Since Obamacare is a tax . . .

[turtlespeed 226]

Should it force us to eat healthier?

Discuss.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[quade 4]

turtlespeed

Quote

Since Obamacare is a tax . . .

Should it force us to eat healthier?

This makes no sense. What other tax "forces" you to "eat healthier?"

What are you getting at? You could save a lot of time by just saying it.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kelpdiver 2]

quade

This makes no sense. What other tax "forces" you to "eat healthier?"

California's snack tax encourages it. Excise taxes on alcohol can as well.

Realistically....we're going to have more carrots, and eventually some sticks in federal policy. The looming costs are just too high.

[quade 4]

kelpdiver

***
This makes no sense. What other tax "forces" you to "eat healthier?"

California's snack tax encourages it.

Encourage does not equal force.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kelpdiver 2]

quade

Encourage does not equal force.

Even the worst fears of Obamacare won't result in them forcing you to eat broccoli. But doubling, tripling your premiums...certainly possible. Just as done for smokers.

Didn't I just read you in another thread talking about people being stuck taking things too literally?

[quade 4]

kelpdiver

Didn't I just read you in another thread talking about people being stuck taking things too literally?

No. I said they were trapped by the ambiguity of the English language. There is nothing particularly ambiguous about the meaning of the words in this case.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[turtlespeed 226]

quade

***

Quote

Since Obamacare is a tax . . .

Should it force us to eat healthier?

This makes no sense. What other tax "forces" you to "eat healthier?"

What are you getting at? You could save a lot of time by just saying it.

I don't know . . . What other tax forces you to buy a product?

Since we are breaking the rules of taxation, why not just go all in?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[DanG 1]

Quote

I don't know . . . What other tax forces you to buy a product?

Does the mortgage interest deduction force you to buy a house?

- Dan G

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Realistically....we're going to have more carrots, and eventually some sticks in federal policy.

Vitamin A, beta carotene and fiber. Seems like a win-win to me.

[turtlespeed 226]

DanG

Quote

I don't know . . . What other tax forces you to buy a product?

Does the mortgage interest deduction force you to buy a house?

So you are actually equating a deduction in tax to a penalty.

IOW, if you don't buy a house, you get fined, and the fine is only legal or constitutional if it's a tax.

Gotcha.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[DanG 1]

Quote

So you are actually equating a deduction in tax to a penalty.

4-2=4+(-2)

- Dan G

[turtlespeed 226]

DanG

Quote

So you are actually equating a deduction in tax to a penalty.

4-2=4+(-2)

OK - I challenge you to prove that in the real world.

1) Don't buy a house and don't get a tax credit.

2) Don't purchase an insurance product, as the law states you must, and pay the fine.

See which one actually comes out of your pocket and which one wasn't there to begin with.

I bet you have an Obamaphone too, eh?

Snicker - you are tho funnay!

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[FastRon 0]

What I've been wondering is if it's only a tax... can I deduct it?

[tkhayes 348]

Your assumption is incorrect, therefore not worth discussing. If the ACA is a 'tax', then so is your car insurance. And many other things that you pay for every day because you have to.

And no one is discussing those things.

[kelpdiver 2]

tkhayes

Your assumption is incorrect, therefore not worth discussing. If the ACA is a 'tax', then so is your car insurance. And many other things that you pay for every day because you have to.

And no one is discussing those things.

ACA is a tax per the Supreme Court. Thus, there's no "if" here, and that's why the OP used the word "since."

[tkhayes 348]

The opening statement is still incorrect. The Supreme Court did not rule the ACA as a tax. What they said was the government could levy a penalty and that penalty would be considered a tax should people not get health insurance. If you have health insurance then there's no tax. That does not absolutely include all of the ACA as a tax.

The opening statement is a massive oversimplification of something and summarizing it in one word- tax. That's just plain silly

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

ACA is a tax per the Supreme Court.

No it isn't.

[kelpdiver 2]

SkyDekker

Quote

ACA is a tax per the Supreme Court.

No it isn't.

You can disregard the Roberts decision all you want, but without his 5th vote, ACA was toast.

[turtlespeed 226]

tkhayes

Your assumption is incorrect, therefore not worth discussing. If the ACA is a 'tax', then so is your car insurance. And many other things that you pay for every day because you have to.

And no one is discussing those things.

Show me where they passed a law that every individual must purchase car insurance or get fined.

Here is a hint. What is the percentage of the population of NYC that maintain individual car insurance.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[turtlespeed 226]

kelpdiver

***

Quote

ACA is a tax per the Supreme Court.

No it isn't.

You can disregard the Roberts decision all you want, but without his 5th vote, ACA was toast.

They are picking nits because they are afraid to answer the question posed, realistically, truthfully and honestly.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[tkhayes 348]

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0300-0399/0324/Sections/0324.021.html

That is just Florida and it is only one example of which I stated there were many. try again.

I will believe your fervent eagerness to make an issue out of the ACA when I see you letters to state and federal representatives regarding your requirement to have car insurance as a 'tax'.

[kelpdiver 2]

turtlespeed

Show me where they passed a law that every individual must purchase car insurance or get fined.

CA will not give you a registration sticker without insurance or a posted bond. Not a fine per se, but definitely a consequence. (and no sticker translates to frequent tickets)

[kallend 2,146]

kelpdiver

***

Quote

ACA is a tax per the Supreme Court.

No it isn't.

You can disregard the Roberts decision all you want, but without his 5th vote, ACA was toast.

Roberts did not say ACA is a tax. He said the penalty provision of ACA amounted to a tax.

Quite different.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[airdvr 210]

kallend

******

Quote

ACA is a tax per the Supreme Court.

No it isn't.

You can disregard the Roberts decision all you want, but without his 5th vote, ACA was toast.

Roberts did not say ACA is a tax. He said the penalty provision of ACA amounted to a tax.

Quite different.

Fun to watch you guys try to pick this turd up by the clean end. We'll see what happens in 2015 and beyond when the true penalties for not having insurance kick in.

In 2014, the penalty is the greater of a flat $95 per adult and $47.50 per child under age 18, up to a maximum of $285 per family, or 1 percent of your family’s modified adjusted gross income that is over the threshold the requires you to file a tax return. That threshold is $10,150 for an individual, $13,050 for a head of household and $20,300 for a married couple filing jointly.

Next year the penalty increases to $325 per adult or 2 percent of income, and in 2016 it will be the greater of $695 or 2.5 percent of income.

The $95 penalty has gotten a lot of press, but many people will be paying substantially more than that. A single person earning more than $19,650 would not qualify for the $95 penalty ($19,650 - $10,150 = $9,500 x 1% = $95). So the 1 percent penalty is the standard that will apply in most cases, say experts. For example, for a single person whose MAGI is $35,000, the penalty would be $249 ($35,000 - $10,150 = $24,850 x 1% = $249).

The penalty is capped at the national average price for a bronze plan, or about $9,800, says Brian Haile, senior vice president for health policy at Jackson Hewitt Tax Service. The vast majority of taxpayers’ incomes aren’t high enough to be affected by the penalty cap, he says.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[SkyDekker 1,465]

kelpdiver

***

Quote

ACA is a tax per the Supreme Court.

No it isn't.

You can disregard the Roberts decision all you want, but without his 5th vote, ACA was toast.

For a guy who is always harping on the details and how important it is, you are sure quick to accept this incorrect statement.

You are correct that without that ruiling the ACA in its current format would have been toast. You are still incorrect that the Supreme Court rules ACA a tax.

It makes for a great sound bite and rallying cry....but it is still wrong.

Whether or not ACA is a turd, is yet to be seen. As can be seen by this simple statement, emotions are by far overruling fact. It will take a number of years to see what the true impact is.