Sunday, December 9, 2012

Here We Go:New Taxes to Take Effect to Fund Health Care Law

Forget waiting for the resolution of the "fiscal cliff" to see the start of taxes going up.

Affluent Americans will soon be hit with new taxes adopted as part of the 2010 health care law, reports Robert Pear at NYT.

The new levies, which take effect in January, include an increase in the payroll tax on wages and a tax on investment income, including interest, dividends and capital gains. The Obama administration proposed rules to enforce both last week.

Pear continues:
Affluent people are much more likely than low-income people to have health insurance, and now they will, in effect, help pay for coverage for many lower-income families. Among the most affluent fifth of households, those affected will see tax increases averaging $6,000 next year, economists estimate.
Here's how the scheme gets even more outrageous:
 In the Affordable Care Act, the new tax on investment income is called an “unearned income Medicare contribution.” However, the law does not provide for the money to be deposited in a specific trust fund. It is added to the government’s general tax revenues and can be used for education, law enforcement, farm subsidies or other purposes.

And here is another hidden tax increase:
Under another provision of the health care law, consumers may find it more difficult to obtain a tax break for medical expenses.
Taxpayers now can take an itemized deduction for unreimbursed medical expenses, to the extent that they exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income. The health care law will increase the threshold for most taxpayers to 10 percent next year.

And that's not all:
 In addition, workers face a new $2,500 limit on the amount they can contribute to flexible spending accounts used to pay medical expenses. Such accounts can benefit workers by allowing them to pay out-of-pocket expenses with pretax money.
These hidden taxes are not going to stop. For sure, they will be tucked in every corner of the "fiscal cliff" resolution. It's going to be very ugly and expensive.

Not to mention that on the government spending side, things will continue to climb. University of Chicago professor Casey Mulligan pointed out during my interview of him that the Affordable Care Act is designed in a way to keep people from joining the workforce, which means they will be takers from the system boosting the cost of the Act, resulting in more taxes and money printing down the road.

3 comments:

  1. RW stated and quoted:

    "Here's how the scheme gets even more outrageous:

    In the Affordable Care Act, the new tax on investment income is called an “unearned income Medicare contribution.” However, the law does not provide for the money to be deposited in a specific trust fund. It is added to the government’s general tax revenues and can be used for education, law enforcement, farm subsidies or other purposes..."

    Sorry RW, but I have to disagree. It is not outrageous at all and marks the logical end of entire sections of the Constitution.

    As evidence, I offer the recent Presidential Election, which was decided by a vote of one to nothing. The Traitor John Roberts (Who apparently voted against the Appalling Abomination Act before voting for it...) sealed the Language of the Modern State. Social Security had been finessed in the Supreme Court cases that decided that as long as an appropriation by Congress could conceivably be funded for the General Welfare through General Funds, all was OK.

    Now, this idea is the Defining Feature of the American State. Note: This is a moment concerning LANGUAGE. As long as Convenient Language is formulated between like minded People of the State Apparatus, anything is possible.

    Examples multiply. A quarter century of "Privacy Rights" found expression in a thirteen year old being able to get an abortion without a parent's knowledge. Meanwhile, though Congress granted control of the electromagnetic spectrum to a government agency, individual states could outlaw radar detectors lawfully built and sold, because it was conceivable - in language - that an individual could use that detector to evade the Poh-Leece.

    Now, Congress is about to require that cars be outfitted with recorders, which records could be used in court - "Yer honor, even though the defendant was NOT speeding when the officer recorded his speed on a tested and calibrated radar gun, his recorder has shown that he was speeding moments before, which was the proximate cause of this Sheriff checking his speed at that time..."

    Privacy? What on earth are you talking about? BTW, Drudge Report had a blurb recently that a single traffic light equipped with a camera device has returned $3 Million profit for the city of Los Angeles. Remember, it's not to make money, it's for Public Safety!

    Privacy Rights?

    In short, although it is outrageous what has happened with National Socialist Health Care, the implementation was not outrageous at all. It is now encoded into the Constitution. "It's about what we want to spend, when we want to spend it." "

    "Now, shut up and get back to work...Prole."

    Charles Wilson

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. >It is added to the government’s general tax revenues and can be used for education, law enforcement, farm subsidies or other purposes.

      Well we found out what it really was all about, a new tax, nothing more, nothing less.

      Why are all of us putting up with this(and I don't mean just Obamacare, but everything going on)?

      This system is headed for breakdown, this system is headed for revolution.


      Delete
    2. Arthur Krolman, CFADecember 9, 2012 at 2:43 PM

      I agree. The justice of the Constitution as a defender of individual rights is gone. These actions, and many more to follow, are not surprising at all.

      "Justice being taken away, then, what are kingdoms but great robberies?"
      Augustine of Hippo 354-450AD

      Delete