Search This Blog

Friday, March 8, 2013

Obamacare Taxes

There's far more than we knew. I found them listed over at Americans for Tax Reform.
On Wednesday, March 5, Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration J. Russell George tesified before the House Appropriations Committee. As part of his exchange with lawmakers, Mr. George was asked about the tax implications of Obamacare.
As reported by POLITICO's Rachael Bade:
“It is unprecedented in recent history, the amount of responsibility the IRS is being given in an area that most people don’t think of as an IRS function,” George said. Americans, he added, will have more questions about their taxes because of health care penalties or credits, flooding already busy call-in and walk-in tax help centers. “This is going to lead to problems, sir.”
And these resource issues are bound to spill over into tax fraud enforcement, where the IRS will have to do a cost-benefit analysis when determining which tax fraudsters to chase.
“They have to determine what enforcement mechanisms they’ll employ … how they go about determining who to audit and who not to,” George said.
You might already know about the twenty new or higher taxes in Obamacare.  What you might not know is that the non-partisan Government Accountability Office (GAO) says that the IRS has 47 new taxes and regulations to administer in overseeing Obamacare. 
The IRS is not capable of doing all this, as the quotation above confirms. 

To see the full list of taxes/fines/penalties/whatever you want to call them, please use the link at top.

Also note that Senator Cruz (R, Texas) wants to defund Obamacare by introducing a bill, Restore Growth First, requiring that the American economy be in a more robust growth period before the implementation of a behemoth such as Obamacare which is already negatively impacting the economy before it's even fully implemented.

On a related note, did you see how the very same week of the sequester (which government wanted to be a horrible experience for Americans - I mean tax payers) the unemployment rate dropped a little? That is NOT what Obama wants to see. He wants cuts in government spending (which aren't even real - just cuts on spending growth rather than principal) to be painful. As admitted in private. Also, the government has more tax revenue than ever before, yet it is still nothing to the amount spent - which is continually escalating. The sequester is not even a drop in the bucket in terms of slowing spending.

However, no, Obama, cutting government spending is NOT painful in the long term.

Yes, the impact in taking millions of dollars out of the economy has a short term negative affect proportional to the amount of money not spent that was formerly spent, but consider first that the government is spending only OUR money and borrowed money. The less government spends of both, the better off we'll be. The private sector feeds the public sector and you can't have a parasitic government and have a healthy host. As we Americans have all experienced for the past five years now.

This is precisely why Americans take issue with the $6T in added deficit under Obama and why Americans take issue with the Democrat's refusal to reform entitlement programs and make them more financially sustainable for the future. This is not all about votes, people.

This is about making our country work for its citizens. Something our politicians have lost sight of, as evidenced by the very passage of Obamacare in late 2009 against popular support which continues against it to this day with no effort to defund it beyond that of Senator Ted Cruz, despite Republican control of the House since 2010.


No comments:

Post a Comment