Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

1 Bump

The New Federal Wedding Tax: How Obamacare Would Dramatically Penalize Marriage.. WTF??

One bizarre feature of the Senate-passed healthcare bill is its pervasive bias against marriage. Under the bill, couples would face massive financial penalties if they marry or remain married. Conversely, couples who cohabit without marriage are given highly preferential financial treatment. If the Senate bill becomes law, saying “I do” would cost some couples over $10,000 per year. 

Most people feel that marriage is a healthful institution that society should encourage and strengthen. Inexplicably, the Senate health care bill takes the opposite approach. At nearly all age and income levels, the bill profoundly discriminates against married couples, providing far less support to a husband and wife than to a cohabiting couple with the same income. If the bill is enacted, married couples across America will be taxed to provide discriminatory benefits to couples who cohabit, divorce, or never marry.

Analyzing Anti-Marriage Discrimination in the Senate Health Care Bill

The Senate bill is designed to provide health care benefits that are substantially more generous for lower-income persons. The bill’s anti-marriage penalties occur because of the income counting and benefit structure rules of the bill. If a two-earner couple is married, the bill counts their income jointly; since the joint income will be higher, a married couple’s health care subsidies would be lower. 


There is more at that link. plus some graphs. What do you all think?? I wonder how reliable this site is. Anyway...What your thoughts on all of this. Is Obama just tryiong to really piss of the whole nation even more? IDK...


Answer Question

Asked by Michigan-Mom74 at 4:59 PM on Nov. 1, 2013 in Politics & Current Events

Level 34 (66,351 Credits)
Answers (9)
  • I am not divorcing my DH for that reason. My DH is retired. Military, I would loose all my benefits from that if I did.

    Answer by louise2 at 5:29 PM on Nov. 1, 2013

  • I wonder how reliable this site is

    It's Heritage, so about -23, but there is a grain of truth in there. If your employer provided individual insurance costs more than 9% of your income, you're allowed to use the exchanges and get a subsidy. If it costs less than 9%, you are allowed to use the exchanges, but you have to pay full price and aren't allowed a subsidy. If you are married and/or have children (because this also fucks over single parents), and the individual plan is less than 9%, but the family plan is more than 9%, no subsidy, not even if the family plan is equal or higher than your income - you pay full price at the exchange, because technically, you have qualifying benefits available through work. It's just one more thing they screwed up by not bothering to proof read the bill. They made no allowances for family plans costing double or even 5 times what the individual does.

    Answer by NotPanicking at 5:37 PM on Nov. 1, 2013

  • Is Obama just tryiong to really piss of the whole nation even more?

    All he has to do anymore is open his mouth and he's pissing someone off. Just when you think things couldn't get any worse, they do.

    Answer by Rosehawk at 5:56 PM on Nov. 1, 2013

  • "Divorce rate skyrockets as there are more couples now who are just living together w/o getting married."

    ^^I can see that headline in our near future.

    Answer by hopeandglory53 at 6:04 PM on Nov. 1, 2013

  • I have never been a fan of Obama or Obama care.
    Just one more reason.

    Answer by Dardenella at 6:23 PM on Nov. 1, 2013

  • Well I'm not so sure about the truth of all that, I'm sure there's a bit of truth to it.

    I was looking at our 2014 benefits at work. Something new is that we have 30 days to certify whether or not our spouse or domestic partner is eligible for insurance with their employer. If they are, and we choose to put them on our plan, we have to pay an extra $20 per pay period to have them on there. Doesn't matter if the spouse's employer plan is more expensive and that's why we decided to put our spouse on our plan. If they are eligible for another plan, we have to pay extra to keep them on ours.

    Answer by anime_mom619 at 6:48 PM on Nov. 1, 2013

  • Not surprising. I believe the federal government has the destruction of the traditional family as one of its top 5 goals. Everything to do with taxation penalizes married couples. Unless they are poor, like, really poor.... but then I guess the feds think they must be dem-voting so it is OK.

    Answer by 29again at 9:36 PM on Nov. 1, 2013

  • yeah...the Heritage Foundation is about as reliable as a chain email saying "something horrible will happen if you dont forward this". im sure there is some truth in there, something they can base this off of, but i wouldnt be surprised if this is just fear the death panel thing. i mean, the Heritage Foundation is one of the largest Republican backers, which isnt a problem other than i dont like to get my news from obviously biased sources.

    anytime a couple lives together, is not married, but have kids, they qualify for more govt benefits. its not just ACA, its just the way the system in set up. my Bro and his gf arent married, so she would only have to report her no income and she could get assistance despite my bro's income being more than enough to keep them from needing it.

    also, if its a Senate bill, wouldnt that make it Congress' doing, not Obama's?

    Answer by okmanders at 9:52 PM on Nov. 1, 2013

  • "also, if its a Senate bill, wouldnt that make it Congress' doing, not Obama's?"
    It would have to go by Obama anyway.

    Comment by Michigan-Mom74 (original poster) at 10:13 PM on Nov. 1, 2013

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.