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

(minimum 6 characters)

Tax on Individuals without "Acceptable" Health Coverage?

According to page 167 Sec. 59B of the HR3200, it states:

"(a) Tax Imposed - In the case of any individual who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed a tax equal of 2.5 percent of the excess of-
(1) the taxpayer's modified adjusted gross income for the taxable year over,
(2) the amount of gross income specified in section 6012(a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer.

So my question is, who decides what is "acceptable health coverage"?


Asked by Anonymous at 11:57 AM on Aug. 28, 2009 in Politics & Current Events

This question is closed.
Answers (7)
  • Now, you're getting it. Sure there are arguments about vague language in HR3200 - but there is plenty that's plain as the nose on your face that should have us all saying "wait a minute here". Which is why the town halls are erupting like they are. YES, there are some conspiracy theories, some 'what ifs; - but there's no getting around the stuff that is plainly stated. A commissioner ( maybe even a czar - who answers to no one but the president) will be the one finalizing the rules. Yes, there will be a "board" set up to help guide those decision (I found a board of 26 people I think) but of those, the majority will be chosen either by the President or the commissioner he appoints - smell the rat yet?

    Answer by PaceMyself at 12:59 PM on Aug. 28, 2009

  • The government obviously... this is THEIR addendum to the ir code of 86....

    Answer by Anonymous at 12:15 PM on Aug. 28, 2009

  • OP here, do you think this is fair that the government has a right to TAX you just because they dont believe you have "acceptable" healthcare? Would you consider this an invasion of your rights?

    Answer by Anonymous at 12:38 PM on Aug. 28, 2009

  • Acceptable coverage and affordable coverage, both are vague terms. Who decides what the average American can afford? You can't base it entirely on income because cost of living varies from state to state. Acceptable coverage is the same. What is acceptable to me isn't acceptable to others.

    Answer by mancosmomma at 1:13 PM on Aug. 28, 2009

  • Who wants politicians determining what "ACCEPTABLE" means in terms of their healthcare?

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 2:00 PM on Aug. 28, 2009

  • I have brought this up in every post debating the healthcare bill. A 2.5% tax for not having an "acceptable" health care policy with no indication of what "acceptable" means. Who decides? The committee they will set up.

    Sounds like we're being punished for "being able to keep our policy or our doctors" to me....

    Answer by Imogen13 at 2:04 PM on Aug. 28, 2009

  • It is good to be clear that the socialized health care in, say, England or Canada differs from this proposed system in an important way - Americans will be required to purchase their chosen plan.

    Not pay for it through taxes only, but also pay a monthly insurance premium. Pay it to a private insurance company, or to the gov't for the public option. So not only would the gov't collect the higher taxes written into the bill, but it would ALSO collect the insurance premiums from the ever-increasing number of citizens in the public option. ...

    I realize that many proposals are out there, and the bill they vote on might not contain a public option. But I think it is valuable to look at what they were trying to get away with before people began to notice.

    June 26th the House PASSED the Energy bill. They expected to do the same with healthcare just weeks later, with no citizen objections.

    Start reading the Energy bill.

    Answer by waldorfmom at 4:47 PM on Aug. 28, 2009