“Who”, wonders Jennifer Rubin, “will be the first Senate Democrat to say he wouldn’t have voted for a tax on the middle-class if he knew what he was voting for?”
RELATED: Glenn Reynolds quips, ‘THE SUPREME COURT SAYS “YOU LIE:’ White House Already Denying That Mandate Is A Tax. If you deny that it’s a tax, you admit that it’s unconstitutional. . . .”
ALSO RELATED: Also from Glenn Reynolds: “HOW’S THAT HOPEY-CHANGEY STUFF WORKIN’ OUT FOR YA? (CONT’D): 75% of Obamacare Costs Will Fall on Backs of Those Making Less Than $120K a Year. ‘It’s a big punch in the stomach to middle class families.'”
“Dems to abandon Obamacare now that we know it raises taxes?”
Who had their taxes raised? Specifically.
Those, torrent, who refuse to buy the type of health insurance the federal government mandates they buy.
Here’s a few for you torrentprime:
Taxes that took effect in 2010:
1. Excise Tax on Charitable Hospitals (Min$/immediate): $50,000 per hospital if they fail to meet new “community health assessment needs,” “financial assistance,” and “billing and collection” rules set by HHS. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,961-1,971.
2. Codification of the “economic substance doctrine” (Tax hike of $4.5 billion). This provision allows the IRS to disallow completely-legal tax deductions and other legal tax-minimizing plans just because the IRS deems that the action lacks “substance” and is merely intended to reduce taxes owed. Bill: Reconciliation Act; Page: 108-113.
3. “Black liquor” tax hike (Tax hike of $23.6 billion). This is a tax increase on a type of bio-fuel. Bill: Reconciliation Act; Page: 105.
4. Tax on Innovator Drug Companies ($22.2 bil/Jan 2010): $2.3 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to share of sales made that year. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,971-1,980.
5. Blue Cross/Blue Shield Tax Hike ($0.4 bil/Jan 2010): The special tax deduction in current law for Blue Cross/Blue Shield companies would only be allowed if 85 percent or more of premium revenues are spent on clinical services. Bill: PPACA; Page: 2,004.
6. Tax on Indoor Tanning Services ($2.7 billion/July 1, 2010): New 10 percent excise tax on Americans using indoor tanning salons. Bill: PPACA; Page: 2,397-2,399.
Taxes that took effect in 2011:
7. Medicine Cabinet Tax ($5 bil/Jan 2011): Americans no longer able to use health savings account (HSA), flexible spending account (FSA), or health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insulin). Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,957-1,959.
8. HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike ($1.4 bil/Jan 2011): Increases additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10 to 20 percent, disadvantaging them relative to IRAs and other tax-advantaged accounts, which remain at 10 percent. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,959.
Taxes that took effect in 2012:
9. Employer Reporting of Insurance on W-2 (Min$/Jan 2012): Preamble to taxing health benefits on individual tax returns. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,957.
There you go again, confusing TP with facts.
Of course, the biggest taxes in Obamacare are (1) the lives it’s going to cost, (2) the economic sense in which all massive new spending programs are taxes and entail higher future taxes, (3) the higher prices it’s going to entail on everybody, (4) the jobs it has already deterred employees from creating, and will continue to deter.
I wanted it to go down, EVEN THOUGH that outcome would have greatly helped Obama with the economy.
No.
You wish.
Well, if they deny the mandate is the tax, then the White House is admitting it’s unconstitutional.
That doesn’t make it unconstitutional though. You can’t ‘admit’ something already deemed constitutional to be unconstitutional, it makes no sense.
Besides, if you’re justified in thinking it’s unconstitutional despite the Supreme Court ruling, then the White House can be justified in thinking it constitutional under the Commerce Clause (as proposed in Ginsburg’s concurrence/dissent) rather than taxation powers. You’re both disagreeing with the majority, but that still doesn’t change the verdict.
Yes, it does. According to the Supreme Court of the United States, at least.
If the Obamacare mandate is not a tax, then it is unconstitutional. It could only be constitutional, if and because it is a tax. That is what SCOTUS has just said.
(continued) Roberts had 5 votes, counting his own, behind the idea that the mandate is in fact unconstitutional under the Commerce clause.
Unfortunately, Roberts missed something important. He missed the fact that fascists** like Pomposity don’t care about his reasoning or distinctions, or about any reasoning or any distinctions, in their endless lust to expand the power of the State.
(**A carefully-chosen term. Fascism is that variant of collectivism which attempts or claims to preserve private property ownership, while voiding property and liberty de facto through the intensive use of government regulation and mandate. In other words: the modern Left. They are frequently called “socialist” out of politeness, i.e., out of a desire to avoid the term “fascist”; but “fascist” is in fact the proper term.)
I keep hearing that polls show that “part of Obamacare are popular.” But those polls never ask about the cost of those benefits. If you poll a kid about what’s on his Christmas list, all of those items will be popular, too. Poll a kid about spending his allowance on them; quite different result.
ILC is correct, and from now on I choose not to pretend that our adversaries are anything OTHER than FASCISTS.
Thanks, ILC.
I tried to think of a response to this, but nothing suitable comes to mind. Instead I’ll note Betteridge’s Law of Headlines which indirectly inspired my initial post and the following quote about it:
Certainly says it better than I could.
Shorter Amy:
Stince the statement above does not end in a question mark, it is an accurate description.
Thank you for that honesty, Amy.
Clearly Amy supports Dred Scott and Korematsu then. (Look, a liberal supporting rounding people up because of their ethnicity. How… Progressive of her.)