PDA

View Full Version : IRS: Parents Must Pay Federal Fine for Uninsured Kids




sailingaway
01-31-2013, 11:20 PM
In new, final regulations issued Wednesday, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) said that parents must pay a federal fine under Obamacare if their children or dependent spouses are uninsured for any part of the year.

The regulations clarify provisions of Obamacare that seem to say that a parent will be held liable for Obamacare’s individual mandate penalty if they don’t have insurance coverage for their children.

In its final regulations, the IRS states that parents will be made to pay the penalty if they can claim an uninsured child or spouse as a dependent, regardless of whether they actually claim them or not.

“The proposed regulations clarify that a taxpayer is liable for the shared responsibility payment imposed with respect to any individual for a month in a taxable year for which the taxpayer may claim a personal exemption deduction for the individual (that is, the dependent) for that taxable year,” the regulations state.

“Whether the taxpayer actually claims the individual as a dependent for the taxable year does not affect the taxpayer's liability for the shared responsibility payment for the individual.”

In other words, if a child goes without government-defined health insurance coverage for any month of the year, their parent must pay a fine to the government, regardless of whether they claim the child as a dependent or not.

The only thing that matters to the IRS is whether the parent could claim the uninsured child as a dependent.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/irs-parents-must-pay-federal-fine-uninsured-kids

Origanalist
01-31-2013, 11:27 PM
We are about to become a country of outlaws, finally.

Danke
01-31-2013, 11:43 PM
And one day I'll wake up to see the populous realize exactly who is liable under the federal tax regulations...


I can dream, right?

mad cow
01-31-2013, 11:43 PM
Doesn't Obamacare define children as those under 27 years old?
I think a lot of 18 through 26 year olds are going to find themselves disowned shortly.

DamianTV
02-01-2013, 01:44 AM
So they cant pay the insurance, but they somehow CAN afford to pay the fine?

This is gonna work out so well for everyone! /s

Philhelm
02-01-2013, 01:45 AM
Penalized for being poor...hahaha!

RickyJ
02-01-2013, 01:49 AM
Enforcement of this will be not be pretty. People can't afford the insurance and most can't afford the fines either so there will be many that do neither. If they try to put people in jail for this then all hell will break loose. This could be a reason DHS bought all that ammo they recently purchased. All hell is about to break loose because no one in their right mind is going to put up with this without fighting them.

DamianTV
02-01-2013, 01:51 AM
Im gonna go buy stock in Condoms and other forms of Birth Control now. Um, anyone have any money I can just have to go buy these stocks?

UWDude
02-01-2013, 02:39 AM
fine? there are no fines. Scalia said it was a tax.

Peace Piper
02-01-2013, 03:02 AM
fine? there are no fines. Scalia said it was a tax.

Wasn't it Chief Justice/Bush Appointee John Roberts that was responsible for upholding the secondary argument -tax "authority" (after the commerce clause justification was thrown out?) And IIRC Scalia tried to talk him into throwing out the whole law? The difference b/w a fine and a tax is disappearing anyway, thanks in large part to a Republican Chief Justice.

LibertyEagle
02-01-2013, 03:31 AM
Wasn't it Chief Justice/Bush Appointee John Roberts that was responsible for upholding the secondary argument -tax "authority" (after the commerce clause justification was thrown out?) And IIRC Scalia tried to talk him into throwing out the whole law? The difference b/w a fine and a tax is disappearing anyway, thanks in large part to a Republican Chief Justice.

Yup, it was Roberts.

tod evans
02-01-2013, 04:28 AM
If I'm understanding this correctly "Our-Government" is requiring parents to either earn enough to satisfy the newest edicts or quit work and suck the government tit.

Anything else could result in being tried and convicted of a crime.

Schifference
02-01-2013, 05:54 AM
I have been working many hours over the last 2 years for a facility. I worked many 55-65 hour weeks and received overtime after 40. However, I received no benefits because the company had me on the books as an 8 hour employee. So no holiday or vacation either. Over those 2 years I have proven my ability and dedication to this facility. I would work any shift any department whenever they needed me. The problem with this arraignment is if the facility were ever fully staffed without people calling out or on vacation, I would only be scheduled 8 hours per week. Per protocol I have written to management several times requesting more scheduled hours. Finally this January I have become a 32hour employee. 36shceduled one week 28 the next. BTW full time has just been changed to be 36 or more hours. But I am now eligible for ETO (earned time off) & sick time & other benefits. I received a large packet of info to fill out regarding insurance.

The facility stated specifically, "PLEASE NOTE: if you are waiving medical insurance, you must provide proof of other coverage."

So if I want to work for this employer I must either purchase insurance from them or provide proof I already have it. If I do not provide proof they will deduct the cost of insurance from my pay. The government will use employers to be their enforcers.

If an individual made $10 and hour and worked 55 hours per week as a per-diam employee they would NOT find it a benefit to become a scheduled employee with benefits. Especially if they were required to have spouse and dependent coverage costing them $341.71. "Your contributions per biweekly pay period." $8884.46 per year mandatory unless you provide proof of other insurance.

I work as a nurse making more than $10 per hour. On another note it was mandated to all employees to have the flu shot or lose their jobs late last year.

I believe that the government will use all sizable employers to be their enforcers. If employers do not comply they will be severely penalized by the government. At this time employees are abundant.

osan
02-01-2013, 06:05 AM
So they cant pay the insurance, but they somehow CAN afford to pay the fine?

This is gonna work out so well for everyone! /s

That could be one of the points. You cannot afford to pay. IRS fines you, which you also cannot pay. They either seize or place a tax lien on your house. Now they have your ass. "Sign here, here, here, here, here... and here. Initial here, here, here..."

I trust you get the picture.

newbitech
02-01-2013, 06:40 AM
Many aunts, uncles, cousins, and grandparents are gonna get an IRS slap down for being in a position to help their family members in the most basic way.

Hang on kids, before you visit Aunt Jill and Uncle Jack we'll need to go to the corner store and buy up some ENSURE ANTS.

Loving the wedge between family's right here. Very subtle coercion. If it's not pressure from the employment line, it will be pressure from the family.