A tax is something we have to pay but, with healthcare only those without insurance will pay. That doesn't mean people who are low income or have no jobs. They are tax exempt. It means people who are able to pay. Many working Americans have insurance, anyway. Those that don't will be getting some type of option through their work and it doesn't have to be the highest insurance. The costs will be low.


The Republicans started that stuff yesterday. Michelle Bachmann (big mouth) called it a tax! I would have loved to be a mouse in the court yesterday just to watch the Republican mouths and faces!

That's hundreds of millions of Americans who will be forced to pay trillions in taxes because they don't want health insurance.

Add that to GOP spending cuts and the National Debt will disappear by lunch tomorrow and the country will be bankrupt.

Anyway, who can blame these people for not wanting health insurance? Why take a 48% discount when you can pay full price? After all, that's what freedom is all about, isn't it?

About 50 million are currently uninsured. About a quarter of those people qualify for public assistance. About 5 million of them are uninsured because of pre-existing conditions. Only around 20% of the 50 million uninsured are estimated to be able to afford insurance to begin with. When you start taking all those numbers into account, the amount of people actually effected by the mandate becomes smaller and smaller and smaller.

This is a fact we've known for more than two years, since the bill was debated and passed. I understand your urge for us to correct Republican framing, but putting an exclamation on it makes it seems like this is a revelation or something. We should continue to call it what it is: a penalty imposed through the taxing authority of Congress for those who choose not to cover themselves with health insurance, though they are able.

The Republicans are touting this "tax" thing is not because they are ignorant of the truth here: it's because they want to manipulate the ignorant. And it's not just Republicans. I'm still steaming from the number of people on this board, who still don't get, or don't want to get, the most basic details of this bill, or who want to mislead.

Your point is important: my only quibble is with your exclamation point!

Because that's not how the law puts it.

But most also know that you're wrong.

Let's say you spend $400 a year on books and have thought about spending more. Then there's a pro-reading law that says if don't spend $800 a year you have to pay a $200 fine. (With means testing, so if it's a hardship you get $350 a year in free book.)

You think, "I spend $400, if I spend another $400 I'm only going to be spending $200 of my own money." So you spend $800 instead of $400.

Others will increase their spending from $600 to $800, others from $700 to $800. Few would decrease from $1000 to $800.

The legislative folk know that this is a likely outcome even as they say, "It's just $200!" Just look at how the mortgage exemption increases home prices and the willingness to buy houses. Store owners know that a 5% sale will get people to spend more than they save. (The standard joke, "Dear, it's $1000 marked down to $800, we'll save $200 so let's get it." "But if we don't buy it we'll save $1000!&quot

So, yeah: technically it's a $200 tax that most people won't pay. But others know that as a result of avoiding the tax a lot of people will spend more money, and many will spend a lot more, so they sense that the "tax" itself isn't just what people will pay but the kinds of spending that the penalty coerces.

When we look at free speech cases, when we look at hate crime statutes, we understand the same kind of principle. You can "chill" speech or alter the behavior of a lot of people by a relatively small act. So when we look at free speech regulations we look not at how it will effect people in a given situation but how it will effect people in situations not covered by the law. When we talk about punishing hate crimes we don't punish the direct effect on the victim, but the extended, indirect effects on a community.

Comprehensive List of Tax Hikes in Obamacare

Next week, the U.S. House of Representatives will be voting on an historic repeal of the Obamacare law. While there are many reasons to oppose this flawed government health insurance law, it is important to remember that Obamacare is also one of the largest tax increases in American history. Below is a comprehensive list of the two dozen new or higher taxes that pay for Obamcare’s expansion of government spending and interference between doctors and patients.

Individual Mandate Excise Ta Jan 2014): Starting in 2014, anyone not buying “qualifying” health insurance must pay an income surtax according to the higher of the following


1 Adult
2 Adults
3+ Adults

2014
1% AGI/$95
1% AGI/$190
1% AGI/$285

2015
2% AGI/$325
2% AGI/$650
2% AGI/$975

2016 +
2.5% AGI/$695
2.5% AGI/$1390
2.5% AGI/$2085


Exemptions for religious objectors, undocumented immigrants, prisoners, those earning less than the poverty line, members of Indian tribes, and hardship cases (determined by HHS)

Employer Mandate Ta Jan 2014): If an employer does not offer health coverage, and at least one employee qualifies for a health tax credit, the employer must pay an additional non-deductible tax of $2000 for all full-time employees. This provision applies to all employers with 50 or more employees. If any employee actually receives coverage through the exchange, the penalty on the employer for that employee rises to $3000. If the employer requires a waiting period to enroll in coverage of 30-60 days, there is a $400 tax per employee ($600 if the period is 60 days or longer).

Combined score of individual and employer mandate tax penalty: $65 billion/10 years

Surtax on Investment Income ($123 billion/Jan. 2013): This increase involves the creation of a new, 3.8 percent surtax on investment income earned in households making at least $250,000 ($200,000 single). This would result in the following top tax rates on investment income


Capital Gains
Dividends
Other*

2010-2012
15%
15%
35%

2013+ (current law)
23.8%
43.4%
43.4%

2013+ (Obama budget)
23.8%
23.8%
43.4%



*Other unearned income includes (for surtax purposes) gross income from interest, annuities, royalties, net rents, and passive income in partnerships and Subchapter-S corporations. It does not include municipal bond interest or life insurance proceeds, since those do not add to gross income. It does not include active trade or business income, fair market value sales of ownership in pass-through entities, or distributions from retirement plans. The 3.8% surtax does not apply to non-resident aliens.
Excise Tax on Comprehensive Health Insurance Plans($32 bil/Jan 2018): Starting in 2018, new 40 percent excise tax on “Cadillac” health insurance plans ($10,200 single/$27,500 family). For early retirees and high-risk professions exists a higher threshold ($11,500 single/$29,450 family). CPI +1 percentage point indexed.

Hike in Medicare Payroll Ta $86.8 bil/Jan 2013): Current law and changes:


First $200,000
($250,000 Married)
Employer/Employee
All Remaining Wages
Employer/Employee

Current Law
1.45%/1.45%
2.9% self-employed
1.45%/1.45%
2.9% self-employed

Obamacare Tax Hike
1.45%/1.45%
2.9% self-employed
1.45%/2.35%
3.8% self-employed


Medicine Cabinet Ta $5 bil/Jan 2011): Americans no longer able to use health savings account (HSA), flexible spending account (FSA), or health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insulin)

HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike($1.4 bil/Jan 2011): Increases additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10 to 20 percent, disadvantaging them relative to IRAs and other tax-advantaged accounts, which remain at 10 percent.

Flexible Spending Account Cap – aka“Special Needs Kids Tax”($13 bil/Jan 2013): Imposes cap of $2500 (Indexed to inflation after 2013) on FSAs (now unlimited). . There is one group of FSA owners for whom this new cap will be particularly cruel and onerous: parents of special needs children. There are thousands of families with special needs children in the United States, and many of them use FSAs to pay for special needs education. Tuition rates at one leading school that teaches special needs children in Washington, D.C. (National Child Research Center) can easily exceed $14,000 per year. Under tax rules, FSA dollars can be used to pay for this type of special needs education.

Tax on Medical Device Manufacturers($20 bil/Jan 2013): Medical device manufacturers employ 360,000 people in 6000 plants across the country. This law imposes a new 2.3% excise tax. Exemptions include items retailing for less than $100.

Raise "Haircut" for Medical Itemized Deduction from 7.5% to 10% of AGI($15.2 bil/Jan 2013): Currently, those facing high medical expenses are allowed a deduction for medical expenses to the extent that those expenses exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI). The new provision imposes a threshold of 10 percent of AGI; it is waived for 65+ taxpayers in 2013-2016 only.

Tax on Indoor Tanning Services($2.7 billion/July 1, 2010): New 10 percent excise tax on Americans using indoor tanning salons

Elimination of tax deduction for employer-provided retirement Rx drug coverage in coordination with Medicare Part D($4.5 bil/Jan 2013)

Blue Cross/Blue Shield Tax Hike($0.4 bil/Jan 2010): The special tax deduction in current law for Blue Cross/Blue Shield companies would only be allowed if 85 percent or more of premium revenues are spent on clinical services

Excise Tax on Charitable Hospitals(Min$/immediate): $50,000 per hospital if they fail to meet new "community health assessment needs," "financial assistance," and "billing and collection" rules set by HHS

Tax on Innovator Drug Companies($22.2 bil/Jan 2010): $2.3 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to share of sales made that year.

Tax on Health Insurers($60.1 bil/Jan 2014): Annual tax on the industry imposed relative to health insurance premiums collected that year. The stipulation phases in gradually until 2018, and is fully-imposed on firms with $50 million in profits.

$500,000 Annual Executive Compensation Limit for Health Insurance Executives($0.6 bil/Jan 2013)

Employer Reporting of Insurance on W-2(Min$/Jan 2011): Preamble to taxing health benefits on individual tax returns.

Corporate 1099-MISC Information Reporting($17.1 bil/Jan 2012): Requires businesses to send 1099-MISC information tax forms to corporations (currently limited to individuals), a huge compliance burden for small employers

“Black liquor” tax hike(Tax hike of $23.6 billion). This is a tax increase on a type of bio-fuel.

Codification of the “economic substance doctrine”(Tax hike of $4.5 billion). This provision allows the IRS to disallow completely-legal tax deductions and other legal tax-minimizing plans just because the IRS deems that the action lacks “substance” and is merely intended to reduce taxes owed.