that the mandate is a tax rather than a penalty? Deceptive propaganda or pure idiocy?
  • James 2012/07/01 03:55:13
    hahahaha!
    James
    +2
    Funny how people don't notice Obama would be eating his words right now.
  • Obama Failed Soda Head Chie... 2012/06/30 18:59:20 (edited)
    hahahaha!
    Obama Failed Soda Head Chief Opi
    +3
    Yes, it tax and were gong to get hose Obama Care,the most expensive and freedom robbing tax bill in U.S. history



    IRS
  • CUDDLY BUT STILL CRABBY 2012/06/30 15:12:36
    hahahaha!
    CUDDLY BUT STILL CRABBY
    +4
    Obamacare has actually little to do with health care.

    It's all about control and power over other people.

    The ultimate Utopian socialist vision for all folks, except for the elites and uber-wealthy that is.
  • Ken 2012/06/30 14:11:51 (edited)
    hahahaha!
    Ken
    +3
    It will be repealed as it has been un-constitutionally generated in the Senate, all taxes must be generated in the House.
  • Schläue~© Ken 2012/06/30 14:36:41
    Schläue~©
    +3
    The 16th amendment gives CONGRESS the power to levy taxes and does not stipulate the House of Representatives.
    All spending bills must originate in the House.
  • Ken Schläue~© 2012/07/01 05:00:34 (edited)
    Ken
    +2
    Read this it might help you understand how tax bills originate.

    http://www.polisci.ccsu.edu/t...

    Read the House Ways and Means Committee first paragraph.

    "Furthermore, as established by the Constitution, the House of Representatives was the branch of government which represented the people directly, whereas the Senate, as originally projected, was to represent the states. It was therefore left to the House to originate all tax bills. This arrangement is similar to conditions in the British Parliament, where all money bills have to originate in the House of Commons, rather than in the House of Lords."

    and this says the Senate doesn't.

    "The Senate Finance Committee. Like the House Ways and Means Committee, the Senate Finance Committee is basically concerned with issues relating to the raising of revenues, through such means as taxes and tariffs. As we have already noted, although this committee does not constitutionally have the direct power to initiate taxation legislation, it does so by amendment. In addition, since amendments to revenue legislation are allowed on the floor of the Senate far more often than they are on the floor of the House, the amending process here plays a rather significant role. Because of this process, House and Senate versions of fund-raising legislation can...
    Read this it might help you understand how tax bills originate.

    http://www.polisci.ccsu.edu/t...

    Read the House Ways and Means Committee first paragraph.

    "Furthermore, as established by the Constitution, the House of Representatives was the branch of government which represented the people directly, whereas the Senate, as originally projected, was to represent the states. It was therefore left to the House to originate all tax bills. This arrangement is similar to conditions in the British Parliament, where all money bills have to originate in the House of Commons, rather than in the House of Lords."

    and this says the Senate doesn't.

    "The Senate Finance Committee. Like the House Ways and Means Committee, the Senate Finance Committee is basically concerned with issues relating to the raising of revenues, through such means as taxes and tariffs. As we have already noted, although this committee does not constitutionally have the direct power to initiate taxation legislation, it does so by amendment. In addition, since amendments to revenue legislation are allowed on the floor of the Senate far more often than they are on the floor of the House, the amending process here plays a rather significant role. Because of this process, House and Senate versions of fund-raising legislation can often differ markedly. Moreover, because of the prestige and power of the Senate, compromises between the two bodies often fall closer to the Senate version. "
    (more)
  • Schläue~© Ken 2012/07/01 10:41:33 (edited)
    Schläue~©
    Perhaps you should have taken the time to familiarize yourself with the role of the Senate as well?

    From your own link.

    "Like the House Ways and Means Committee, the Senate Finance Committee is basically concerned with issues relating to the raising of revenues, through such means as taxes and tariffs. As we have already noted, although this committee does not constitutionally have the direct power to initiate taxation legislation, it does so by amendment."

    The 'bill' itself, DID originate in the House labeled HR 3200 and was the most heinous version which became the battle of Summer 2009.
    It brought people out to the town hall meeting - show-downs when Congress went into their August recess and the TEA Party as we know it today was born.

    Many versions of the bill followed with the last being introduced and sponsored by Charles Rangel as HR 3590 on 9/17/2009 which was further amended and finally voted on by the Senate in Dec. 2009. The House took their final vote in Mar. of 2010 and became public law 11-148 on March 23, 2010.

    Regardless, nowhere in the Law does it use the word 'Tax' ... that was an interpretation made by Roberts in his opinion. That debate will rage on until November and possibly beyond.

    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin...

    http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/...
    Perhaps you should have taken the time to familiarize yourself with the role of the Senate as well?

    From your own link.

    "Like the House Ways and Means Committee, the Senate Finance Committee is basically concerned with issues relating to the raising of revenues, through such means as taxes and tariffs. As we have already noted, although this committee does not constitutionally have the direct power to initiate taxation legislation, it does so by amendment."

    The 'bill' itself, DID originate in the House labeled HR 3200 and was the most heinous version which became the battle of Summer 2009.
    It brought people out to the town hall meeting - show-downs when Congress went into their August recess and the TEA Party as we know it today was born.

    Many versions of the bill followed with the last being introduced and sponsored by Charles Rangel as HR 3590 on 9/17/2009 which was further amended and finally voted on by the Senate in Dec. 2009. The House took their final vote in Mar. of 2010 and became public law 11-148 on March 23, 2010.

    Regardless, nowhere in the Law does it use the word 'Tax' ... that was an interpretation made by Roberts in his opinion. That debate will rage on until November and possibly beyond.

    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin...

    http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/...
    (more)
  • Ken Schläue~© 2012/07/01 22:34:10
    Ken
    +2
    Robert's interprtation only validated the mandate because it was declared a tax, otherwise the mandate would have been struck down.
  • Schläue~© Ken 2012/07/02 02:02:45
    Schläue~©
    +1
    I understand that.

    All 9 of the Justices agreed on that point when they first went into conference after the 4 days of oral arguments.
  • Ken Schläue~© 2012/07/02 03:04:11
    Ken
    +1
    In one of your previous post you state the Senate can initiate taxes, the post I gave you specifically says they can't. I copied and pasted in the previous post for your info.
  • Schläue~© Ken 2012/07/02 03:20:59
    Schläue~©
    No, I never made that claim. I said that all spending bills must originate in the House and that the 16th amendment gave Congress the power to levy taxes, which it does.
  • Ken Schläue~© 2012/07/02 03:27:03
    Ken
    +1
    If initiated in the House.
  • Ken Schläue~© 2012/07/02 04:09:08
  • irish -liberty or death! 2012/06/30 13:41:17
    hahahaha!
    irish -liberty or death!
  • santa6642 2012/06/30 03:36:01
    hahahaha!
    santa6642
    +6
    I hate coolaid but you are right, and I have to agree we are being Raped by our own government.
  • rustyshackelford 2012/06/30 00:07:18
  • ed 2012/06/29 23:57:25
    hahahaha!
    ed
    +4
    Great school and here is something else that if obamacare stands I honestly think we will see the disappearence of many doctors who are against obamacare to begin with and they have first hand knowledge of what obamacare will do to us all and yes even the liberals.
  • ConLibFraud 2012/06/29 23:51:52
    hahahaha!
    ConLibFraud
    +7
    We The People have the power if we would only use it!!!!

    It's time for We The People to take matters into our own hands starting with a nationwide tax revolt, stop paying all bank loans and implement a national plea for our military to come home and rescue their country and put up a fence around DC and call it the National Penitentiary. Then put all of them (politicians and judges) and their bankers on trial and punish them for treason. And a note to the media ... we have special plans for you!

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2013/05/23 22:36:07

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals