It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obamacare’s Tax Hike Train Wreck

page: 1
8

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 1 2013 @ 01:09 PM
link   
Mods, I tried to search for a duplicate topic, but kept getting "internal server error 500". We really need a better search function imo.




The most destructive Obamacare tax increases are just around the bend Asked about Senator Max Baucus’s (D-Mont.) recent “train wreck” comments, President Obama today said, “A huge chunk of it [Obamacare] has already been implemented.” Unmentioned was the wave of destructive Obamacare tax increases that will begin to hit Americans during the next tax filing season and beyond:


Trainwreck Link

BOHICA(Bend Over Here It Comes Again). The obama regime's largest tax increase yet. Also a solid contender for the largest tax increase in the history of the republic. Most of these new taxes are aimed squarely at the "middle class", not the hated "rich"(whatever that term really means anymore). These new taxes include:
1) Obamacare Medical Device Tax. This tax alone, levied on gross sales not net, will cost hundreds of jobs and lead to price increases for everybody who needs any kind of medical device.

2) Obamacare High Medical Bills Tax: Had a medical catastrophe? Here comes uncle obama to rub salt in the wound by increasing taxes where you would have previously had more of a deduction to help offset the costs.

3) Obamacare Flexible Spending Account Tax: This one is especially heinous imo. This tax targets the families who already have huge burdens dealing with special needs children among others.

4) Obamacare Individual Mandate Non-Compliance Tax: Don't want to pay to subsidize the corporations, or assist in the slaughter of millions of infants? Too bad. The regime will punish you for your non-compliance with a special penalty/tax just for you.

5) Obamacare Employer Mandate Tax: The real job killer of this act. Any employer with 50 employees or more who does not or cannot provide health insurance now gets a special penalty/tax. What do you think employers will do here? I closed my doors for this and other reasons. Others are switching to independent contractors. Even more are cutting their staffs to 49 employees and making the others pick up the slack. How many new unemployed will we get just from this?

6) Obamacare Tax on Health Insurers: That's right more taxes on the evil corporations providing this mandatory insurance. "Good" you say? You are a fool if you do. Corporations never pay taxes. It becomes a cost of doing business factored into the cost of providing the product/service they sell. In other words, this is just another back door tax on us.

Back Door? I did say bend over, right.




posted on May, 1 2013 @ 01:21 PM
link   
I'm from England where we have the NHS so please excuse my lack of knowledge on the subject but are people not getting free medical care when it comes to Obama care. In the UK we have to pay taxes so the NHS isn't free for everyone but the poorest and neediest do not need to pay these taxes (only vat).

So my question is, You talk of tax hikes for expensive treatments, equipment etc... Well is this after being given an otherwise incredibly expensive treatment for free?



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by DarthMuerte
 


Two funny things. A recent poll suggests that 42% of Americas do not even realize that Obamacare has passed.

And then there's this:




posted on May, 1 2013 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by lewman
I'm from England where we have the NHS so please excuse my lack of knowledge on the subject but are people not getting free medical care when it comes to Obama care. In the UK we have to pay taxes so the NHS isn't free for everyone but the poorest and neediest do not need to pay these taxes (only vat).

So my question is, You talk of tax hikes for expensive treatments, equipment etc... Well is this after being given an otherwise incredibly expensive treatment for free?
No. The abominable care act requires all people, except those obama supporters given exemptions, to buy private health insurance for face a fine for failure to do so. It is nothing but a corporate bailout for private insurance companies.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by lewman
...but are people not getting free medical care when it comes to Obama care...


No, not free. In fact, due to the mandates included in the law, health care insurance premiums are skyrocketing. Many poor will lose coverage. Smaller businesses that had offered health insurance can no longer afford to do so.
edit on 5/1/13 by AnonymousCitizen because: fix tpyos


Personally, I like the idea of a single-payer system. A patient goes to the doctor for care, and then pays the doctor for his services.
edit on 5/1/13 by AnonymousCitizen because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by DarthMuerte
 


When I filed my taxes for 2012 and BOHICA literally financially raped me..... Never had that feeling before. The tax accountant stated "Do you have Insurance" Of coarse I do and with a /sigh of relief she stated "Good, because next year if you don't you will be penalized (something like 1,250~1,450)"


Now to the middle class... That don't have insurrance. Think about what your average IRS return is? Prolly somewhere around the penalty. Guess what folks.... Buh Bye! No more return~

Thanks Obama! You da man, now dawg~



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by sulaw
 

That part is easily dealt with. File a new W-4 and max out your exemptions to minimize your withholding.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 01:33 PM
link   
Can politicians be sued for malpractice?

Has this ever been done?



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 01:34 PM
link   
Thank's Darth and Anonymous, it doesn't sound very democratic lol. Can't they just tax the rich a bit more. Although the rich have recently been given tax cuts in the UK, so I can't pretend it's all rosie over here.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 01:37 PM
link   
If you fools would do your research then you should know all cures for everything is on this planet. You don't have to go to the doctor for every little thing. Only idiots and people who need surgery should go to the doctor. Everything else is easily curable.

I remember what it was like to be brainwashed by the pharma. now i can cure all diseases/sicknesses by myself without any assistance using natural herbs. You can laugh at me but I've cured cancer first hand, just recently. I laugh when people say they have cancer. Its so god damn easy to cure!



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by lewman
Thank's Darth and Anonymous, it doesn't sound very democratic lol. Can't they just tax the rich a bit more. Although the rich have recently been given tax cuts in the UK, so I can't pretend it's all rosie over here.


Funny you should ask. The very rich and the poor really don't pay taxes. The bulk of the taxes lie heavily on the upper middle class. You know, the ones that are out there busting their butts trying to create jobs. They are already getting screwed by taxes. Between income taxes (federal and tax), property taxes, sales taxes, motor vehicles taxes (list goes on and on) many middle and upper middle class families are paying in excess of 50% of their income in taxes. The first American Revolution was started over less taxes than that.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by lewman
Thank's Darth and Anonymous, it doesn't sound very democratic lol. Can't they just tax the rich a bit more. Although the rich have recently been given tax cuts in the UK, so I can't pretend it's all rosie over here.
IIRC, a study was done showing that if the US government confiscated all of the wealth of the top 1% the money gained would only run the country for ~15 days. Taxing the rich is not the solution. We need to seriously cut spending.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by DarthMuerte
 


As far as #5 on your list goes, if a company is over 50 full-time employees or their equivalent (30 or more hours), then you either have to OFFER coverage at a minimum level or else pay a penalty. The company would only have to pay for a portion to meet the guidelines of the rule, not pay for it outright. The general idea is that the penalty would subsidize insurance for people who don't have coverage through work when they go to the supposed state exchanges.

My company actually had a benefits consultant come in late last year, and we're having him back in a few months so we can plan accordingly for the large changes which come into effect at the end of this year.

It's ironic to note that some companies will actually save a lot of money by opting out and paying the fine ($2000 per employee I believe). Technically, if an employer is paying more than $2000 per year per employee, they will save money by dropping their coverage and paying the fine.

In the long run, it's going to be mass confusion all around, and the only people who will make money will be the benefit consultants and the insurance companies. We all know the government exchanges will end up running deficits that we'll all need to ultimately foot the bill for.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarthMuerte

Originally posted by lewman
Thank's Darth and Anonymous, it doesn't sound very democratic lol. Can't they just tax the rich a bit more. Although the rich have recently been given tax cuts in the UK, so I can't pretend it's all rosie over here.
IIRC, a study was done showing that if the US government confiscated all of the wealth of the top 1% the money gained would only run the country for ~15 days. Taxing the rich is not the solution. We need to seriously cut spending.


Ha! That's the problem with socialism. Sooner or later you run out of other people's money.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by peter_kandra
 


Sounds like our company will be one of them that would do better with the penalty.
When this wonderful
bill came out, we had the accountant in here. Right now, our employer pays 100% of our medical. The account said that if they continue to do that, in 2014, they will have to pay big fines! And can no longer write it off.

How the hell is that fair, to a small company, trying to do the right thing by their employees.

And don't even get me started on how this is going to screw small business by way of the workers comp insurance.
edit on 1-5-2013 by chiefsmom because: wording



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by peter_kandra
reply to post by DarthMuerte
 


As far as #5 on your list goes, if a company is over 50 full-time employees or their equivalent (30 or more hours), then you either have to OFFER coverage at a minimum level or else pay a penalty. The company would only have to pay for a portion to meet the guidelines of the rule, not pay for it outright. The general idea is that the penalty would subsidize insurance for people who don't have coverage through work when they go to the supposed state exchanges.
This is why you read about companies cutting employees to get below 50, and/or cutting employees to a maximum of 29 hours/week. They are doing all they can to avoid getting involved with this boondoggle heading their way.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by AnonymousCitizen
 





Personally, I like the idea of a single-payer system. A patient goes to the doctor for care, and then pays the doctor for his services.


There is no such thing as a "single payer system"

A single payer system denotes A SINGLE PAYER fact is those who are using it, and can't pay for it will have to be made up pretty much as it is now.


If people were serious about lowering the cost of health care they would implement tort reform.

Malpractice insurance significantly raises the cost of healthcare.



edit on 1-5-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 02:51 PM
link   
yea a signal payer system would be great .Pity you if you need a doctor .
lets get ride of insurance all tighter first!
Heck I read the hospital cost that they would have charged me for my sons delivery 19 years agaio
almost 4000$ no complication! all they had to do is play checher lol . A over nighter.
well you will get the birth rate down to zero with that idea .
((oo what you have insurance? sure as long as you don't acutely get sick and - the dectuable
and lets not forget any time they don't want to pay they just say preexcisting



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by midnightstar
yea a signal payer system would be great .Pity you if you need a doctor .
lets get ride of insurance all tighter first!
Heck I read the hospital cost that they would have charged me for my sons delivery 19 years agaio
almost 4000$ no complication! all they had to do is play checher lol . A over nighter.
well you will get the birth rate down to zero with that idea .
((oo what you have insurance? sure as long as you don't acutely get sick and - the dectuable
and lets not forget any time they don't want to pay they just say preexcisting
I can only assume english is not your first language, but your post is incomprehensible to me.



new topics

top topics



 
8

log in

join