Health Care Reform Act

[Guest]

Are you saying that if I (hypothetical I) don't get insurance and pay the penalty/tax that I will then be covered under a federal insurance program?

Seems rather pointless to me.

It doesn't seem true to me, nothing I've read has suggested that the tax buys you federal insurance, just that it's purpose is to discourage people from deciding not to bother with insurance until they actually get sick.

SORRY! The sentence came out wrong. The translation from head to paper/er/keyboard croaked. I decided not to edit it, instead just put this post in...

No, I mean to cover those who cannot afford to buy insurance. Not YOU if you are not one of those who qualify for subsidy.

Okay, what I was trying to say is - the fines set up are not going to be spent in any other government fund except for the purposes of the healthcare act... e.g., to help pay for health insurance for those who cannot afford it... because Traveler was saying that we don't know what our taxes are spent on - which is true - except for this one, because the bill appropriates the fines back to the healthcare act, so we know where the tax is going for this particular one.

Okay, does that make better sense?

[Dravin]

SORRY! The sentence came out wrong. The translation from head to paper/er/keyboard croaked. I decided not to edit it, instead just put this post in...

No, I mean to cover those who cannot afford to buy insurance. Not YOU if you are not one of those who qualify for subsidy.

Okay, what I was trying to say is - the fines set up are not going to be spent in any other government fund except for the purposes of the healthcare act... e.g., to help pay for health insurance for those who cannot afford it... because Traveler was saying that we don't know what our taxes are spent on - which is true - except for this one, because the bill appropriates the fines back to the healthcare act, so we know where the tax is going for this particular one.

Okay, does that make better sense?

Yes, that makes sense. You're saying the HCA individual mandate tax is earmarked for HCA costs and won't be going towards cruise missiles or high speed rail projects.

[Just_A_Guy]

Anatess, do you have a cite for that? My understanding was just the opposite - that the penalty/fine/tax just goes into Uncle Sam's general fund.

[MorningStar]

That's a frustrating unknown about this situation. We don't know the income guidelines and who the government will decide can't afford insurance. People who have individual circumstances might not be able to afford it, but have to pay the fine anyway because according to the guidelines, they can afford it. I have friends who have to pay cash to see the doctor. It's not going to help them if they're required to pay a fine on top of that.

[Guest]

Anatess, do you have a cite for that? My understanding was just the opposite - that the penalty/fine/tax just goes into Uncle Sam's general fund.

I'm looking at my go-to-for-healthcare stuff and I can't find it there. But, I do know that back in 2010 (or when that was that they passed those jillion pages of healthcare bill) that the giant pow-wow was the republicans accusing the democrats of the healthcare fine was nothing but a tax increase and the democrats stating "this is not a tax increase, people!" stating that particular reason that I mentioned. Do you remember that from way back then?

[Just_A_Guy]

Googled the issue. Media outlets seem to be very close-lipped about what actually happens to the revenue from the "penalty". Sometime I'll have to dig into the Act itself--but today is not that day.

But on an interesting tangent: This article says that they can't prosecute you--or even levy you or lien your property--for nonpayment of this particular tax/penalty.

[MorningStar]

Googled the issue. Media outlets seem to be very close-lipped about what actually happens to the revenue from the "penalty". Sometime I'll have to dig into the Act itself--but today is not that day.

But on an interesting tangent: This article says that they can't prosecute you--or even levy you or lien your property--for nonpayment of this particular tax/penalty.

Yeah, but if you do your taxes, you have to prove you have insurance. Insured people will receive a form and if they don't enter that, the tax will be taken from their refund if they have one.

[talisyn]

In Texas you cannot register your vehicle without showing proof of insurance. Is that a tax?

[MorningStar]

No, because driving is optional. If you choose to own a car, you need to prove that you can cover the expenses if you cause an accident. The car registration itself is a tax, but not the requirement to have insurance.

[Just_A_Guy]

Yeah, but if you do your taxes, you have to prove you have insurance. Insured people will receive a form and if they don't enter that, the tax will be taken from their refund if they have one.

Let me be clear at the outset that I loathe PPACA. I think it was dreamed up by politicians who were primarily concerned with shoring up their own position by making increasing numbers of Americans dependent on their own re-election. I think it will kill medical innovation, provide countless opportunities for graft, and hurt millions when the financial house of cards inevitably collapses. I can easily visualize a situation where it is used by the Executive Branch in order to deny health care to those who dare oppose it--if not now, then a few decades in the future; by politicians of any political party.

That said, I do want to address this implicit assertion that I have some kind of inevitable ownership interest in a tax refund. What makes people--even conservatives--think we have a right to a refund? If we overpay taxes via withholding, sure; we should get that money back--but with careful planning (filing a new Form W-4 if necessary), you can mitigate that problem by adjusting the amount withheld from your paycheck. So the only refunds that would unavoidably be seized by noncompliance with PPACA are those that accrued through refundable tax credits like the EIC (if you qualify), child tax credit, etc. These refunds are redistributionist in nature, and thus should be anathema to conservative principles. I'm an imperfect conservative--if the money's offered I'm not going to turn it down, not with four kids and a mortgage--but when the freebies end, I'm not gonna whine. I'll just double down and work harder for my keep--'cause that's what conservatives do.

Edited July 11, 2012 by Just_A_Guy

[Guest]

Let me be clear at the outset that I loathe PPACA. I think it was dreamed up by politicians who were primarily concerned with shoring up their own position by making increasing numbers of Americans dependent on their own re-election. I think it will kill medical innovation, provide countless opportunities for graft, and hurt millions when the financial house of cards inevitably collapses. I can easily visualize a situation where it is used by the Executive Branch in order to deny health care to those who dare oppose it--if not now, then a few decades in the future; by politicians of any political party.

That said, I do want to address this implicit assertion that I have some kind of inevitable ownership interest in a tax refund. What makes people--even conservatives--think we have a right to a refund? If we overpay taxes via withholding, sure; we should get that money back--but with careful planning (filing a new Form W-4 if necessary), you can mitigate that problem by adjusting the amount withheld from your paycheck. So the only refunds that would unavoidably be seized by noncompliance with PPACA are those that accrued through refundable tax credits like the EIC (if you qualify), child tax credit, etc. These refunds are redistributionist in nature, and thus should be anathema to conservative principles. I'm an imperfect conservative--if the money's offered I'm not going to turn it down, not with four kids and a mortgage--but when the freebies end, I'm not gonna whine. I'll just double down and work harder for my keep--'cause that's what conservatives do.

You wouldn't believe how many people think they don't pay taxes... that instead, the government gives them money (via tax refund).

And you wouldn't believe how many people treat tax refund as a "windfall". Like some kind of savings plan.

It boggles the mind.

[Just_A_Guy]

You wouldn't believe how many people think they don't pay taxes... that instead, the government gives them money (via tax refund).

And you wouldn't believe how many people treat tax refund as a "windfall". Like some kind of savings plan.

It boggles the mind.

Indeed. Even if your refund has no refundable credit component to it--even if the government's just paying you back for excessive withholding throughout the prior year--you've still just lent the US government a couple thousand bucks for a year, interest-free.

Why on earth would someone do that in the first place?

[beefche]

JAG, that's what I tell my friends. But they all insist that they want to have those extra couple thousand bucks. I think it is a way for them to "save" money. I keep telling them to give me the money and I'll save it for them and they will actually get more money back than they would if they gave it to the government. So far, no takers.