IRS to Spend $10 Billion Hiring 17,000 to Collect Penalties

[ColonialMarine0431]

Wait'll people hear more about this.

IRS to Spend $10 Billion Hiring 17,000 to Collect Penalties If You Don’t Pay Health Care

Congratulations America. You really screwed yourself. 

[thundley4]

Didn't the IRS also purchase some firearms recently? 

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=8d3b076bd4de14bbda5aba699e80621d&tab=core&_cview=1&cck=1&au=&ck=

[ColonialMarine0431]

Yup.

[JohnnyReb]

Do you really think those 16,000 new agents are going after the poor people that don't buy health insurance? No, they're not going to waste $5,000 worth of resources to collect a few hundred dollars in fines from people that can't and won't pay the fine. Those new agents are to make sure they wring every dime out of the working people of America so Obama and his fellow communist can "spread the wealth around".

[Alpha Mare]

Obutthead never uses the word "tax",-you'll be "fined" if you don't have insurance.  But when I tried to read this craptastic bill, I noticed it wasn't called a 'fine', it's a 'tax'. 

Ah, now it makes sense. The IRS can not collect a 'fine'- only unpaid 'taxes'. 

But I'm hearing that this is a no-go too. I'll look it up after the coffee kicks in. 

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

It's for the children.

[JohnnyReb]

It's for the children.......of our dear political leaders.

[Alpha Mare]

http://healthcarereform.nejm.org/?p=2967

Third, the mandate is particularly vulnerable from an enforcement perspective. It essentially imposes a tax penalty (to begin in 2014 and to be fully phased in by 2016) on uninsured individuals who do not purchase health insurance, subject to a number of exceptions for those who cannot afford health insurance or who oppose it for religious reasons.

Individuals are supposed to pay this penalty with their annual income taxes, but the Senate bill waives criminal penalties and prohibits the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) from imposing liens or levies on a taxpayer’s property for failure to pay. Compliance will, therefore, be largely voluntary (although the IRS can still make a tax resister’s life miserable, whether or not it can ultimately collect).

[thundley4]

Third, the mandate is particularly vulnerable from an enforcement perspective. It essentially imposes a tax penalty (to begin in 2014 and to be fully phased in by 2016) on uninsured individuals who do not purchase health insurance, subject to a number of exceptions for those who cannot afford health insurance or who oppose it for religious reasons.

Individuals are supposed to pay this penalty with their annual income taxes, but the Senate bill waives criminal penalties and prohibits the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) from imposing liens or levies on a taxpayer’s property for failure to pay. Compliance will, therefore, be largely voluntary (although the IRS can still make a tax resister’s life miserable, whether or not it can ultimately collect).

I see nothing that would prevent the IRS from taking the tax/fine/levy whatever out of a persons refund.

[IassaFTots]

I see nothing that would prevent the IRS from taking the tax/fine/levy whatever out of a persons refund.

True, if a refund is due, I bet they surely would take it.  I wonder if you didn't have a refund, if you owed, and you paid what you owed, sans HC, would the HC tax/fine/levy adversely affect your credit score????

[thundley4]

True, if a refund is due, I bet they surely would take it.  I wonder if you didn't have a refund, if you owed, and you paid what you owed, sans HC, would the HC tax/fine/levy adversely affect your credit score????

Or would the IRS simply be able to alter your withholding for the next year to make up for it. Maybe the IRS would take the HCR tax out of withholdings first, and then that would make a person delinquent on their income tax, which would make them subject to liens/fines/property confiscation on  unpaid income tax.

[IassaFTots]

Or would the IRS simply be able to alter your withholding for the next year to make up for it. Maybe the IRS would take the HCR tax out of withholdings first, and then that would make a person delinquent on their income tax, which would make them subject to liens/fines/property confiscation on  unpaid income tax.

There is a thought.  But, with all this "financial reform" business going on, I wouldn't be surprised to see it hit your Credit as well.  That way they get a three-fer.  They get the $$ that you paid in penalty, the $$ you paid on your unpaid income tax, AND higher interest for any loans you need.   

[Ralph Wiggum]

Let me guess, the 17,000 will just transfer over from ACORN.

[Alpha Mare]

I see nothing that would prevent the IRS from taking the tax/fine/levy whatever out of a persons refund.

Someone on Fox discussed this- the gist was that if two people owed the fine, and one had any money coming from the gov.,but the other didn't- and the IRS took from one but the other, it violates the mandate that government can't pass any laws that 'favor' one citizen above another.    Which is the basis for at least one of the lawsuits being filed.
 Nevada claims the Senate bill is illegal because

"the United States Constitution makes numerous references to states having "equal standing", also duties, imposts and excises are to be "uniform throughout the United States."

Refers to any state receiving special considerations.

But they're not done "fixing" it yet.  It is, was and always shall be a colossal clusterf*ck.

[Alpha Mare]

Let me guess, the 17,000 will just transfer over from ACORN.
ACORN is alive and well.

Section 2212. Contracts. This section directs the Secretary to award contracts for servicing federal Direct Loans to eligible non-profit servicers. In addition, this section provides that for the first 100,000 borrower loan accounts, the Secretary shall establish a separate pricing tier. Specifies that the Secretary is to allocate the loan accounts of 100,000 borrowers to each eligible non-profit servicer. The section also permits the Secretary to reallocate, increase, reduce or terminate an eligible non-profit servicer’s allocation based on the performance of such servicer. In addition, this section appropriates mandatory funds to the Secretary to be obligated for administrative costs of servicing contracts with eligible non-profit servicers. This section also requires the Secretary to provide technical assistance to institutions of higher education participating or seeking to participate in the Direct Lending program. This section appropriates $50 million for fiscal year 2010 to pay for this technical assistance. Additionally, this section authorizes the Secretary to provide payments to loan servicers for retaining jobs at location in the United States where such servicers were operating on January 1, 2010. This section appropriates $25,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2010 and 2011 for such purpose.

[debk]

According to what someone said on Fox last night....there is nothing in the Constitution that says a person can be forced.... by the government....to purchase anything. (goods and services)

That alone should make the fine or tax or whatever label they put on it....should make it illegal to collect the $2000.


 

[thundley4]

According to what someone said on Fox last night....there is nothing in the Constitution that says a person can be forced.... by the government....to purchase anything. (goods and services)

That alone should make the fine or tax or whatever label they put on it....should make it illegal to collect the $2000.


 

That should cause that part of the bill to be struck down.

[Hawkgirl]

I really want to punch IOWA right now.....they started this slippery slope.

[debk]

I really want to punch IOWA right now.....they started this slippery slope.

They didn't want Hilary....wonder if they still think they made the right choice lauding Obama?

[docstew]

I really want to punch IOWA right now.....they started this slippery slope.

Aren't you forgetting the credible reports of busloads of Illinois residents at those caucuses?