Jump to content




Photo
- - - - -

$1 Trillion Obamacare Tax Hike Hitting on Jan. 1


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
30 replies to this topic

#1 Ronald Reagan

Ronald Reagan

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 28-November 08
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 213
  • Reputation: 15
HUDDLER

Posted 28 December 2012 - 11:10 PM

.

On January 1, regardless of the outcome of fiscal cliff negotiations, Americans will be hit with a $1 trillion Obamacare tax hike.

Obamacare contains twenty new or higher taxes. Five of the taxes hit for the first time on January 1. In total, for the years 2013-2022, Americans face a net $1 trillion tax hike for the years 2013-2022, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
The five major Obamacare taxes taking effect on January are as follows:
The Obamacare Medical Device Tax: Medical device manufacturers employ 409,000 people in 12,000 plants across the country. Obamacare imposes a new 2.3 percent excise tax on gross sales – even if the company does not earn a profit in a given year. In addition to killing small business jobs and impacting research and development budgets, this will increase the cost of your health care – making everything from pacemakers to artificial hips more expensive.
The Obamacare Flex Account Tax: The 30-35 million Americans who use a pre-tax Flexible Spending Account (FSA) at work to pay for their family’s basic medical needs will face a new government cap of $2500. This will squeeze $13 billion of tax money from Americans over the ten years. (Currently, the accounts are unlimited under federal law, though employers are allowed to set a cap.)
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 several million 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. This Obamacare tax provision will limit the options available to these families.
The Obamacare Surtax on Investment Income: This is a new, 3.8 percentage point surtax on investment income earned in households making at least $250,000 ($200,000 single).


http://www.atr.org/t...tting-jan-a7393

#2 jasonluckydog

jasonluckydog

    Honorary Honeydick Member

  • Joined: 28-December 08
  • posts: 13,944
  • Reputation: 3,657
SUPPORTER

Posted 28 December 2012 - 11:19 PM

My employer pays all of my health insurance cost...


I wonder how this will effect me?????

#3 Anybodyhome

Anybodyhome

    USN Retired

  • Joined: 07-July 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 7,955
  • Reputation: 2,713
HUDDLER

Posted 29 December 2012 - 09:42 AM

Why did you choose to use an ultra-conservative, very far right, very Republican lobbying group's website as a reliable "source" for your data?

I'd have thought that if you wanted to make a case against Obamacare, you'd come up with your own ideas and use data provided by an unbiased, unencumbered source... least, that's how people used to do it before they got lazy and let the Fox News's of the world start doing all their "rational" thinking for them.

#4 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • Joined: 17-March 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 19,303
  • Reputation: 483
HUDDLER

Posted 29 December 2012 - 10:39 AM

Why did you choose to use an ultra-conservative, very far right, very Republican lobbying group's website as a reliable "source" for your data?

I'd have thought that if you wanted to make a case against Obamacare, you'd come up with your own ideas and use data provided by an unbiased, unencumbered source... least, that's how people used to do it before they got lazy and let the Fox News's of the world start doing all their "rational" thinking for them.


The fact if you don't have health insurance now by choice...you will have to pay a fee. That's a tax. I don't know if you missed it, but the Supreme Court said it was a tax.

#5 broseidon

broseidon

    MEMBER

  • Joined: 06-August 12
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 285
  • Reputation: 46
HUDDLER

Posted 29 December 2012 - 11:31 AM

My employer pays all of my health insurance cost...


I wonder how this will effect me?????



If he's a small business and unable to pay the costs of the new HC. He could cut your hours to part time work to avoid paying HC benefits

#6 thatlookseasy

thatlookseasy

    Death to pennies

  • Joined: 16-August 11
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,950
  • Reputation: 607
HUDDLER

Posted 29 December 2012 - 11:38 AM

The fact if you don't have health insurance now by choice...you will have to pay a fee. That's a tax. I don't know if you missed it, but the Supreme Court said it was a tax.


Good. Though it should be higher to stop the freeloaders

#7 PhillyB

PhillyB

    sườn núi phía đông thứ ba của mặt trời

  • Joined: 29-November 08
  • posts: 23,894
  • Reputation: 20,229
SUPPORTER

Posted 29 December 2012 - 12:59 PM

The fact if you don't have health insurance now by choice...you will have to pay a fee. That's a tax. I don't know if you missed it, but the Supreme Court said it was a tax.


in your opinion what is the best way to rectify the problem created by uninsured people costing the system billions of dollars annually by simply receiving emergency room treatment and leaving the bills unpaid, and the problem of individuals being denied coverage and left to die because of pre-existing conditions?

these are two major, major problems, economically and ethically, and i don't recall seeing anyone really offer an alternative solution other than "that there obummer is just turning us into moscow with his socialisms."

#8 google larry davis

google larry davis

    fleet-footed poster

  • Joined: 06-August 12
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 4,862
  • Reputation: 1,450
HUDDLER

Posted 29 December 2012 - 02:15 PM

nothing says "socialism" quite like requiring people to purchase healthcare coverage from a worthless middleman

#9 Anybodyhome

Anybodyhome

    USN Retired

  • Joined: 07-July 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 7,955
  • Reputation: 2,713
HUDDLER

Posted 29 December 2012 - 02:40 PM

The fact if you don't have health insurance now by choice...you will have to pay a fee. That's a tax. I don't know if you missed it, but the Supreme Court said it was a tax.


Your fishing license is also a tax... as is your auto registration, and the list goes on... who cares what it's called?

#10 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 24,927
  • Reputation: 2,617
SUPPORTER

Posted 29 December 2012 - 02:42 PM

G5s plan is to put all the crazy guys with guns at the ER entrances, thus saving the Second Amendment and the nations Health Care System in one brilliant move.

#11 pstall

pstall

    Gazebo Effect

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 23,928
  • Reputation: 3,141
HUDDLER

Posted 29 December 2012 - 04:25 PM

i think the issue on it being called a tax part is the entire time before the court ruling Team Obama was like nuh huh it's not a tax. then the Supreme Court said it was.
so either TO was flat out lying or collectively as smart as a speed bump in a Wal Mart parking lot.

#12 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • Joined: 17-March 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 19,303
  • Reputation: 483
HUDDLER

Posted 30 December 2012 - 07:29 AM

Wait...the crack on the article was calling it a tax...when it was. It was even "argued" by the Obama administration that it was and the justices laughed at their lawyer. Seemed he needed the help. So let's back up. My comment was to refute what a liberal here was whining about.