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.

 

the Obamacare catch 22

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 31 2013 @ 02:36 PM
link   
So i am noticing this ridiculous trap that seems to be set by this Obamacare disaster.

The new law forces nearly 90 percent of current insurance contracts to be cancelled.

At the same time nobody can buy any insurance because most of the exchanges are down.

Add to this that most insurance companies hike up your rates when you have a cancellation or lapse in coverage
so besides that you also have the cost of it which looks like it's going to amount to nearly 90 percent of working-class paychecks[]

This law is so profoundly bad that most people have no choice but to just opt out and pay the penalties.


edit on 31-10-2013 by dashen because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 31 2013 @ 02:57 PM
link   
Yep.

Just one more big problem !!

And I think many of these "cancellations" (due to the minimum coverage regulations) are because of small and possibly marginal 'violations'. Like being "just under" the minimums.

In the meantime, every 'new' policy seems to have a higher cost and higher deductible.

I'm 100% sure all the people in the HHS knew exactly how many policies were going down.

They HAD to know.

They MUST have conducted studies and that's how they knew exactly what regulations to administer.

It's obvious.

How else could they have known which "minimums" to focus on ?



posted on Oct, 31 2013 @ 03:03 PM
link   

xuenchen
Yep.

Just one more big problem !!

And I think many of these "cancellations" (due to the minimum coverage regulations) are because of small and possibly marginal 'violations'. Like being "just under" the minimums.

In the meantime, every 'new' policy seems to have a higher cost and higher deductible.

I'm 100% sure all the people in the HHS knew exactly how many policies were going down.

They HAD to know.

They MUST have conducted studies and that's how they knew exactly what regulations to administer.

It's obvious.

How else could they have known which "minimums" to focus on ?



Which is more likely...

Everyone knew exactly what they were doing..?

or..

No one knew what they were doing..?


Whichever answer you give, you lose.



posted on Oct, 31 2013 @ 03:05 PM
link   
someone share me the details about about how the bill itself says no one can force us to pay the penalty if we decide not to pay it.

im interested in that



posted on Oct, 31 2013 @ 03:14 PM
link   

edit on 31-10-2013 by dashen because: ignorance



posted on Oct, 31 2013 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Bisman
someone share me the details about about how the bill itself says no one can force us to pay the penalty if we decide not to pay it.

im interested in that


The IRS regulations are in the Federal Register.

They can only hold up a tax refund. Nothing else.

Even a wage garnishment is prohibited (no liens and levies) !!


Shared Responsibility Payment for Not
Maintaining Minimum Essential Coverage



page 19 of the link pdf....


§ 1.5000A–5 Administration and
procedure.

(a)In general.

A taxpayer’s liability
for the shared responsibility payment
for a month must be reported on the
taxpayer’s Federal income tax return for
the taxable year that includes the
month. The period of limitations for
assessing the shared responsibility
payment is the same as that prescribed
by section 6501 for the taxable year to
which the Federal income tax return on
which the shared responsibility
payment is to be reported relates. The
shared responsibility payment is
payable upon notice and demand by the
Secretary, and except as provided in
paragraph (b) of this section, is assessed
and collected in the same manner as an
assessable penalty under subchapter B
of chapter 68 of the Internal Revenue
Code. The shared responsibility
payment is not subject to deficiency
procedures of subchapter B of chapter
63 of the Internal Revenue Code.
Interest on this payment accrues in
accordance with the rules in section
6601.

(b)Special rules.
Notwithstanding any
other provision of law—

(1)
Waiver of criminal penalties.

In the case of a failure by a taxpayer to
timely pay the shared responsibility
payment, the taxpayer is not subject to
criminal prosecution or penalty for the
failure.

(2)
Limitations on liens and levies.

If a taxpayer fails to pay the shared
responsibility payment imposed by this
section and §§ 1.5000A–1 through
1.5000A–4, the Secretary will not file
notice of lien on any property of the
taxpayer, or levy on any property of the
taxpayer for the failure.

(3)
Authority to offset against
overpayment.

Nothing in this section
prohibits the Secretary from offsetting
any liability for the shared
responsibility payment against any
overpayment due the taxpayer, in
accordance with section 6402(a) and its
corresponding regulations.

(c)
Effective/applicability date.

This section and §§ 1.5000A–1 through
1.5000A–4 apply for months beginning
after December 31, 2013




posted on Oct, 31 2013 @ 03:31 PM
link   
so as long as i owe a tiny bit every year, i can be in the clear from this obamacare mess.



posted on Oct, 31 2013 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by dashen
 


And the penalty goes to the IRS, not any insurance company. So once the IRS gets it, who knows what use it gets put to. Health care? Who knows?



posted on Oct, 31 2013 @ 03:33 PM
link   

xuenchen
Yep.

Just one more big problem !!

And I think many of these "cancellations" (due to the minimum coverage regulations) are because of small and possibly marginal 'violations'. Like being "just under" the minimums.

In the meantime, every 'new' policy seems to have a higher cost and higher deductible.

I'm 100% sure all the people in the HHS knew exactly how many policies were going down.

They HAD to know.

They MUST have conducted studies and that's how they knew exactly what regulations to administer.

It's obvious.

How else could they have known which "minimums" to focus on ?


Yea, like men having their insurance canceled because they don't have prenatal care or maternity coverage, because that is totally necessary for men...

edit on 31-10-2013 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join