I understand now -- It's NOT a tax!

When they penalize us 15% of our income for not buying an approved health insurance policy, it's not a tax.

Although they will use the IRS to enforce this, and this penalty will show up on our tax bill, it's not a tax.

It's simply money the government takes from us, and keeps.

See? Not a tax! I get it!

Indeed. THis is behaviour modification in the form of TAXATION.

Our very leaders that we elect front shit like this...
Ensign receives handwritten confirmation

Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) received a handwritten note Thursday from Joint Committee on Taxation Chief of Staff Tom Barthold confirming the penalty for failing to pay the up to $1,900 fee for not buying health insurance.
Violators could be charged with a misdemeanor and could face up to a year in jail or a $25,000 penalty, Barthold wrote on JCT letterhead. He signed it "Sincerely, Thomas A. Barthold."
___________________________

Enough Said. Are you angry yet? You should be.

Yup......that's what happens when Americans have a 30 second soundbite attention span.
 
When they penalize us 15% of our income for not buying an approved health insurance policy, it's not a tax.

Although they will use the IRS to enforce this, and this penalty will show up on our tax bill, it's not a tax.

It's simply money the government takes from us, and keeps.

See? Not a tax! I get it!
Aren't you the fuckwit that spent last week trying to convince us that fees and penalties weren't taxes?

Oh, yeah!

It's classified as a penalty, if it even exists, because you can appeal a penalty but you cannot appeal a tax. In other words, if you can make your case the penalty will be waived.

Also, aren't you the fuckwit that wanted to tax the poor and spent another week trying to convince us that we should?

Oh, yeah!

Guess what, if you are talking about a 15% penalty at medicare rates, if you make $100,000 per year...and even paying the employee/employer portion of medicare...your "penalty" would be a whopping $435. EVEN at 10 times that it would be $4350...and for your "penalty" you'd easily recoup your losses from just one emergency room visit. A sweet little tax on the poor, fuckwit.

Have I called you a fuckwit lately? I must be slipping.
 
When they penalize us 15% of our income for not buying an approved health insurance policy, it's not a tax.

Although they will use the IRS to enforce this, and this penalty will show up on our tax bill, it's not a tax.

It's simply money the government takes from us, and keeps.

See? Not a tax! I get it!
Aren't you the fuckwit that spent last week trying to convince us that fees and penalties weren't taxes?

Oh, yeah!

It's classified as a penalty, if it even exists, because you can appeal a penalty but you cannot appeal a tax. In other words, if you can make your case the penalty will be waived.

Also, aren't you the fuckwit that wanted to tax the poor and spent another week trying to convince us that we should?

Oh, yeah!

Guess what, if you are talking about a 15% penalty at medicare rates, if you make $100,000 per year...and even paying the employee/employer portion of medicare...your "penalty" would be a whopping $435. EVEN at 10 times that it would be $4350...and for your "penalty" you'd easily recoup your losses from just one emergency room visit. A sweet little tax on the poor, fuckwit.

Have I called you a fuckwit lately? I must be slipping.

What is a Penality for NOT doing what they tell YOU as an affrront to Liberty but a TAX dimwit?

Of course therein lies the rub that YOU like being TOLD what to do, no matter that it is UnConstitutional, and an affront to your own Liberty.

I expect nothing LESS from you. You are such a HACK, Ravioli.
 
When they penalize us 15% of our income for not buying an approved health insurance policy, it's not a tax.

Although they will use the IRS to enforce this, and this penalty will show up on our tax bill, it's not a tax.

It's simply money the government takes from us, and keeps.

See? Not a tax! I get it!
Aren't you the fuckwit that spent last week trying to convince us that fees and penalties weren't taxes?

Oh, yeah!

It's classified as a penalty, if it even exists, because you can appeal a penalty but you cannot appeal a tax. In other words, if you can make your case the penalty will be waived.

Also, aren't you the fuckwit that wanted to tax the poor and spent another week trying to convince us that we should?

Oh, yeah!

Guess what, if you are talking about a 15% penalty at medicare rates, if you make $100,000 per year...and even paying the employee/employer portion of medicare...your "penalty" would be a whopping $435. EVEN at 10 times that it would be $4350...and for your "penalty" you'd easily recoup your losses from just one emergency room visit. A sweet little tax on the poor, fuckwit.

Have I called you a fuckwit lately? I must be slipping.
[Emphasis mine] 15% at medicare rates? Source, please.
 
Last edited:
When they penalize us 15% of our income for not buying an approved health insurance policy, it's not a tax.

Although they will use the IRS to enforce this, and this penalty will show up on our tax bill, it's not a tax.

It's simply money the government takes from us, and keeps.

See? Not a tax! I get it!

Indeed. THis is behaviour modification in the form of TAXATION.

Our very leaders that we elect front shit like this...
Ensign receives handwritten confirmation

Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) received a handwritten note Thursday from Joint Committee on Taxation Chief of Staff Tom Barthold confirming the penalty for failing to pay the up to $1,900 fee for not buying health insurance.
Violators could be charged with a misdemeanor and could face up to a year in jail or a $25,000 penalty, Barthold wrote on JCT letterhead. He signed it "Sincerely, Thomas A. Barthold."
___________________________

Enough Said. Are you angry yet? You should be.

Yup......that's what happens when Americans have a 30 second soundbite attention span.

I unfortunately *AGREE* with this illogical sadness.
 
Ravi's pulling more Huffington bullshit out of his ass.........

He cannot help himself. For he portends to Lop off his nose to spite his face...

In short? Ravioli, is an enemy to his own liberty.

Very true...and yet Ravi's too stupid to realize that he's advocating pissing away the future of America on a social engineering project dreamt up by some filthy rich European hedge fund manager.
 
When they penalize us 15% of our income for not buying an approved health insurance policy, it's not a tax.

Although they will use the IRS to enforce this, and this penalty will show up on our tax bill, it's not a tax.

It's simply money the government takes from us, and keeps.

See? Not a tax! I get it!
Aren't you the fuckwit that spent last week trying to convince us that fees and penalties weren't taxes?

Oh, yeah!

It's classified as a penalty, if it even exists, because you can appeal a penalty but you cannot appeal a tax. In other words, if you can make your case the penalty will be waived.

Also, aren't you the fuckwit that wanted to tax the poor and spent another week trying to convince us that we should?

Oh, yeah!

Guess what, if you are talking about a 15% penalty at medicare rates, if you make $100,000 per year...and even paying the employee/employer portion of medicare...your "penalty" would be a whopping $435. EVEN at 10 times that it would be $4350...and for your "penalty" you'd easily recoup your losses from just one emergency room visit. A sweet little tax on the poor, fuckwit.

Have I called you a fuckwit lately? I must be slipping.

Make our case to the fed and maybe just maybe they will play nice and waive the penalty? Please cite the Article, Section, and Clause of the Constitution, that enumerates the right of Congress to demand such from us via healthcare.
 
When they penalize us 15% of our income for not buying an approved health insurance policy, it's not a tax.

Although they will use the IRS to enforce this, and this penalty will show up on our tax bill, it's not a tax.

It's simply money the government takes from us, and keeps.

See? Not a tax! I get it!
Aren't you the fuckwit that spent last week trying to convince us that fees and penalties weren't taxes?

Oh, yeah!

It's classified as a penalty, if it even exists, because you can appeal a penalty but you cannot appeal a tax. In other words, if you can make your case the penalty will be waived.

Also, aren't you the fuckwit that wanted to tax the poor and spent another week trying to convince us that we should?

Oh, yeah!

Guess what, if you are talking about a 15% penalty at medicare rates, if you make $100,000 per year...and even paying the employee/employer portion of medicare...your "penalty" would be a whopping $435. EVEN at 10 times that it would be $4350...and for your "penalty" you'd easily recoup your losses from just one emergency room visit. A sweet little tax on the poor, fuckwit.

Have I called you a fuckwit lately? I must be slipping.

You are one clueless dumb fuck. When was the last time you appealled a fee/penalty handed down by the FEDERAL govt? And stupid fuck, when you pay a tax you can at least claim it on your end of year taxes. Try claiming a penalty with the IRS.

Anyways, this is just another tax to pay for the lame and sorry assholes that wont do for themselves.

I will be the first to help someone out that wants help but why should I have to support those that wont get off their fat ass to help themselves? Fuck you Obama and shove you tax up your ass.
 
When they penalize us 15% of our income for not buying an approved health insurance policy, it's not a tax.

Although they will use the IRS to enforce this, and this penalty will show up on our tax bill, it's not a tax.

It's simply money the government takes from us, and keeps.

See? Not a tax! I get it!
Aren't you the fuckwit that spent last week trying to convince us that fees and penalties weren't taxes?

Oh, yeah!

It's classified as a penalty, if it even exists, because you can appeal a penalty but you cannot appeal a tax. In other words, if you can make your case the penalty will be waived.

Also, aren't you the fuckwit that wanted to tax the poor and spent another week trying to convince us that we should?

Oh, yeah!

Guess what, if you are talking about a 15% penalty at medicare rates, if you make $100,000 per year...and even paying the employee/employer portion of medicare...your "penalty" would be a whopping $435. EVEN at 10 times that it would be $4350...and for your "penalty" you'd easily recoup your losses from just one emergency room visit. A sweet little tax on the poor, fuckwit.

Have I called you a fuckwit lately? I must be slipping.

Make our case to the fed and maybe just maybe they will play nice and waive the penalty? Please cite the Article, Section, and Clause of the Constitution, that enumerates the right of Congress to demand such from us via healthcare.

See? This is Something that NO ONE that supports such a thing can DEFEND. If they make excuses for it? It just shows the rest of us that they are in this for their own partisan hackery, without real forethought to the issue.
 
Ravi's pulling more Huffington bullshit out of his ass.........

He cannot help himself. For he portends to Lop off his nose to spite his face...

In short? Ravioli, is an enemy to his own liberty.

Very true...and yet Ravi's too stupid to realize that he's advocating pissing away the future of America on a social engineering project dreamt up by some filthy rich European hedge fund manager.

And what's really scary as HELL? He doesn't SEE it. He has to be a GOOD Statist.
 
PART 1--INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY
SEC. 401. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE.

(a) In General- Subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new part:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink

‘PART VIII--HEALTH CARE RELATED TAXES

‘subpart a. tax on individuals without acceptable health care coverage.

‘Subpart A--Tax on Individuals Without Acceptable Health Care Coverage

‘Sec. 59B. Tax on individuals without acceptable health care coverage.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink

‘SEC. 59B. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE.

55
‘(a) Tax Imposed- In the case of any individual who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of-- ...

H.R.3200

Excise Tax. The consequence for not maintaining insurance would be an excise tax. If a taxpayer‘s MAGI is between 100-300 percent of FPL, the excise tax for failing to obtain coverage for an individual in a taxpayer unit (either as a taxpayer or an individual claimed as a dependent) is $750 per year. However, the maximum penalty for the taxpayer unit is $1,500. If a taxpayer‘s MAGI is above 300 percent of FPL the penalty for failing to obtain coverage for an individual in a taxpayer unit (either as a taxpayer or as an individual claimed as a dependent) is $950 year. However, the maximum penalty amount a family above 300 percent of FPL would pay is $3,800.

The excise tax would apply for any period for which the individual is not covered by a health insurance plan with the minimum required benefit but would be prorated for partial years of noncompliance. The excise tax would be assessed through the tax code and applied as an additional amount of Federal tax owed. No excise tax will be assessed for individuals not maintaining health insurance for a period less than or equal to three months in the tax year. However, assessed excise taxes for those not insured for more than three months include the entire duration the individual was uninsured during the tax year.

Baucus bill, page 32

Nope, it's not a tax.
 
Ame®icano;1561180 said:
PART 1--INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY
SEC. 401. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE.

(a) In General- Subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new part:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink

‘PART VIII--HEALTH CARE RELATED TAXES

‘subpart a. tax on individuals without acceptable health care coverage.

‘Subpart A--Tax on Individuals Without Acceptable Health Care Coverage

‘Sec. 59B. Tax on individuals without acceptable health care coverage.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink

‘SEC. 59B. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE.

55
‘(a) Tax Imposed- In the case of any individual who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of-- ...

H.R.3200

Excise Tax. The consequence for not maintaining insurance would be an excise tax. If a taxpayer‘s MAGI is between 100-300 percent of FPL, the excise tax for failing to obtain coverage for an individual in a taxpayer unit (either as a taxpayer or an individual claimed as a dependent) is $750 per year. However, the maximum penalty for the taxpayer unit is $1,500. If a taxpayer‘s MAGI is above 300 percent of FPL the penalty for failing to obtain coverage for an individual in a taxpayer unit (either as a taxpayer or as an individual claimed as a dependent) is $950 year. However, the maximum penalty amount a family above 300 percent of FPL would pay is $3,800.

The excise tax would apply for any period for which the individual is not covered by a health insurance plan with the minimum required benefit but would be prorated for partial years of noncompliance. The excise tax would be assessed through the tax code and applied as an additional amount of Federal tax owed. No excise tax will be assessed for individuals not maintaining health insurance for a period less than or equal to three months in the tax year. However, assessed excise taxes for those not insured for more than three months include the entire duration the individual was uninsured during the tax year.

Baucus bill, page 32

Nope, it's not a tax.

DOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6GuEswXOXo&feature=related]YouTube - 32 D'oh's in 15 Seconds[/ame]
 
Aren't you the fuckwit that spent last week trying to convince us that fees and penalties weren't taxes?

Oh, yeah!

It's classified as a penalty, if it even exists, because you can appeal a penalty but you cannot appeal a tax. In other words, if you can make your case the penalty will be waived.

Also, aren't you the fuckwit that wanted to tax the poor and spent another week trying to convince us that we should?

Oh, yeah!

Guess what, if you are talking about a 15% penalty at medicare rates, if you make $100,000 per year...and even paying the employee/employer portion of medicare...your "penalty" would be a whopping $435. EVEN at 10 times that it would be $4350...and for your "penalty" you'd easily recoup your losses from just one emergency room visit. A sweet little tax on the poor, fuckwit.

Have I called you a fuckwit lately? I must be slipping.

Make our case to the fed and maybe just maybe they will play nice and waive the penalty? Please cite the Article, Section, and Clause of the Constitution, that enumerates the right of Congress to demand such from us via healthcare.

See? This is Something that NO ONE that supports such a thing can DEFEND. If they make excuses for it? It just shows the rest of us that they are in this for their own partisan hackery, without real forethought to the issue.

I have seen some try and make an honest case. But, as a whole, I agree with you. Many put feelings first.
 
And while I am thinking about it Ravi, using vulgar made up words makes you look ignorant and immature. If that is who you truly are, carry on. That sentiment goes for a lot of people on here. I understand people get irritated at times and feel a need to use adult language. It makes for very weak debate though.

/stepping off soapbox
 
Ame®icano;1561180 said:
PART 1--INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY
SEC. 401. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE.

(a) In General- Subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new part:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink

‘PART VIII--HEALTH CARE RELATED TAXES

‘subpart a. tax on individuals without acceptable health care coverage.

‘Subpart A--Tax on Individuals Without Acceptable Health Care Coverage

‘Sec. 59B. Tax on individuals without acceptable health care coverage.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink

‘SEC. 59B. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE.

55
‘(a) Tax Imposed- In the case of any individual who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of-- ...

H.R.3200

Excise Tax. The consequence for not maintaining insurance would be an excise tax. If a taxpayer‘s MAGI is between 100-300 percent of FPL, the excise tax for failing to obtain coverage for an individual in a taxpayer unit (either as a taxpayer or an individual claimed as a dependent) is $750 per year. However, the maximum penalty for the taxpayer unit is $1,500. If a taxpayer‘s MAGI is above 300 percent of FPL the penalty for failing to obtain coverage for an individual in a taxpayer unit (either as a taxpayer or as an individual claimed as a dependent) is $950 year. However, the maximum penalty amount a family above 300 percent of FPL would pay is $3,800.

The excise tax would apply for any period for which the individual is not covered by a health insurance plan with the minimum required benefit but would be prorated for partial years of noncompliance. The excise tax would be assessed through the tax code and applied as an additional amount of Federal tax owed. No excise tax will be assessed for individuals not maintaining health insurance for a period less than or equal to three months in the tax year. However, assessed excise taxes for those not insured for more than three months include the entire duration the individual was uninsured during the tax year.

Baucus bill, page 32

Nope, it's not a tax.
Thank you for the informative post. It wiped up some bullshit in the thread, too. So, that's a plus as well.
 
Shot down in flames......the lefties are, once again.....shot down in flames!

82919.jpg
 
When they penalize us 15% of our income for not buying an approved health insurance policy, it's not a tax.

Although they will use the IRS to enforce this, and this penalty will show up on our tax bill, it's not a tax.

It's simply money the government takes from us, and keeps.

See? Not a tax! I get it!
Aren't you the fuckwit that spent last week trying to convince us that fees and penalties weren't taxes?
No stupid, I was saying they ARE taxes, and they are.
Also, aren't you the fuckwit that wanted to tax the poor and spent another week trying to convince us that we should?
Wrong again! I just KNOW you'll find where I said we should "tax the poor" and post it here for all to see, right? (Hint, you won't because I never said any such thing.)
I must be slipping.
Not at all! You're consistently stupid, and consistently unable to remember which poster said what!

Your mindless diatribe has been well debunked and shredded here by others, but I'll add to that you're completely missing my point now, and you are simply lying about what I've said before.

And if you think the POOR aren't gonna be taxed out the WAZOO by what this menstruation has in mind -- tax on soda pop, cap and trade, forced purchase of HC insurance -- then you are a blinded, stumbling IDIOT.

And you are.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top