New taxes from2074 page Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

[spursncowboys]

The bill has over a dozen new taxes, including:

-A 40 percent excise tax on "high value" health care plans of $8,500 or more for an individual and $23,000 or more for a couple ($149.1 billion in new taxes over the next 10 years);

-A 0.5 percent hike in the Medicare payroll tax for single earners over $200,000 and joint earners over $250,000 ($53.8 billion);

-Changes in health savings accounts (HSAs), Archer Medical Spending Accounts, health flexible spending accounts (FSAs), and health reimbursement arrangements ($5 billion);

-A $2,500 cap on FSAs in cafeteria plans ($14.6 billion);

-An increase from 10 percent to 20 percent in the penalty for early non-qualified HSA withdrawals ($1.3 billion);

-A tax on branded drugs ($22.2 billion);

-An annual tax on the health insurers[31] ($60.4 billion);

-A tax on companies that manufacture or import medical devices ($19.3 billion);

-A 0.5 percent excise tax on cosmetic surgery ($5.8 billion over 10 years);

-An increase in the floor of the medical expenses deduction from 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income to 10 percent, except for seniors, who will stay at 7.5 percent ($15.2 billion);

-Elimination of the Medicare Part D (prescription drug) deduction ($5.4 billion);

-A $500,000 cap on the tax deduction for the salaries of employees of health insurance companies ($0.6 billion over 10 years)[32]; and

-A mandate on companies with more than 50 employees to provide health coverage or pay a $750 penalty per employee for those who obtain coverage through the insurance exchange ($36 billion over 10 years) and a mandate on individuals to obtain coverage or pay a tax penalty.[33]

http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/bg2353.cfm

[Wild Cobra]

You have to be missing some. Afterall, we are talking about democrats making the law.

What about tax breaks? Have any statistics on how many tax credits will disappear?

[Winehole23]

Both you gentlemen presumably would agree that any bill that is not paid for by cutting spending elsewhere, should be paid for by raising taxes. Wouldn't you?

[Wild Cobra]

Both you gentlemen presumably would agree that any bill that is not paid for by cutting spending elsewhere, should be paid for by raising taxes. Wouldn't you?
Hell no.

Raising taxes is the worse thing to do, especially in this economy. They are already too high. When you take money away from tax payers, there is less money to keep the economy going, especially with the way government does things.

[Winehole23]

Hell no.

Raising taxes is the worse thing to do, especially in this economy. They are already too high. When you take money away from tax payers, there is less money to keep the economy going, especially with the way government does things.If you refuse to pay for new bills through either spending cuts or tax hikes, then by default you do it by adding to the deficit.

If I follow you aright, WC, you would sooner add to the national debt than raise taxes to pay as we go. Is that right?

[Wild Cobra]

If you refuse to pay for new bills through either spending cuts or tax hikes, then by default you do it by adding to the deficit.

If I follow you aright, WC, you would sooner add to the national debt than raise taxes to pay as we go. Is that right?
The politicians shouldn't be giving us new bills to pay.

I think the politicians spending the money in unwarranted ways should be jailed until they can pay the costs of what they vote for.

I know, counter productive, but we can't shoot them to solve the problem. It at least keeps them from spending more money we don't have.

[Winehole23]

The politicians shouldn't be giving us new bills to pay.Sure. I agree. But that's not gonna happen.

"New bills to pay" is how lawmakers get votes. It's how they prove they've done something for us.

Until voters demand that their reps refuse to spend on their behalf, or bring home the federal pork, that won't change.

[nuclearfm]

The bill has over a dozen new taxes, including:

-A 40 percent excise tax on "high value" health care plans of $8,500 or more for an individual and $23,000 or more for a couple ($149.1 billion in new taxes over the next 10 years);

-A 0.5 percent hike in the Medicare payroll tax for single earners over $200,000 and joint earners over $250,000 ($53.8 billion);

-Changes in health savings accounts (HSAs), Archer Medical Spending Accounts, health flexible spending accounts (FSAs), and health reimbursement arrangements ($5 billion);

-A $2,500 cap on FSAs in cafeteria plans ($14.6 billion);

-An increase from 10 percent to 20 percent in the penalty for early non-qualified HSA withdrawals ($1.3 billion);

-A tax on branded drugs ($22.2 billion);

-An annual tax on the health insurers[31] ($60.4 billion);

-A tax on companies that manufacture or import medical devices ($19.3 billion);

-A 0.5 percent excise tax on cosmetic surgery ($5.8 billion over 10 years);

-An increase in the floor of the medical expenses deduction from 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income to 10 percent, except for seniors, who will stay at 7.5 percent ($15.2 billion);

-Elimination of the Medicare Part D (prescription drug) deduction ($5.4 billion);

-A $500,000 cap on the tax deduction for the salaries of employees of health insurance companies ($0.6 billion over 10 years)[32]; and

-A mandate on companies with more than 50 employees to provide health coverage or pay a $750 penalty per employee for those who obtain coverage through the insurance exchange ($36 billion over 10 years) and a mandate on individuals to obtain coverage or pay a tax penalty.[33]

http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/bg2353.cfm


This pales in comparison to tax rates during WWII to the Reagan era and we had a growing economy during most of that time. Difference is we didn't send our dollars overseas for cheap generic crap.

[boutons_deux]

...

[ElNono]

This is good. At least we know how this is partly going to be paid for. Now, you don't have to be for it, but at least this is a major improvement over past bills like Medicare Part D.

[spursncowboys]

This is good. At least we know how this is partly going to be paid for. Now, you don't have to be for it, but at least this is a major improvement over past bills like Medicare Part D.
This is only BHO's first year.

[Wild Cobra]

Sure. I agree. But that's not gonna happen.

"New bills to pay" is how lawmakers get votes. It's how they prove they've done something for us.

Until voters demand that their reps refuse to spend on their behalf, or bring home the federal pork, that won't change.
And their lies the problem.

People without values. These people want to live off of others rather than themselves.

[Winehole23]

People without values. These people want to live off of others rather than themselves."Those people" are our fellow citizens and countrymen.

[boutons_deux]

""Those people" are our fellow citizens and countrymen."

nah, they're niggas, 'spics, Mexicans, poor white trash.

They aren't Real Aryan Euro-Americans and so don't qualify for American solidarity.

[Kori Ellis]

a mandate on individuals to obtain coverage or pay a tax penalty

What if I choose to put money into a savings account and pay for health care from there, rather than buy an insurance plan. What would be the tax penalty amount on this?

[boutons_deux]

"What would be the tax penalty amount on this"

you pay the same penalty for not having insurance.

Why would it matter where else you put your sicky-day savings?

Assume you got really sick, like $200K sick, would your sicky-day savings pay for it?

or would you go to the public hospital and have taxpayers pay for it like other uninsured?

[Kori Ellis]

"What would be the tax penalty amount on this"

you pay the same penalty for not having insurance.

I understand that. I'm asking how much the penalty is.



Why would it matter where else you put your sicky-day savings?

It wouldn't. You misunderstood what I was asking. I was asking the amount in the Obama health care plan proposal.




Assume you got really sick, like $200K sick, would your sicky-day savings pay for it?

or would you go to the public hospital and have taxpayers pay for it like other uninsured?

I have used savings rather than paying for insurance for the last six years. Hospitals only charge you about 30% as a cash pay patient. But yes, major illness is something to worry about.

[Winehole23]

I understand that. I'm asking how much the penalty is.$750/year.

[Kori Ellis]

$750/year.

Thanks.

[BacktoBasics]

$750/year.Ridiculous.

[Marcus Bryant]

How compliant the people are now to accept a fee on their very existence. No doubt the price of that will rise soon enough.

[Winehole23]

I think the figure was $7500 to start with.

[Winehole23]

Not that that should have any effect whatsoever on the principle involved.

[MiamiHeat]

again, how the F is it logical to pass a mandate to buy insurance to be ALIVE??!?

Car insurance is different. Don't drive if you don't want to pay. Problem solved.

but health insurance? wow.

[SouthernFried]

We've been told this was going to reduce costs, not increase them.

Now...how to "pay" for reducing the costs of health care.

...and pay we will.

It's always about the money.

[Wild Cobra]

"Those people" are our fellow citizens and countrymen.
If someone is able to work, but doesn't try to, then they can get the fuck out. If they don't have the dignity and self respect to attempt to provide for themselves, then fuck the. I say trade them for an illegal immigrant who wants to work. They are just low-life scums.

[Wild Cobra]

Ridiculous.
Yes it is, but that's your demonrats at work. Passing unconstitutional laws.

[Wild Cobra]

again, how the F is it logical to pass a mandate to buy insurance to be ALIVE??!?

Car insurance is different. Don't drive if you don't want to pay. Problem solved.

but health insurance? wow.
No kidding. If the premise is you cannot drive without car insurance, then will the next step be you cannot live without health insurance?

[Winehole23]

25% of TX drivers have no insurance, even though coverage is mandatory. The percentage of people who choose not to carry health insurance might be even higher if, as projected, the cost of coverage goes up.

More especially so since applicants can no longer be denied coverage for preexisting conditions; there will be a powerful incentive to wait to get sick before getting coverage.

[Winehole23]

Yes it is, but that's your demonrats at work. Passing unconstitutional laws.You seem to have recovered from the pants down spanking FWD gave you on this point a couple of weeks ago. :hat

[Wild Cobra]

You seem to have recovered from the pants down spanking FWD gave you on this point a couple of weeks ago. :hat
I never conceded to his points. You can involuntarily tax, but not make a person buy something.

If passed, you can bet someone will get a court hold until tried in court.

[BacktoBasics]

Yes it is, but that's your demonrats at work. Passing unconstitutional laws.Or perhaps the other side was too busy trying to stifle the opposition at all costs rather than work towards a mutual middle ground. All I've seen in the last couple of years was an effort exercised on one plan....and that plan was to tear down anything the dems offered. Regardless of who it didn't or did benefit.

Seems that we could have had something that was beneficial across the board instead of something that just barely gets the job done and most certainly will require changes and adjustments. The inability of our so called elected officials to work together for the betterment of the people is disgusting. Both sides.

And I hardly think the right can cry about the left passing unconstitutional laws. That's just laughable.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

""Those people" are our fellow citizens and countrymen."

nah, they're niggas, 'spics, Mexicans, poor white trash.

They aren't Real Aryan Euro-Americans and so don't qualify for American solidarity.

Such hate for someone with such a little dick. Go get laid or something.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Hmmm, $4000 insurance plan, or $750 a year 'fine', and can still buy insurance if anything major happens due to the no pre-existing exclusions provision.

Whatever will most young healthy Americans in the workplace do?

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

25% of TX drivers have no insurance, even though coverage is mandatory. The percentage of people who choose not to carry health insurance might be even higher if, as projected, the cost of coverage goes up.

More especially so since applicants can no longer be denied coverage for preexisting conditions; there will be a powerful incentive to wait to get sick before getting coverage.

The big difference in that comparison is that the state driving laws don't give the IRS access to your bank accounts, like the health bill does...

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Or perhaps the other side was too busy trying to stifle the opposition at all costs rather than work towards a mutual middle ground. All I've seen in the last couple of years was an effort exercised on one plan....and that plan was to tear down anything the dems offered. Regardless of who it didn't or did benefit.

Seems that we could have had something that was beneficial across the board instead of something that just barely gets the job done and most certainly will require changes and adjustments. The inability of our so called elected officials to work together for the betterment of the people is disgusting. Both sides.

And I hardly think the right can cry about the left passing unconstitutional laws. That's just laughable.

LOL. The Republicans offered something like 43 amendments to this piece of shit, all were shot down in committee by the Dem majorities.

Gimme a break on the blame the Republicans game. The Dems pushed this through on their own. They, like you, are whining about the Republicans only because they want someone to blame for this down the road when it bankrupts us.

[MiamiHeat]

ABOUT THE "No pre-existing conditions provision"

This is easy to get around.

The government has said the insurance company cannot deny you health coverage, but they DIDN'T say that the health coverage must come into effect immediately.

So...just institute all sorts of ridiculous and clever 'waiting periods' for your insurance to kick in. So technically, they are not denying you coverage, but you will wait 90 days until you can use your policy

So, you will be forced to :

1) Buy insurance when you are health 'just in case' so you don't get F'ed with the waiting periods

or

2) Buy insurance when you get sick or hurt, and wait x amount of time for the policy to take effect. You wait while you are dying, or sick, and really need medical care. Are you going to wait 3 months to get it?

There are tons of clever ways to get around it.

This bill sucks. One giant cock sucking session for the insurance companies

[MiamiHeat]

oh btw, don't companies already do the tactic I just described up there?

[spursncowboys]

LOL. The Republicans offered something like 43 amendments to this piece of shit, all were shot down in committee by the Dem majorities.

Gimme a break on the blame the Republicans game. The Dems pushed this through on their own. They, like you, are whining about the Republicans only because they want someone to blame for this down the road when it bankrupts us.

Not to mention all the closed session meetings the Dems did. The only reason the Dems want Repubs on the vote is so they can spread the blame when it goes wrong.

[BacktoBasics]

LOL. The Republicans offered something like 43 amendments to this piece of shit, all were shot down in committee by the Dem majorities.

Gimme a break on the blame the Republicans game. The Dems pushed this through on their own. They, like you, are whining about the Republicans only because they want someone to blame for this down the road when it bankrupts us.I'm blaming everyone.