General Discussion

frazzled

(18,402 posts)

30. Technically, the penalty for nonobservance of the mandate is a tax

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 03:00 PM

Jun 2012

Not the mandate itself. I think that's important to state. Because everyone is going to think they are having their taxes raised, otherwise. This is a PENALTY for not being covered. If you are already insured through a group plan at work (like 85% of the country), there is no "tax." If you are uninsured or privately insured and receive a credit to purchase the insurance on one of the exchanges, there is no tax. If you qualify for the expansion of Medicaid, and your state decides it is going to cooperate, there will be no tax.

For the few scofflaws left who just don't want to get themselves covered (and are not among the excluded), a penalty will be applied, enforceable through the IRS, who can take it out of any refund you're owed (or possibly other ways).

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

59 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I used to be HIGHLY skeptical of the HCR. Then this happened. And now I support it 100% [View all] Taverner Jun 2012 OP

yep. nt Whisp Jun 2012 #1

Yes. Obama always said this is a starting point. nt wiggs Jun 2012 #2

And now, it really is a starting point Taverner Jun 2012 #6

Remember: It's the PATIENT PROTECTION and Affordable Care Act. patrice Jun 2012 #3

But doesn't the law specifically forbid enforcement? aquart Jun 2012 #4

It prohibits CERTAIN methods of enforcement. But if it is a tax, then IRS has enforcement authority nanabugg Jun 2012 #22

The argument that judicial nullification would have paved the way for single payer was laughable bluestateguy Jun 2012 #5

I am mostly in agreement with your analysis, but have a slight twist to offer slackmaster Jun 2012 #7

I doubt it quinnox Jun 2012 #8

The way things are set up now, that could very much become a reality Taverner Jun 2012 #10

huh? this changes nothing. but you are right to be for it. Schema Thing Jun 2012 #9

As a mandate, like car insurance, the government only needed proof that you had health insurance Taverner Jun 2012 #11

The mandate didn't become a tax. It is being compared to a tax, but it isn't a tax. Lionessa Jun 2012 #12

The mandate became a tax based on the USSC ruling Harmony Blue Jun 2012 #14

No it did not. You are mistaken. It was compared to a tax to justify it, but it isn't being Lionessa Jun 2012 #16

It is a tax Harmony Blue Jun 2012 #19

You just don't get it, even if those who don't have insurance pay the tax, they don't get healthcare Lionessa Jun 2012 #24

Nowadays, so much is privatized especially in the military and now with charter JDPriestly Jun 2012 #54

Democrats and Republicans won big today Prism Jun 2012 #13

The Commerce Clause was too ambigous Harmony Blue Jun 2012 #15

This has to do with the Medicaid expansion Prism Jun 2012 #21

I am completely failing to see why "they will ensure all Americans are covered" phantom power Jun 2012 #17

who is paying the tax? how does that work, exactly? HiPointDem Jun 2012 #18

If you have insurance already you do NOT pay a tax Harmony Blue Jun 2012 #20

i see. and where are large corporations taxed? or is it all on the backs of individuals? HiPointDem Jun 2012 #23

They too have to choose Harmony Blue Jun 2012 #25

so corporations *have to* buy plans for their employees? or they can just give them a voucher HiPointDem Jun 2012 #27

Here Son of Gob Jun 2012 #56

thanks for the link. i forsee a lot of corps dropping their health care policies. Seems like HiPointDem Jun 2012 #59

This is not correct, the tax doesn't get you a health insurance plan, it just doesn't, it's a Lionessa Jun 2012 #26

so you pay the tax but still get no insurance? so how about people with no income (e.g. homeless) HiPointDem Jun 2012 #28

Same as those that don't have insurance and pay the tax, ER only. Lionessa Jun 2012 #29

so basically the very poor would be in the same place they are today? HiPointDem Jun 2012 #32

No they quality for the exemption and will be part of Medicaid Harmony Blue Jun 2012 #33

i just read that some states were saying they wouldn't expand medicaid, & it seems the SC said HiPointDem Jun 2012 #36

While that may be true Harmony Blue Jun 2012 #40

um, when does the requirement to buy insurance come into effect? HiPointDem Jun 2012 #45

I believe it is 2014 Harmony Blue Jun 2012 #47

As well as many working poor who still won't be able to afford insurance, but will be penalized by a Lionessa Jun 2012 #35

The tax is not a flat tax across the board Harmony Blue Jun 2012 #41

define "middle class" HiPointDem Jun 2012 #46

U.S. definition or U.N. definition? Harmony Blue Jun 2012 #48

give me an income figure. "well above the poverty level" tells me nothing, and in fact, i don't HiPointDem Jun 2012 #51

yeah, this is the part i'm not seeing how it works -- but i'm feeling like this will eat up their HiPointDem Jun 2012 #42

I think you're getting the gist of it Lionessa Jun 2012 #52

I never said that it did Harmony Blue Jun 2012 #34

It seems as though you keep suggesting that the tax will provide insurance, it won't. Lionessa Jun 2012 #38

I suggested no thing Harmony Blue Jun 2012 #44

Technically, the penalty for nonobservance of the mandate is a tax frazzled Jun 2012 #30

so how about if you have no job & no income, then say 4 years later get a job. do they come HiPointDem Jun 2012 #39

If you have no job and no income you can get Medicaid frazzled Jun 2012 #43

'spelled out' = not really. there are lots of permutations. as for medicaid, it's already been cut HiPointDem Jun 2012 #49

just to be clear, it was ALWAYS a tax, collected by the irs, paid to the u.s. treasury. unblock Jun 2012 #31

Correct Harmony Blue Jun 2012 #37

right. the only thing that "changed" was the argument. the law itself didn't change. unblock Jun 2012 #50

Agreed. And I have always thought that the mandate needed to be done under JDPriestly Jun 2012 #53

YUP ... they avoided calling it a Tax because lots of bluedogs would have balked. JoePhilly Jun 2012 #57

I'm with you 100%. ieoeja Jun 2012 #55

It will be at the least four years before the question is seriously raised. Occulus Jun 2012 #58